On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Dale <rdalek1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I had a interesting adventure the other day. A friend of mine's son is > getting ready to go to college. Budget is tight so we went to find a > used laptop for him. I went into the local puter shop and the techie > guy there had a interesting statement that makes me think I'm not > recommending them for computer service to anyone else. While we was > chatting, he said that Linux is just as prone to getting a virus as > windoze and so is a Mac. I think my laughing let him know I wasn't > buying his comment. > > I since did some googling and it seems I am right and he just thought I > was some know nothing guy he could sell some service too. Anyway, has > anything changed to make Linux more prone to viruses than it used to > be? I read a percentage somewhere that said like 99% of viruses are > windoze only. Is there a indisputable source of information on this?
There have absolutely been viruses and various root exploits for Linux systems, but to say it is even 1% as many as Windows would probably be a massive overstatement. Not that Linux or Mac are necessarily inherently more secure than Windows, but Windows (and software that runs on Windows) is by far the biggest target for bad guys, and the most used by careless users. On any operating system, proper maintenance with regard to security updates, and smart behavior (don't run that EXE attachment the Nigerian prince just sent you) will keep you safe. For people who don't do that, Linux is typically set up more securely than Windows, by default... but the person sitting at the keyboard is usually capable of screwing it up more than any virus. :)
