Changing Spots
I’ve always thought of Paul Thurrott as a Microsoft Apologist, however, in the last year or so, Paul has written articles that challenge my opinion. His latest article compares Windows Vista Beta 1 with Mac OS X “Tiger”, and while I agree with Scott McNulty of TUAW that comparing a Beta to a finished product isn’t particularly meaningful, I was stunned by one of the opening paragraphs of Paul’s piece:
Microsoft claims that Windows XP and, by extension, Windows Vista, were architected for security, thanks to their NT roots. That claim is, however, bogus. Windows NT was designed in the pre-Internet days, and though the system’s architecture is extensible, modern Windows versions are further hobbled by the inclusion of the buggy and insecure IE Web browser and other design mistakes. In short, Windows is a house of cards that seems increasingly incapable of handling today’s demands.
This certainly doesn’t read like something a Microsoft Apologist would write. There’s good stuff there. Go check out the comparison for yourself: Windows Vista Beta 1 vs. Mac OS X “Tiger” (Part 2).