1. I though a discussin was a exchaning of opinions to come to the truth of the subject but we are somhow focused on one argument same as the OLPC one, this is what i meant with strange angle.<br>2. I was refereing to Ms not in a bashing way but rather to the method it uses to develope its software, as in i am bashing the methos not the company itself ( nobody can argue that ms has achieved somthing just look at its net profit and since its in a country which is under the impression of being capitalistik, and the hart of capitalism is that every individual can earn money). now the way that ms get rid of security holes is by users telling them of a problem, now if u have more users the more bugs u get. but if u r intelligent and report a bug sometimes they dont listen( i think one guy reported a bug for 3 years wasnt listened to and then wrote a virus and the hole got fixed in one day but infected loads of pc's) linux hasnt reached the stage of millions of users yet but a good example for its engagement in bugs would be openbsd.<br>
3. No one disputes that a system with a major bug is not as good as a one with 100 week ones but i once heared sombody saying that the simple bugs hide the big ones. <br>4. now what i was refering to that since ms is a company who has to secure
its many costomers it has to have some level of security now ms forces
major companies to jump on the band wagon called vista simply because
it has seased its support for xp (i think).<br>5. the best scurity is by obscurity. since as albert einstein once said "only 2 things in life are infinite human stupidity and the universe but i am not sure about the second". there will always be bugs <br>
<br>good luck and good nigth <br>tim<br>