Quote:
Originally Posted by geekraver
Unlike <insert your alternative here> which has zero bugs and is totally secure.
Yeah, right.
|
Making this an "all or nothing" argument is inappropriate (and unconvincing). One system can have
significantly fewer security problems than another without being, itself, perfect. I am satisfied that my quantitative estimates of the security problems of Windows compared to the several other OS's that I use are reliable, and a sound basis of choosing an operating system
for my purposes, which I acknowledge may not be the same as anyone else's.
One could argue, of course, that more viruses (and other security attacks) are targeted towards Windows simply because of its market dominance, but from my point of view, this matters less than the bottom-line fact that there are far fewer viruses on the OS's that I use. I don't play video games and I don't have a dependency on any of the small number of other types of software packages that are only available for Windows, so I don't run it on systems I own and use for production purposes.
I'm not trying to convince anyone else to change their position or their choices with regard to operating systems, simply explaining how I make my decisions. If someone else wants to try to convince me to change my mind, I can say that hard facts from an unbiased source (or at least a source without a vested interest in an OS vendor) will go a lot farther toward convincing me than sarcasm or absolutism. I don't mean that I won't consider arguments presented by a Microsoft employee (or an Apple employee, etc.), only that the evidence presented to support the argument should come from a non-vested source.
We now return you to the discussion of the Fujitsu FLEPia....