Oliver Wong wrote:
>
> "Geico Caveman" <spam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:44c4e20f$0$576$b45e6eb0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 14:12:35 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>> Only you, roy, could say in the exact same post "Microsoft to kill it's
>>> partners" and then claim that the market for it's partners will increase
>>> (vista less secure).
>>>
>>> You can't have it both ways. Either Vista is going to put it's
>>> partners, like Symantec, out of business by providing it's own
>>> anti-spyware and virus protection, or the market will increase because
>>> Vista will be less secure. Which is it?
>>
>> Only you, Erik. Microsoft is getting into the Windows security business.
>> The
>> inherent conflict of interest there is going to lead to both :
>>
>> 1. More security flaws in Windows Vista.
>> 2. Death of Microsoft's rivals in the Windows security business as they
>> would not know as much about the flaws as Microsoft would.
>
> Actually, 1 and 2 are sort of contradictory too. There's two
> possibilities:
>
> (A) Microsoft is competent at fixing their own security flaws.
> (B) Microsoft is not competent at fixing their own security flaws.
>
> If (A) is true, that implies (1) is NOT true.
> If (B) is true, that implies (2) is NOT true.
>
> - Oliver
You are neglecting the conflict of interest. It is possible that A is true,
but then Microsoft might not want to (now that they have something to gain
from existence of flaws).
|
|
