[PLUG] got info?

[Christian]

m0gely wrote:
> Christian wrote:
>
>> m0gely wrote:
>>>
>>> Linux has no viruses or vulnerabilities and can't be infected by 
>>> such?  C'mon!  That's an outright lie!  I could tear apart a lot 
>>> more of your points (like Windows not having the *same* free support 
>>> you speak of for Linux) as well but I just don't have time.
>> ~~~~~~~~~
>> If this is an outright lie, then you must know of a Linux virus...
>
> Did you really try?
>
> http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/linux.rst.b.html
>
> Let me quote you:
>
>   2.Linux
>   1.cannot be infected with
>   1.virus's
>   2.malware
>
> And emphasize your *cannot be infected*.  As if it's something no one 
> will ever have to worry about... evar.
>
~~~~~~~~
Less than 2000 infections for all of the 'virus'. I can say that  Linux 
user will not have to ever worry about getting an infection... most of 
them were lab tests.
~~~~~~~~
>
> Well what free live support are you talking about exactly?  You 
> mention IRC, chat groups, email, all under Linux but not Windows.  You 
> imply it doesn't exist.  Now if you mean live as in Freegeek, fine.  
> But that's not exactly what you said.
>
~~~~~~~~
free live support - live people giving support for Linux for free-
modes- email, IRC, and so on. Where is it at for M$ Windows?
~~~~~~~~
>> I would like for you explain where I have gone out of control. 
>> Everything will be backed by evidence. It is obvious that you are 
>> biased to M$, and that is ok... but I would like support for your 
>> claims. Thanks much.
>
> You either need to re-read what I said or open your eyes.  I've said 
> nothing that should require any sort of proving.  It's basic common 
> sense.  You cannot claim Linux *cannot* be infected by viruses. You 
> cannot claim Linux can be learned in a day.  That's an insult to your 
> peers. You cannot claim all Linux software is free ("1.ranges from 
> $0-$0000").  These are some of the things you claim that are flat not 
> true.  IMHO, that is out of control.  I am not biased towards MS.  
> They wouldn't get another dime from me if I didn't have to be 
> acquainted with their software to serve my customers.
>
Most people only use a handful of programs. (Email, Browsers, 
OfficeSuites) These apps are easily transfered over from win to lin. 
Will they be able to grasp the changes in a day, and have an operating 
level of knowledge? I know they can have the same level as they have 
with win. I do not claim that all Linux software is free. Some is quite 
expensive, which is why I have 4 0's there. Also, it should be pretty 
obvious that I am not making this claim, as I state that linux corporate 
edition costs about $36,000 dollars for a certain version. HOWEVER, 
those that I am talking to will (more than likely) NEVER encounter this 
type of software. The software that they will wish to purchase will be 
game emulators, and the such. (I also noted it is something I had not 
considered in another email.) You may not be understanding some of the 
notation that I used. In that case there are others that are probably 
not reading it the way it is intended.

This outline is not finished by any means, merely a rough draft. There 
are some higher knowledge level issues that technically challenged 
people will have a VERY difficult time making it work... (Like a linksys 
wireless NIC).

I am not examining all differences between win and lin. I have 5 min. 
That is it. It will be just about impossible to go into some of the 
details with this kind of time frame, much will be overly generalized. 
(Probably, should have posted this first.)


Thanks for your response. I appreciate it very much. I will definitely 
give the best representation of Linux possible. Besides, the last thing 
we want are people installing Linux and expect everything to be the 
same, then become so frustrated that they are completely turned off to 
Linux. That would be counter productive. Again, thanks for your response.


christian