Posted by ketyung
on Mar/23/2007
at 4:00 am
I was working a lot over the Linux server system environment before becoming the manager of the team. I like Linux much better than Windows as the server, due to it’s less virus and hackers prone. Furthermore, the Linux server environment is easier to manage and maintain, if you’re used to command line interface and those shell scripts. Especially I like most is that you can remotely login to manage the servers. I’m not saying Windows no good, but anyway it’s got pretty nice and user-friendly GUI interface. But the only problematic side is it’s too virus and hackers prone. As a user, I did have several bad experience that I deployed a Windows server purely for software development on my home PC. Due to laziness, I didn’t patch it immediately. But too bad was the Windows server got infected by worms and followed by viruses only after a few days of using Internet Explorer for surfing the web!
As a user only for the desktop, I’d been quite loyal to Windows mainly due to its wide support of software application and also some easiness on the GUI interface. But I’ve just had a switch to Linux (Fedora Core 3) desktop recently for my office PC, due to I also experienced similarly, infected by viruses and worms. Even though we’re fully equiped with the Trend Micro anti-virus. It looks like viruses or worms for Windows are simply to quick to produce and replicate before the anti-virus companies managed to get the clue and cure! I only have my laptop now,which’s still on Windows. With Linux either as server or personal desktop, I have no worry for viruses and worms at least.
The recent report by Symantec really surprised me. As it claims that Windows is the most secure, which is having fewest number of patches and the shortest patch development time of any other OSes, including Mac, Red Hat Linux, Solaris, and HP-UX. So, what do you think? Is it a bias? But if you think more deeply, Symantec is selling anti-virus for Windows. They should have claimed that Windows is extremely vulnerable to viruses and hackers attack, then more people will but buy their anti-virus and security solution. Furthermore, according to Gizmodo, Symantec ever sued Microsoft last year. So, it looks like these two companies aren’t good friends. So, it could be true that Windows is the most secure? Else, Symantec wouldn’t defend for Microoft ? If I were to accept that’s the fact, I’d only accept that Windows is the most secure without taking into account of Internet Explorer. As my several bad experiences of virus infection were due to using Internet Explorer for web surfing. I’m now a loyal Firefox user for the web.
via [Gizmodo]
Software security,Microsoft Windows,security,Linux,Symantec
Technorati Tags: Software security, Microsoft Windows, security, Linux, Symantec
Leave a Reply