Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 5th Feb 2006 17:10 UTC
Features, Office One of the biggest reasons for many people to switch to a UNIX desktop, away from Windows, is security. It is fairly common knowledge that UNIX-like systems are more secure than Windows. Whether this is true or not will not be up for debate in this short editorial; I will simply assume UNIX-like systems are more secure, for the sake of argument. However, how much is that increased security really worth for an average home user, when you break it down? According to me, fairly little. Here's why.
Permalink for comment 92883
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
pffft
by Resolution on Sun 5th Feb 2006 17:40 UTC
Resolution
Member since:
2005-11-14

I can see this will turn into a flamebait article, which was probably the intention...

Of course, they should make backups-- but wasn't Linux supposed to be secure?

Don't confuse security with user clumsiness.

Isn't Linux immune to viruses and what not? Isn't that what the Linux world has been telling them?

No one said Linux was immune to viruses. Linux just won't allow a virus to propagate efficiently due to the way it handles permissions, which makes it much better at containing the damage that a virus can cause than say Windows. This fact also applies to Mac OS X.

Your system is only as secure as the person who maintains it. Just because a person loses personal data through their own fault, doesn't mean the blame should be placed on Linux.

Reply Score: 5