A) hardware driver models are a somewhat different beast, and that's held true for many a platform, and isn't really germane to what we are discussing here.
B) MS provided that info to HW devs FAAAAAR in advance. The point is, carrying forward a user base in the 100's of millions and an app base in the 10's of thousands requires some significant transitioning. Now you can argue their timeing all you want, but the OP's comment had two basic tennents that bear on this: 1) He was comparing current day OS's (i.e. Win7 vs "the Mac") 2) He was discussing the OS, not the apps written for them Using AV infection #'s to compare those things and draw the conclusion he did is no accurate, IMO. -sc > -----Original Message----- > From: Ben Scott [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 12:47 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: WTF? Fake AV > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Steven M. Caesare > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> " But when Microsoft wants to, say, create a new API for something, > >> they just do, and abandon the old one, and everyone else has to play > catchup" > > > > I guess I haven't seen those multitude of Technet articles ... > > Yah, tell that to anyone who had hardware that lacks Vista drivers. > Or has stuff written around Office 97-2003. The fact that sometimes > Microsoft plays nice doesn't mean they always do. > > -- Ben > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
