Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>   You are twisting the whole thing in a really strange way.

I'm not twisting the thing, I'm just twisting the perspective. And I wouldn't
call it strange, but rather just unconventional.


>   It doesn't change the fact that Linux is more secure for the average
> user than Windows is, for the simple reason that Linux is not targetted
> as much as Windows is.

I'm not saying "Linux kernel needs more attention because it is less secure".

I'm saying "Linux kernel needs more attention because a breach of the Linux
kernel poses a higher security risk". Seen from a larger perspective than just
the rather egocentric "how safe is *my* individual computer" perspective.

Post a reply to this message