Reply to post: Re: Put up or shut up

And the buggiest OS provider award goes to ... APPLE?


Re: Put up or shut up

>>I was talking about software vulnerabilities and fixes so I thought the context made it clear.

Sorry, you were talking about the security in the broader sense: >>I've generally found GNU/Linux and Windows to be comparable in security (assuming competent admin in both cases)...

Since the meaning is clarified now, your

>> slight practical edge to Windows because of their more standardized (imo) release process

sounds strange to me. I would rather choose when a vulnerability fixed within hours or couple days of its discovery without any standardization, than waiting weeks for it when it's done once every month on Tuesday.

Moreover, since on GNU/Linux an update of an application barely requires a reboot of the whole system but only the application in question while many non-kernel MS Windows applications often need the complete system reboot, the practicality edge should be given to GNU/Linux.

Further, in case of the kernel update a GNU/Linux system would keep the old kernel for the user to boot into in case the new kernel is faulty, so it's hard to end up with "an unbootable MS Windows update" situation. Or, likewise, when most of the entire system installs and updates (consisting of tens of gigabytes of binaries) is standardized through a single update/install mechanism (both front and back end), like apt (aptitude, synaptic, update manager) on Debian-based distros or yum on Red Hat based ones, etc versus a tiny number of mostly MS-based software is a huge, fat practical edge right there..

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019