Sermo Malifer wrote:
> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>> Sermo Malifer wrote:
>>
>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>
>>>> ____/ High Plains Thumper on Thursday 05 February 2009 13:55 : \____
>>>>
>>>>> Matt wrote:
>>>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>> Not to mention the fact that Windows does not have a centralised
>>>> patching mechanism. <snip>
>>> That's not a fact, it's an outright lie. Windows has automatic
>>> downloading and patching from a central store.
>>
>> For the OS itself and a few selected MS apps.
>
> Yes.
Ah, so we agree here
>> Not even all MS apps are included.
>
> That's not true.
Fine. Show us the link where *all* MS apps are included with "windows
update"
>> *No* third party apps are included
>
> Even if that were true, it's dragging the goalposts from "Windows does
> not have a centralised patching mechanism."
It is true. And please show us where only MS apps (and only a select
subset of those) are eligible for "universal patching"
Since about everyone has apps from different vendors installed (on a
typical windows install), they would benefit greatly from a "centralised
patching mechanism". Yet that does not exist at all. It exists only for a
subset of MS apps
>> So yes, it is a fact.
>
> No, that's a lie told to cover Roy's lie.
You have shown nothing so far to substantiate your claim
>>> Your hatred of Windows, Microsoft, and Bill Gates is not a license to
>>> lie about them.
>>
>> He didn't
>
> Yes he did, and it's easily verified that both you and he are wrong.
Good. Since it is "easily verified " you will now supply the links, right?
Riiiight?
--
Windows isn't unstable. It's spontaneous.
|
|
