Linux has fewer bugs than rivals.

[alexander]

Linux users have been saying this for years, Linux is a much more secure operating system, well now they have something to back it up. A research done by the University of Stanford shows that on average linux 2.6 kernel (when released) had .017 bugs ber 1000 lines of code, totalling in 985 bugs in 5.7 million lines of code that make it up. Commercial software on average has about 20 to 30 (still per 1000 lines) which would be equivalent to 114,000 - 171,000 bugs in 5.7 million lines that make up linux, showing just how secure the OS is . Most of the bugs documented have already been fixed by the the members of the open-source community.

For more info and details:
http://www.wired.com/news/linux/0,14...w=wn_tophead_1

[TINNY]

what is defined as bugs? how does the research detect the bugs? how do bugs relate to security?
from the link:

Windows XP, by comparison, contains about 40 million lines of code, with new bugs found on a frequent basis.

what is meant by frequent basis?
where do the reseachers get the source code of commercial software?
enough questions for now.

[Tormod]

I am considering setting up a Linux box. Since Hypography is moving towards a mixed PHP/ColdFusion environment the development coudleasily be done on two platforms.

What would be a good Linux distribution to start with? I own a copy of Mandrake 9.

[pgrmdave]

It doesn't matter which OS has fewer bugs, or even which is better. So long as more software is made for Windows, we'll have to suck it up and use it.

[TINNY]

It doesn't matter which OS has fewer bugs, or even which is better. So long as more software is made for Windows, we'll have to suck it up and use it.

BIG MISTAKE. it does matter which ones have fewer bugs. you should support the better one even if there's less software. coz as more and more people support it, more people are available to contribute to the open source and more people to use it and identify errors and give revenue to producers of oss code.

[pgrmdave]

I'm a gamer, if I didn't have Windows, I'd never have played some of my favorite games. Unfortunately, I am forced into submission by myself. If I support the better OS, I have no real reason to use my computer, if I want to use my computer, I have to support Windows, well, sort of, it's not like I actually PAID to use this version of windows.

[TINNY]

it's not like I actually PAID to use this version of windows

Yeah! Good view there, but you'll forever be stuck with windoze. why do you not seek the long term plan?
maybe if price is a bother, you just download illegal copies. but the question is of quality&security.

[pgrmdave]

I can't honestly say which OS is more secure. Even if Windows was more secure in its code, more viruses and spyware are written for it. Someone running Linux is less likely to have problems simply because it's not Windows.

[TINNY]

fair enough i guess. we'll wait for alex...

[alexander]

Ok, i finally have a day off to catch up on all this...

Originally Posted by Tinny

what is meant by frequent basis?
where do the reseachers get the source code of commercial software?
enough questions for now.

frequent basis = pretty much a few times a week, every time you download an update, several bugs within the code are fixed.
The companies that produce the software will share their code with research groups. WinXP code was released to some government agencies and research groups, as to other software, there's industry standards that are kept and the 20-30 problems/1000 lines come out of another research i think...

Originally Posted by Tormod

What would be a good Linux distribution to start with? I own a copy of Mandrake 9.

not mandrake, or red hat. Mandrake is a PPS (Package Packaging System), for a server, that is not what you need, and red hat is almost like "microsoft linux", its just so much GUI based, you can make a Red Hat box very nice, but you need to spend lots of time on it, if you want a real linux, setup gentoo or slackware...

Originally Posted by pgrmdave

It doesn't matter which OS has fewer bugs, or even which is better. So long as more software is made for Windows, we'll have to suck it up and use it.

For 90% of the software in Windows, there is an equal and many times better solution in Linux, with the only difference that Linux solutions are free and open-source. The rest are games, and there are games written for Linux like UnrealTournament for example... And the security of the OS always matters!

'm a gamer, if I didn't have Windows, I'd never have played some of my favorite games. Unfortunately, I am forced into submission by myself. If I support the better OS, I have no real reason to use my computer, if I want to use my computer, I have to support Windows, well, sort of, it's not like I actually PAID to use this version of windows.

that still doesnt explain why you dont support the better OS, the fact that a year ago i was just using windows does not mean that i havent been supporting Linux for the last 5... and you could get paid to use Linux, the cost of stitching from windows xp to gentoo is -$100, thats right negative 100 bucks, how you ask? Linux is free, you mainly pay for packages and support, well, gentoo is compleately installable with a broadband and a live CD that is free form their site, support is free, and there are 70,000 gentoo forum users, chanes are that something that went wrong on your system, has gone wrong before, so you can solve it, but you still have that windows right? You could return the cd key to microsoft and they are supposed to pay the refund for your copy of Windows, thats about $100 in your wallet. (an extra 100 bucks, imagine all the things you could get ...)

I can't honestly say which OS is more secure. Even if Windows was more secure in its code, more viruses and spyware are written for it. Someone running Linux is less likely to have problems simply because it's not Windows.

The thing is, since Linux kernel is virtually uncrackable, you would have a real tough time writing a virus for it, all the 48-49 viruses ever written for Linux exploited wholes in programs that come with certain distros of Linux, not the system itself, just because it is that much more stable. Worms might be able to get to your system, but you need root access to do anything in Linux, and it is hard to get, not impossible, nothing is, but you need to know the system inside out to do this kind of stuff!