| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Which Is Buggier - Windows or Linux? | |
|
||
| Time: 07:54 EST/12:54 GMT | News Source: NewsFactor | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
Thanks RMD. Which operating system -- Windows or Linux -- deserves the dubious title, "Most Prone to Bugs and Security Problems"? The answer, judging by a quick survey of industry headlines, seems obvious: It must be Windows. Every week brings a new announcement of yet another Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) security fix. To best describe the number of security bulletins the software giant puts out, the word that jumps to mind is "blizzard." So it comes as quite a surprise that Linux is far more prone to problems than Windows -- at least, judging by one side-by-side comparison (described later in this report). In any case, answering the question of which OS wins the dubious "Bug" award requires plenty of twists and turns. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 443 Last | Next |
The time now is
4:54:08 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 5/25/2003 11:51:19 AM |
|
LOL!
Already the Linux FUD machine is working to discount this reality. |
| #2 By 16451 (65.19.16.208) at 5/25/2003 1:40:07 PM |
| How do you know? Are you coordinating them in that alleged effort? |
| #3 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 5/25/2003 2:41:19 PM |
| Read the comments on the Newsfactor site. |
| #4 By 8273 (4.47.72.198) at 5/25/2003 3:18:03 PM |
|
My favorite quote was "Since Windows XP comes with little more than notepad and paint". First Linux users cry that RH is being unfairly treated because it has much more software available that shipps on disks. Then when MS tries to add new software to Windows, the Linux people cry that MS is unfairly bundling software. So which argument do you want to use?
Oh, that's right, the Linux argument does not need to make sense or be correct, just bash MS as much as possible. |
| #5 By 16451 (65.19.17.174) at 5/25/2003 3:46:10 PM |
|
>>> Read the comments on the Newsfactor site.
And? Its the same dribble that gets posted on this site, only the twist is from the opposite direction. |
| #6 By 3465 (68.50.165.22) at 5/25/2003 4:59:48 PM |
| LOL! Activewin-The most Activated Open Source Resource since 2003 |
| #7 By 3653 (209.149.57.116) at 5/25/2003 6:45:24 PM |
| macrosslover... the logical thinkers that frequent this site... should rest easy knowing that most CIOs aren't so easily swayed by FUD. Thats why Windows, SQL Server, etc are having banner years... while Linux, etc aren't increasing market share outside the Unix realm. |
| #8 By 2459 (69.22.78.22) at 5/25/2003 11:04:51 PM |
|
#10 Open Source, or more specifically Linux, is also trying to cater to the average computer user. Those users, if they somehow find themselves installing Linux, will likely pick a popular distro such as Red Hat and install it using the defaults.
If they buy a computer with a distro preinstalled, such as the case with Lindows, they will likely try to use the computer with its default configuration. In either case, if the user needs some other functionality that is gained by installing extra packages included with the distro, those are also likely to be used. If the vendor packages the software with the distro, it should be counted in the bug tally for that distro. If the distro vendor doesn't want the included software counted against them, they should not include it, or mark it as unsupported. At the very least all packages included in the default install should be counted unless you want to separate app bugs from OS bugs. In this case, apps such as Open Office shouldn't count, but Desktop Environments such as Gnome or KDE and their supporting utilities as well as common services such as TCP/IP should be counted since the majority of users, especially the average Joes, are likely to use such software. It doesn't matter what a distro can be stripped down to (I can remove a lot of things from Windows). What matters is what the average user is going to be using to get work done. |
| #9 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 5/26/2003 12:36:02 AM |
|
gg - The truth is out there, it is our duty on Activewin to reveal it. :-)
|
| #10 By 8589 (65.71.67.226) at 5/26/2003 3:23:54 AM |
| The question is not which OS has more bugs, but should be, which OS has the most users, support, and programs written for it? And whatever that OS is, that is the one to go with, and improve. We don't need another OS, but just improve the one we have. But we do need to decrease the bugs in the present programs first, then make new ones. |
| #11 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 5/26/2003 12:09:00 PM |
|
Flight - "The problem with this is RedHat keeps an errata on ALL of their released products in one location. So all the bugs add up, whereas Microsoft separates them out by product. "
You compare security bulletins by Redhat to Microsoft and come back here and say that with a straight face. If you can do that, you would be an excellent replacement for Ari Fleischer. "That is the sad truth, that no one wants to admit. MS is just not doing a very good job, they need competition, they need to focus on security over features." No the sad truth is that while Microsoft has room for improvement, they are still light years ahead of the competition. A competition which is in complete Denial in terms of their problems. "Overall the review was just plain pathetic. " This article has flaws, granted. However the Linux apologist arguments do not address those flaws, instead they make up their own reality distortion field. That's not arguing against a statement, that's just called flat out Denial. |
| #12 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 5/26/2003 12:10:10 PM |
| gg - Agreed, but the ABMer society has not generally considered that. Instead they just claim that Microsoft sucks and we should all use Linux instead. Well the reality is, Linux is worse in terms of quality and most notably security than Microsoft. |
| #13 By 3653 (209.149.57.116) at 5/26/2003 9:12:36 PM |
|
Linux revenue seems so awesome, until you consider the facts...
http://eastbay.bizjournals.com/eastbay/stories/2002/08/05/daily3.html Estimates of $280M by 2006. LOL. A quarter billion, in only another 3 years. Hillarious. Windows revenue is what? $20B today? Someone with more time might want to look that up. Linux - the OS that was gonna grow, almost grew, would surely grow one day... but never has. This post was edited by mooresa56 on Monday, May 26, 2003 at 21:13. |
| #14 By 1845 (12.209.152.69) at 5/27/2003 11:47:01 PM |
|
Flight, STFU!
You've behaived yourself very poorly on this thread. Here's an example: In post #23 you searched for fixes in Windows 2000. You also searched for fixes in Internet Explorer 5.5. In post #27 you said "I choose the versions of software based on the OS in question, since I based my numbers off Windows 2000, then comparing it with IE 6 wouldn't be correct because it didn't ship in the same time frame." So, what's the contradiction? Windows 2000 shipped with Internet Explorer 5. The launch was in February 2000 IIRC. Windows ME shipped with Internet Explorer 5.5 several months later. Several more months later Internet Explorer 6 was released. If you truly chose software based on the OS in question, you'd have chosen to search for IE 5 not IE 5.5. The reason I point this out to you is this - you don't know whereof you speak, so it would be wiser for you not to speak. I don't really care that Windows has more bugs than Linux or Linux than Windows. You obviously seem to, but you lack that knowledge to correctly assess the situation. Until you gain such knowledge, I recommend you stop posting claiming knowledge, wisdom, and understanding which you do not posses. |
| #15 By 37 (66.82.20.150) at 5/28/2003 1:14:56 PM |
| Bob, I think you hit the nail on the head with Flight. I hope he can see his errors. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 443 Last | Next |
The time now is
4:54:08 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
