WIN 7

[Death]

More like the robbers would rob someone with their Windows open.


Got proof?

Not in my pocket.
You may Google "Linux servers Hacked" and read all the resulting links for
the next couple of years.
Knock yourself out.
It happens, dummy.

Servers don't use Compiz.

Since I said "users" ... most Linux users don't run servers.
Some do though.

 

[DanS]

People with money are more likely to be robbed.
No duh...moron.
Were you born stupid, or did a brick land in your brain
cavity?

Again....nothing intelligent to say.

 

[Death]

I've done that and in all cases, it was due to user error, not the OS.

You hen pecked 2 of 3,650,000.
Keep reading.

You wrote "servers" initially and all servers need users to run them.

I wrote server, then through the magic of intellectual thought and ellipsis,
I wrote Linux users.
You even broke my sentence between the two.
You squirrely tailed pendant.

 

[John B. Slocomb]

I was referring to programs that are not installed by default and the
repository needs to be added.


It's getting better in Windows but you still need to get updates from
more than one source, unlike Linux. You see, for home users, the less
complicated you make it, the better for the home user and the safer for
everyone on the Net. But you don't care about that. All you care about
is winning a pissing contest with someone.

You are a Linux user and you never install a program using the source
code? If you have I'm sure you must have noticed that those programs
are not upgraded automatically.

If I read your statement correctly you are condemning the "home
computer user" to mediocrity.

I must associate with a better class of people then you do as I've
known "home Users", i.e., non computer professionals, who were
certainly as knowledgeable as you have demonstrated yourself to be.

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[DanS]

It doesn't matter why. At this time, Windows is more

People with money are more likely to be robbed.
No duh...moron.
Were you born stupid, or did a brick land in your brain
cavity?

And just so I'm completely clear, *you* have nothing intelligent
to say, so you just spit out insults and an insinuation that
Linux users are poor.

.........you are a Linux user also.

 

[Death]

Again....nothing intelligent to say.

Nothing intelligent to go up against.
It is an obvious, undeniable, indisputable fact that Windows and its 90%
market share will get targeted.
There is nothing to argue there, moron.
And then there is usability by masses of people... something Windows must
concern itself with, and Linux (obviously) does not.

 

[John B. Slocomb]

You really are desperate to find *something* you can use to discredit me
and make yourself look wonderful. You really need to do something about
that. I help people under a different nym, a nym you'll never guess or
know so STFU. Now, for your infantile benefit, I will rephrase what I
said to meet your idiotic standards:

"MOST people who don't have problems with their OS do not post on
forums". Happy?

As I have said, many times, you certainly do lack in English
comprehension.

You say that I am discrediting you but I have simply repeated you own
words and pointed out that you are wrong, and I might point out that
you have never rebutted these statements. Or, as you have above, you
rebut them by rephrasing my statements as though you just discovered
the wheel.

I stated, " Or, at least the problems that they seem to post, looking
for help, are generally not the sort that system
managers usually need help with."

You rebutted this by saying " People without problems, even newbies,
don't post on the forums much so what you're seeing is not a complete
picture even though you represent it as such."

"MOST people who don't have problems with their OS do not post on
forums". Happy?

In other words, you are simply enforcing my statement that "At least
the problems that they seem to post..."

Alias, no one needs to discredit you. You do such a complete job of it
all by your self.



John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[Death]

And just so I'm completely clear, *you* have nothing intelligent
to say, so you just spit out insults and an insinuation that
Linux users are poor.

........you are a Linux user also.

No, you and Alias are just dumbasses.
Dumbass senior, and Dumbass junior.
Ya'll can fight for seniority...Alias has the upper hand.

I use Linux...but I don't really run any programs in it.
I hate OO...and since I own Office 07, guess which one I use.
I can't stand any of the mediocre financial software programs found in
Linux... so I still use Money...will get Quicken when my financial
institutions no longer support Money.
The list goes on and on...my GPS...oops, need Windows.
Wireless media sharing?...oops, need Windows.
Sound that doesn't snap, crackle, and pop...oops, need Windows.

Instead of saying I use Linux, you might wanna say I can boot into it.

 

[Tony Yarwood]

I agree, at the moment. The point that I was trying to make is that if
Linux ever gains a dominant position in the computer world that the
amount of Linux mal-ware will increase proportionally.

Root kits were originally designed for Unix systems.

Best regards

Tony

Google ain't your friend.
More privacy, no tracking.
http://clusty.com/

I block all posts from googlegroups. If you wish your thoughts
to be seen by everyone you'll have to find a different method of
posting.

 

[Bob I]

You are confirming is that Windows is the imminent target of
spyware/malware writers ? (Which was the original point of this
thread branch.)

