Well, Windows is back on the disk.

[Michael T. Richter]

On Thu, 2006-19-01 at 07:41 -0600, Richard Colbert Jr wrote:
> I never meant to imply that Debian had there shit together when it came to
> releasing patches. What I mean was MS doesn't even work on patches (usually)
> until it has hit the media. 

This is trivially proven incorrect.  What's the proof?  When I was using
Windows a lot (i.e. until about a month ago), I was downloading updates
at least once a month (sometimes more).  That since XP got released
in...  2001, was it?  2002?  Each time there were multiple fixes per
patch.  Most of the fixes were of the variety "a weakness has been found
which could allow an attacker...blah blah blah".  The vast majority of
them never hit the press -- and indeed most of them were purely
hypothetical attacks with ZERO examples in the wild.

Microsoft not talking about working on patches isn't the same as them
not working on them.

--
Michael T. Richter
Email: ttmrichter at gmail.com, mtr1966 at hotpop.com
MSN: ttmrichter at hotmail.com, mtr1966 at hotmail.com; YIM:
michael_richter_1966; AIM: YanJiahua1966; ICQ: 241960658; Jabber:
mtr1966 at jabber.cn
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20060120/6051be4d/attachment.sig>