Ubuntu 'more secure' than Windows, says Dell

the register ^

[Gomez]

Dell reckons Ubuntu offers more protection than Windows online as it convinces consumer PC shoppers they shouldn't be scared of Linux.

In a statement flagged here by TheVarGuy.com, Dell picked on security as one of ten reasons why people should buy PCs running Canonical's Linux rather than Microsoft's operating system.

According to Dell's site (here, and a PDF here (pdf) in case the page is moved):

6) Ubuntu is safer than Microsoft Windows: The vast majority of viruses and spyware written by hackers are not designed to target and attack Linux.

Dell does not provide further details, but continues to state anti-virus and anti-spyware software is "unwarranted" for Ubuntu while such software comes at "extra cost" for Windows.

It's a new take on the classic argument that Linux, Mac or Windows is safer than one of the others, and one that's going to inflame and inspire fanbois on both sides.

Microsoft does actually offer free anti-virus software with Windows, with Windows Defender, along with its free Security Essentials service to protect against viruses and spyware.

Also, the operating system is not the only way into a system and its applications that leave users' vulnerable - even those on Linux. Adobe Systems Flash 10 contained a zero-day security flaw that affected Linux and Mac systems in addition to Windows and could let a hacker potentially take control of a users' PC.

The vendor, which has slipped to third place in global PC shipment rankings, buttressed its security argument by trying to neutralize potential concerns people might have on opening the box containing their new PC to find it doesn't run Windows.

"Linux has been around for nearly 20 years. The software itself is not only stable and reliable, but also pervasive. Linux is used on computers of all sizes ranging from the biggest to the smallest," Dell said.

Dell added it's been shipping Ubuntu since 2007 with every PC fully tested to "ensure the best possible Internet and multimedia experience Linux has to offer".

The push for Ubuntu comes as Dell's site indicated Ubuntu 10.04, released in April, will be appearing on Dell systems this summer. In a further push Dell said boot times have been improved dramatically over Ubuntu 9.10, currently on Inspiron 15n systems, to around 30 seconds.

[Gomez]

ping

[martin_fierro]

[B Knotts]

Dell doesn’t offer much selection in their Ubuntu-preloaded systems. Looks like they’re currently offering a grand total of two systems, both laptops.

[softwarecreator]

For many years my biggest complaint against Linux was the ability to "plug and play" 3rd party applications such as Photoshop. Using "Wine loader" has changed all that and I am now a semi-converted Ubuntu user.

Actually, my favorite distro is "Mint". Mint is easy to install and has some great out-of-the-box software ready to run.

I still think that about 50% of the Windows users out there are still not ready for Linux though, as it has a bit of a ways to go yet.  This is quite an improvement because 3 years ago I thought 90% could not possibly make the transition.

If it weren't for the the fact that my business requires asp.net and SQL server, I would probably use windows only on rare occasions.

[ShadowAce]

[CA Conservative]

First a disclaimer: I am a computer security professional, and have been in the computer industry for 15 years.

The argument Dell is making is both true and, for most home users, immaterial. It is true that Windows has by far the most malware written for it. Microsoft has a reputation for leaving holes in the OS as they rush to market. (Windows 7 has been a pleasant exception to that rule - the vast majority of the critical security updates for Windows 7 since its release have been for IE8, not for the OS itself.) Windows also controls about 90% of the PC market, so anyone writing malware gets more bang for their buck by attacking the Windows platform.

It is immaterial because most users are still going to want a Windows PC because that is the platform they want in order to run the apps they like. Most users just want to turn on the PC and go - they don't want to learn command line utilities, or learn how to compile and install apps from source.

I like Linux, especially Ubuntu. I use a lot of Linux utilities when doing forensic exams, etc, and I even like it as a desktop OS. But I am a bit of a geek, and I enjoy the intricacies of Linux and the wide variety of open source software. But I represent the market that Linux appeals to - technically advanced users who enjoy tweaking and tuning their systems, who like to develop apps or use the advanced features of the system. Until Linux can match Windows for the type an quality of apps offered by Windows, it will not be a mainstream OS.

Sorry, but that is my professional opinion. Flame away. (Asbestos suit on.)

[marktwain]

I purchased a Dell laptop with Ubuntu over a year ago, and I love it. I only need it for a little word processing and net surfing.

Of course, if it gets too popular, many of the advantages will be reduced.

[TimothyIan]

Having ‘grown up’ using UNIX PWB 7 on a PDP 11/45 back in 1979, one can just imagine the frabjous joy when Linux came out. A true multi-user operating system, one where the individual (a truly hated term at Microsoft) can control his/her own security and, here’s the best part, it’s FREE!!!!

In addition:

Apache Web Server - FREE
Open Office - FREE
Firefox - FREE
Firewalls - FREE
Windows-like User Interface Option - FREE

Incredible! Just like software used to be before BillCo started charging ever increasing amounts for a seriously flawed, vulnerable Operating System.

[chuck_the_tv_out]

[marktwain]

I may be one of another set of Ubuntu Linux users. I don't care about advanced applications. I want a basic, simple system that I don't constantly have to worry about getting hacked or invaded by viruses and malware.

There are a tremendous number of users out there that use their computer primarily for surfing the net, email, and a little word processing.

Ubuntu does all of those thing wonderfully.

It is all I want to have on the net. If I am going to do a lot of processing, I will probably do it off line in a dedicated computer so that I don't have to worry about compromising my security.

[rarestia]

Keep in mind that Linux is only as secure as the user. When MS put UAC in Vista, folks were annoyed with the pop up for permission that they either disabled UAC or just blindly click to accept without understanding the risks.

With Ubuntu, anything requiring sudo access requires the password be entered, and if someone enters their password without thinking about why the popup came up in the first place, they may be setting themselves up to fail. Many malware, spyware, adware, and virus programs are written with Windows FS in mind, but I’m certain there are variants of those programs in ext3/4 or other flavors of Linux FS that could cause equal havoc. That would make most folks batty considering the Linux FS is vastly different from NTFS, and if one isn’t knowledgeable of the infected Linux FS, they might as well toss the machine out a Window.

Oh, and good luck to those woebegone users who take it to Geek Squad or some other commercial outfit to fix. The prevalence of Linux-knowledgeable admins at a company like that would be nil to non-existent. If you’re any good at NIX-based systems, there’s a bigger market in corporate America over some retail PC repair shop job.

I agree with you CA, you’re not going to get wholesale market buy-in of Linux considering the need to understand basic CLI and the initiative to search the web for issues. The Ubuntu forums are awesome, but granny and grampy aren’t going to have the initiative to do the legwork when Thunderbird blows up.

[CA Conservative]

I may be one of another set of Ubuntu Linux users. I don't care about advanced applications. I want a basic, simple system that I don't constantly have to worry about getting hacked or invaded by viruses and malware.

You are a part of a small minority of users. Perhaps that group will begin to grow, as web apps become more prevalent and installed apps become less important. But we have a way to go to get there.

Of course, if Linux starts to become more prominent, the amount of malware to be written for it will increase as well...

[Astronaut]

Last week I ordered a nice Core i5 system from Lenovo and I plan to install Ubuntu 10.04 on it. I am running it now in Virtual Box and I’m quite impressed with it - this is the first Linux I’ve seen that can actually compete with Windows and OS X in terms of useability and appearance. I am switching to Linux because even though Apple makes a nice OS, their corporate culture sickens me. Secrecy, closed source, and now the impending death of OS X in favor of the iOS with an App Store that will only sell Apple approved software. I dont want Steve Jobs controlling what goes on my computer, and Ubuntu 10.04 is a great alternative for home use. For business, its Windows 7 all the way, however.

[TNoldman]

I have Linux PCLinuxOS on a separate bootable HD. I primarily use WinXp as I have 100 PLUS APPS NOT READILY AVAILABLE with Linux.

[Nateman]

I just got a Dell 15N. I'm little peeved at Dell because the Windows version was put on sale but the Linux version was not. I bought the Windows one because it was 100$ cheaper and installed Ubuntu on it, which I'm now using with Chrome.(Chrome finally has a stable Linux version!)

For anybody doing likewise the automatic dual boot option leaves a tiny half a gig of the drive for Ubuntu. I have since changed that to 60 Gigs without any problems with the Windows part.

By the way I made the above graphic with a Linux program called Gimp. One of the many FREE programs Linux offers. (I'm not worried about the Flash 10 security problem because they still don't have a 64bit version that works for Linux!)

[Pearls Before Swine]

The Alpha version of 64-bit Flash 10 works fine, now.

[jonno]

...Ubuntu is safer than Microsoft Windows: The vast majority of viruses and spyware written by hackers are not designed to target and attack Linux.

I'm pretty sure my house is less secure than one in any neighborhood in Detroit.

It's a good bet though that its safer...

[Sudetenland]

To take the contrarian position, I have never had any virus problems in any of my Windows computers from 3.0 through 95, 98., NT 4.0, XP, XP Pro, XP Pro x64, Vista or Windows 7. Why, because I have always used anti-virus software and used auto-update. I am now using Microsoft's in house security software, Security Essentials.

I have yet to have had a problem . . . ever . . . due to a virus. I download gigabytes of test progs, music, all kinds of stuff, and have never had an infection.

For me AV software, especially over the past 3 or 4 years is pretty much effortless. I operate my computer an unless I get a warning pop-up from the AV, I don't even think about it.

GET A GOOD AV PROGRAM, USE IT AND UPDATE IT AUTOMATICALLY!!!

I have attempted to use Ubuntu a number of times, but I have always found the limitations with respect to software a non-starter. Plus, you have to know what you are doing when you install it. Little quirks like the fact that GRUB will over write Boot Manager, so if you want to remove Ubuntu from your computer, you will be SOL and be forced to reinstall windows unless you are prepared and know how to remove it properly.

Ubuntu has gotten better, but it is still far from user friendly at the level of OSX or Windows. Until it is widely adopted and supported by software companies, it will remain a fringe-geek, OS.

I was just forced to recover my computer from lost drives, because of a careless moment (I don't advise installing any software at 2:30AM :() when attempting to install 10.04.

Besides, Win 7 is a really great OS.

Still, I will probably install Ubuntu in dual boot in the next couple of days. My software needs are far less than they used to be and I can probably get by with the Linux versions for most of what I do.

[antiRepublicrat]

You are a part of a small minority of users

For most of the home users I've seen, even MS Office is too advanced for their needs. They need to surf, do documents, spreadsheets for some, maybe chat or want P2P. That's all available on any platform. The differentiating question then becomes how seamlessly, elegantly and idiot-proof it all works together. Mac wins there, Windows second, Linux third.

Of course, if Linux starts to become more prominent, the amount of malware to be written for it will increase as well...

That's what they said about the Mac. Under OS 9 and previous there were over 100 pieces of malware active in the wild, infecting computers. With the much larger installed base of OS X, we're still waiting. What's the difference? The old OS architecture was swiss cheese security-wise.