On Saturday 31 Jan 2004 7:20 am, Saswata Banerjee & Associates wrote: > > But from this article, I guess Lindows would be a bad choice. > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/56/33226.html > > > > The fact it's pretty insecure, like windows, does not give a good feel > > factor. > > I read the article, but do not find any reference to Lindows at all. How > did you arrive at this conclusion ???
Not sure why you were not able to see this part of the article. Try doing a text search on the word 'Lindows' .... I've copied and pasted the text for your ref. However, it may be feel out of context... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Some caveats There is one Linux distribution that is ignoring many years of common sense, good design, and an awareness of secure operating environments in favor of a Microsoft-like deprecation of security before the nebulous term "ease of use": Lindows. By default, Lindows runs the user of the system as root (and it even encourages the user to forgo setting up a root password during installation by labeling it as "optional"!), an unbelievably shortsighted decision that results in a Linux box with the same security as a Windows 9.x machine. http://www.phatvibez.net/reviews.php?ID=lindows4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Regards Rishi -- http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
