[for-q-clinton]

The difference is that in your case to get Windows passwords up to UNIX standards you have to write a complete replacement of the Windows password management system (don't forget, you have to store the individual salts next to the passwords), while I would just have to put a few for loops into Linux's current password management system. No hard work, no large fee, just a tiny bit of editing and a recompile. You don't have that option with Windows.

But someone had to write the linux part. No? Or did it magically write itself?

Face it, you didn't know it was available and now you're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Often when windows has an advantage Linux types will say I can customize linux to do that. Or there's an OSS project right now underway to do that, it should be ready for beta in x months.

You're a joke.

[antiRepublicrat]

But someone had to write the linux part. No?

You seem to be missing something. My thing doesn't even need to exist in order for Linux passwords to be too hard to break by today's lookup tables. They already are. Your thing does need to exist for Windows to get up to the quality of current Linux passwords. And you haven't even proven it does exist.

Often when windows has an advantage Linux types will say I can customize linux to do that. Or there's an OSS project right now underway to do that, it should be ready for beta in x months.

We're talking about how it's shipped from Microsoft, or in Linux how it's shipped in common distros. Or, in this case, just to be nice, I will accept an add-on if it's available and widely used, as that would still have an impact on general Windows security.

Face it, Windows is inferior in this aspect. Is that so hard to accept, or do you love Microsoft so much?