A known rootkit that would not be detected by anything but UAC? While I doubt that, I'll give UAC the credit of fetching a single incident since the times of XP then.
Starforce would by most be granted access anyway, since hey, majority of people do not Google every UAC warning thanks to the "crying wolf" quality of it.
Because one of the primary uses of Linux is web servers? Yes, it is. For the average Windows user, publicly accessible ones sure as hell isn't.KDE is not a Linux distribution. It's a desktop environment like Gnome or Enlightenment, independent of the distribution. And Linux is just as susceptible to infection like Windows. Because most exploits, nowadays, try to use applications/services/plugins to get access to the system. Apache, for instance, has as large a number of security holes as the IIS. If you run a publicly accessible webserver, you'll be astounded at the amount of attacks specifically tailored towards a Linux environment.
It's a completely foreign world for one that's used to Windows. Everything from using the terminal to getting the hang of the basics will be a struggle. That's essentially why a lot of netbooks which were released with Ubuntu on it, was returned.And 'Linux is a pain in the ass for those who just want to use a computer "normally".'? Geeze, man, you really don't know what you're talking about.
What do you think caused the decrease of the installation volume?Yes, of course, the "snappiness" of the OS is directly proportional to the size of the installation volume... right.
That, my dear, is related to the amount of programs you're running at the same time. Which is close to zero directly after a fresh installation. Everything after that does not come from the installation volume.Windows Vista did run sluggish out of the box for most laptops that were released in it's time and age. With my vLite configuration, it didn't.
![]()





Reply With Quote