On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 06:43:14PM -0800, Michael M. wrote: > And yet, just saying "Windows is dangerous" doesn't say anything about > why or how you should use Linux, nor does it say anything about which > Linux distro you should use, nor why Linux would be a better choice than > OS X for these users, if in fact it would be. Very true. It is just a starting point. Much like the progress of tobacco smoking in the US (and maybe elsewhere, but here I am, in the US). It was initially accepted and even encouraged. The transition towards change began with admitting that it was a health problem. So it goes with computers. Admitting there is a problem with the generally accepted computing platform is the first step in phasing out that platform for something more robust (whatever that may be). Gosh. sounds like a 12 step program for windows users... > It's also a fact that most > of the exploited vulnerabilities in Windows are vulnerabilities that > Microsoft has already fixed, but millions of Windows users have not > applied because they can't be bothered or don't know how to use Windows > Update. It's hard for me to imagine how these users would cope with the > need to enter "apt-get update && apt-get upgrade" in a terminal, which > would look very alien to people who've only ever done point & click. It is a tragedy. So many pwned boxen. Nothing about modern computing was designed with what is the current average user in mind. At least it appears that way to me in my limited knowledge. Computing was designed for researchers and scientists. The parts we all use day in and day out are simply layers over the top of that structure. A
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature