Linux 2.6.0 heart transplant imminent

TalkBack 23 of 34:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

too bad stupid people are literate

I'm just speachless at your incredible display of ignorance. Realy, please know what you're talking about before you consider voicing your opinions. You get a new kernal every week from windows update, you say? Obviousely you don't even know what the kernal is. Asumeing you weren't using an NT windows version, you'd be downloading a new version of dos weekly, wich they havn't produced for years. The kernal of the os is the very os itself. Everything that makes up a distrobution is more like an extra program, or set of programs, that make it more useable. For example, a gui. In the case of windows (before NT), dos was the kernal. Every version of windows before the NT series was purely just a gui extention to and a minorly update version of dos. Granted, they don't call the NT kernal "dos" anymore, but its essentialy the same idea. You most certantly can't udate to a new version of windows via the windows update site.

What the windows update site does, is it lets you install patches for their swis-cheese style of coding. There is a very big difference between a patch and a kernal. A patch purely adds on to a program where the kernal is the os itself.


Also, I don't see where you're coming from when you say that Linux is full of security holes in contrast to Microsoft. You ought to go to an antivirus site... ANY antivirus site... and count how many viruses windows has and how many Linux has. You find a suprisingly larger amount of viruses for Windows than for Linux. And when I say suprisingly, "infinitely" might be more apt.

Now, I'm gonna go a step ahead of you and asume you're gonna think "well, that proves linux is inferior because antivirus sites know that its a lost cause/ not enough people use it to be suported"... that most certantly is not the case, because it IS suported. The only reason you'll find very few virus definitons for Linux is because there are very few virus definitions for Linux. Try calling that a security hole.

...

...

...

...


Wow, you have a company? Are you the pointy haired boss from dilbert? I chalenge you to never, EVER, buy from a company that uses Linux. EVER.

...

As for this rep from M$, what makes you think that M$ would tell you that their competitor sells ("gives away" is more accurate) better and more relyable software?

Posted by: Lunpa   Posted on: 12/17/03 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Why Isn't Server Virtualization Saving Us More? A Few Small Changes May Dramatically Increase Your Efficiency VMware Companies have rapidly adopted server virtualization over the past few ... Download Now
• Get top-ranked Novell support for Red Hat at 50% less Novell A simplified IT environment isn't just less complex, it's more reliable. ... Download Now
• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now