4 ms·
The problem with this is that they are adopting a good tool because a wrong reason. Linux is not immune to virus, and then what would happen when Linux is popul
by pmelendez 14y ago
The problem with this is that they are adopting a good tool because a wrong reason. Linux is not immune to virus, and then what would happen when Linux is popular enough to bring malware's writers attention? Are they going to switch to OSX?
- Joeboy 14y ago> Linux is not immune to virus No, but it's a lot easier to create a minimal / auditable Linux installation than it is with Windows.
- derleth 14y ago> what would happen when Linux is popular enough to bring malware's writers attention? It's been popular enough for that for at least a decade now. Just because you personally don't run it doesn't mean nobody does. Another example: If everyone drove BMWs, they would be just as crappy as a Ford Fiesta, right?
- pmelendez 14y ago>Another example: If everyone drove BMWs, they would be just as crappy as a Ford Fiesta, right? If BMW makes the compromises to equal a Ford Fiesta price tag, then probably they are going to be quality comparable. However, this case is completely different. I don't think Linux share is greater than 10% on the desktop market and that's the target for most malware software. Edit: BTW I do run Linux on both sides, Desktop(Home) and Server. :)
- derleth 14y ago> the desktop market and that's the target for most malware software I think that's only the case to the extent the desktop world is tied to the insecure monoculture of the Windows world. You can't tell me there wouldn't be money to be made from being able to reliably infect Linux webservers, for example.