Ubuntu is safer than Windows, it's official

Come on guys. Ubuntu is safe because it's less than 1% desktop/notebook marketshare. If it took over, it'd be even worse. Look how good these hackers are at reverse-engineering Windows code and exploiting it. You think it's safer if you give them the source code too? You think the "open source community" has enough people working for free to issue patches and updates to compete with an army of nerds in grandmother's basements being enabled by people that click 'OK' and 'Next' to everything they see on their computer screen? Sorry dude, no way. Not that I'm happy with Windows completely, but to suggest Linux is a Windows replacement, is a joke. By the way, if you look at servers, mainframes, and supercomputers, Linux and UNIX are pretty big there. You don't think punks and hackers know how to get into those servers, mainframes, and supercomputers? They probably look in on that stuff all the time. They just don't infect many of them because they don't want to do serious jail time for hacking into a military or government network. But if all the Aunts, cousins, and neighbors of the world have Linux on their Dell with a always connected broadband connection, considered it just as pwned as any OS...

Ubuntu is pretty good, but the backend still needs work to make it user friendly. The GUI has definitely improved, but updates and package management still need more work. I don't have an hour to figure out why a program wouldn't compile; just tell me and confirm the requirements managing all that.

Meanwhile the only Ubuntu systems sold by Dell are one silly netbook and one outdated laptop. Every other desktop and laptop comes with Microsoft Windows .

The Ubuntu page is an aberration probably created by two guys working out of a basement office at Dell. It's not representative of the whole company.

There are an awful lot of people hatin on Linux here because they had problems with some obsolete version.

Yeah, I though Windows 98 was crap too. Try finding a Win98 driver for the latest Nvidia cards, for example. You cant! Point being?

The fact is that if you approach Ubuntu (and most other distros) in an unbiased way they are *exactly the same* as Windows. In terms of functionality or usability there is almost *nothing* to choose between them.

Sure, you can single out this or that feature of Linux that isnt 100% perfect. Similarly, you can single out this or that feature of Windows that isnt 100% perfect. To put it mildly.

So. There are *millions* of people using Linux daily and having no problems with it. Saying it "doesnt work" or is "too hard to use" just makes you look like you dont know what youre talking about. So please can you just stop doing that?

On behalf of everyone, no matter what OS they use - thanks.

"Since the massed will not know how to manage linux/ubuntu, it will be come even safer still as they stop using thier computers."
WHAT!?WHAT!?
I have installed ubuntu in several computers that are owned by not computers experts (the contrary is true!) and they found that ubuntu in fact IS easier, prettier and more functional!(multiple desktops, programs and menus more organised, no need to install antivirus, easier to install new programs through ubuntu one etc!)
UBUNTU IS READY FOR EVERYONE and it is easier than windows to use!
Just give the chance to the world to try it!

Thought I'd better come out and say it... I assume you've been wrestling with Ubuntu 9.10, but it is specifically 9.10 and recently superseded by 10.04. They have the eccentric practice of mainly doing x.04 and x.10 releases, with the number reflecting the year and month, e.g. October 2009 and April 2010. There is also a "long term support" edition of 10.04 which is intended to be particularly suitable for computers that you don't want to upgrade substantially more than once: maintenance updates and compatibility will be maintained for a good while.

Configuration I caennot help you with, but I know all about the version numbers :-)

I've just installed Ubuntu 9.1 to try it out.
First, fresh out of install I had to update the package manager in order to be able to download new packages. ??
Then, I spent no less than two evenings searching for a way to get the official Nvidia driver update working on the bloody OS.
For that, I had to go install yet another package.

Whereas Windows you install, go to Nvidia's site, download the driver, launch it and reboot. Done.

I respect the fact that Linux is a far better OS in every respect. I hate the Windows registry with a passion, and I despise the fact that any installer can plonk dlls in my system folders without so much as a "please".
Yet, with all the goodwill I have towards Linux, it is simply not as useable as Windows out of the box. It may have a graphical interface, but said interface is not inherently destined to make things more user-friendly, just better-looking.
I want ease of use in addition to security as robust functionality. I'm sure it will happen, given a few more decades, but we're not there yet.

