Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 16:16 UTC, submitted by brewin
Thread beginning with comment 224006
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.






Member since:
2005-07-06
Oh come off it. Can Windows be run without getting infected? Yes, I have done it. I used to beta test for Symantec AV and I used live virus files to do it. (They about had a fit when they found I was testing the product against live virus files, BTW).
I can definitely state the OS X, (and Linux and BSD for that matter), is more secure than any of the Windows OS's I have run, (except Vista and since I haven't run that I can't comment on it). I can secure a Mac and a Linux/BSD machine in a matter of minutes. To get the same level of security in Windows takes a lot longer. And that is why most people will never properly secure their Windows machine. They don't know how and even if they did they would not want to take the time required.
Linux/BSD and OS X are far more secure out of the box than Windows. All of them can be made more secure, but at this time only with Windows is is absolutely essential that you do so. I would never hook any computer straight to an always on connection regardless of the OS running on it. But a lot of people hook Windows up that way. So yes, Windows is less secure by default.