[link|http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=112589|http://www.computerw...&articleId=112589]

Ebert said he is most impressed by Microsoft's public push to convince users that it is serious about securing its products. "Eighty percent of security is dealing with the psychology of people and processes," he said. "The technical part is almost easy by comparison."

I know a few people who might dispute that. But let's assume for the moment that it's true. Or at least accept that there are people who believe (or want to) that it's true.

"I've never seen any other company invest this much to prevent attacks against their software," said Dan Kaminsky, one of 20 security consultants hired by Microsoft to help tighten up Vista.

Kaminsky said he believes that Vista is now on par or better than operating systems such as Linux and Apple Computer Inc.'s Mac OS X.

Let's see, we've just said that the psychology is more important than the technology. And we've got a guy being paid to improve it. So it's safe to assume he's being paid to help with the psychology of it. And his criterion for evaluation is the amount they've invested. And his conclusion is that since they've invested more than anyone else, it must be on par with -- or better than -- Linux and OS X.

Umm, argument by dollars?