A hole of what depth
Posted on January 13, 2006
Filed Under Software Eng, Computing |
weblogs.oreilly.com >> Windows Has Fewer Security Holes than Linux
This should be titled “Windows MIGHT have fewer security holes than Linux”.
Index this one to the FUD, incomplete information, and bias opinion presented as fact to make his target audience fell a little warm and fuzzy inside. The title is catchy, but the author (Preston Gralla) tries to justify his opinion on data that he then goes on to say is inaccurate.
So you say based on these numbers that Windows has 3 times less security holes than Linux, but some of the Linux numbers are counted more than once. If you don’t know how many are counted multiple times, then you cannot use the data in your argument. PERIOD. If each is counted twice, and only twice, Windows still fairs better. If each is counted three times, Linux number drop below Windows. So after stating the obvious uselessness of the data used in the argument he goes on to say:
Still, though, the report should go at least a little way toward turning the conventional wisdom on its head.
Why? How? Oh right, only those that are not fully informed, critical Socratic-sytle questioners of arguments will take your headline and run with it.
In the future, please form a sound argument based on complete and accurate data, and save everyone one the time from reading your dren, and me having to write about it.
Comments
Leave a Reply