I try to bring up Linux in conversations as much as possible (just as I do with Stargate), but consumers are often hesitant to use something they’re not used to. While I completely understand the learning curve involved, I bring up as many points as possible to convince people that Linux beats Windows. One of the first things I usually mention is that Linux doesn’t get viruses. “Why not?” “Well, it’s more a question of why Windows DOES get viruses.”
But what makes Linux less vulnerable to viruses? After all, Windows is made by a multi-billion dollar company, while Linux is thrown together by a bunch of volunteers who might never have even met IRL. White I do hold that Linux is less vulnerable in nature simply because it’s not coded to allow unauthorized programs to run, a few other things might be involved too.
Okay, so Linux isn’t coded to accept viruses like Windows is—but what if a really clever hacker does make a virus? If this happened on Windows, the vulnerability would need to be reported, and then it might get passed around the office a few times like the file of a convict at a government agency. Then, multiple coders would collaborate to find the most efficient way to deal with the flaw, at which point it would be submitted for testing. Assuming it passes, the fix would be scripted, packaged into an update, and, finally, would probably be released to the public next Update Tuesday.
That’s all fine and good, but what happens when a Linux vulnerability arises? Firstly, unlike Windows, nobody has to fall victim to the virus for it to be detected. That’s because tons of hobbyist programmers with nothing better to do are scrutinizing the Linux source code every day. They can only do this legally because Linux is open source—its code is released to the public. Similarly, if a vulnerability is found, it can be patched right away; the programmer finds a way to fix the flaw, then contacts someone—most likely either the maintainer of their distribution or the creators of the Linux kernel itself. After making sure it works with a second set of eyes, the patch can be released as a distribution update, or included in the next version of the kernel.
As you can see, in optimal settings Linux problems could be fixed much more quickly and efficiently than Windows flaws could. Let’s talk about a different problem now. The other day, a subscriber messaged me asking if I was concerned about Ubuntu spying on people. I suspect he was trolling, but never the less, I explained to him that because Ubuntu Linux is open source, tons of people view the source code every day, and these people would notice and say something if a monitor or backdoor was built into the operating system. Windows isn’t open source, however; while I highly doubt that Microsoft is spying on you, they could do it much easier than any Linux distro can. Oh, and Mac OS? Don’t even get me started on Mac OS.
So, the next time you’re wanting to up Linux, don’t forget to mention crowd coding. While open-source software might not be perfect, being studied and fixed by the community using it certainly adds stability.