Slashdot Mirror
MS Security Chief Says Windows is Safer Than Linux
Kip Winger writes "Mike Nash, Microsoft's Chief Security Executive, has made claims that Windows is more secure than Linux. In a recent online chat, he staunchly defended Microsoft's record on security, basing part of his argument on how Windows Server 2003's 15 patches in the past year are far less than what RedHat or SuSE have had to endure." He also mentioned the recent purchase of Sybari and their Antivirus product.
Right and I have a lovely bridge you can buy...
Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. - Martin Luther King, Jr.
Or is M$ really flooding the media with a lot of their fantasies? also, they are not very funny any more...
Pumbaa! I don't wonder; I know.
2. Distribute 12 patches over a year
3. Claim superiority by only having 12 patches in a year
4. Profit
Cool, for once, didn't even need a ??? for item 3 - that's why MS is doing so well :-)
Irresponsible PC users cause a lot of the major security issues in this connected world; you can't put all the blame on Microsoft.
You're absolutely right. However, I think we can at least claim that MS creates favorable conditions for the spread of virii both in the products themselves and user education associated with them.
What about some of the biggest issues in recent history like blaster or code red? Both were patched by Microsoft well in advance of their outbreak.
Those are two very good examples of MS breaking from normal behavior. That's just my opinion, however, so take it with a grain of salt.
Windows is definitely more secure. I patch whenever necessary and have never had a problem! I love Microso
At a recent TS2 event, after the presenter said that they will shortly be cutting off Windows Update for users of the major pirate CD keys, I said, "What does it matter if they cut it off, users never patch anyways!"