>The same company lets it's code out before testing it, letting us test it >for them. That's the point, you keep twisting it into Apple's favor because >you can't see anything but that soft glow from Steve Jobs' eyes. And I >never said they had poor software, that's your tactic. I said very clearly >and I'll say it again, it's not about security, it's about how many code >fixes these companies had to issue, if OS X has zero wild threats, why does >it have so many security updates? Because of badly written code they didn't >test well enough...the same argument you've been using against the Zune.
You keep beating that dead horse. While MS was struggling to produce just one misbegotten Vista, Apple gave us Leopard, Tiger, Panther, Jaguar, Puma, and Cheetah -- all major version upgrades. They are running circles around MS and innovating like crazy. They are staying well ahead of the malware writers. All things MS isn't able to do. All you do is beat on one hokey statistic which momentairly shows a lower number for MS. Yes I do think MS has poor software and I got to that conclusion by using their software. If you think their software isn't poor I attribute that to your not having experience with that better software. That better software is not just from Apple. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
