>>>Besides keeping patched and being vigilant, you can be proactive by disabling active content such as scripting and Adobe/Java as listed above, by using FireFox with the NoScript extension. It's always good to be retroactive too, by having good backups.
>>
>>IMO a Linux VM running on Win Host is better - having a dedicated Boot USB-stick for separate machine is best.
>>Currently my old 17' laptop has those tasks: running ubuntu with browser and nothing else
>>a single core 2Gig machine is good enough although adblocker on some sites is more helpful than on current CPUs.
>>I once tried to have separate installs with adobe or scripting allowed, but nowadays think a fully enabled install which
>>can be scrapped and replaced by a fresh copy is best. Clearly YMMV depending on personal habits,
>>but for me it is better to highten the fence as Murphy corollary says it will hit you exactly when safety is out of date.
>>
>>regards
>>
>>thomas
>
>Are your unning VFP on a Linux machine?

Nope. At least not directly via WINE.
Had it running a couple of years ago when there was the WINE/vfp hoopla,
but decided it was not worth the effort to test against even more OS problems -
and install problems - back then SMB problems where not in the MS world.
But I have it also in a Win-VM, which can run on linux as well.

I agree with most that linux desktop for broad usage won't happen,
but I learned to love it early this century when I had to reanimate a large group of PCs
with no idea of installed HW, previous formating, passwords and so on.
LiveLinux (back then Knoppix) saved the day and my sanity from click feavor.
Since then kept always something running for enhanced safety.
Linux is faster, is easy enough for tech-liking people, but the $ saved from MS OS
tax are not worth the time to teach the no-tech circle linux ways.

And for biz apps the client mostly is Win - Only one client was on Linux,
and for him nearly all the licenses from the office PCs were put into VM's,
the office machines reinstalled with their dev licnses and the VM's given to the client
for the install time measured in favor for the installer.
License-wise ok, as those licenses were in fact double.

Running as server MS seems to loose ground though - will grow interesting.

regards

thomas