'real facts' show Linux more secure: study

Nothing irritates me more than terms like true facts and political surveys that deem themselves to be "Polls". This is treading dangerous ground - something is either a fact, an opinion or an outright lie. A fact is a fact it needs no descriptive adjective. If it is neither true nor real it simply is not a fact. Its opposite is either false or distortion or simply made up, which are Not facts.

By the way I read most of the article previously and I thought it was quite valueable.

I think the point I was trying to make above is more succinctly made here:

Windows v Linux security: the real facts (Register) The Register does some myth busting on the subject of Windows vs. Linux security. "Myth Statistics 'prove' that Windows has fewer, less serious security issues than Linux, that Windows issues are always fixed, and that they are fixed faster. Fact Quite a broad collection of 'facts' exist in this category, but what they have in common is the (actual) fact that they are usually based on single metrics, on a single aspect of measuring security."

On this page in the Linux Weekly News: http://lwn.net/Articles/107496/

I like there use of Myth vs. Fact, just wish they would drop the real part!