I know it’s “cool” to bash Microsoft, but students would be better served by a fact-based critique than the cobbled together mischaracterizations and potshots Sam Wong offered in his column.

The exaggerated “hack” of Microsoft’s network was not because of a Microsoft software fault. It was because a human ignored security warnings and executed untrusted code. As far as I know, no company has yet issued a patch for human fallibility.

The incidents Wong cited distort the big picture: no piece of software is immune from security problems.

The Netscape Navigator “Brown Orifice” allowed hackers to see, run and delete files on victim’s computers. The Sun box was quickly penetrated in eWeek’s OpenHack competition due to a Solaris vulnerability while the Windows 2000 server stood firm. Slashdot reported that Red Hat 7 was “infested with bugs.”

The notion that corporate America doesn’t trust the security of Microsoft products is flatly contradicted by their reference list: from Lycos and GMAC to Merril Lynch and Credit Suisse, Microsoft products are relied upon every single day for mission critical business functions.

I’d be interested to know what supposed “IT professionals” Mr. Wong interviewed for his story. And so goes the rest of his editorial: warp a fact, make a leap of logic, repeat. I guess that’s just how it is though. It’s unfortunate, but no journalist ever got fired for bashing Microsoft.

Kevin Moore JuniorComputer engineering