Re: Linux is KING - Couldn't be hacked - Mac, Vista went down in flames

["Arthur Pemberton" <pemboa gmail com>]

On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 3:56 AM, Manuel Aróstegui <manuel todo-linux com> wrote:
>
>  El dom, 30-03-2008 a las 20:13 +1030, Tim escribió:
>
> > On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 19:04 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>  > > I blame Microsoft and all the geeks who seem to feel for being geeks
>  > > and want to dumb everything down.
>  >
>  > Those of us who remember personal computing before Microsoft was but
>  > tiny company would probably agree that it was a bad idea to make
>  > computers something the ignorant could play with, they used to be the
>  > domain of experts and people actually interested in computing.  Computer
>  > systems need to be much better designed before it's going to be okay for
>  > toy computing, both to protect the ignorant, and everyone else that they
>  > interfere with.
>
>  Yep, that's why I think that having a good windows administrator and a noob running a Linux server
>  you'll have more possibilities to hack the linux machine than the
>  Windows one.
>
>  Again, out of the box and running both systems by default, it is obvious
>  that Windows is going to suffer mucho more to keep itself clean.
>
>  Arthur, this is the third time I say that I'm GLAD that they didn't hack
>  the Linux box, but it doesn't mean that Linux is invincible and Windows
>  can be easily hacked by a dog.
>  There are probably out there servers owned by really good Windows
>  sysadmins which are truly difficult to get compromised, and servers
>  owned by dumb Linux sysadmins that get hacked every single week.

I still agree with you.

-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )