Linux is a lean program, very secure by design, and flexible. Linux is an operating system ONLY. When you want an office suite, there are many to choose from but the most popular is Open Office. It was designed on a base of Linux code, it is not integrated. Firefox is built on Linux code, it is not integrated. Remote Desktop is built on Linux code, it is not integrated.
Windows is extremely insecure by design, and not flexible. Windows has integrated CD burning, integrated browser, integrated firewall, and a host of other things. Vista will also integrate the above and many more. The problem with integration is it doesn?t offer the user the chance to use programs ?other? then Microsoft.
Symantec, along with other vendors will be locked out of the kernel of Vista and will not be able to protect Vista at all. Microsoft is implementing Patch Guard to protect the Kernel. If history has taught us anything, this will not work. I don?t condemn it prior to release, but if the old tried and true are not allowed to protect Windows, then there is no point in deploying Vista among the masses. One of the reasons for Vista acceptance is the ability to protect the operating system. If Microsoft insists on protecting itself, then Vista is truly doomed.
According to this article; ?http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1931914,00.asp? Microsoft can?t rewrite the kernel so it?s forcing certain applications to run in user mode, rather than in Kernel mode. This article shows that Windows will not be as secure because the Kernel is the same as that in XP, and Windows 2000, in spite of all the patches to date. Of course, the topic at hand did specifically state that this Patch Guard would only be available in the 64bit version of Vista. Support of XP, SP1 will end in November 2007 according to Microsoft cycle of products. Therefore, for those wishing to continue with Windows must do so at their own expense after November 2007.
My other concern is that the patches that come out each month on Tuesday, I would like to know if there is any place I can go to research just exactly these patches do. I do not believe Microsoft has the best intentions of the user when implementing patches that may not be patches.
When WGA came out under the guise, it caused a lot of problems for both the user and company IT personnel. It disabled sysprep, it forced WPA compliance, and it caused a great number of DELL customers (both single users and corporate IT) to fail authentication. What I don?t understand is that the OS is tied to the bios of the machine and therefore can?t fail, but in many instances did. Microsoft came out with WGA2 which was suppose to fix the issue but instead, made it worst.
Though I?m done with Windows for myself personally, I will still assist those whose choice just got narrower with Vista. As much as I welcome the work, I don?t appreciate fixing that which was not fixable in the first place. I can guarantee myself countless nights of working on reloading, virus cleaning, and profile copying in terms of restoring systems that are guaranteed to fail, all by design.
The Business Essentials Guide provides you useful tools and templates to help grow your business and save you time with automated shipping solutions.
Read about top issues IT decision-makers face every day, plus get cost-effective solutions to real-life IT problems.
Doc delivers the scoop on today's enterprise content management, printer maintenance, and all other issues related to document management. It's the DocuMentor Blog.
