Message-Id: <3.0.16.19901025164221.08a775ae@tellus.swip.net> X-Sender: mt58779 AT tellus DOT swip DOT net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 Demo (16) To: opendos AT delorie DOT com From: Bernie Subject: Re: Overclocking, Linux issues: was Re: About Micro$quash... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 18:03:25 +0200 Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com Rob wrote: >> security.) NT also has better security than does 95/98/ME. However, if you >> want real security, go with Linux > >I'm not so sure about this. I wholeheartedly recommend Linux over any MS >OS, but is it really more secure? Sure, in some ways, but I know I could >easily get root access on any Linux box (if I had physical access, that >is.) I'd have to work a bit harder to get Administrator control on NT. Wouldn't this do: 1. Boot DOS. 2. Use NTFSDOS and copy the file containing the latest logins and passwords. 3. Crack the codes at another computer. >I understand from >Glenn McCorkle here that Arachne for DOS can give you a graphical Web >browser under DOSEMU (and the Linux version is coming someday.) There is a Linux version already (and has been for a while): http://browser.arachne.cz/linux/ >I've >heard some subjective comments from users who believe that their Windows >performance is better under VMWare than native Windows. I would believe it since 16-bit Windows programs are faster under OS/2.