Christopher Anthony must have even more free time on his hands than I do, which is a sad state to live in. How can I say that? He actually took the time to rebut my analysis of his website, although he just changed the word order of his original arguments to combat my points. How many flaws are in his argument? Quite a few, but I’m unwilling to clutter my Blog to debate him – would the punk actually allow for comments on his site, I would, but he seems a little skiddish – so my rule of thumb is to wait until he posts something worth responding to.
And in spite of that, I have noticed some key quotes from our whipping boy…
Linux is a multi user system – So is Windows, you buffoon. If more people ran as a regular user – instead of as an Administrator which is what people usually do because they are lazy – then they would have limited rights to the core OS. And since the most popular viruses simply spread through email not the core OS, should they not run email? So yes, it is a misconfigured computer that helps a Trojan horse, same as it is a user that opens the attachment in the first place. To further support my point, if a Linux system had no account but Root, then wouldn’t it be in the same situation? Yes, yes it would. Here’s a better thought: spread some blame around to the hackers that write viruses and Trojan horses instead of just the people that write the OS. Oh lemme guess, the next comment will be “Microsoft writes its own viruses for more press”, right?
how come Linux only has 15 viruses where Windows has 500,000 – Hackers need attention, much like you seem to, so they will target the larger audience. Why on earth would a hacker waste time on 5% of the computer world?
Linux is hacker proof. – How can you say this and then back it up with unless you have root privileges? That means it is not hacker proof because any password can be hacked. A user can get into the box over a network, use sudo and guess what? They have root access. The only hacker proof computer is a computer that is turned off. Any password can be hacked, given enough time, and no network can ever be 100% safe. Stop sounding like an ass and say it’s more secure or whatever you’re trying to prove, because no system is hacker proof.
re OSS: I’ve run MovableType on Windows boxes – freeware and built on PeRL – and it runs fine. Just because you don’t like the way it runs doesn’t mean it does not work.
Red Hat charged for media – then it’s not free now is it? If they weren’t charging for software why did they have a basic and profession edition at two different price points? The same amount of media is included. And I like you how ignore the fact that there were a few dozen updates when I installed it initially, along with an update a day whenever I checked the upgrading service. Apple has updates for OSX and they’re Linux based… FreeBSD is the core of Darwin, I believe… And IBM charges for the services that are used to install the software: that’s not free either.
I did have an AV package already installed and it did tell me I had three viruses, anyone who does a Windows install will tell you they always get hit by at least one virus during update. – This is my personal favorite. Doesn’t he understand that the media would jump all over this if this is indeed the case? And given that I had to install XP about a dozen times already this year, from a retail CD, and I’ve run with Norton AV 2004 all this time, how come I haven’t seen a virus yet? Or better yet, what update had the virus? Or what virus was found? Odds are it was a “something is trying to be installed” message that most AV products like to throw out there, and he just didn’t read it. He then goes on to say that AV products are only out there because Microsoft sucks and they shouldn’t be for free (i.e. OSS) because they wouldn’t be trusted… so now OSS is untrustworthy? Again, how about putting some blame on the hackers? If there were not hackers, we wouldn’t need AV now would we?
He goes on and on (and on) and he’s even trying to say that he’s not a zealot, too [the link is for your Chris, seeing as you don’t know what it means, I’m guessing] Yeah right. Being a zealot on it’s own isn’t a bad thing, but being completely obsessive for an argument that is based on nothing but blind passion and skewed facts is where there’s a problem…
that and the fact that he keeps trying to argue OS selection like it was a religious decision. If he really was a Linux fan, he’d be better off trying to prove why Linux is better for him, instead of trying to bash Microsoft for everyone else.
The truth is that in a few months, we’ll have to revisit our big boy’s predictions – I can promise you that his allegiance will shift between Linux partners. He already hates SCO for “MS backing” or some shit and he hates OSX for reasons I can’t explain. Give him a few months and the story will change yet again. Always against Microsoft, though – that will be constant. I can just imagine that he was a huge fan of SCO before they started to sue anything that moved… I just love the fact that he’s only pissed that Microsoft has a bigger market share than Linux: that’s they short story of all this whining… you can trust me on that.
What I wanna know is who is this Novell company he keeps yammering about?