[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>At 12:13 PM -0800 on 11/2/99, Alain Farmer wrote:
>>eric-engle: The reason i used attachments is because
>>our school system is installing linux - which made it
>>crash prone. After losing a couple long letters ...
>>
>>Alain: This is the first negative feedback concerning
>>Linux that I have heard so far, apart from the fact
>>that it is substantially more complicated than a Mac.
>>I thought that that was the deal-with-the-devil
>>(tradeoff): More complicated but extremely reliable. I
>>suppose that I shouldn't be that surprised!
>
>Honestly, it's about as stable as francium if you manage to make a good
>enough mess of the configuration.
Lets not forget about system crackers, they can ruin your day unless your
in the protective confines of a mac running firewall software. Lets be
honest, systems like linux are complex, and therefore, inherently insecure.
While *nix boxes are much more secure than MacOS or Windows, exploitable bugs
are still found more readily. It's a natural law, chaos.
Only someone with immense experience with MacOS would be likely to even
try to find a bug in it (although they probably wouldn't have to look very
far, did you know that aliases can be exploited to contain executable code?),
and frankly, I'd take my chances with one of them than a *nix cracker who
knows his stuff.
--
Still trying to get rid of lousy KDE eating up disk space on my nice LinuxPPC
drive.
