On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 11:24:49AM -0600, William L. Jarrold wrote: | When I see announcements like the below, I get really angry and I think | (to myself) stuff like... | | (1) the security problem is that people use windows. | | (2) If everyone switched to unix/linux systems would be 99% (90%???, | 99.9%???) more secure.
99.9% more secure = almost twice as secure. I don't think you're using the right terms to express yourself here. However, to say `99.9% fewer security' problems, which is probably closer to what you really mean, is pretty difficult to believe. | (3) Windows has serious misfeatures and bugs related to security. To be fair, you've made some assertions here and not backed them up with any facts whatsoever. Granted, your audience probably doesn't need them all explained, but even so, some examples are required. | (4) e.g. one such misfeature is that Winblows Saying things like Winblows, Micro$oft (and Linsux and Slowlaris) will not convince anybody of anything except that you're a kook and best ignored. | thinks that every file is a program to be executed. unix/linux, by | contrast, implements the distinction between executable and | non-executable files. Windows does *not* think that every file is a program to be executed. It generally decides how a program is to be executed based on it's file extension (.exe, .cmd, etc.) where *nix does the exact same thing, but it's based upon the first few bytes of the file (the magic number.) I do believe that the *nix `magic number' system is more powerful than the Windows `file extension' system, but I wouldn't say that either is really significantly more secure than the other. In both *nix and Windows you can execute a program by giving the name of the file to be executed to the name of the program that executes it. Like `perl file', `sh file', `cmd file' or `java file'. | ...I don't yell (or at least, try not to (-;) this to all my friends bc my | understanding of these issues is primitive and quite likely wrong. Thus, | trumpeted my views would risk being accused of "crying wolf." At the risk | of starting a flame war I would love to hear people improve upon the | above assertions. | | To the extent that some approximation of assertions 1 thru 4 are true, | at least one person from this list should go to this meeting and as | calmly as possible state/ask during the Q/A somethign to the effect of | "just get rid of windows, adopt unix/linux and 99% of your problems will | go away." Of course, doing so will probably get you labeled as one of those `linux weenies' and promptly ignored. And that 99% figure is an outright lie -- sure, most of their current problems will go away, but they will be replaced with many new problems, and some of the old problems will come back, but looking a little different. You also need to understand the administration's goals -- Windows is probably what most of the student body and faculty wants, and the administration's goal is to give them what they want. Now, the administration may choose to give them what they *think* they want rather than what they're asking for, but then you'll start getting into some serious political issues. Ultimately, most end users want Windows. A few want Macs. Fewer still will want things like Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, AIX, etc. Trying to force one group to use something else is not going to be easy -- they'll fight you every step of the way, and even assuming that you win that fight, there's still the issues of education and support. One thing that can be done to make you seem like less of a zealot is to not keep saying Linux, Linux, Linux. Mix it up -- rather than Linux, suggest a `Unix clone' -- Linus, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. Bring up examples of companies or other universities who have made the switch, and talk about all the savings in licensing costs and support hours, increased productivity, etc. When somebody makes this sort of switch and succeeds, they usually write all kinds of white papers and such about it to brag about their accomplishment. Capitalize upon their success. And lastly, don't get your hopes up. Changing people's minds is hard, and the odds are that you will not succeed. That doesn't mean you shouldn't try -- but you should be prepared for failure, and be prepared to learn from your failure. And before you dismiss me as a `Microsoft sympathizer', you should probably know that that's about as far from the truth as you could get. -- Doug McLaren, [EMAIL PROTECTED] He who laughs last is probably your boss. _______________________________________________ Siglinux mailing list [email protected] http://www.utacm.org:81/mailman/listinfo/siglinux
