4 ms·

>assuming that the fix is just a few lines of code

• kybernetikos 10y ago
  Even assuming that, there could be a massive testing load to ensure that those few lines of code don't mess up something tangentially related, or cause new security issues of their own.
  • cmdrfred 10y ago
    Microsoft fired it's QA department so that doesn't seem to be a reasonable explanation either. http://www.computerworld.com/article/2878026/microsoft-to-business-dont-worry-about-windows-10-consumers-will-test-it.html http://www.computerworld.com/article/2878026/microsoft-to-bu...
  • simion314 10y ago
    Assuming you just need to add a check for null pointer and that this bug is very critical like hackers are exploiting it, assume engineers create a fix and are 100% it is safe, hopefully there was no other component that was depending on the broken code , how much it will take to fix it, maybe there is somewhere a history of critical bugs , with the date of when it was found and when it was fixed then we can find the time interval.
    • city41 10y ago
      The Windows kernel is one of the most mission critical pieces of software in the world. And is easily the most important piece of IP for MS. I'd argue there's no such thing as a "simple fix". I have no doubt even the most trivial of changes has to be very thoroughly vetted.
    • kybernetikos 10y ago
      I've worked on software where without fail every new release would go through more than a week of soak testing.