Monday, July 21, 2008

Vista has 50% fewer security vulnerabilities than XP? LOL!

hmm, so less is better, agreed, but still nowehere near ZERO!
In case you forgot the history, here is one example, from the NY Times.

In a mix of online and print material(Online July 8, print July14), J. Nicholas Hoover points out, with the help of Brad Brooks(no relation to me), VP of Windows Consumer marketing that "We broke a lot of things" when discussing Microsoft Vista.

And we should be happy that the safest most secure version ever to be released by Redmond, has:
"According to Microsoft, Windows Vista had fewer than half the security vulnerabilities Windows XP had in its first year. Brooks even made a bold claim that Windows Vista was the most secure commercial operating system ever in its first year of release, and said "you don't hear Apple saying that," though he didn't lay out the evidence for that claim. "

So now Microsoft has turned around their inability to write secure code and make it sound like that is a good thing?

Think Brad needs some reassigning or a promotion, depending on how you view this info.


  1. No security issues here since purchasing two new machines last year running Vista Ultimate.

  2. LOL indeed. "the most secure commercial operating system ever in its first year of release" I bet there's even no factual data to back this up.

    I'd also bet for example any version of AmigaOS had less vulnerabilities.

    @chris - just because you haven't seen them doesn't mean they're not there ;-)