Linked by David Adams on Tue 22nd Jun 2010 16:14 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Privacy, Security, Encryption A Computerworld editorial takes note of some interesting changes Dell made to the Linux page we linked to last week. They watered down some of their pro-Linux claims, but not as far as you might think.
Permalink for comment 431158
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: From the article ...
by WorknMan on Wed 23rd Jun 2010 03:22 UTC in reply to "RE: From the article ..."
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

And even if they were...? Linux still has far fewer pieces of malware written for it than Windows ever did.


Well, Linux doesn't have that much malware written for it for the EXACT reason that these kinds of users largely don't exist on the Linux platform. Why write malware for dumb users to install, if dumb users aren't using the platform? By and large, dumb users don't run servers, so the popularity of Linux as a server platform is irrelevant when comparing how much malware exists for Linux vs Windows.

I have little doubt that if Linux / Windows had an equal amount of dumb users behind the wheel and an equal amount of malware written for them, there'd probably still be more exploits on Windows, but Linux wouldn't exactly be immune either.

Reply Parent Score: 3