--- Peter James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If Linux enjoyed the same type of (often less-than-computer-literate) > user base that Windows does, there'd be plenty for virus writers and > vulnerability exploiters to do.
Those who are "less-than-computer-literate" are not protecting anything important. Thus, those who attack these peoples' computers are the "less-than-computer-literate" script kiddies and such, not the intelligent attackers. The best people go after the most important data. There has been research to support that Linux is attacked more than three times as much as Windows (http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3076701). This makes sense, too, because Linux is more likely to be protecting important data. The argument that those who chose Windows are the less intelligent users and systems administrators is a poor defense of the OS. > Linux is not necessarily more secure... I am not aware of a single security expert who would agree with this assertion. Of course, I am not aware of a single security expert who would consider Linux more secure than OpenBSD, but the difference is at least less severe. I generally trust the experts until I feel that I am an expert myself. > But that's just my 2 cents (for which I will almost certainly earn > the title of troll). I wouldn't say you're a troll. You're probably just tired of seeing Windows bashed at every opportunity and are having your doubts as to whether it is deserved (and feeling like someone needs to play devil's advocate anyway, just so that people at least consider another perspective). Most people who bash Windows likely have no idea whether their comments have any merit, but don't discount their comments based on that alone. There is likely some truth to their rhetoric. Chris ===== Become a better Web developer with the HTTP Developer's Handbook http://httphandbook.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
