Linux.com

Frequent upgrades: Windows security patches

Posted by: Thomas Frayne on May 12, 2004 06:34 AM
Microsoft's position:

"The open source philosophy of "release early, release often" does not work in large corporate settings, he said. Getting a release cycle every two years or 18 months is hard enough; frequent upgrades are simply impossible, he added."

Microsoft rolls up multiple security fixes into a single patch to make it seem that they don't have many security holes. Then, after sitting on a security bug for 6 months, they release the fixes, and, when customers are hit by an exploitation, complain that customers should have applied the
fixes immediately.

The customers respond that they would have, but the security patches caused their systems to fail.

Microsoft is right. Microsoft's frequent upgrades for security patches are impossible for corporate customers to keep up with.

On the other hand, RHEL has a much longer release cycle than Microsoft's security upgrades, and releases bug fixes one at a time, so a security patch will seldom take down an RHEL machine.

#

Return to Red Hat, Microsoft clash at open source conference