That is, again, nonsense. You were talking about the out of the box security. Windows is garbage, especially windows server. Luckily for that garbage OS this discussion does not involve performance.
Yes, i were talking about out-of-the-box in one sentence:
Generally, yes. Linux is safer (out-of-the-box). And you are more secured against the day-to-day threats, yes.
All i have said was that any system can get compromised and that no system is secure directly after installing.
It is the configuration which makes it more or less secure. The possibilities and simplicity of unix-based OS's are the reason linux can be made more secure in an easier way.
This has nothing to do with linux = secure; windows = horrible. It all depends on the configuration and the management.. always.
What has me never seeing a linux system get compromised have to do with the existence of exploits? Strawman facepalm. I'm well familiar with exploits, especially those that were planted by NSA undercover contributors[1]. Read before you respond next time or just avoid responding at all (the later is the better option).
[1] Greetings to all american kool-aid drinkers again; you live in such a lovely country.
Just because you didn't see X, it means X doesn't exist ? What kind of an argument is that ?
Also.. why are you hating so much ? There is not a single reason to be aggressive at all..
Edit:
Just checked your post history and it seems you have a bad day today..
What about we stop the discussion here now and talk some other day about this topic (given that you want to properly discuss this topic) ?