"Gene Heskett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
...
>
> 's funny.   Your sig is an advert for Norton...
>
> Q: I wonder why Norton doesn't make a security product for linux?
> A: Because linux generally doesn't need it.  Its many times more
> secure than winderz will ever be.

's funny. Your data is very misleading.  Linux:
--  Has a steep learning curve
--  Uses non-intuitive program names as a rule
--  To this day still lacks drivers for some of my hardware, preventing 
it from being a major player
--  has more undiscovered security risks than Windows by a long shot 
with the actual quantity varying as each of many authors add their own 
improvements and additional features.
--  Carries many of the SAME security risks in the "user" category of 
bad use
--  is much more difficult to add/remove a program from than Windows
--  Complete newbies find themselves understanding the nuances of 
controls and management much faster and easier in windows than in Linux
--  is not user friendly

That said, I will still switch if/when they develop/make available the 
drivers I need.  A reasonably experienced PC person can switch to Linux, 
or one of its many flavors, successfully with some effort.  But this 
user can not switch without drivers that I need. But I keep looking. 
Someday I will no longer be captive of MS and its single-sourced 
attitude. 




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to