@Spork

It annoys me when laymen try to comment on OS design. Clearly you are somebody who has never worked in any tech support role.

It is very frustrating trying to explain a sequence a mouse clicks to someone, whereas it's reliable and easy for them to copy and paste from a web browser into the terminal.

And it's a complete joke when you find yourself doing all graphical server management for Windows Server! @

You are completely out of date - everything for routine installation and maintenance is GUI (doesn't have to be if you prefer CLI) and as been for years on most of the big distros

Perhaps you haven't had to tell someone how to do something on their computer over the phone or internet in the past.

It's a lot easier to for them to make an error in misunderstanding if you're asking them to click here, then here, then here, than it is for you to ask them to type, "sudo apt-get update" or whatever in the terminal.

The fact that the command line exists and is well-structured and accessible makes support easier for both the supporter and the supported.

I guess you have not used a GNU/Linux distro in the past decade? Ubuntu, and almost all other Distros have very user friendly GUI for installing software.

In fact, all execpt the fanbois and employees of M$ will agree that it is far easier to find and install SAFE, VIRUS FREE, MALWARE FREE software using the package management GUIs included in almost all GNU/Linux distros, then it is to find and install SAFE, VIRUS FREE, MALWARE FREE software in the Windows OS of your choice.

Yeah, Ubuntu might be safer, but having to constantly do type this crap: "sudo-apt-get-etc......" into the terminal just to do what SHOULD be incredibly simple tasks is ridiculous and will hold Linux back forever.

Yes, I know, there is a package manager, but when you look for help online with stuff, all you get it an endless stream of "oh, just type or copy/paste this into the terminal" and then there's 10 lines of text that need to be entered. And that'll just be to update bloody codecs or something.

Linux might be safe, but it's a total fail when it comes to ease of use. They will NEVER become any kind of major player until the terminal is completely removed.

I love Linux and how it has grown over the years. IN MY OPINION it is far superior to windows. It,s not only faster it is safer and the reason it's safer is that security is built into the core, not haphazardly tacked on. Most people will stick with whatever comes on there computer though, so this is one time I might agree with Dell.
Thats a big slap in the face for Microsoft and I hope HP and the rest foloow.

MS has had years to make windows safer, and it has a little. In the early days MS was not concerned with security, according to some coders that worked at MS. It's hard to change the foundation of what windows is with the registry and feeble attempt attempt at security. Yes there the most targeted os for several reasons but I am certain I am safer running Linux. That does not mean I will never have a problem but pride in what they do vs the greed of MS to me is the better way to go. I run 3 different computers with windows and Lucid Lynx dual boot. The only time I us windows is for Netflix.Do I trust Microsft, HELL NO. Do I trust Ubuntu, much more than MS and the truth is Ubuntu is the better os hands down.
Thanks to the people who made Linux possible.

...Linux on the desktop? JKLOL we all know that will never happen.

Ubuntu isn't worried about becoming number 1. It's there for everyone to use. It's solid, easy to use, and friendly. Most people don't have the slightest idea of what's going on with Windows. They are just following their basic pattern. If they were given a chance to use Linux most people would learn it and stick with it.

Please, stop exaggerating the OSes positions. There's no need to be an unwitting shill of Microsoft. Take the time yourself to learn and use it. We'll all be better off if you did.

Since the massed will not know how to manage linux/ubuntu, it will be come even safer still as they stop using thier computers.

And, if ubuntu were to magically become the #1 OS, how many people still think it will be safe. The hackers/virus writers will be targeting is just as hard. And all those "safer than windows" lemmings will suddenly be quiet.

Think of all those (wasted) compute cycles used to scan for viruses. What's the carbon footprint for that?

Expect them to fail to follow up after the LTS+1 release and let the offered models wither into overpriced obsolescence.

It's easy to be the #1 volume OEM when they're the only OEM with the nadgers to try it at all.

Yes, indeed. That's all I ever ask for.