Re: SQL Server Worm devastates Microsoft Corporate networks!

Simon Cooke wrote:
> Yes, it's embarassing for Microsoft. However, that glib "whatever it
> was" is like saying:
>
> 1. "Hey, Slashdot's down again! Must be because they're using Linux"
> 2. "No, actually, it's because they're moving colo hosts"
> 3. "Whatever it was... it's highly embarassing .. you can't get away
> from that glaring fact"
>
> The problem is that (3) insinuates that frankly, you don't give a shit
> what the real reason was, and you don't believe the one given either.
>

i'm sorry, but you REALLY must be paid by microsoft, because i can't believe the sorry excuses you're making up (and believe me, the only person you're convincing is yourself).

UNIX servers (not web servers, but servers) make up the bulk of large enterprise servers (divided among sun, IBM, and HP), oracle is the #1 database, apache is by far the #1 web server, and J2EE app servers make up a good chunk of the app servers out there, and yet you keep insisting microsoft products are continually being hacked because they are so prevalent. c'mon!

THEN you try to excuse the nightmare of microsoft ITSELF being hit by the sql server slammer (After insisting all those OTHER companies were completely to blame for not installing patches, might i add - how's that for egg on your face?) by blaming it ALL on the microsoft developers, even though it turns out the microsoft corporate servers themselves were hit (and obviously were not patched).

you give new meaning to the term "microsoft-apologist". Received on Wed Jan 29 2003 - 07:25:59 CST