Linux security

[Daniel Carrera]

John L Fjellstad wrote:
> No, you read me wrong.  I didn't think it's necessary that Windows will
> be better.

<quote>
And it doesn't change Eric Dunbar's point in that as bugs get discovered
and fixed, MS Windows will get better.
</quote>

> I disagree that it's necessary that Windows will either stay
> the same or be worse, which was your premise.

Show me where I said that. Where did I say anything like that? I said 
that the pressures acting on Microsoft mean that to them it makes 
finnancial sense to release insecure software and just fix the 5-10% of 
bugs that hit users after they've done their damage. And I used an 
expert reference to back my position.

> Despite increasing functionality, it hasn't
> become less stable, which is *your* premise.

Show me where I said that. Either you can't read or you're making stuff 
up. I said that new functionality introduces bugs (true) and whether 
Windows gets better or worse depends on the rate at which old bugs are 
removed and the rate at which new bugs are introduced (also true). This 
isn't a difficult concept. I'd expect any high school kid to understand 
it. Why can't you?

Daniel.
-- 
      /\/`) http://opendocumentfellowship.org
     /\/_/
    /\/_/   ...and starting today, all passwords must
    \/_/    contain letters, numbers, doodles, sign
    /       language and squirrel noises.