> Do you really need MS Office when OpenOffice.org reads/writes MS formats? > I've found OOo to be so much easier to use than MS Office.
Sometimes I do. I perfer to use OOo too, but sometimes it isn't sufficient. > This is a fallacy. Why? Because I can give you a Solaris box so locked down, > that the only > thing you could bang on is the OpenSSH -- the very same > OpenSSH used on OpenBSD. > What does that make Solaris? It makes it exactly as secure as OpenBSD. No, that makes a Solaris box you could theoretically secure to prove a point more secure than a default installation of OpenBSD. > In addition, like OpenBSD has PF, Solaris has had IPFilter for years (which > has recently > been integrated by Sun). IPFilter can do load balancing as well, and is a > completely free > and open source product (always has been, and continues to > be). So there is nothing > proprietary in firewalling SW bundled with Solaris -- even if there was, you > could just > download the latest source, pkgrm the SW and compile and pkgadd the newest > version > of IPFilter. I picked load balancing as an example. What about stateful IPv6 filtering? Binary logging for better performance and less writing to disk? Renumbering TCP ISNs from weaker OSs? Integrated queueing support? > That's the game you have to play: either you have usability or you have > security, but > there are some sweet spots in the middle -- this is what Solaris capitalizes > on and is > very good at. You can make this platform go either way according to your > needs or > keep it right in the 'sweet spot'. Neither Linux nor OpenBSD are currently in > a realistic > position to offer that. When both Linux and OpenBSD exist one doesn't have to play the game. Linux can be used when usability is required, OpenBSD when security is required. This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
