14 DAY TRIAL // Microsoft software versus open source software has been, and still is a never-ending debatable issue. Both camps have harsh supporters who claim their favorite is the best. Personally, I think that both sides have their own ups and downs and you cannot just say one of them is better. Just because one suits you better, doesn't imply the other is lame.
However, there are some situations where you can say it loud and clear that some of them just do not do a certain task properly. And that's what I'm gonna do now. I'll stood up and point out to Microsoft who didn't took proper care of solving the bugs and flaws in its Windows operating systems. And I'm going to do that based on their own vulnerability scorecard, published by Jeff Jones on its Security blog.
According to the vulnerability release, the Microsoft team wasn't able to fix more Windows flaws than the number of open software flaws fixed by the major open source companies. Ouch!, that doesn't sound good at all. Let's think about Red Hat for example. Red Hat Inc. company happens to have forty times less employees than Microsoft does, but still fixed and closed most of their security bugs, including the minor bugs. Regarding the minor bugs, here Microsoft didn't even fix one minor bug during the same period.
Red Hat impressed its customers by fixing numerous flaws in the RHEL 5 version. Unlike Red Hat, Microsoft can brag with only a few Vista bugs fixed. I don't know about you, but this report actually makes me wonder just how trustworthy Windows Vista can be when it comes to security when the Microsoft guys pay "so much" attention to it. If interested, you can see with your own eyes the charts that emphasize Microsoft's recent laziness.