It doesn't matter why. At this time, Windows is more susceptible
than Linux.

Ah yes, the old "Security through Obscurity" ploy. Susceptible!=Vulnerable

 

[Tony Yarwood]

Yet there are only used on Windows boxes.

You're knowledge is about as bad as your English.

Best regards

Tony

Google ain't your friend.
More privacy, no tracking.
http://clusty.com/

I block all posts from googlegroups. If you wish your thoughts
to be seen by everyone you'll have to find a different method of
posting.

 

[John B. Slocomb]

Not in my pocket.
You may Google "Linux servers Hacked" and read all the resulting links for
the next couple of years.
Knock yourself out.
It happens, dummy.

For example:

IT Facts
Alex Moskalyuk

Home / News & Blogs / IT Facts
Linux servers hacked more frequently than Windows

By ZDNet Research | February 19, 2004, 8:21am PST
Summary
An analysis of hacker attacks on online servers in January by security
consultancy mi2g found that Linux servers were the most frequently
violated, accounting for 13,654 successful attacks, or 80% of the
survey total. Windows ran a distant second with 2,005 attacks.

A more specific analysis of government servers also found Linux more
susceptible, accounting for 57% of all breaches. The research did not
include other methods of intrusion such as viruses and worms.

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

I've done that and in all cases, it was due to user error, not the OS.


You wrote "servers" initially and all servers need users to run them.

IT Facts
Alex Moskalyuk

Home / News & Blogs / IT Facts
Linux servers hacked more frequently than Windows

By ZDNet Research | February 19, 2004, 8:21am PST
Summary
An analysis of hacker attacks on online servers in January by security
consultancy mi2g found that Linux servers were the most frequently
violated, accounting for 13,654 successful attacks, or 80% of the
survey total. Windows ran a distant second with 2,005 attacks.

A more specific analysis of government servers also found Linux more
susceptible, accounting for 57% of all breaches. The research did not
include other methods of intrusion such as viruses and worms.

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

Still pissing, eh?

Ah... you're identified as an ignorant liar and that is all you have
to say?

Talk about your ad hominem.

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

Nope. If it ain't in the repositories, it ain't on my machine. So far, I
have all the programs I need.

You, the great Linux advocator and you never compiled an application?

Well, if that proves nothing else it certainly brands you as some sort
of newbee as it wasn't that many years ago that we were recompiling
the kernel in order to add or remove services.

So Newboy, you can't even look at an application unless the Ubuntu
folks have sprinkled it with, well whatever they use for holy water in
Ubuntu Land, and added it to the repository.

Let me give you some advise - stay away from the Slackware sites as
those blokes compile the entire system.

Which programs?

As I have mentioned from time to time, you are obtuse, aren't you.

If one wished to use an application that the good folks at the distro
haven't bothered to include in their repository you will have to
compile it from source code. Try Source Forge, they have millions of
examples. As the package manager has no entries for these
self-compiled apps you won't get an automatic update.

Try safety and what other users do is there business.

English please. "what other users do here is there business?"

You are really becoming redundant and boring.

Very likely true, but then I am dealing with a fool and as they say
"in Roman do as the Romans do".

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

Yet there are only used on Windows boxes.

First of all, it is "they're", but ignoring that root-kits were used
on Linux systems, after all, why else were they named "root-kits",
that is a Unix/Linux term.

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

Ah yes, the old "Security through Obscurity" ploy. Susceptible!=Vulnerable

IT Facts
Alex Moskalyuk

Home / News & Blogs / IT Facts
Linux servers hacked more frequently than Windows

By ZDNet Research | February 19, 2004, 8:21am PST
Summary
An analysis of hacker attacks on online servers in January by security
consultancy mi2g found that Linux servers were the most frequently
violated, accounting for 13,654 successful attacks, or 80% of the
survey total. Windows ran a distant second with 2,005 attacks.

A more specific analysis of government servers also found Linux more
susceptible, accounting for 57% of all breaches. The research did not
include other methods of intrusion such as viruses and worms.


John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[DanS]

Ah yes, the old "Security through Obscurity" ploy.
Susceptible!=Vulnerable

What is obscure ?

Do the virii/malware/spyware writers not know that Linux
exists ?

These developers can't get their hands on a Liux distro to
experiment ?

 

[DanS]

in message

<SNIPPED OFF-TOPIC COMMENTS>

 

[John B. Slocomb]

Six year old article that is obviously biased. You *really* are desperate.

Are you saying that as of NOW the servers aren't being hacked into?
That the percentages have changed radically?

And as far as six year old articles you will notice that I carefully
included the date when I quoted it. Unlike you I'm not trying to pull
the wool over anyone's eyes.

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)