Re: controversial paper
From: Mxsmanic (mxsmanic_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 09/27/03
- Next message: Mxsmanic: "Re: controversial paper"
- Previous message: Mack: "Re: DriveCrypt"
- In reply to: David Taylor: "Re: controversial paper"
- Next in thread: Tom St Denis: "Re: controversial paper"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 12:46:47 +0200
David Taylor writes:
> Well, one solution would be open standards.
No, open standards are not a solution. You can still write bug-ridden
software to an open standard, and untrained users can still make
mistakes with software based on open standards.
> If end users ran 4 different versions of 'Windows' written by seperate
> manufacturers, but using one standard set of file formats, etc, there
> would be less chance a single virus would be able to kill them all..
Hardly. The virus could simply be written on the open standard itself,
and then it would interoperate with (and infect) all the other software
written to that same standard.
-- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
- Next message: Mxsmanic: "Re: controversial paper"
- Previous message: Mack: "Re: DriveCrypt"
- In reply to: David Taylor: "Re: controversial paper"
- Next in thread: Tom St Denis: "Re: controversial paper"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
