The Instigator
Franciscodc
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
vbaculum
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Lunix distributions are safer than windows distributions.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/9/2013 Category: Technology
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,134 times Debate No: 35449
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

Franciscodc

Pro

First, of all- Im Francisco Daniel and this is going to be my first english debate ever, so its gonna be hard to me, because my English is no that good, Thanks :).

Many people say :

1. You can't get a virus on GNU/Linux OS.
2. Linux doesnt need Antivirus Software.
3. There is not Malware for Linux
4. Big companys use Linux because its safer.

And many other stupid facts.

Im not saying in any way that windows is safer then Linux or Linux safer than windows, im saying that Linux can be as Dangerous as windows.
vbaculum

Con

In the comments section, my opponent has confirmed that he is arguing for the resolution "Linux is as dangerous as Windows". By "dangerous", it is clear from his round 1 that he means "prone to malicious threats".

I look forward to reading his arguments for this resolution in his round 2.
Debate Round No. 1
Franciscodc

Pro

Sorry, For not answering quic, since, i dint saw your arguments.

well my argument is that Linux user have more computer nowledge, in that case they know how to protect their self from getting a virus. As well linux has less users, making this inactivity for programmers to create virus for linux. What virus programmers look for is making money from unexperienced people, and its hard to find people vulnerable to this attacks, BUT! this doesnt make linux safer than windows, in compare, if linux had same user that windows has, They would have more activity and more programmers to interes getting some cash from them.

1.Una de las vulnerabilidades de GNU/Linux es que multitud de usuarios piensan que no es vulnerable a los virus. Tom Ferris,

2.un investigador de Security Protocols en Mission Viejo, California, dijo en 2006: "En la mente de la gente, si no es Windows, es seguro, y ese no es el caso
vbaculum

Con

Pro seems to be arguing that, since Linux has fewer users, virus writers have less of an incentive to target Linux machines, and instead, target Windows machines. He wants to say that, even though this may make Linux more secure, it doesn't mean that it's inherently more secure. However, the resolution doesn't concern itself with the inherent security of Linux, but rather its de facto level of security, i.e., how secure Linux actually is compared to Windows. So by pointing out that virus writers are less interested in targeting Linux, Pro has inadvertently argued against the resolution.

So, as Pro points out, Linux is more secure against viruses because their authors would rather target Windows. Targeting Linux, which runs on about 1% of all computers [1], would be irrational, since, by definition, the success of a virus is determined by how well it is able to propagate itself. Additionally, as Pro points out, it is a common assumption that Linux users are more technically advanced than users of other OS's. This is another reason it would be irrational to target Linux machines since they are not assumed to be vulnerable hosts. Viruses are very rarely written to target Linux hosts, and the ones that do would propagate very poorly for a want of hosts.

In conclusion, a user is safer from viruses if he or she is on a Linux computer.

[1] http://marketshare.hitslink.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Franciscodc

Pro

Franciscodc forfeited this round.
vbaculum

Con

I won't introduce any new arguments in this round since Pro forfeited his round 3. Hopefully he will return in round 4 to argue his case further.
Debate Round No. 3
Franciscodc

Pro

Franciscodc forfeited this round.
vbaculum

Con

Again, I won't post any new arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
Franciscodc

Pro

Franciscodc forfeited this round.
vbaculum

Con

In R2, I demonstrated how all the arguments used by Pro to support the resolution are actually arguments that negate the resolution. Pro forfeited all the following rounds, and thus did not counter my arguments. This clearly demonstrates that my arguments, in this debate, were stronger than his.

For citations, Pro used Spanish language sources despite the fact that the debate was being conducted in English. Pro conducted his portion of the debate inappropriately and should be docked the conduct point.

Pro isn't a native English speaker and should therefore be given a handicap for his grammar. However, that doesn't excuse the fact that he didn't use a spell checker in his rounds. Spell checkers are available on almost every computer system and one is provided by DDO itself, so there really is no excusing this. His poor spelling made his (forgivable) poor grammar that much more difficult to understand.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Franciscodc 3 years ago
Franciscodc
Sorry, dindt copy they transalation

One of the vulnerabilities in GNU / Linux is that many users think it is not vulnerable to viruses. Tom Ferris,

a researcher of Security Protocols in Mission Viejo, California, said in 2006: "In the minds of people, if not Windows, is safe, and that is not the case
Posted by Franciscodc 3 years ago
Franciscodc
Linux is as dangerous as Windows.
Posted by vbaculum 3 years ago
vbaculum
Are you arguing that Linux distributions are safer than Windows distributions, or that Linux is as dangerous as Windows. Could you maybe state the resolution you are arguing for and declare you are Pro for that resolution. Thanks.
No votes have been placed for this debate.