... IE is integrated into Windows, you can't remove it. When you install Linux as an OS, it comes with nothing. You add whatever 3rd party application you choose.

The "can't remove IE" bit was all part of the 'trickery' to conclusively obliterate the original Netscape out of existance. That point was exposed wide open in one of the many court battles against Microsoft practices.

In Windows 2000, on the START menu, there is a selection to "Set program access and defaults" and you can quite effectively use this to make Internet Explorer disappear.

If you want to do a little more work, you can remove Internet Explorer completely.

In XP service pack 2, you can deny network access to anything.

... and on a corporate network, you can lock things down to the point that end users are limited only to what has been loaded by IT.

That any different from Linux?

---

... IE is integrated into Windows, you can't remove it. When you install Linux as an OS, it comes with nothing. You add whatever 3rd party application you choose.

The "can't remove IE" bit was all part of the 'trickery' to conclusively obliterate the original Netscape out of existance. That point was exposed wide open in one of the many court battles against Microsoft practices.

In Windows 2000, on the START menu, there is a selection to "Set program access and defaults" and you can quite effectively use this to make Internet Explorer disappear.

If you want to do a little more work, you can remove Internet Explorer completely.

In XP service pack 2, you can deny network access to anything.

... and on a corporate network, you can lock things down to the point that end users are limited only to what has been loaded by IT.

That any different from Linux?

It is different than what the Linux advocates have been repeating: that Windows cannot be secured (it can).

---

... IE is integrated into Windows, you can't remove it. When you install Linux as an OS, it comes with nothing. You add whatever 3rd party application you choose.

The "can't remove IE" bit was all part of the 'trickery' to conclusively obliterate the original Netscape out of existance. That point was exposed wide open in one of the many court battles against Microsoft practices.

In Windows 2000, on the START menu, there is a selection to "Set program access and defaults" and you can quite effectively use this to make Internet Explorer disappear.

If you want to do a little more work, you can remove Internet Explorer completely.

In XP service pack 2, you can deny network access to anything.

... and on a corporate network, you can lock things down to the point that end users are limited only to what has been loaded by IT.

That any different from Linux?

It is different than what the Linux advocates have been repeating: that Windows cannot be secured (it can).

well I guess if you don't mind going through all that BS to get it secure instead of secure out of the box....be my guest.

---

[...]
That any different from Linux?

It is different than what the Linux advocates have been repeating: that Windows cannot be secured (it can).

With enough effort, you could cocoon anything in a kindergarten type environment!

We've thrashed this enough without diving into a "Total Cost of Ownership" can-of-worms discussion...


I'll simply state that from my experience:

I've found Windows to be inherently insecure for multiuser and/or network use and requires multiple third-party utilities to 'patch over' the worst of the holes;

In contrast, *nix systems inherently have security in depth for multiuser operation;

In recent years, Linux (one of the family of unix systems) has become much more home-user friendly. One good example distro being Ubuntu Linux;

The present day problems of computer viruses, worms and trojans are persistently a MS Windows problem only and has been so for a surprisingly long time. No other OSes (home or business or scientific use) suffer anything similar.


I think there's enough in this thread to let people follow their own views. (Ooops, sorry, bad pun on Vista...!)

Regards,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... IE is integrated into Windows, you can't remove it. When you install Linux as an OS, it comes with nothing. You add whatever 3rd party application you choose.

The "can't remove IE" bit was all part of the 'trickery' to conclusively obliterate the original Netscape out of existance. That point was exposed wide open in one of the many court battles against Microsoft practices.

In Windows 2000, on the START menu, there is a selection to "Set program access and defaults" and you can quite effectively use this to make Internet Explorer disappear.

If you want to do a little more work, you can remove Internet Explorer completely.

In XP service pack 2, you can deny network access to anything.

... and on a corporate network, you can lock things down to the point that end users are limited only to what has been loaded by IT.

That any different from Linux?

It is different than what the Linux advocates have been repeating: that Windows cannot be secured (it can).

well I guess if you don't mind going through all that BS to get it secure instead of secure out of the box....be my guest.

I know Windows, and it should be fairly obvious that I haven't spent that much time with Linux. For me, Windows isn't that big a problem. It's whatever you're used to.

Mostly I was hoping to add just a little factual information in place of all of the "lore" that has been floating around pretty freely.

The "fact" that IE can't be removed or secured is an urban legend. The "fact" that you're stuck with Internet Explorer and Outlook Express (or for that matter, IIS) is also an urban legend.

---

... IE is integrated into Windows, you can't remove it. When you install Linux as an OS, it comes with nothing. You add whatever 3rd party application you choose.

The "can't remove IE" bit was all part of the 'trickery' to conclusively obliterate the original Netscape out of existance. That point was exposed wide open in one of the many court battles against Microsoft practices.

In Windows 2000, on the START menu, there is a selection to "Set program access and defaults" and you can quite effectively use this to make Internet Explorer disappear.

If you want to do a little more work, you can remove Internet Explorer completely.

In XP service pack 2, you can deny network access to anything.

... and on a corporate network, you can lock things down to the point that end users are limited only to what has been loaded by IT.

