Hacker News Reader

Comment by Joeri | Hacker News Reader

From a security standpoint the best thing is to stop adding features and fix security issues as they are found so the system gradually becomes secure.

The upgrade treadmill is good for microsoft's revenue stream, but bad for customers who already have a working system. New != better, just different. I guarantee you that w10 has just as many security holes as xp, they just haven't been found yet because it's so new.

View on HN

If there is no revenue stream, where do the resources to fix security issues come from?

Aren't the vast majority of Windows revenues from new PC sales and volume licensing?

Both would continue if Windows was "perfect" feature-wise and only security updates were provided going forward.

> if Windows was "perfect" feature-wise and only security updates were provided going forward.

Therefore the kernel is secure, assuming spherical cows are used in the bubble memory of the return stack.

One possibility is from the huge surplus that they collected when they initially sold the software.

It seems to ultimately boil down to software becoming more expensive to sell, especially when it will be used in critical situations.

But that's handled by the contract at the point of sale. One Windows XP with N years of support for $ money.

Legally, they are covered.

Sure, there is this specific situation where Microsoft probably isn't on the hook for anything.

But there is also the more abstract problem of how hospitals and the like go about using computers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com