Linux REALLY has no viruses and such?

Well, if it's true that there's about 1000 linux viruses in the wild, then that could be considered a lot (just in the number, not compared to windows 170,000 some viruses).
My understanding so far is, linux is more secure, and using a firewall plus safe browsing practices should make it near impossible to get a virus.
So, depends on how you look at it.

 

It's all about the user, not about the OS. If you're smart you can have no viruses in Windows, but if you're dumb you can **** up Linux in a few minutes. There's no escaping from the weak link (the idiot behind the screen).

PS: I don't really get these kind of threads.

 

In the 10 or so years I've been using PC's, I got a virus just once, and that's cause I was stupid and did something risky. Hmm, I think about 6 years ago or so, I downloaded something questionable off a torrent. That was the only time I was infected, thank goodness. Of course, my AV scanner quickly caught it and destroyed it, but still...

 

You just proved my point.
I had a few viruses (less than five unwanted, many collected) and got infected just to see what happens. And nothing happened (noticeable). I was the idiot, not Windows.
If you get a BSOD it's mostly because you're doing something wrong, not because Windows sucks. I hardly remember the last BSOD I got (which was on XP, but that was because I had hardware problems; the most I got on Windows 98 and curiously Windows Me was stable for me). On the same note I remember the last time I screwed something in Linux/BSD just by installing something (I screwed FreeBSD with KDE and Linux with me trying to update something...can't remember).

 

You're not the only one. I knew someone with ME that never had a single issue with it. Everyone else I knew were still running 98 at the time (including myself).

 

I have to agree with you there, I've never gotten a BSOD or a virus (after I became computer literate). Never had any problems in Linux either. Read this article though, What's wrong with Microsoft?.

 

windows 98 was really awful

 

BSODs and viruses are two completely different, unrelated things. BSODs are most often caused by crappy drivers, not looking at **** sites.

 

Huh? You can't write 110n?

 

Maybe he didn't want to get caught bypassing the word filter?

 

Whooo! Calvin, now you are the bad boy.
Time to slam that edit button!
(Final off topic post)

 

Aheh, I slammed it and it jammed on me.

 

I strongly agree with Fade to Black on this one; the real reason why viruses are so rampant on Windows is not its design, but the technological ignorance behind the screen.

When Microsoft brought out Windows 3.1 with its easy-to-use GUI and mouse interface, they essentially set the stage for the masses to be abnecessarily one of speed, but one of smoothness. Even doing basic tasks on your computer, a multi-core processor can divvy up the different programs you're running between the cores, resulting in a smoother running computer. So if youle to use a computer. Viruses were almost non-existent before then. Thats the problem; any fool can use a computer. It only makes sense that the OS with the 90% market share should also have a significant percentage of technically-handicapped people.

Mark my words, there are some stupid design decisions from Microsoft; the poor implementation and effectiveness of UAC as a replacement for the other design blunder of having the user run as an admin by default has probably been a major contributor to the number of Windows machines ever compromised. Some simple (well, maybe not so simple) design changes would at least help protect technically-ignorant people from themselves. On the bright side, Microsoft is at least aware of these issues. I just wish they would read more of the articles from the website in my signature.

edit: wtf? protect is a hyperlink?

 

Yeah, the autolink does that....

 

how else would NBR pay the bills? =P