| Linux: Now how much would you pay? [Linux and Main] |
May 22, 2002
Dennis E. Powell offers this commentary examining the inherent security of Linux vs. Windows systems. Powell's premise centers on Microsoft's 'open' structure, requiring a system administrator to 'close down' a system, as a far riskier choice for a corporation when compared to Linux's structure that requires the system be 'opened up'. Powell focuses on security and the 'total coast of ownership' in this article at Linux and Main . . .
" . . . Microsoft software is one giant 'Welcome' mat for crackers; in practice, it also has a flashing neon sign for those who didn't see the mat. As often as not, it's incompetently administered. That's because you have to do some things to lock down a Microsoft site . . . Linux is just the opposite: you have to do some things to open up any installation of a modern Linux system. The out-of-box experience is a lot happier with Linux, if keeping private things private is the goal. We've all heard the slogan that information wants to be free, but it is Microsoft that makes it so . . . "
" . . . The TCO of Linux is small when you adopt it early. But if you wait until you've been bankrupted by the TCO of Microsoft products, which total cost includes regular access to your private documents by anyone who cares to look -- never mind those who find them unsolicited in their mailboxes -- the price you've paid by the time you get bright and move to Linux will already have been way too high . . . "
Read full story
(Click here for further information)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
