Really? As if linux has not had it's worms? I think blaming Windows here is a tad bit short sighted. What we hopefully can be glad for is that most of the people on this list (hopefully) is good at upgrading their systems.
Well yes and no.First of all MS has to take some of the blame for advertising NT as an easy to use and administer system that does not need a competent sysadmin to set up and run. They hammer this point repeatedly whenever the subject of Linux VS Windows comes up. You really can not blame people for not hiring "expensive unix sysadmins" and letting some semi competent windows user run the NT network.
Secondly MS has to take the blame for creating an operating system that needs to be brought offline for even the most routine patch. People put off patching their windows systems because it means coming in at midnight after everybody else has gone home.
Finally It's very very important to remember that Windows is a PRODUCT not a PROJECT. NT costs a lot of money no matter how you slice it. You expect that something you paid for and which is supposedly guaranteed and backed by the largest and the richest company on the planet should actually be better then the PROJECT run by volunteers. In other words I would expect linux to be much worse then windows alas it's the other way around.
----------------------------------------------
Tim Uckun
Mobile Intelligence Unit.
----------------------------------------------
"There are some who call me TIM?"
----------------------------------------------