On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 06:28:22PM -0800, Neil Schneider wrote: > > Andrew P. Lentvorski, Jr. said: > > > > On Feb 11, 2005, at 4:12 PM, Lan Barnes wrote: > > > >> He's comparing apples to unicorns, and he cheats, too. > > > > Yeah, but the fact that he has *some* good data should not be ignored. > > > > Huh? What relevance does that rant have to my comments? > > This article <" > http://www.theregister.co.uk/security/security_report_windows_vs_linux/ > "> pretty well debunks his numbers. Firstly the numbers quoted from > the original article referenced here <" > http://techworld.com/security/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1329 "> looks at > all the patches for Linux which includes "bugs" on applications vs > Windows "vulnerability" patches. >
Thank you. It's what I've been saying, except in a more hand-waving way. -- Lan Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Guy, SCM Specialist 858-354-0616 -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
