*sigh*
Yeah, but we all agreed on your point that 1 does not equal 0 long ago. Knitebane, not Swordmaker and not I, said this:
The question is "Why is an operating system so easy to infect that it requires us to have this conversation [about viruses]?" Other operating systems don't seem to have this problem.Knitebane didn't say "zero" either, he said it was a non-problem, i.e. below the threshold of worry. For instance, do I worry about people trying to break into my systems with user/pass auth? No, because it's not an effective attack.
You misinterpreted "it's not a problem for other operating systems" (meaning they are robust), and thought he was saying there were no attacks. OF COURSE there are attacks against all operating systems. No one has said otherwise.
You have been beating that dead horse for dozens of comments since then, and I am about to conclude that you're not just being dense, you're trolling. Against my better judgment I have again tried to enlighten you that you're tilting at a windmill here.
We all agree, 1 attack does not equal 0 attacks. But if the '1' (or '2' or whatever) are INEFFECTIVE, they are below the threshold of concern.
*sigh*
No actually you didn’t. Over and over again you guys keep saying I said the threat is equal, here’s some quotes:
Swordmaker - Saying that having an OS with few minor attack points is the same as an OS having thousands of attacks point is what is silly.
you - Unix had one or two demonstrable worms/viruses in the past 20 years, that it was somehow equivalent to Windows,
knitebane - Attempting to say that it’s the same
See over and over you guys say I’m saying it’s the same level of problem. And yet if you actually bothered to READ what I’ve said you’d see all the way back in post 46 I said “All OSes have the problem, maybe not as bad as Windows but they still have it.”
When knitebane said it was a non-problem he was wrong. It’s a problem for all OSes. If he’d said it wasn’t AS BIG a problem he’d have been correct. Which is my point, which you guys just can’t seem to bother to acknowledge is what I actually said.
The only reason I’m beating any horse is because you guys keep lying about what I said. Had you not constantly added a concept of equivalency to what I said, a concept I DIRECTLY CONTRADICTED at the beginning of this conversation, it would already be over. But here, again, you insist I’m taking a position exactly the opposite of what I’m taking. I’m not trolling. You’re the one throwing insults, you’re the one lying about what I said, you’re the one showing all the trollish behavior. All you need to do to make this a polite conversation again is get off your high horse, stop assigning me a position I’ve never taken, and stop assuming.