Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message From: "Joe" <j...@home.com> Sender: "Joe" <j...@home.com> Subject: Linux in decline Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 17:05:26 -0800 Lines: 91 Message-ID: <146501c1b03c$b1a1c5a0$39ef2ecf@TKMSFTNGXA08> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Thread-Index: AcGwPLGhUrDLKyB6Tqyp+6+S6eOHbg== Newsgroups: microsoft.public.msn.discussion NNTP-Posting-Host: TKMSFTNGXA08 10.201.226.36 Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02! supernews.com!isdnet!proxad.net!fr.usenet-edu.net! usenet-edu.net!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de! tkmsftngp01!tkmsftngxs01!tkmsftngxs02!cpmsftngxa08 Xref: archiver1.google.com microsoft.public.msn.discussion:45235 Windows more secure than Linux? Yep! For at least the first 8 months of 2001, open-source poster child Linux was far less secure than Windows, according to the reputable NTBugTraq, which is hosted by SecurityFocus, the leading provider of security information about the Internet. (The company's 2001 statistics are available only through August 2001 for the time being.) According to NTBugTraq, Windows 2000 Server had less than half as many security vulnerabilities as Linux during the reported period. When you break the numbers down by Linux distribution, Win2K had fewer vulnerabilities than RedHat Linux 7.0 or MandrakeSoft Mandrake Linux 7.2, and it tied with UNIX-leader Sun Microsystems Solaris 8.0 and 7.0. A look at the previous 5 years--for which the data is more complete--also shows that each year, Win2K and Windows NT had far fewer security vulnerabilities than Linux, despite the fact that Windows is deployed on a far wider basis than any version of Linux. So once again, folks, you have to ask yourselves: Is Windows really less secure than Linux? Or is this one of those incredible perception issues? For more information and the complete stats, visit the SecurityFocus Web site. AND RedHay says: Linux can't beat Windows You could argue that's the idea behind Microsoft's .Net. Exactly. So if you think about the desktop, if you think about it as a geographic location, how did Microsoft get to own the desktop? Microsoft did not convince people to unplug VMS from their Digital VAX systems in 1979. They took advantage of a major shift in technology toward the PC, and they became the de facto standard on the new technology model, being the PC. So our opportunity is not to replace Microsoft on the PC. If you've got a perfectly good working PC, why you would go through the angst of replacing it? This is what's kept Apple alive. People like their Apple OS running on their computer. There may be a lot of pressure, there may be a lot of applications on the Windows PC that they don't have on theirs, but theirs works, so why bother? AND Linux more bark than bite SAN DIEGO, Dec. 19 /PRNewswire/ -- WebSideStory, Inc. ( www.websidestory.com ), the world's leading provider of outsourced e-business intelligence services, today reported that despite much hype and expectation in recent years, Linux has failed to gain market share from Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) and Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) operating systems. As of December 17, 2001, Linux held a global usage share of only 0.24 percent, according to WebSideStory's StatMarket ( www.statmarket.com ), a Web development optimization service and the leading source for data on global Internet user trends. This compares with Microsoft's Windows and Apple's Macintosh operating systems, which hold a combined global usage share of more than 98 percent. For almost three years, Linux usage share has fluctuated between .2 and .3 percent, with no substantial growth. Usage share is the percentage of Internet surfers that are using a particular operating system. AND Sun opts out as Microsoft and other top companies join together: Microsoft Corp., IBM and a host of rival technology competitors on Wednesday said they formed an organization to work on standards to make it easier for companies share information and do business over the Web. The anticipated news sees Microsoft and IBM coming together with a string of fierce rivals in the technology sector -- including Intel Corp., Oracle Corp., SAP AG, Hewlett- Packard Co. and Fujitsu Business Systems Ltd. The group brings together rival camps split between using Microsoft's .Net Internet technology and Java, a rival technology which was developed by Sun Microsystems Inc. Sun Microsystems, a bitter rival of Microsoft, was noticeably absent from the line-up. But a spokesperson said ``Sun has been and will be committed to supporting industry standards as they emerge and evolve,'' adding ``WS-I is a good concept and bears looking into.''
Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com! isdnet!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!out.nntp.be! propagator-SanJose!in.nntp.be!pd2nf1so.cg.shawcable.net! residential.shaw.ca!news2.calgary.shaw.ca.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Brian" <br...@subdude.com> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.msn.discussion References: <146501c1b03c$b1a1c5a0$39ef2ecf@TKMSFTNGXA08> Subject: Re: Microsoft is in decline Lines: 83 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 Message-ID: <YLG88.37294$Jq.1969421@news2.calgary.shaw.ca> Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 02:31:20 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.69.255.206 X-Complaints-To: ab...@shaw.ca X-Trace: news2.calgary.shaw.ca 1013135480 24.69.255.206 (Thu, 07 Feb 2002 19:31:20 MST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 19:31:20 MST Organization: Shaw Residential Internet Xref: archiver1.google.com microsoft.public.msn.discussion:45242 "Joe" wrote... > Windows more secure than Linux? Yep! Bwahahahahahahahahahaha... Let us Review: www.trustworthycomputing.com/ <clipped massively distorted and misrepresented fluff> The fact is, when Microsoft's Windows 2000 operating system (no applications) has a security bug, that is counted as ONE, when a Linux distribution (operating system and up to 1500 utilities, daemons and applications) finds a security flaw in one of it's seldom used third party programs, it is counted as one for each distribution. The artilce counted the same flaws in each Linux distro and then added them together! Bwahahahahahahahahaha.... The article was founded on such totally moronic principles I am amazed anyone had the lack of simple logical understanding as to actually quote it. Why don't we count all the security flaws and exploits of each version of Microsoft Windows currently in circulation and add them all together? Windows 98, Windows NT Workstation, Windows NT Server, Windows NT Enterprise, Windows ME, Windows 2000 Pro, Windows 2000 Server, Windows 2000 Advanced Server, Windows 2000 Datacenter, Windows XP Home and Windows XP Professional. Shall we even talk about Microsoft SQL, IIS, Exchange/Outlook, OE, IE, Frontpage extensions, Netmeeting... the list grows daily. Nuff said? > AND > RedHat says: Linux can't beat Windows <clipped for brevity> So where did Redhat say Linux can't beat Windows? > AND > Linux more bark than bite <clipped article long on conclusions but short on specifics> That is so interesting because according to netcraft.com, Apache on primarily Linux runs over twice as many web domains as Microsoft. Further, neither websidestory.com and statmarket.com run on Microsoft servers? How about that. 8^) Ya gotta wonder how they counted... 8^) > AND > Sun opts out as Microsoft and other top companies join > together: <clipped article about future web standards> What this has to do with any perceived decline of Linux is beyond me. Perhaps you can explain. 8^) Best regards, Brian Linux Mystic