[H]omer <spam@xxxxxxx> espoused:
> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>
>> Okay, so it's _confirmed_ now. Not only have they compared apples and oranges
>> as people argue all along (comparing minor fixes to a 2,000-package distro
>> against XP+minesweeper with bloated multi-hit fixes), but they also cheat by
>> keeping embarrassing things secret.
>
> Makes those MS funded studies like the recent CTO "Days of Risk"
> analysis a complete sham, doesn't it? Where's their "final proof" now?
>
It was Microsoft who first started trying to fix figures in this area,
in fact, if you look back in cola history, you'll see both Erik F and
Timmy both arguing that rolled-up patches for Windows count as "1", and
should be compared against the sum totality of patches for all packages
for all linux distros.
It was only natural that Microsoft would continue down a typically
disingenuous route.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |
|
|
