Windows more secure than Linux

[slave]

Vulnerability tracker gives Windows cleaner bill of health than Open Source

http://www.vnunet.com/News/1128907

"Windows suffered fewer security vulnerabilities than Linux last year, according to figures released by vulnerability tracker SecurityFocus."

"For five years straight, in fact, Windows has come out less scathed than Linux, with 2000 pinpointed as the most significant year when Linux suffered over 150 vulnerabilities and Windows fell just short of 100."

[ravuya]

vnunet sucks. try the register, at least they're funny.

feel your trolling advantage slipping away any, xp boy?

[slave]

The Register would never report something like this as they are biased Linux advocates.  You cannot deny it, however, regardless of who said it.  No one can honestly say Linux is more secure than Windows if they look at the facts; Linux is just more unpopular.  Even many Linux advocates will admit this.  When Microsoft hiccups, everyone hears about it.  Tux can catch Ebola and people seem to just sweep it under the rug.

[Heru]

Very few people trust vnunet for anything more than a waste of space.

Your last few posts have been useless.
Your runnig out of evidence aren't you?

Don't you have anything better to do than post here trying to get people to use Windows instead?

I wouldn't have replied to this, but someone already had, so I thought 'what the hell'.

[slave]

PS I'm not trolling, I'm informing.
There's a big difference.

[ravuya]

XP, I think you should just leave here and never return. The admins are getting quite testy about your recent behavior, and I wouldn't be surprised if a few of the moderators started pulling the ol' usenet death penalty on your posts.

[slave]

quote:Originally posted by Heru:
Very few people trust vnunet for anything more than a waste of space.

Your last few posts have been useless.
Your runnig out of evidence aren't you?

Don't you have anything better to do than post here trying to get people to use Windows instead?

I wouldn't have replied to this, but someone already had, so I thought 'what the hell'.

You have obviously closed your mind to any possibility that Linux isn't the OS it's sometimes cracked up to be.  Just look at the facts, and it will be clear to you.  I notice you didn't responded with any counter-evidence of your own to disprove these claims.  So, why don't you practice what you preach?  Instead of replying with the same old "Linux rules, get lost XP Luser" crap I hear 99.9% of the time I bring someting like this to your attention, try something more original.

[Heru]

XP, you are  not informing.
Each piece of 'information' you have provided us with has been half informed or from questionable web sites.
Post something from a website that we trust.  Better yet why don't you go read the news articles about the reports from the US Defense Department that say the Linux and various Unixes are more secure than Windows.  The US DD has adopted Linux/Unix for a reason.

[slave]

quote:Originally posted by Ravuya:
XP, I think you should just leave here and never return. The admins are getting quite testy about your recent behavior, and I wouldn't be surprised if a few of the moderators started pulling the ol' usenet death penalty on your posts.

So, trying to get away with the ol' intimidation game, eh?  Well, if they ban me, that's fine, I'll just recreate as Windows XP User #5225982376 and resume.  I have a dynamic IP address anyway; it changes every time I connect.

If you are "enraged" by my posts so much, then don't respond to them.  No one's making you reply to my postings.  They're "utter nonsense" anyway, right?  Aren't you wasting your time responding to nonsense?

[slave]

quote: Post something from a website that we trust.

In other words, post something from a biased Linux website like Slashdot or The Register.  I'll post articles from Microsoft's website if I think they have merit.

[slave]

quote: Better yet why don't you go read the news articles about the reports from the US Defense Department that say the Linux and various Unixes are more secure than Windows.  

Could you provide hyperlinks, per chance?

[TheQuirk]

quote:Originally posted by Windows XP User #5225982375:


Could you provide hyperlinks, per chance?

Yes.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60050-2002May22.html
http://www.esecurityplanet.com/trends/article/0,,10751_1276831,00.html

[Heru]

quote:Originally posted by Windows XP User #5225982375:


In other words, post something from a biased Linux website like Slashdot or The Register.  I'll post articles from Microsoft's website if I think they have merit.

Actually, not quite.
I mean like the links TheQuirk just posted.
You know, trusted newspapers, like the Washington Post or trusted enews sites like news.com

[voidmain]

Look dumb ass XP Luser. The numbers in that study have been proven to be bull shit, and it isn't hard to figure out that if the four top Linux distros have the same 25 vulnerabilities you can't add them together and say Linux has 100 vulnerabilities. Duh! And in fact none of the vulnerabilities are "OS" related.  They are from applications that you don't get with M$ OSes and have to get them separately. Some of them I can download and run on M$ in which case, should have been counted as another vulnerability for M$.

You want a link?  Here's a link:
http://www.trustworthycomputing.com

[Heru]

quote:Originally posted by VoidMain:
and it isn't hard to figure out that if the four top Linux distros have the same 25 vulnerabilities you can't add them together and say Linux has 100 vulnerabilities. Duh!

Great point.  It is like this: last week 30 seperate Linux distros anounced a vulnerability in bind, now smart people realize that makes one vulnerability total, but vnunet would prolly say 'Linux has 30 new vulnerabilities this week'.

[ June 08, 2002: Message edited by: Heru ]