Does one OS having fewer security patches than another operating system mean that the OS with the fewer patches is the safest OS? You know, I’m not sold on that concept. As we near the first anniversary of the consumer launch of Windows Vista we’ll be seeing pundits all over the media taking a look back at the Vista’s first year. One aspect of Vista that some will undoubtedly be looking at is patches and how many have been issued for Vista (in fact, my blogging colleague Ed Bott’s already done this). Many will interpret the fact that XP has had more patches rated critical and important than Vista as an indication that Vista is safer than XP (in fact, this is the conclusion that Ed himself came to).
http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=1036
Urs
PingBack from http://www.ditii.com/2007/12/17/does-fewer-patches-safer-os/