3y3 agree. linux, for example, is never (ri7icised because it's only us3d by experienced users who h4ve allready learned it. Microsoft has a much larger audience to please. but i think they could still do a better security job then they did on xp...

sorry about the coloring...this is what i m34nt to s4y...

3y3 agree. Linux, for example, is never (ri7icised because it's only us3d by experienced users who h4ve already learned it. Microsoft has a much larger audience to please. but i think they could still do a better security job then they did on xp...
J3D1 M4573R what are you saying, or what are you trying to bring across, and why so many times?

Anyway, am not going to bash M$ today but I will say they can do a little better than what we have today.

M$ created WinME which was very very bad, but then they came up with Win2K which I find to be quite stable with a view holes well maybe a lot of holes here and there but nonetheless it's stable in comparison to the others.

WinXP home, I can't stand that OS it beats the crap out of me. WinXP Professional a lot better but I can't see it as being as stable as Win2k but it should be it came out after. That's my problem with M$ when they are supposed to be getting better they pull out something that has more problem and claims it has more functionality. That's BS to me and I think M$ can do much better than that.

I have used M$ and I will continue using M$ along with my *nix flavors cause there are just something u need to run on either. One thing though I will continue to bash both *nix and M$ because that's the only way we will get something better.

Competition leads to a better product no doubt about it and we the users have to point out the flaws.

Guidance...