Dell: Ubuntu Safer than Windows

Of course its safer than Windows.

who knew?

i would use linux as my main OS but most game devs don't support OpenGL...


and doing level design makes it even harder to switch over :S

Linux more secure than windows? Who saw that coming? As long as the vast majority of malware is written for windows, then everything else is safer.

BREAKING NEWS


Linux safer than Windows--who would have ever thought?

More at 10.

In other news, the sky is blue.

Seriously, when was this ever questioned? The only reason Ubuntu and linux in general aren't more popular than they are is because of all the hurdles you have to jump to get trivial things like mouse buttons working.

People often mistake security with vulnerability.

Why not just go with Debian?

"simply work"? Linux is a pain in the ass to get the things to work you want to work, unless everything is pre-installed.

But I have the feeling that if Dell starts selling Linux only computers that soon they will get heaps of viruses too.

so why is starcraft 2 not being made for ubuntu that would be nice....

I don't know about "SAFER". I mean in the context that far less malicious software is written to target these systems then sure, but is it really "safer"?

Windows 7 has alot of Memory Randomizations and such now to help protect the systems that run it. Not too keen on linux protection mechanisms but I doubt linux goes thru the lenghts Windows does to protect you.

Im not saying Win 7 is perfect, far from it but that is the nature of software. If people have the will and persistence, they will find a weakness in ur code.

To me, this Dell statement is vague and baseless and doesn't even have any data or facts to back it up, other than Microsoft has all the market share so everyone writes malware for it.

Obviously it's going to be safer. For the same reason that a Mac is safer, Linux does not command the market-share that Windows does. If that were to change and either Linux or Mac would control the majority of the market then we would constantly be reading about how bad Mac/Linux does with security.

Don't get me wrong, I like Linux, and I like Ubuntu a lot. I have more boxes running Linux than I do running Windows. But I still would never use Linux as my only OS.

I think saying "If you’re the kind of person who likes your computer to simply work, Ubuntu is right for you." is a bit misleading. I've had more issues with Ubuntu than I have with Windows(Usually video drivers), and the vast majority of the time the fix for Windows is much simpler than what needs to be done for Linux. You average computer user that is overwhelmed by Windows won't be able to handle Linux in my opinion.

I like Linux I really do I hope it gets better and better for everything I need to do. However statements like "If you’re the kind of person who likes your computer to simply work, Ubuntu is right for you." makes me feel like they are out of touch with reality. There are programs that people use purely to work that just won’t work on Linux from accounting software to graphic and film editing. I’m not saying that there are not like replacements for Linux that work as well if not better just that it might not do everything I might need to do my job.
That said long live Linux.

...which is why Dell has offered home and business purchasers the option of getting Ubuntu instead of Windows on their system for quite some time. Er.... um.... well, maybe not.

At least they always make sure linux driver support exists for all their products, right? ........or maybe not.

Seriously, if Dell really wanted to get behind Ubuntu they should:

1) Offer it as an option as an OS for any purchase
2) Support linux drivers for their systems
3) Sell paid linux support as an option
4) Produce a DVD/Webinar on how to use Ubuntu for home users in order to promote adoption
5) EXPLAIN the differences between linux and Windows.

Ubuntu "simply works" for me, all my mouse buttons work, my video driver works (without using fglrx), it's twice as fast as windows 7 on the same machine, and i don't need any antivirus & antispyware software using up resources.

I don't know why people keep using the market share theory as the reason why linux is safer, linux has the market-share majority in servers & has done for a long time, yet where are all the viruses for linux?

I don't think the point of the article was to start a Ubuntu debate but with a title like that it was unavoidable. Rather the headline should read "Hey... Dell is making pro alternative-OS statements". That's where the news is. You wouldn't think Dell would make statements that might have a negative effect on their cost of software from Microsoft. What's next? Dell: OpenOffice.org a better value than MS Office? Dell doesn't make statements like this without first anticipating what affect it would have on their relationships with business partners (i.e. Microsoft). This reminds me of years ago when I got a pop-up from Dell asking me a one question survey; Would you like to see Dell offer computers with AMD processors?

