> > Since there are quite a few more
> > problems with Linux, and the risks are much greater, I'm not buying into
> > your argument.
>
> What problems ? A properly set-up Linux box has only the services and
> tools installed that
> are necessary. (If done properly, of course) We've even got control over
> the kernel.
>
> Windows gives one much less control over what is and what is not
> installed. (Ever try to remove the web browser? Uninstall ActiveX or
> Outlook Express ?)
>

1) Creating a custom install, and even more compiling a custom kernel have
two major problems.

A) It takes a lot more training than required to secure a Windows box.

B) It takes more time than securing a Windows box (and securing a Windows
machine takes quite long enough, thank you).

[Item 1 is less relevant as more units are manufactured in a product run.
At a certain point the free *NIX gains a cost advantage.]


2) It assumes that a minimal, targeted install is acceptable.  Note that
this means that you have decided to use a computer as a secure data
appliance.  It is no longer a proper general computer that can emulate any
state or data processing machine.