That any different from Linux?

It is different than what the Linux advocates have been repeating: that Windows cannot be secured (it can).

well I guess if you don't mind going through all that BS to get it secure instead of secure out of the box....be my guest.

I know Windows, and it should be fairly obvious that I haven't spent that much time with Linux. For me, Windows isn't that big a problem. It's whatever you're used to.

Mostly I was hoping to add just a little factual information in place of all of the "lore" that has been floating around pretty freely.

The "fact" that IE can't be removed or secured is an urban legend. The "fact" that you're stuck with Internet Explorer and Outlook Express (or for that matter, IIS) is also an urban legend.

yes it is fairly obvious you have not spent that much time with Linux. At least we can agree on that.

---

well I guess if you don't mind going through all that BS to get it secure instead of secure out of the box....be my guest.

Well I guess if you don't mind going through all that BS to get LUNIX so you can use it instead of being usable straight out of the box....be my guest.

Take your choice. Secure out of the box, or usable out of the box.
*shrug*

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Take your choice. Secure out of the box, or usable out of the box.

I would say that is a good place for this thread to die! Please!

---

Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....

well I guess if you don't mind going through all that BS to get it secure instead of secure out of the box....be my guest.

Well I guess if you don't mind going through all that BS to get LUNIX so you can use it instead of being usable straight out of the box....be my guest.

Take your choice. Secure out of the box, or usable out of the box.
*shrug*

BS? Can you download Windows off the net? For free? NO...who needs a box? Yeah it's real hard to use Linux. ::rolls eyes::

Sheeple.

---

BS?

I was using your very words there.

Can you download Windows off the net? For free? NO...

And the relevance of this statement is???
You were talking about how secure LINUX was out of the box, i was pointing out how usable Windows is out of the box.

who needs a box?

You were the one that mentioned it...

Yeah it's real hard to use Linux. ::rolls eyes::

Assuming you can get all your hardware recognised, even with the GUIs that are avaialable it's still not as easy to use as Windows.

Sheeple.

Arrogant zealots.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

BS?

I was using your very words there.

Can you download Windows off the net? For free? NO...

And the relevance of this statement is???
You were talking about how secure LINUX was out of the box, i was pointing out how usable Windows is out of the box.

who needs a box?

You were the one that mentioned it...

Yeah it's real hard to use Linux. ::rolls eyes::

Assuming you can get all your hardware recognised, even with the GUIs that are avaialable it's still not as easy to use as Windows.

Sheeple.

Arrogant zealots.

SuSE 10 configured and recognized all my hardware when I installed it. No problems :)

---

I know Windows, and it should be fairly obvious that I haven't spent that much time with Linux. For me, Windows isn't that big a problem. It's whatever you're used to.

Mostly I was hoping to add just a little factual information in place of all of the "lore" that has been floating around pretty freely.

The "fact" that IE can't be removed or secured is an urban legend. The "fact" that you're stuck with Internet Explorer and Outlook Express (or for that matter, IIS) is also an urban legend.

And indeed there is a lot of "urband legend" misinformation surrounding any "Windows" discussions. Although to be fair, Microsoft's "Get The Facts" road campaigns have spread a lot of misinformation for obvious commercial gain.

Whatever the precise "facts" are, Microsoft has made an overwhelmingly successful business for itself. Part of that success is from steering people into all Microsoft products and then using "lock-in" tactics.

People pay a lot of money for all this, and so passions are easily raised regardless of any facts, true or otherwise.

Thanks for keeping the discussion useful.

Regards,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

...You were talking about how secure LINUX was out of the box, i was pointing out how usable Windows is out of the box.

Out-of-the-box, Windows is very spartan. You must pay extra for other Microsoft products or others to be able to do anything useful. With a Linux distro, you get OpenOffice, graphics editors, and others all at no extra cost and all part of the initial installation. Never understood why it takes so very long in comparison to load up the Microsoft stuff.

Assuming you can get all your hardware recognised, even with the GUIs that are avaialable it's still not as easy to use as Windows.

Try it for a recent distro. You'll be presently surprised. Eg: Ubuntu Linux

(Don't fall for the trick of comparing WinXP against a FIVE YEARS OLD Linux distro as has been done in the media!)

Arrogant zealots.

Embarrassed at how much money you've spent for your software?

(I certainly am!!! Zero. So I've voluntarily subscribed to one of the Linux distros to at least contribute a little towards the very usable systems that I just simply use.)

Regards,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

...You were talking about how secure LINUX was out of the box, i was pointing out how usable Windows is out of the box.

Out-of-the-box, Windows is very spartan. You must pay extra for other Microsoft products or others to be able to do anything useful. With a Linux distro, you get OpenOffice, graphics editors, and others all at no extra cost and all part of the initial installation. Never understood why it takes so very long in comparison to load up the Microsoft stuff.

Assuming you can get all your hardware recognised, even with the GUIs that are avaialable it's still not as easy to use as Windows.

Try it for a recent distro. You'll be presently surprised. Eg: Ubuntu Linux

(Don't fall for the trick of comparing WinXP against a FIVE YEARS OLD Linux distro as has been done in the media!)