As for the actual statements I kinda agree with some of them but I've only tasted Windows 7... and I liked it. However Ubuntu has been running my file server for 2.5 years cuz 'it just works'. Ubuntu runs my Media PC cuz VDPAU on XBMC is awesome. But right now I'm using my office computer where TightVNC and my old games just work better on XP. But if I can get my few old games and a smooth VNC client on Ubuntu to work then XP is so gone.

My alarm clock is safer than both.

ascA

I think Dell is more concerned of money than safety. Since ubuntu is getting better why not ship computers with free software instead of paying microsoft milions

I like Dell's stance. In marketing and politics you have to bend the truth a little to get your point across.

I recently bought a computer that was not Dell... I had to pay the Windows Tax :-( That is the reason Windows will never be as good a Linux. When you have a guarantee user base, and people are brain-washed to use a certain tool since they are born, it is easy for then to keep using the inefficient known tool than to try other technologies and THINK which one is best. So MS will never have an incentive to update the OS to what the current technology can do.

Hopefully, Google's Chrome and Android will start some competition. Canonical is too small to make a difference. And Apple is too stingy with its platforms to ever get wide support beyond niche devices.

omg STFU about this! same with Mac!

it is NOT a selling point! let me get this strait: so the marketing pitch would be:
"you are far less likely to get a virus with our OS!"
"why?"
"because no one uses it!"
"umm... why... does no one use it?"
"err... look over there! a bird!"
"and even if everyone starts using it, won't you just end up in the same situation as Windows?"
"... look! its flapping its wings!"

maybe if dell hadn't "shipped millions of PCs running Windows-based operating systems" it would be "more secure" too, because not as many people used it!

there was already the article on here where experts agreed that Windows WAS more competent when it came to security, but because it was targeted more, ultimately you were better off on a lesser used competitor... for now.

I don't wanna here any more arguments on the issue unless it is actually based on comparisons between the ACTUAL OSs, and their security features.

Yea and if everyone went linux then U would have a bunch of virus's n such wrighten for linux.

In other news: the internet now comes on computers.

And I'm sure if Linux had it's OS installed in 95% of the Market that it wouldn't be so secure either. I never got a virus on my computer.. It's called being smart and not surfing stupid ass sites.

Again with the "no one uses it so no one writes viruses for it claim"
Again look at the server market where linux has the market share, also supercomputers, movie studio's, police, military etc... use linux, basically any place where features such as security, stability, performance, flexibility are required.

The main reason why windows is common on desktops is because people go out and buy a computer and it comes with windows on it and most of them don't even know that there are other OS's available (they probably don't even know what an OS is) also it's hard to measure how many people use an OS that you can get for free

What Dell stated is actually fairly accurate. It IS less painful for the user as to the malware/trojans/adware etc, because there isnt a point in making it FOR the OS, because not many people use it. However, the same argument could be made for Apple OS X. However, the inherent advantage of Linux even if all things where equal, is its design. In my opinion, a unix based system even if heavily targeted for the same types of malicious / annoying "viruses" that windows has, its method of security / organization makes it very easy to clean -- To a point where an automated "Go back" script could be made that would put all the key elements back, but not ditch everything else such as program settings stored in the profile. It is more obvious whats going on. While I realize Windows once you get through its many layers of registry mess, becomes easier to deal with, its still not as simple a design, and in my opinion inherently flawed when it comes to dealing with things like "viruses". This same thing applies to all the variants of UNIX. However it can be said, that if you put an unskilled user in front of it, who merely says yes to everything and has no additional knowledge of how it works, they're still going to have a hard time.
That said, the problem of all this seems to come back down to the person sitting in front of the keyboard every time, no matter the OS.

WOW, who knew??? this comes as no surprise for me... but it will suck if microsoft makes them retract this all. i use ubuntu for everything except sim city 4.

Ubuntu: Hi, I am an Ubuntu.
PC: Hi, I am a PC.

To tell you the truth it is safe for now, next day it won't be that way. . . I promise you that.