Windows Vista no more secure than XP: Report

Filed in archive Software on May 31, 2007

Read the blog entry that comments on a report that Windows Vista is no more secure than Windows XP.

A week of extensive testing using Vista and two notebook computers leads the report writers to comment:

Vista remains riddled with holes, despite its multilayer security architecture and embedded security tools. Besides providing no improvement in virus protection vs. XP, Vista brings little or no security gains over its predecessor against such threats as RDS exploits, script exploits, image exploits, VML exploits, malformed Web pages and known malicious URLs, the Test Center found.

The big selling point that Microsoft has emphasized is the increased security of Vista; seems like this advantage is a hollow call from Microsoft. I cannot see how a business person like myself would actually go for Vista with the negatives now emerging.

Personally I have no regrets on changing to Ubuntu (or variations on the Ubuntu theme, like Kubuntu which is a little more Windows like). In fact, I have both Ubuntu and Kubuntu installed and go between them depending on what I am actually doing for the day/week/or other time.

I think you will find that the 'baddies' out there will exploit Vista and find gaping holes. The problem I see is that with Vista being relatively new the 'baddies' are going to get out ahead of the 'hole-fillers' and therefore your computer could be at greater risk going to Vista. If you are not buying a new computer I would recommend either staying with Microsoft XP, or changing to Ubuntu Linux (or Kubuntu Linux). Kubuntu is the same thing as Ubuntu but using the KDE desktop that runs a little like Windows XP, and can certainly run most any Windows program using a Third Party Application called WINE.

I just think Vista is going to take a lot more work before it is as secure as XP (the known devil) or Kubuntu (for which there are very few 'baddies').