<p>Wow, lot's of good info goat4d. Thanks :)</p>
<p>Thanks, goat4d, that is true. Also, the security issue is multifaceted. I will admit that freeBSD is probably inherently more secure than Windows.</p>
<p>Also, @Saluki Alex, it's worth noting that the NT kernel--the current Windows kernel--is actually based off of OS/2. OS/2 was a joint project between Microsoft and IBM back in the 90s to create a 32 bit operating system for the x86 platform, until MS pulled a fast one on IBM and decided to stop contributing, but to continue to use the OS/2 code base for their own new OS. While NT has pulled away from OS/2 by quite a bit in the past ten to fifteen years, that still might explain some of the viruses on OS/2. OS/2 does still include a Win16/Win32 emulation layer.</p>
<p>Finally, I might be wrong, but I've always viewed Trojan horses as a type of virus. I have yet to find a virus that doesn't require at least some user interaction to get started, even if it's as simple as navigating to a questionable Web site. Even so, you'd have to click "OK" to load up an ActiveX control or something of that sort to load it.</p>
<p>Basically, if you're smart, don't click on random crap, and install basic security software to protect yourself, you'll be fine. In all the years that I've been using Windows, I've yet to have a virus.</p>
<p>@saluki alex</p>
<p>See? Unix is not Linux.</p>
<p>A trojan horse is a virus but at the same time isn't. And the Mac isn't immune to viruses or trojan horses. I haven't heard of many problems with OS X at all but on the classic Mac OS (1984-2001) there were some viruses and yes, trojan horses.</p>
<p>Some trojan horses erase your drive but there was at least one for the Mac that was a fully functional game that installed a virus in your system when you played it.</p>
<p>What I like to do, since it's far less vulnerable to viruses, is surf the web on my Macs and keep my PC's disconnected. If I need to download a file for the PC, I'll often do it on the Mac and then transfer it to the PC on a flash drive. Of course, I do keep the possibility of connecting a PC to the web open in case it needs something like automatic updates, but I rarely put them online.</p>
<p>The OS/2 deal is why IBM is so high on Linux. A wonderful marriage between IBM and MS ended in a messy divorce after that one. Ever notice how they've got Linux stuff all over their commercials and website but only mention a little blip about Windows? Sort of like promoting your new wife and leaving your ex's picture up because of your son or something.</p>
<p>@afruff23</p>
<p>I'm not sure what you're problem is, or better yet, what your new argument is.</p>
<p>You accused me of saying that Mac OS X is bases on Linux, something that I never said. I clearly said that OS X is based on UNIX, which is true (by way of freeBSD, but it's still UNIX).</p>
<p>Perhaps you have trouble admitting that you were wrong, or just have trouble apologizing when you said that I didn't know what I was talking about, when clearly it was you who fails to grasp the concept at hand.</p>
<p>Interesting report that sheds some more light on the subject: <a href="http://blogs.csoonline.com/windows_vista_6_month_vulnerability_report%5B/url%5D">http://blogs.csoonline.com/windows_vista_6_month_vulnerability_report</a></p>
<p>Given that, I stand corrected. Goat4d, you're definitely right on this issue--Apple's freeBSD-based kernel definitely wins over both Linux and XP. Vista really has improved Windows by a lot though, and that report backs it up.</p>
<p>Now, if they'd only use the Singularity (<a href="http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity/%5B/url%5D">http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity/</a>) code as the basis for codename "Vienna!" Nobody would be able to knock Windows for security reasons ever again.</p>
<p>Oh well, here's to hoping...</p>