Vista is still the most secure OS to date.

[iMav]

oh say open bsd closed bsd which ever bsd ... installing anything on it is not simple alwys go into tht terminal ... if thts wat u call usable then sorry yaar doesnt fit into my definition

 

[rocket357]

iMav, gx, Zeeshan, I am taking back what I said, please continue posting in this thread, coz ...

Then we can see some Excellent replies which worth reading.

hahahahahaha daaaaamn.

oh say open bsd closed bsd which ever bsd ... installing anything on it is not simple alwys go into tht terminal ... if thts wat u call usable then sorry yaar doesnt fit into my definition

Sigh...it's SECURE...

I said it makes a killer desktop...need I spell out how much knowledge is required to get to that point? I didn't mention it, but OpenBSD is a complete pain in the ass to work with (default security is unbelievably tight). Even after years of using OpenBSD, I still have to read man pages and google for stuff. But you know what?

I'd trust an OpenBSD machine directly connected to the internet with no firewall before I'd trust ANY other operating system in the same situation.

 

[kalpik]

oh say open bsd closed bsd which ever bsd ... installing anything on it is not simple alwys go into tht terminal ... if thts wat u call usable then sorry yaar doesnt fit into my definition

Whatever, that DOES NOT make it less secure than Windows Vista.

 

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

Whatever, that DOES NOT make it less secure than Windows Vista.

Agreed , that doesn't .

But going by the same notion , if you don't plugin any pen-drive in to your Vista , don't use DVD's etc then Vista(or for that matter any OS) is as secure

this is just an example , i'm not contesting the Security of BSD coz i myself am planning to study where BSD originated

 

[iMav]

technically there is nothing wrong with the title coz ... open bsd doesnt qualify as a desktop OS to install anything go that terminal .... it may be secure but its less usable

@kalpik that was a reply to some discussion that was going on before ...

 

[kalpik]

Again, the title says "Vista is still the most secure OS to date." Now am i blind or what? I cannot seem to find the word "desktop" in the title.

 

[rocket357]

Again, the title says "Vista is still the most secure OS to date." Now am i blind or what? I cannot seem to find the word "desktop" in the title.

Oddly enough, the main OS's being compared are not all "Desktop" OS's, either. I mean, RHE = Desktop? When did that happen?

 

[iMav]

ah now u came to the article and i again request u to fight the claims with the author

 

[rocket357]

Windows Vista - 6 Month Vulnerability Report

Hrmmm...no mention of "most secure OS" here...must be a thinkdigit issue!

 

[iMav]

rocket u seem to have missed the graph for some reason, it is a plot of vulnerabilties disclosed but not patched & patched ... and in that vista has the lowest and on that basis vista is more secure, some may say that vista is new and hence has very less vulnerabilities and some may say that in 5 years MS has been able to do a fairly decent job but unfortunately the later cannot happen coz most pll are anti_ms anyways

 

[rocket357]

But going by the same notion , if you don't plugin any pen-drive in to your Vista , don't use DVD's etc then Vista(or for that matter any OS) is as secure

So if I install the ATI drivers (which have disclosed exploits...doh?) on my Vista system, I'll be ok as long as I don't use DVD's or pen-drives?

rocket u seem to have missed the graph for some reason, it is a plot of vulnerabilties disclosed but not patched & patched ... and in that vista has the lowest and on that basis vista is more secure, some may say that vista is new and hence has very less vulnerabilities and some may say that in 5 years MS has been able to do a fairly decent job

Hrmmm...was OpenBSD on the graph?

Oh, it wasn't?

Hrmmm...I wonder why...maybe the title should read "Vista is still the most secure OS to date when compared to OS's picked by Microsoft". I'd like to reiterate the point that Ubuntu and Red Hat are precompiled bloat distros (actually, I'm a bit surprised at Red Hat's numbers, but ehh, it happens). Give me a report on OpenBSD, PAX/RSBAC Gentoo, and Vista and we'll see which is "the most secure OS to date".

but unfortunately the later cannot happen coz most pll are anti_ms anyways

Give me a break...are you serious? 90 something percent of the people out there are M$ users and you think YOU have it rough because "most people are anti-M$"? Why don't you try being a supporter of OpenBSD on a Windows fanboy forum!

 

[mediator]

Man , the reply wasn't even to your post , Rocket357 replied that BSD will support devices if hardware vendors release it's specifications to BSD team . and as most user-product hardware vendors don't take *NIX as serious business area so they won't support it initially(then OS drivers will be made by reverse engineering and the likes and then the hardware will be supported).

This is a forum, not a private meeting to be discussing things and clearing concepts!!

Yes , it does not play ISO files coz it's meant to play Media files and ISO files r specialized data files that contain media files , so u can mount an ISO file and en play it normally using WMP .

