On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, martin f krafft wrote: > i guess the main argument against this joke is that an operating > system with 10 different web servers, 10 different mail servers, 10 > different ftp servers, 20 different window managers, 10 different > browsers, 20 different mail clients, and so on, and so on, will have > how many more bugs than a monolithic approach with 1 web server, > 1 mail server, 1 ftp server, etc... I don't consider the web/mail/ftp servers, windows managers, browsers, mail clients etc. to be part of the operating system, per se. Certainly a vulnerability in Apache should not be a strike against Linux, should it? I like how the article quoted Steve Ballmer comparing Windows 2000 Server and W2K3 Server with Red Hat 6. Why doesn't Ballmer compare the state of the art Windows OS' available at the time RH6 came out? Did Windows NT 4 not stack up as well against RH6 as W2K/3? -- Dave Hull Senior IT Analyst, Information Services The University of Kansas voice: (785) 864-0403 || fax: (785) 864-0485
