Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Windows Cheaper to Patch Than Open Source?

Posted by Zonk on from the fud-for-breakfast dept.

daria42 writes "Is Windows cheaper to patch than open source software? Of course this Microsoft-commissioned report thinks so - but a number of people disagree, including a key Novell Asia-Pac exec, Paul Kangro. Kangro highlights problems with the report including the fact that it refers to problems faced by administrators before 2003: before significant improvements were made to Linux patching tools. 'We didn't have tools like Xen for Linux then,' says Kangro. 'When I patch my Linux box I don't need to bring it up and down any number of times.' Kangro also points out the report doesn't mention costs associated with rebooting systems after a patch is applied."

1 of 473 comments (clear)

  1. Re:apt vs windows update by Kihaji · · Score: 1, Troll

    And if Microsoft started adding in patches for software that isn't theirs you would be screaming "MONOPOLY" at the top of your lungs.