Printed from

MS: Vista more secure than Linux, Mac OS X

updated 12:55 pm EDT, Fri June 22, 2007

Vista most secure OS?

According to a study (PDF file) conducted by Microsoft's own Trustworthy Computing group in its Security Business Unit, Windows Vista is more secure than any of its current rivals, including Mac OS X and Linux. Vista was paired alongside other operating systems for 90 days, and compared for the number of vulnerabilities and repairs that arose; while it still came second behind Windows XP, and with a "high" severity rating, it still defeated Mac OS X -- which came in third -- and three major Linux variants, namely Ubuntu 6.06 LTS, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4, and SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10.

Concerns over the legitimacy of the test include not only the objectivity of the source, but the number of entry points provided by the operating systems: different features may make one OS inherently more vulnerable than another. To counter this Microsoft removed unnecessary programs from the Linux bundles, but this did not address any differences between Windows and the Mac OS. Similarly, the popularity of an OS may make it a more likely target, although this fact biases the study in favor of Microsoft.

A recent independent report actually suggested minor improvements over XP in terms of security, mainly in Windows Defender's ability to catch trojans and spyware. Vista also tends to provide more warnings about installing malware or spyware. [via vnunet]

By Electronista Staff
Post tools:




  1. chas_m



    It's BS

    There's a lot you could say here, the highlights of which I'll just shorthand:

    *Microsoft's credibility *Alterations made in the test *Differing scale of threat *Differing scale of damage *Definition of "vulnerability" in MS's world *Definition of "security" in MS's world *Contradiction of results by both independent testing and anecdotal evidence from users

    As I say, there's a lot you could fill in here, but I think "this is complete bullshit from MS" covers it thoroughly.

  1. Hillbilly Geek

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Aug 2006




  1. bojangles

    Senior User

    Joined: May 2000


    Here’s something else…

    Don‘t forget that this deals with vulnerabilities discovered during the first 90 days Vista was available to *businesses.*

    1) How many businesses actually upgrade their installed OS during the first 90 days a new version is on the market?

    2) How many end users got their hands on Vista within the first 90 days it was available to businesses?

    Now take those numbers and decide how many vulnerabilities *could* have been found during that particular time period. Even if the study were completely accurate, it was conducted during a time period where there were maybe two people using Vista outside of Ms itself, and those two people were probably too busy trying to get around its rampant security features to evem load a legitimate web site, let alone any security breaches.

    I’ll take my Mac OS X, thankyouverymuch.

  1. Sprocket

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: May 2002



    bullsh!t. This falls into the same category as Linux costing MORE than Microsoft. Those arguments are weak at best. What a steaming load of c***.

    This is just Ballmer looking for justification to push his tarted-up sagging legacy OS onto an unsuspecting public. I laugh.

  1. gskibum3

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Nov 2006



    This means that the Windows world can carry on day to day life without having to use anti-virus - just like we do on Macs! LOL!

  1. jpellino

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Oct 1999


    to be fair...

    they only counted new vulnerabilities, so the first 114,000 viruses on the windows box didn't count. (sorry - couldn't resist) besides, 90 days ago there was a boatload of things unpatched - and now patched on 10.4, and vista was barely out long enough to catch a cold. try it now.

  1. TheSnarkmeister

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jun 2007


    Well, actuallly...

    There may be something to this... although not in the way you might think. Vista has been so locked down, that accomplishing any sort of task that Microsoft's GUI engineers did not anticipate has become almost impossible. Try setting up a shared printer off of a Vista machine with wireless access from Windows 2k clients. Thanks to "security," it can't be done without resorting to setting up CUPS printing. MS has taken it from one extreme to the other. At least it will keep all those Windows "engineers" employed.

  1. jarod

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Apr 2005



    It's official...Microcrap has officially lost it.


  1. horvatic

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Apr 2002



    Bahahahahahahah!!!! NOW THAT'S THE BIGGEST FUD I'VE HEARD ALL YEAR!! Who are they kidding!!

  1. horvatic

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Apr 2002


    OSX passed governement

    OSX passed government standards which are way more stringent than anything Microcrap could ever do. Bahahahahahaahahaha!!

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.


Network Headlines


Most Popular


Recent Reviews

Seagate Wireless

It seems like no matter how much internal storage is included today's mobile devices, we, as users, will always find a way to fill the ...

Lenovo Yoga Tablet 2 (Android, 10.1-inch)

Lenovo is building a bigger name for itself year after year, including its devices expanding beyond desktop computers. The company's l ...

Brother HL-L8250CDN Color Laser Printer

When it comes to selecting a printer, the process is not exactly something most people put a lot of thought into. Printers are often t ...



Most Commented


Popular News