http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105_2-5097423.html
"Take your standard Windows install for example, you need to apply dozens of patches as soon as you install it to make it even half secure. I've just taken a look at the content directory on our Microsoft Software Update Services server here at work and there are over 600Mb of security updates, some critical. Granted they're not all pertinent to a particular system, but it gives you a good idea,"Unix and Linux have become even harder to penetrate, saying that even out of the box "most become practically impenetrable" with just a small amount of configuration
man i just watched that interview with ballmer saying windows is more secure than open source and when he compared windows 2003 to redhat 6, that was some cheap funny shitty comparising, he really bit his own tongue right there, redhat 6.0 came out in april of 1999. does anyone know the numbers of vulnerabilities now with between win 2k3 and the latest redhat?
yea I just watched that I was funny but also if you look closely the two guys asking the question tried soo hard to keep in there laughter while he was talking. Also why the hell does he have to talk so fuckin loud we can all tell he is just screaming out FUD >
. oh and Win2k had more vulnerabilites then RH. But what he didnt say was how quickly the patches where fixed
p.s sorry my grammer sucks :-[
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks