Re: Windows FULLSTOP is not ready for the INTERNET
He might not know much about Windows, but I do. I can tell you, after 34 years in the fireld (including Masinframe, Unix, Linux and Windows Systems), with 20 years as a Windows programmer, System Administrator and Network Administrator (yes that's right going back to pre Windows 95 days, up to and including Windows 7 and Server 2008 - I'm now retired), that your man has the right idea, his view is a bit extreme, but essentially he is correct.
Any Unix like (including BSD and Linux) system is inherently more secure than Windows, and is easier to secure even further. Yes Windows can be brought up to a secure level that is close to a Unix like System, but it can never quite reach the level possible with a Unix like system. And to do so requires much more work and monitoring.
As a consequence of this, and Unix like desktop system, Mac OSX, Ubuntu, Fedora and etc is going to be, by default, sunstantially more secure than any default Windows sytem. Yes those Windows desktops can be made substantially more secure, but so too can the Unix like systems.
In practice, however Windows desktops are raely secured as strongly as they can be or even as strongly as Unix like systems are by default, and certainly not as stronly as unix like systems can be. Ther reason for this is that doing so usually inconveniences users too greatly. This is why, in practice unix like systems, such as MacOSX and Ubuntu, Fedora, Mandriva, Slackware, and etc, desktop systems are more secure,
That fact that currently there is a Windows mono culture on the desktop does not help either, as businesses and general users are subject to the double whammy of a system that is inherently less suecure, and a system that is easier to create malware for.
It is primarily because of these facts that i have chosen to use Linux based systems for my personal use, in my retirement, as I cannot be bothered spending the time adequately securing Windows systems in what should be MY time.