I guess u forgot that an end-user isn't interested in reasons, and why MS doesn't provides drivers,antivirus,infection resistance,office etc!! Its sad u can't keep up with the enlightenment of ur fellow musketeer!

just compare the UI of WMP to MPlayer and you'll know what i mean(or should i provide screenshots).

And when we start talking about beryl u guys start crying! Please don't talk selectively or just talk straight to the topic of this thread!! Its all about security, not eye candy!!

Going by your way , even i can say GNU Linux cannot play games , so do i have to bring this up each and every time in a thread ?

U shud ask this to the other 2 musketeers of ur group who r trolling around, out of words and deviating it to desktops,popularity,eyecandy or wateva they know to whine about!!

My Fellow ignorant forum member, mind telling us here whether ISO is one of the most widely used Media format out there or not.? Mind telling us how u ge ISO files (piracy)? Mind telling us, how mplayer plays ISO files without mounting

Typical words of an MS-fanboy who questions popularity of DRM in INDIA and then on other talks about piracy to prove his pwned points!! Who talked about media format? Did u went to MS today that u lost the iota of brain cells u were having? Ofcors why shud I use a 3rd party mounting software, follow a set of steps to mount it and then watch an ISO DVD. Talk about practicality, this is INDIA and in many places including Delhi people rent DVDs and form ISOs so as to watch anytime they want and delete it after that. Even a noobie will luv to watch it as easily as mplayer lets u see it like many do in my area and around the globe!!

And yea I think we discussed the mounting thing. I still can't stop
laughing on u where u showed ur ignorance and didn't even the basic working of an OS! So atleast don't show the level of ur ignorance to everyone now by talking of it again n again!!

 

[iMav]

ya right and ur alliance is allowed to bring drm drm drm drm drm dmr drm tum karo toh chamatkar hum karen toh balatkar

 

[rocket357]

And when we start talking about beryl u guys start crying! Please don't talk selectively or just talk straight to the topic of this thread!! Its all about security, not eye candy!!

Oh wow, the fanboys know what Beryl is? Sigh.

*www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=5496461

*www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=5277213

That second one is what I use when I want to actually get work done. Too much eyecandy is distracting and slows the machine down.

 

[mediator]

ya right and ur alliance is allowed to bring drm drm drm drm drm dmr drm tum karo toh chamatkar hum karen toh balatkar

Ur Jokes are still better than the entertaining ignorance of ur fellow musketeers!!

@rocket: Looks nice...may be u can give a tutorial in OSS section!!

 

[rocket357]

Ur Jokes are still better than the entertaining ignorance of ur fellow musketeers!!

@rocket: Looks nice...may be u can give a tutorial on OSS section!!

Oh man, I'd love to! I've written a few tutorials (mostly Linux installation tutorials), so it would be fun to get away from this nonsense for a bit to post some "reality" haha

 

[din]

@rocket: Looks nice...may be u can give a tutorial in OSS section!!

Great, I was about to post exactly the same thing. We can see all his posts are really nice. I am sure hes having a lot of yrs experience in this field and he has real knowledge.

 

[mediator]

I agree!

 

[infra_red_dude]

Re: Vista is still the most secure diOS to date.

a few mis-conceptions i never said bsd is more vulnerable than windows ...

and where did anybody say that u said so???

...i said it is as vulnerable...

yeah and i'm still laughing at the same thing!!

...but infra dude i tried installing my display card drivers on slax kill bill edition and if thats any thing that u call usable then u got to be kidding me

it can imply only 2 things:
1) u use either the newer generation ati cards which has a hopeless driver from ati or u use via igp which is equally hopeless in driver support.
2) if u haf proper supported card + driver then you haf difficulty read the install/readme file for instructions on how to install.

i still can't understand why ppl are fighting over the word "desktop" i can't see any such word in the first post!!!!

@rocket
thanks for the info!

...if you don't plugin any pen-drive in to your Vista , don't use DVD's etc then Vista(or for that matter any OS) is as secure

and you call this a usable system??!!!

 

[rocket357]

And yea I think we discussed the mounting thing. I still can't stop laughing on u where u showed ur ignorance

Umm, must we get THAT specific here? Or has the concept of virtual memory eluded some of us?

Hrmmm...my WinXP machine seems to have 1.7 GB of stuff in "RAM"...perhaps I should install another 1 GB so I don't "overflow"...

Guess I'd best do the same for my Win2k3 Server machine...and my OpenBSD box (errr...wait...that one usually only uses 30-50 MB of RAM...so I guess it's ok with 512 MB)...and my Gentoo Linux box (oh yeah, that one also only uses like 40-60 MB of RAM...guess it's ok with the 1 GB it has already)...and my FreeBSD box (oh wait...same thing...it usually uses 25-50 MB of RAM and it has 256 MB).

Looks like my Windows machines are the only ones that really *need* the virtual memory idea...I wonder why that is? (And don't get me started on Vista's requirements!) haha