🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 06:43:29 +0000, Phred wrote:

> In article <pan.2004.02.15.02.37.20.58430@dontspamme.invalid>, techie <none@dontspamme.invalid> wrote:
>>On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 12:15:49 +1000, W wrote:
>>
>>> "techie" <none@dontspamme.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:pan.2004.02.15.01.50.20.784223@dontspamme.invalid...
>>>> Windows hasn't gotten as much scrutiny during its entire 15-years lifespan
>>>> as the Linux kernel goes through every week.
>>> 
>>> A windows product tester - it is always good to see one from time to time.
>>>
>>>> > And to imply that MS software developers are less capable than
>>>> > those who participated in Linux development is just dogma and cliche.
>>>>
>>>> Are these never-ending email worms costing businesses tens of billions of
>>>> dollars a year also just dogma and cliche?
>>> 
>>> What about those that affect Linux, you do not hear so much about them but
>>> they exist.
>>
>>The only Linux email worm I've heard of was about 7 years ago. I don't recall
>>the name but it was in a third-party program and affected only email servers,
>>not individual email clients. Linux email clients don't execute attacments, and
>>our filesystems determine filetype by examining the file rather than trusting
>>on the extension, so I find it doubtful that there are *any* email worms for
>>Linux. But if there is then our second line of defense comes into play: many
>>different distributions and many different email clients. Lack of a
>>monoculture makes it impossible for an email worm to spread very far.
> 
> Which, of course, destroys one of the biggest advantages of a 
> monolithic proprietary system -- it works the same way for all users.

You mean, like when there's only one make and model of car, and it only comes
in one color?