mailing list archives
Re: Windows' future (reprise)
From: BMF <badmotherfsckr () gmail com>
Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 13:54:15 -0700
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Thor (Hammer of God)
<Thor () hammerofgod com> wrote:
I am constantly amazed at posts like this where you make yourself sound like some sort of statistical genius because
you were "able to predict" that since last year was %243, that this year would be %243. Wow. Really?
I agree that the post is a bit pompous...however:
And for the record, these claims of 'inherent insecurity' in Windows are simply ignorant. If you are still running
Windows 95 that's your problem. Do a little research before post assertions based on 10 or 20 year old issues.
This smacks of the classic troll, where you say things like "nothing that Microsoft makes is secure and it never will
But...it is true that nothing Microsoft (or anyone, perhaps) makes is
secure. And given that Microsoft has a decades long history of far
worse than industry average security I think it is pretty reasonable
to surmise that Windows will never be secure.
and then go on to say how easy it is to migrate, and how it's free, with only a one off cost, and how to move off of
We migrated. With only a one off cost. Been a few years now. Business
is looking good.
Obvious "predictions," ignorant assumptions, and a total lack of any true understanding of business computing. Yep,
Trollish but not entirely wrong.
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: Windows' future (reprise) BMF (May 15)
Re: Windows' future (reprise) M.B.Jr. (May 25)
Message not available
Re: Windows' future (reprise) shawn Davison (May 15)
Re: Windows' future (reprise) Thor (Hammer of God) (May 16)
- Re: Windows' future (reprise), (continued)