<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.technet.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Windows vs Linux (Red Hat) - Workstation - 1st Half 2006</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/security/archive/2006/07/14/441673.aspx</link><description>NOTE: I am not asserting that my vulnerability analysis demonstrates that Windows is more secure. Rather, I frequently hear and read Linux advocates making unsupported assertions to the opposite that Linux is inherently more secure than Windows. The "unsupported"</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>Windows vs. Linux Workstation Security</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/security/archive/2006/07/14/441673.aspx#441722</link><pubDate>Fri, 14 Jul 2006 09:26:17 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:441722</guid><dc:creator>It's Way Too Early For This</dc:creator><description>Like his vulnerability comparison for server, Jeff Jones has also completed an initial vulnerability...</description></item><item><title>Jesper's Blog : How many vulnerabilities are there really?</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/security/archive/2006/07/14/441673.aspx#441845</link><pubDate>Fri, 14 Jul 2006 21:00:10 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:441845</guid><dc:creator>Jesper's Blog : How many vulnerabilities are there really?</dc:creator><description>PingBack from &lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="https://blogs.technet.com:443/jesper_johansson/archive/2006/07/14/441844.aspx"&gt;https://blogs.technet.com:443/jesper_johansson/archive/2006/07/14/441844.aspx&lt;/a&gt;</description></item><item><title>Apples, Oranges and Vulnerability Metrics</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/security/archive/2006/07/14/441673.aspx#441879</link><pubDate>Fri, 14 Jul 2006 23:12:20 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:441879</guid><dc:creator>Think Security - Jeff Jones Security Blog </dc:creator><description>&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;NOTE:&amp;amp;amp;nbsp; I am not asserting that my vulnerability analysis demonstrates that Windows is more...</description></item><item><title>re: Windows vs Linux (Red Hat) - Workstation - 1st Half 2006</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/security/archive/2006/07/14/441673.aspx#442379</link><pubDate>Tue, 18 Jul 2006 19:41:37 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:442379</guid><dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator><description>OK so the first argument on Digg goes something like: &amp;quot;Well yes, that is because Linux distros typically include 10 times more applications&amp;quot;.</description></item><item><title>Red Hat and Windows - Defining an Apples-to-Apples Workstation Build</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/security/archive/2006/07/14/441673.aspx#463400</link><pubDate>Sat, 07 Oct 2006 01:07:55 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:463400</guid><dc:creator>Jeff Jones Security Blog</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Why Red Hat? As folks know who read my blog know, I normally utilize Red Hat as a proxy for Linux Distributions&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: Windows vs Linux (Red Hat) - Workstation - 1st Half 2006</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/security/archive/2006/07/14/441673.aspx#3091852</link><pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:55:35 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3091852</guid><dc:creator>TNT</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;WHY RED HAT? UBUNTU IS much better! You are awful!&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item></channel></rss>