View Full Version : A question about Windows and Linux

Iarwain ben-adar
February 6th, 2007, 04:34 PM
Hi there,

I was just reading around the forum, and i read several times that the reason why Linux is more secure is that it is made with networking in mind.

Just a little question: Vista was built from scratch, right?
Windows was not written with networking in mind, correct?

Am i alone when i think that it is not quite the logical choice that Vista is not built with networking in mind?
I mean, Vista is built from scratch (that's what i read), and the security problem in Windows is that the networking features are quite exploitable.. Why did Microsoft not build Vista with networking in mind? Today nearly all pc's are connected to the internet, so it is quite obvious.

What am i missing here?


February 6th, 2007, 04:49 PM
Just a little question: Vista was built from scratch, right?

Untrue. Vista has plenty of stuff it carried over from the previous windows versions from the NT series, including the basic design philosophy.

February 6th, 2007, 04:49 PM
you've missed a step in your logic. Merely because something is built from scratch does not also mean that it is not built with networking in mind.

February 6th, 2007, 04:50 PM
I'm no expert, but here are some thoughts on the matter:

Yes, Linux was "built with networking in mind" since Unix in general was always designed to be a multi-user network-enabled OS. However that's only one of many reasons why Linux is more secure. There's also the open source code, which means greater chance to find and fix bugs, and also means that unnecessary components are removed and a cleaner overall design (hence fewer chances for exploitable code). There are many other fundamental design decisions in Linux that make it quite secure.

Although Microsoft says that Vista was built "from scratch" I don't see how that can be true. They need to maintain backwards compatibility, and in the end Vista is still largely based upon previous codebases and previous design decisions. Thus Vista inherits many of the problems of previous versions of Windows (although they have no doubt fixed many older issues).

I'm sure Vista was built "with networking in mind"... but like I said, there are many deep-rooted design decisions in the "Windows way of doing things" that would be hard to remove without breaking existing applications or hardware drivers.

Linux is fast-paced and willing to change from version to version. Software compatibility is maintained because open-source software can be recompiled as the OS changes. Microsoft has to support a wide range of closed-source software, so they cannot change their OS as drastically, and the result is a very difficult to maintain system, hence a larger number of flaws in their code.

So I would say that "open-source" and "able to adapt quickly" are other reasons why Linux maintains its high security.

February 6th, 2007, 04:52 PM
actually vista at its core is still NT/ XP...
dont take the claims as truth as at its black heart vista is not too different or much of an improvemnet of XP

February 6th, 2007, 04:56 PM
And speaking of Vista's security, this just posted...


Iarwain ben-adar
February 6th, 2007, 05:12 PM
I see,

Thanks for clearing this up :D


February 6th, 2007, 05:51 PM
They "build from scratch" to incorporate DRM (http://polishlinux.org/gnu/drm-vista-and-your-rights/) more than improving security and features that are actually used by its users.