QUOTE (nemt @ May 21 2004, 12:25 PM) |
If everyone is using their own little OS, and everyone can view generalized code which applies to a vast amount of users, not only will compatability be an even bigger issue, but so will security. The only reason Linux isn't plagued with security issues like Windows is, is because of the smaller community, in addition to most crackers being losers who think using Linux makes them cool. Opensource is a fine idea for small sourceforge style projects, but it was never intended for an OS. We have Windows for various types of users, UNIX or Solaris for servers/workstations, and Mac for idiots, we don't need any others, especially open source. |
I see your point to a limited degree. If that became a problem, you could just build your kernel with encryption all around (for swap space, filesystem, network, etc). No amount of sourcecode is going to make your computer powerful enough to crack RSA 1024-bit encryption, for example.
There have been a few reported security holes in the past, but the exploit/hole/whatever gets patched so quickly that the window of usage is down to weeks, as compared to months (as it is with Windows).
I still fail to see why opensource is fatally flawed. Besides, I was looking up your FreeBSD, and that is opensource too. (Quote from FreeBSD.com:)
QUOTE |
While you might expect an operating system with these features to sell for a high price, FreeBSD is available free of charge and comes with full source code. If you would like to try it out, more information is available. |
So, tell me, how is FreeBSD any better than Linux with your logic? I'm starting to believe that vicious piece of gossip going around that you're a moron that doesn't post any substantial facts to back your claims.