[pchelpers] Re: Linux riskier than Windows?

Yes, Linz, it's quite amazing how journalists, even so-called experts 
who should know this is nonsense, continually fall for this sort of paid 
advertisement dishonestly disguised as "studies". Especially since it's 
a rehash of the exact same "news story" of one month ago. Scott and i 
discussed that under the subject "Windows vs Linux":
http://www.freelists.org/archives/pchelpers/02-2005/msg00381.html
http://www.freelists.org/archives/pchelpers/02-2005/msg00428.html

Linux has always been much safer than Windows, but this is especially 
true for server versions, which is why this "news story" is especially 
crass newspeak in the best Orwellian tradition.

Ek


Lindsay wrote:
> Who did you say funded this research John?
> 
> On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 07:48 +1200, John Durham wrote:
> 
>> By  Robert Lemos,  CNET News.com
>>Published on ZDNet News: March 22, 2005, 4:56 PM PT
>>
>>Companies face greater risks if they run their Web sites on Linux rather 
>>than Windows, a Microsoft-funded study has concluded.
>>


-- 
-------list-services-below-----------
Regards, John Durham (list moderator) <http://modecideas.com/contact.html?sig>
Freelists login at http://www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi
List archives at http://www.freelists.org/archives/pchelpers
PC-HELPERS list subscribe/unsub at http://modecideas.com/discuss.htm?sig
Latest news live feeds at http://modecideas.com/indexhomenews.htm?sig
Good advice is like good paint- it only works if applied.

Other related posts: