MS does an outstanding job of making sure they get the bug fixes out as quick as possible, since they are sending this out to 90% of the PC users in the world. Linux may get their bug fixes out in 24 hours as previously posted, but the quality and testing is definately not there, since they are only working for 2% of the market, and with limited support, it's kind of like a "try at your own risk" sort of thing IMHO. The other problem with Linux, is the wide variety of OS's out there. You have Redhat, TurboLinux...just to name a couple. Each would have their own patch for bugs/holes. What sense does this make? The only way Linux will survive in the next few years, is if it goes against the whole basis for Linux, and standardize. What mom-pop end-user will want a product that isn't supported fully, or needs to be "re-built" frequently? Not too many that I know of.
What I see happening with Linux, is a forking in the road, where each vendor of Linux and it's applications, will become so intent of their own products, that they eventually won't work with one another (example would be Corel enhancing their product work with Redhat, and not TurboLinux).
Sorry to get off on a tanget, but I had to speak my mind to all the MS bashers out there.
MS is where it is today, because has consistently delivered a product that supports just about all hardware/software on the market. Until the Linux community realizes that it needs to adapt to this type of support, it's not going anywhere anytime soon.

A reasonably wise speech.

there is a program to remove outlook + ie. it's called 98lite. http://www.98lite.net/

And watch Windows components and third-party programs break in the process!

It's an interesting idea, but it is not practical.

I have used 98lite on my system with no problems and have better stability and speed. If you have not tried it then don't knock it because that would be ignorant.

Well I have, and it's a piece of junk.

I can't wait until Whistler comes out so IE will actually be part of the OS rather than an app thats just inegrated into the OS.

Yeah a know someone who can't install any program anymore, just cause he has used 98lite...

Anyway. CPUGuy, what's the difference between "part of the OS" and "app thats just inegrated into the OS", for you ? And why are you so impatient ?

I have not had any problems installing programs after using 98lite and I know others I work with have not had any trouble with it either. I am using 98micro setting which takes all the junk out of win98 and brings the total install of win98 to about 50 megs.

It is fact -- using 98lite can/does break things. Many programs depend on features in IE and the new Explorer shell which 98lite removes.

Which programs? Games run fine, Netscape runs great the only thing that does not work is my scanner which i really do not use that much. I just don't care for having IE on my system the whole issue is choice not what can we force on to consumers. Office will even run on my system in 98micro.

if it were part of the OS, it could not be removed, and actually, if you remove IE, you go back to the old Win95 looking shell (gross, compared to the newer shell).

yes you do go back to the old win95 shell but it is quicker and more stable than the IE enhanced win98 shell.

whatever you guys say... but i have one comment: Microsoft is not afraid of 98lite (if they did, they will already sue 98lite.). Why? There's a simple explanation. Because Microsoft added a new shell on IE4, why not on win95 itself you may ask. Cause they want averyone to know that IE is not just a browser anymore, it's part of the OS. If you forced to removed IE, there is no diffrent to using Win95. You can't use WindowsUpdate, you can't use the more imporved version of Windows's interface. (Remember when install IE4, you can actually type a url into the address bar and the whole windows turned into IE?) When you removed IE4, all of this, along with a few other features, is gone. I have a susgestion: why don't u go use Linux since u so hate IE.

p/s: i don't pro-microsoft, neither do i anti-microsoft.

Why don't you guys quit complaining about all the problems with win98. Why don't you get an OS that is not NOT based on the 9X Kernel?? 9x is crap! What you should be using is Windows 2000. As far as OS'es goes, it is by far the best around. LINUX is crap MAC OS is just as horrid as win95 where crashes and lockups are concerned With windows 2000 out why would you want any of the other things that are currently out? 9x crashes and does not manage memory at all. MAC's are just.... ICKY. LINUX is on it's death bed LINUX is quite possibly one of the WORST attempts at an os that i have EVER seen. DIE LINUX DIE!!!! Now, getting of my soap box... WIN2K ROX... Why use anything else?

Haha, funny.

As one previous said, to remove IE and Outlook. Well, I do not want to remove IE. I think it is great. I have Opera as second browser and have removed Netscape due to the lots of trash they put in. As a webmaster I see from the log that most others - at least 80% -- does the same. But Outlook is a different case: Why can I turn off HTML-mails? I can for the ones I am sending, but not the ones I am getting. There is special one spammer from some ugly adult site in Florida that keep sending me HTML-mails with different headers every time. There are even some strange binary code hidden in the mails which freaks me out. If I could find another good and free e-mail application, then Outlook is history. Yes, I know about the simple one with Opera, but is just too simple.

Conclusion: Keep Internet Explorer and get Outlook out of the way.

Well i have Windows 2000 professional with sp1 tri-booting with Red Hat linux 6.2 and Windows 98. I have to say Windows 2k is better than windows 98 by leaps and bounds but to say its more stable than Linux?!?!?!? I have had OS crash problems witn Win2k since day one. Windows 2k is great if you have just a bare minimum of hardware installed to run it like a trident video card, sound blaster 16 etc... Add any new hardware to it and have a nice time trying to get the drivers to work properly without crashing the operating system.
I love windows NT 4.0 and with the release of win2k ( that is NT 5 ) I hope that, in time, it will become more stable. Until then i have to say Linux kicks Windows's a** as far as stablity goes. At least for now.

I tried an experiment. I had 3 systems, identical, except for OS. One ran Caldera eDesktop, one Win98SE, and one Win2K Pro. With all 3 running, with apps going, I turned the power off to all 3. Win2k came back fine, win98 ran scandisk, fixed a problem, Linux needed reinstalled. I would say Win2k is more rock solid after that. And the best way to get Linux to crash (maybe not at OS level)? Run Netscape on it!

Well CPUGuy thanks for reassuring me that not every member of this website is an idiot. Okay, first off you deserve to get infected if your computer is exploited by a hole that's a year old. I also believe that this particular Hole only effects IE 5 and not IE 5.01 or later. This hole was patched along time ago and was also featured on every Tech News website at that time and the patch was also posted on Windowsupdate. Sheesh how many people can be honestly vulnerable to this?

Not everybody constantly checks Windows Update for bugfixes. I know of heaps of "ordinary consumer joe-blow" people who have never installed a bugfix, nor upgraded their browser.

Well that's their fault, it's not MS's job to make sure every single Windows user in the wolrd goes to windowsupdate.

The only problem is that many user can not always update their software. Users from large corporations must follow the guidelines set forth by their company not MS. While its easy for home users to download the latest and greatest, others are not so lucky.

Ok, so not everybody checks windows update bu the same users would scour newsgroups and websites to patch their linux boxes? You're just another linux fanatic that thinks that only he's right and everybody else is stupid. It's pathetic ...

Perhaps they should. Me does this, doesn't it?

If you want to see something kinda scary (it was for me) got to the Mandrake-Linux web site, and look at all the security updates there. That is one heck of a list, compared to IE/Outlook/OE. Which goes to show, NO OS OR SOFTWARE IS PERFECT, just how quick they fix the problems!

You're right. In the linux community, a bug/hole is fixed within 24 hours... At Microsoft, it takes one month. And they don't even find all the bugs... (when they do, they don't necessary say it =)

You are one pathetic little prick, you know that. I am sick and tired of you little 'know it alls' saying that the Linux community fixes the bugs in 24hours, and MS takes a month or two.

Here is a newflash for you, MS actually fixes the bug in less than a week, tests the fix to make sure that everything works fine, and then deploys it in that same week. It's not a little code hack that hasn't even been tested before like the Linux community does, and here is another thing, Linux probably has more major securtiy holes in it that are known than Windows.
And besides that, Linux is an OS, IE/Outlook is NOT!

So why don't you get off your little pale butt, and stop spreading propaganda.

Yepi...

"MS actually fixes the bug in less than a week, tests the fix to make sure that everything works fine, and then deploys it in that same week"

The same week ? Hahaha !!

"Linux probably has more major securtiy holes in it that are known than Windows. "

Wow, can you tell me where you read this ? Maybe it was in the Microsoft Teach Yourself Windows 95 in 24 hours :) Or maybe you read this nowhere, you just know it... And you say i'm a "know-it-alls", mmm ?

"And besides that, Linux is an OS, IE/Outlook is NOT!"

JAMWHEAT compared Linux MDK (french distribution... french rule =) to IE/Outlook. So i just went on.

"So why don't you get off your little pale butt, and stop spreading propaganda."

Keep cool, man ! I don't spread propaganda. Anyway, you're right, Windows is more reliable than Linux. Outlook's security holes are quickly fixed. And Outlook can't cause any problem to his user.

I had a good laugh again, tonight... So long.

PS : i'm not a Tux-lover/eLeEt hAcKeRz. But i'm not a moron either.

Actually, Exactor, I read an article about 6 months ago that compared the average bug fix times of Red Hat (arguably the largest Linux distro avaialable - at least at the time of this study), Sun Solaris and Microsoft. Sun was nowhere to be seen in the ratings. They took well over a year to fix most bugs (keep in mind this is an average). Microsoft and Red Hat were pretty close. Microsoft was, again, on average behind only by a week per fix.

There are otehr benefits Microsoft provides however that many sites do not. They have built a simple distribution site called Windows Update where users can find out about new bug fixes and download the ones that apply.

Also, keep in mind that many bugs only apply to a small number of people. I read abotu bug fixes being released for SQL server or Outlook Express, both of which I do not use at all.

I must admit that Windows Update is a good idea, it's not only a spy from Microsoft... (no no, don't kick me, CPUGuy ;) That's why several Linux distributions are implementing the same function...

Anyway everything you said is right. But when i said "Cool, It was the IE/Outlook security hole of the day" and all that stuff, it was kind of ironic... I laugh when I see every day "Another hole discovered", "a malicious hacked could...", etc...

Obviously, our friend CPUGuy didn't like it. Well, doesn't matter... (but I still think what I said)

Red Hat has a centralised update repository as well.

You need to get a life, CPUGuy. YOU ARE the pathetic propaganda boy here.

You say Linux has more gitches than Windows. PROVE IT.

Try taking a look at the Linux newsgroups after each release. _Literally_ every time you see "xxx no longer works in kernel 2.2.x", or "xxx is slow in 2.2.x". Quality control in Linux is seemingly non-existant.

Actually, I stated "no OS or software", but I guess you could take it I was comparing Mandrake OS to IE/Outlook. Sorry for the confusion, but was only showing security issues are not "only MS problems".

stubear, you are an ass

If the Linux kernels screws up, all you have to do is change your lilo.conf file back to use the old one. You did save it, right? =)

It's a lot easier to revert back to something than it is under Windows.

Plus, Linux is free. Windows is not. Take that under consideration.

Stop it now. Geez, what a bunch of fanatics the Linux community is. If I wanted to sit on my a** all day and tweak my kernels and command lines I would use Linux. But I need to run my company and get some work done. That's why I use Windows 2000 and IE - I have a backup on tape and CD-ROM. My systems are rock solid stable and I get real work done....how about you?

Many times I have _needed_ a driver that is only present in a newer kernel, thus I had no choice but to upgrade. But then along with getting that driver I needed, I got this "bonus" bug I didn't want.

It's about time Linux adopts a more modular design (a la Windows and most other modern OSes) instead of lobbing everything into a single kernel.

I gaurentee it's much easier to revert a Windows machine (WindowsMe), back to a state in which it wasn't broken. It's a program that comes with it called System Restore.

Actually, Linux is a kernel, not an OS.

Same thing happens on Windows. Need I remind you of Service Pack 5 or 6, which broke Lotus Domino? There are plenty of others ...

Yep, and that's ONE service pack. Compare that to broken things in EVERY Linux kernel.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not "anti-Linux" -- I use it on several servers and it does its job well. But based on my experience I would never call it less buggy than Windows 2000.

Let me guess...a day trader...

IT's just as easy on Linux. Put your boot disk or CD in and copy the kernel back to the hard disk. Run lilo and you're done!

(I think that's right, haven't really touched Linux for a while)

"It's about time Linux adopts a more modular design (a la Windows and most other modern OSes) instead of lobbing everything into a single kernel."

I agree. They are starting to, but they need to get their rears in gear.

I find them both useful. Linux for mail serving, news serving, proxy and low-end or non-dynamic web serving. Win2000 for dynamic web-serving, distributed objects and database.

Both have their fair share of bugs. Both are fixing those bugs. Both may bring new ones in. Repeat from start.

It was the IE/Outlook security hole of the day. Thanx MS.

someone should just write one of these damn things that removes outlook/ie from your PC.