View Single Post
Old 22nd November 2003, 22:07   #35
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
of course, changing kernel source is of absolutely no use at all to 99% of computer users. few of those who know how to do it even bother, so the benefits - while real - are not really as all-encompassing as a lot of people try to make out.

as for worm/virus protection, worm protection can be achieved easily with free software (or just updating windows - the blaster virus would have been avoided if people had updated any time in the three months preceding its release, or something), and virii can be avoided by common sense (although *nix's architecture is a lot more resistant to them, by design - that's a benefit of UNIX-based systems in general, not just linux).

i'm happy with my windows box. it's worm and virus free. it took little to no effort to do that - it's as easy to make a windows box worm-resistant as it is to recompile the linux kernel, even with tools. i find it a better environment to use for day-to-day use. in particular it plays games that linux just can't support (which is something that a lot of people are working on). my linux box is a different idea altogether - i use it for "technical" things - coding, networking, etc. it's more of a "geek" OS. my linux box runs entirely remotely, with no keyboard, mouse or monitor. this is a good thing - it can be done with windows, but i suspect it doesn't do it as well (remote desktop seems unnecessary when everything you want to do is command-line-based...).

linux isn't a complete windows replacement, yet. if people begin to believe it is in every respect, then this is how complacency ensues.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote