Microsoft Security Updates

[mf_dolphin]

Microsoft released several security patches yesterday. If you don't have your PC set to update automatically (shame on you) make sure and do it manually today. A couple of these are pretty important

[Lindaloo]

Thanks Marshall. My PC is set to automatically update. I had to learn my lesson the hard way.

[gtalum]

F-ing Microsoft.

Why these a-holes can't produce a decent OS is beyond me. They have unlimited resources and allegedly excellent programmers. Instead of a decent OS we get an incredibly insecure mountain of buggy code with good marketing.

There, that feels better.

[Guest]

F-ing Microsoft.

Why these a-holes can't produce a decent OS is beyond me. They have unlimited resources and allegedly excellent programmers. Instead of a decent OS we get an incredibly insecure mountain of buggy code with good marketing.

There, that feels better.

Remember when Win 95 came out? I guess the first version was so buggy, not even !OFF insect repelent could take care of it!

Seriously, though, I have heard that the reason why Microsoft has to do this updates jazz is because the platform is so more inviting for a our virus "friends" out there. Most businesses and individuals use Microsoft; Apple/Mac is not as prevelant, relatively.

If I WERE a cyber attacker, I would choose MS-Windows.

[gtalum]

...I have heard that the reason why Microsoft has to do this updates jazz is because the platform is so more inviting for a our virus "friends" out there. Most businesses and individuals use Microsoft; Apple/Mac is not as prevelant, relatively....

So they claim. But in fact far more servers snd corporate back-ends (IOW, the guts of the systems) are run on Linux (or some other flavor of Unix) than Windows. The viruses planted on those Linux servers cannot affect the servers themselves, because of the very architecture of Linux. Mac OS X has a similar architecture to Linux, and thus is equally impervious to viruses. It's the very architecture of Windows itself that makes it vulnerable to attack.

[StormChasr]

I have the best Windows security patch---MAC OSX 10.4 (Tiger)

[mf_dolphin]

So they claim. But in fact far more servers snd corporate back-ends (IOW, the guts of the systems) are run on Linux (or some other flavor of Unix) than Windows. The viruses planted on those Linux servers cannot affect the servers themselves, because of the very architecture of Linux. Mac OS X has a similar architecture to Linux, and thus is equally impervious to viruses. It's the very architecture of Windows itself that makes it vulnerable to attack.

Nice try but wrong. Every OS or program has vulnerabilities. Linux has it's fair share of them to be sure. Most people don't hear about them because they're not running Linux so they don't see the direct impact. I've been in the IT world since 1984 and currently maintain 20+ web servers for a living. I go back to the original MAC and IBM PC. Take a look at any of the bug tracking sites if you don't believe me.

[StormChasr]

I've been in the IT world since 1984 and currently maintain 20+ web servers for a living. I go back to the original MAC and IBM PC. Take a look at any of the bug tracking sites if you don't believe me.

Me too. I agree that there are lots of Linux bugs, but all of my clients who have Win 2K or XP servers have a disproportionate number of security related problems as opposed to the Unix devotees.

[gtalum]

me 3.

Bugs and security issues are two different animals. Linux has some bugs, but nowhere near as many as Winblows. A properly secured Linux machine is infinitely less vulnerable to hacks and viruses than any Winblows machine.