[Leaplist] Re: A letter to my Windows friends...

[Austin Denyer (Ozz)]

On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:23:06 -0500, Chris <Chris at NeptunePCTech.com>
wrote:
> 
> As far as antivirus goes - I have my suspicions there. Gone
> are the days when script kiddies were poking around with VB
> scripts. The new exploits come from well payed, skilled and
> knowledgeable (but criminal) developers. I really wonder if these
> enterprises can't afford a copy of Symantec or McAfee to test
> their exploits against. What do you think?

The trouble is, both of the above are crap.

There is one guy who swears by Norton Anti-Virus.  I swear AT it.  He
would bring his infected machine to me, expect me to fix it for free
(yep, he's a relative), then he would uninstall the good anti-virus
software I put on his machine and replace it with Norton, because
Norton is a bigger name. The fact that his machine had never become
infected during the time he ran my software, and always got infected
while running Norton, never seemed to affect him.

In the end, I told him that this was the last time, and that if he
replaced my anti-virus with Norton again and became infected then he
was on his own. Man was he pissed a month later when he found out I was
serious...
 
> And as far as only one virus with noticeable effect, the same
> point applies. The new breed of criminals go to great pains to
> ensure that you don't notice. Spam relays are being throttled
> down - timing mechanisms are used to minimize network
> hits that would stick out like a sore thumb on any monitor software.

True.

> Some trojans even take care to remove other trojans - not only
> are they competitors for the same prey - but too much of a good
> thing might be noticed.

They also disable anti-virus software.
 
> Windows is a comforting fantasy - much like the Easter
> Bunny and Santa Claus (sorry for the spoiler).

Ok - enough of the Santa-bashing.  NASA track Santa every Christmas
(just check their website), so he MUST be real.  They wouldn't waste
our tax-dollars on a fake...

> But the truth
> is, the people who are at the greatest risk of being betrayed
> by their operating systems are almost precisely those who
> don't need that O/S to start with.
> 
> Windows for Joe or Joan sixpack is exactly the wrong platform,
> and exactly the desktop that Linux IS ready for.

A lot of people complain about the learning curve, but it's really no
different to learning Windoze.  Teaching your Grandma to use a Linux
box is no harder than teaching her to use a Windoze box.  In fact, it's
often easier.  I hate having to explain blue-screens...

Regards,
Ozz.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.leap-cf.org/pipermail/leaplist/attachments/20061129/174e49c3/attachment.bin