Windows 2003 Server better than Linux?

IanIan
edited May 2004 in Software
I found this page Win2K3 Server Web Hosting and look what they say (I've highlight in red the "controversial" claims):

Why use Win2K3 Servers?

At this current juncture there is not a more stable, reliable, and secure operating system available. Microsoft has many critics, and there are those that will rant into the wee hours of the night about Linux and how secure it is. But the facts are simple, and the logic is proven: Microsoft is a 40 Billion dollar company. They put hundreds of millions of dollars more into their software development than any Linux flavor will ever hope to see. Common sense tells us that with those kind of resources, more thorough testing, and more refined development is possible. Although there were many published exploits for Windows 2000, most were reported by Microsoft first, and the problems incurred afterwards were due to system administrators that failed to apply the patches necessary to secure their networks. With Linux, if you are not on top of the network security industry

Comments

  • Ian wrote:
    Open-Source Operating systems offer the would-be hacker an open book to research potential vulnerabilities. Thanks, but no thanks. We like the source code for our operating system locked up somewhere safe, and not freely downloadable from the Internet.

    http://opensource.org/advocacy/faq.php
    This is exactly backwards, as any cryptographer will tell you. Security through obscurity just does not work.

    Any OS will have security holes, Windows does Linux does. Using an OS just because it's source is hidden away somwhere is asking for it,

    ----
    Ian wrote:
    Win2K3 is by default completely secure and almost non-functional, it requires a skillful system
  • I know. MS had some stupid ad in some magazine I was reading about how 2003 Server is cheaper than Linux! Yea, my ass. They're probably like, well since MS owns the world, and you can't run all our MS stuff on linux, and that's all anybody could want, Linux must suck.

    I need to find that ad and scan it in.

    Besides, Linux is safer for now, because Virus creaters write viruses to infect as many people as possible. They're going to want to exploit Windows systems, as well. This is for the majority, if some site they really want is on a Linux site, they'll try hard.
  • And Windows's soruce code is NOT 'locked up somewhere safe' as was proved a short while ago.

    -Q
  • People like a OpenSource OS. You can configure it anyway you want it and also its free. MS doesn't want you to change anything and also want to put a big price tag on something that is unstable. MS puts like over 300 ppl to make a OS and when its down it's left to a group of 30 to find and fix bugs and what not. With linux it took 2 guys to build the main part of it and millions to finish it and update the code for years to come. Also MS are affraid to run Windows on they're systems, they use Linux or some sort of Unix!

    Also look at Viruses, Worms, Spyware, etc etc etc... Windows and Linux are neck to neck. What OS is afected by the harmful things? Windows is, the reason why Linux isn't affected by theses because every distro out there use diffrent configurations and software. Can't attack just one flavor of Linux because most Linux usrs use their own little layout. Also if your smart and don't use the ROOT account no one can get in your system or make a program to change the config files around with out ROOT access. Thats the problem with windows, the registry can be access by and kind of user and also the windows file protection can be bypassed. MS needs to learn that NTFS file system and Windows File Protection isn't the answer. Also they need to drop the price and quit acting like god and then maybe people won't do this shit.

    One more thing. Most of thses hackers and crackers learn how to deface windows by taking a Class from school that certifies you to run Windows NT, 2000, XP and 2003
  • School classes suck ass. I sit through 2 periods and all the teacher is talking about copying and pasting. Its the same for 4 more years, I know people that did it.
  • I took a 2000 class (Dirty little secret). It sucked! The teacher didn't know crap! He went on about the boot files and so I erased NTLDR and he tried to copy it to C:\WINNT instead of C:\! and he claimed that checkdisk was gone because disk drives don't fail anymore!

    I'm lucky that I didn't judge by 1st appearances or I'd've never shown up at BCC again!

    -Q
  • The teachers don't know shit...
  • Bah.... don't get me started about computer teachers!
  • Source: The Inquirer April 01, 2002

    Microsoft uses FreeBSD to host anti-Unix site

    THE GREAT SATAN OF software appears to have been rumbled in an attempt to persuade corporate America to move from Unix to its own family of operating systems.

    A report on NetSlaves claims that a joint Microsoft Unisys Web site - wehavethewayout.com, is hosted on a FreeBSD system.

    That has led to Microsoft being charged with hypocrisy
  • No I don't know about that shot... its fake or something?
  • haha, I'm just quoting. Well, I've never heard or seen anything about that Mac G5 thing and Microsoft. Could be fake. Who knows.
  • microsoft's server ran on Linux for a little bit.
  • I think that was WindowsUpdate back when Blaster was giving it hell.

    -Q
Sign In or Register to comment.