On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 06:15:14 GMT, in <alt.privacy.spyware>, Tim Smith
<reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> Main thing is the same as Windows: apply security updates as soon as they
> are available.
[snip]

While that might be good advice in the context of Linux, it most certainly
is NOT so for Windows. We've already had way too many instances of poorly
thought-out "patches" emanating from Redmond which broke more things than
they "fixed".

> Main difference from Windows is that the updates will be
> available soon enough after a problem is found for the updates to be
> useful. :-)
>
[snip]

I wouldn't call that the "main" difference, tho' it remains one difference.
More important, IMCO, is the fact that such patches/updatesd are needed much
less frequently, and they tend to be much more solid and reliable (partly as
a result of peer review) when they are released. Moreover, the vast
majority of so-called "Linux patches" are not really patches to Linux
itself; but rather to certain popular *nix applications

--

Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net


"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOTE: E-Mail address in "From:" line is INVALID! Remove +SPAMBLOCK to mail.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this E-Mail address is expressly prohibited
under USC Title 47, Section 227. Violators are subject to charge of up to
$1,500 per incident or treble actual costs, whichever is greater.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -