[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Full-disclosure] Windows' future (reprise)
- To: "full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Windows' future (reprise)
- From: BMF <badmotherfsckr@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 13:54:15 -0700
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Thor (Hammer of God)
<Thor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I am constantly amazed at posts like this where you make yourself sound like
> some sort of statistical genius because you were "able to predict" that since
> last year was %243, that this year would be %243. Wow. Really?
I agree that the post is a bit pompous...however:
> And for the record, these claims of 'inherent insecurity' in Windows are
> simply ignorant. If you are still running Windows 95 that's your problem.
> Do a little research before post assertions based on 10 or 20 year old issues.
> This smacks of the classic troll, where you say things like "nothing that
> Microsoft makes is secure and it never will be"
But...it is true that nothing Microsoft (or anyone, perhaps) makes is
secure. And given that Microsoft has a decades long history of far
worse than industry average security I think it is pretty reasonable
to surmise that Windows will never be secure.
> and then go on to say how easy it is to migrate, and how it's free, with only
> a one off cost, and how to move off of .NET.
We migrated. With only a one off cost. Been a few years now. Business
is looking good.
> Obvious "predictions," ignorant assumptions, and a total lack of any true
> understanding of business computing. Yep, "troll."
Trollish but not entirely wrong.
BMF
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/