Linux.com

Hello! I have heard that Vista should be very secure and it could beat Linux. And i have also heard that Linux is secure an Vista is it not. What I want in this forum is argument both why Linux is better then Vista, and why Vista is better then Linux. And I want fact from you and don't begginners talk like "Linux i much better than vista". I will just see what you think about this. //Thank you

Well as for security ...I don't really know much about Vista. Except I don't like it. It doesn't seem like there is much difference between it an xp besides navigating it. I also suppose that any computer that is always being run from the root/ administrator account is not secure. That is my understanding of why linux is secure and relatively virus safe. You are not root so you don't have the privilige of installing virii , but I am a n00b and my view is probably over simplified. I have had lots of trouble with vista ( at least as much trouble as having to learn linux) Vista costs a butt load of money, has problems with apps, and is all about drm. linux. not quite as much native hardware support, you need to read more...well more than vs. xp , but vista has lots o' problems too so maybe you have to read as much as you do in linux for vista. vista: pretty and getting more stable ..newest service pack frees up a lot of resources. Linux: hands down has the best eye-candy out there ( compiz-fusion) Open source so not only is it free but the source code is released so programmers worldwide are always fixing, tweaking, and updating it to make a better and better os. Well in conclusion as far as security goes although it may appear to the average person that windows is everwhere *nix servers run the world, and that can't be because Windows is more secure.

[quote=Alexander]Hello! I have heard that Vista should be very secure and it could beat Linux. And i have also heard that Linux is secure an Vista is it not. What I want in this forum is argument both why Linux is better then Vista, and why Vista is better then Linux. And I want fact from you and don't begginners talk like "Linux i much better than vista". I will just see what you think about this. //Thank you[/quote] everyone of us has different point of views! I used Vista, since I have no PC this time, I used to use a Pc in cyber cafe. I used Linux, Vista as long as what OS they used. They are both good, l'm trying to be more fair lol.. as what I observed, MS product are sometimes pissed me off, I think It's from the people who hates MS or some virus creator who wants to spread the virus and make a sale for their anti-virus. I'm trying to research this one this time. About Linux, I used an older version. It perform well but the speed is disturbing, Low. But it is a older version, Maybe this time, they launch new version, i'm so excited to use it. my friends in [url=http://www.costablancaspain.biz/]Costa Blanca[/url] is really a linux lover person, she strongly recommend Linux. [Modified by: kianne on September 26, 2007 04:20 AM]

I use both. Linux has it's fair share of security/usability problems, and so does Vista. I agree with most points in all of the responses, but because we are comparing desktop OS' (we can't compare Vista to a server installation of Linux because that is like apples-oranges), linux has such a low installation base, it makes common sense for it not to be as vunerable to attack as Vista. I really don't like what Vista has done as far as resource utilization and performance, but as with most development projects Microsoft has really designed Vista for the next generation hardware, so for now it performs horribly on the midrange machines. Linux performs so much better on older hardware, but it suffers from not having a killer desktop suite. For mainstream adoption Linux needs a killer office application, one that works better than office, costs less, and is easily deployable. Sales people have to work twice as hard when they are approaching a client with a solution in place vs a complete new solution, and it is the same with technology; therefore, the desktop suites that are available on linux cannot be "as good" they have to be signifigantly better to really spark a migration. Apple is finding this out with their recent office suite offering. It doesn't have all the features of a mature MS office suite, and therefore is not driving sales of their desktops. It may be a fantastic application, but it has to do something that you cannot do with MS office, and it has to be something that you cannot live without. Summary: there is good and bad with both platforms. Vista is the direction Microsoft is heading, and for those with MS based networks, that will eventually be where they must migrate to. Linux will not replace Vista because there is little on Linux at this point to drive a conversion.

:D wot a convo! I would choose Linux anyday. When i worked for Fujitsu i realised that people that knew what they were doing turned off all the vista extras like phishing filters, windows defender, and that restore feature that takes a massive chunk of HD space for it to be any use. And even if they are the same i think about 7% of the global population use linux compaired to the 70% something that use windows. So less odds of getting your linux distro hi jacked. Kind Regards [Modified by: alpinesatan.com on December 14, 2007 04:25 PM]

OS X 10.4.11 and Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon 7.10, not forgetting fedora :D

thats why i use os x and fedora 8 :D

OS X 10.4.11 and Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon 7.10, not forgetting fedora :D

thanks for you