Arrogant zealots.

Embarrassed at how much money you've spent for your software?

(I certainly am!!! Zero. So I've voluntarily subscribed to one of the Linux distros to at least contribute a little towards the very usable systems that I just simply use.)

Regards,
Martin

Imma cheap bastage. I havn't paid a dime.

---

I think this thread is past it's usefulness. Mods please lock this thread!

>Fred

---

http://www.teamstarfire.org/

And as long as both OS's exist, there will always be the arguement over which is _better_. It will always boil down to personal preference, and proponants of both systems will argue about this forever. It's like religion. Which faith is better? It's a personal choice. But we are going WAY OT now. Since the problem that started this whole thread has now been resolved, I would kindly suggest that we just get back to having fun. If you still feel the need to argue about Linux and Windows, there has been another thread created for that :). If there are more concerns about the Trojan/virus that was the sole purpose of this thread, I would suggest to the mods that this thread be closed and a new thread be opened, for the sake of the users that are still on dial-up.

Regards, Daniel.

Personal choice yes... Also, which OS you choose very much depends on what you want to do with your system... Call me ignorant for saying this, but I do believe that in the games arena, Microsoft's DirectX puts it miles ahead of Linux et all in so far as commercial games compatibility is concerned. I ask you this... How many commercial titles can you run out of the box on a Linux system?

However... If you want a secure and stable base for a file/webserver for example then Linux is the biz... Loads of tools and utilities out there that run on it.

---

And as long as both OS's exist, there will always be the arguement over which is _better_...

Personal choice yes... Also, which OS you choose very much depends on what you want to do with your system... Call me ignorant for saying this, but I do believe that in the games arena, Microsoft's DirectX puts it miles ahead of Linux et all in so far as commercial games compatibility is concerned. I ask you this... How many commercial titles can you run out of the box on a Linux system?

Take a look on TuxGames and count.

The merits or otherwise of "whichever graphics interface API" is a whole another story! In brief summary, Linux has various graphics interfaces that compare well...

However... If you want a secure and stable base for a file/webserver for example then Linux is the biz... Loads of tools and utilities out there that run on it.

And still no viruses.

Regards,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

And still no viruses.

Not quite true http://vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_136856.htm

But anyhow way safer than any windows.

---

Join BOINC United now!

And still no viruses.

Not quite true http://vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_136856.htm

But anyhow way safer than any windows.

Sorry, but that ain't a virus!

That is a script worm that exploited (note the PAST TENSE) a web application. The article dates suggest that the exploit was closed in less than a day. Note, this is not a Linux OS vulnerability. Only web servers running that particular application were concerned. The Anti-Virus site there rates it Low risk. And:

"21.02.2006 12:30
Linux worm Lupper mutates

Since the end of last week, new variants of the Linux worm called Lupper have been making their way through the Internet. Anti-virus experts are using a slew of different names for them: Plupii.C, Lupper.worm.b, Lupper-I and Mare.d. The new variants mainly differ in the names of the malicious programs they download and the type of Trojan installed.

The first Lupper generation uses the XMLRPC hole, which has since been closed, ..."

No more exciting than the recent Apple OS X iChat application worm exploit that got nowhere.

That sort of thing wouldn't have affected desktop users at all.


But then, there's a constant stream of such attacks/attempts. Just nothing like the number of successful attacks that Windows leaves itself open to!

Regards,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

And as long as both OS's exist, there will always be the arguement over which is _better_...

Personal choice yes... Also, which OS you choose very much depends on what you want to do with your system... Call me ignorant for saying this, but I do believe that in the games arena, Microsoft's DirectX puts it miles ahead of Linux et all in so far as commercial games compatibility is concerned. I ask you this... How many commercial titles can you run out of the box on a Linux system?

Take a look on TuxGames and count.

The merits or otherwise of "whichever graphics interface API" is a whole another story! In brief summary, Linux has various graphics interfaces that compare well...

However... If you want a secure and stable base for a file/webserver for example then Linux is the biz... Loads of tools and utilities out there that run on it.

And still no viruses.

Regards,
Martin

Yeah... I never said there wasn't a games following for Linux, what I said is there are very few commercial organisations that develop in parallel for both Windows and Linux boxes... Take Halo for example, if I remember rightly HL2 was another one that was initially only available for a Windows PC, although the latter I think has come out for Linux now. Even the people at ID only made their later games Linux friendly. If you remember rightly, it was only after the source code for Doom came out that Linux users could play it (I think...) It certainly wasn't made officialy available for Linux at the original time of release.

I could liken it back to the days of the Atari ST and the CBM Amiga. Both machines, although different HW platforms, had similar specs. Both could feasibly run the same titles as proved by many a cross platform arcade port of the time. But... There was a lot of SW out there that was exclusively one or the other, and your choice was very much based on your purpose as it were.

That was the point I was getting at there.

... As for the prevalance of viri... The people concerned will tend to write for the platform that has the potential to cause the most damage and spread the furthest, e.g the most common... Windows is still the most common OS running on many more boxes than Linux, so Windows will naturally be the most obvious target for virus/hacker attempts.

---