[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <acdc033d0510030953r62efbdf7t9e0715ec140a11b8@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon Oct 3 17:53:21 2005
From: michealespinola at gmail.com (Micheal Espinola Jr)
Subject: Bigger burger roll needed
Bruce, I don't think you are going to find hard "evidence" for either
conclusion. But Bruce's conclusion is consistent with my own
experiences, and that of many other Administrators that I discuss
issues like this with.
Since its inception, supporting NT 3.0 beta and onward, I have been
dealing with BSOD's. In total, there have been comparatively very few
times were it was a direct fault of MS code. It has very commonly
been in relation to 3rd party drivers that needed reworking or
updating by the 3rd-party manufacturer.
This is not PR spin (of which I don't think you could find any
published PR spin for either side of this argument either). This is
real world experience with the NT+ products across i386 and Alpha
hardware platforms using peripheral devices from many different major
manufactures. There are admins on both sides of the anti-MS fence
that I communicate with that would agree with this conclusion.
On 10/3/05, Bruce Ediger <eballen1@...st.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Steve Friedl wrote:
>
> > The majority of BSODs are caused by buggy third-party drivers and malware
> > (rootkits, etc.) Is that part of "Microsoft's monopolistic abuse"?
>
> Does any kind of evidence (apart from PR-flack-based spin) exist for this
> conclusion?
>
> Can you point me to it?
>
> Sincerely,
> Bruce Ediger
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>
--
ME2 <http://www.santeriasys.net/>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists