Summary: No indication yet that BP took a lesson from its computer error and decided to move to a reliable platform for alerting

IT IS AMAZING -- but at the same time not surprising -- that oil rigs where risk of failure is enormous put Windows in real operations. The Deepwater Horizon disaster could be prevented if it were not for Microsoft Windows BSODs [1, 2] and now it turns out that a new Windows security flaw allows remote code execution (see the recent Siemens fiasco). This permits vandalism from remote countries.

DEVELOPER OF INSECURE SOFTWARE Microsoft has announced the discovery of a serious security vulnerability that allows remote code execution on many of its Windows operating systems.

Time for BP to dump Windows, no? Since Bill Gates is a BP investor [1, 2, 3], there might be some pressure to stay with Windows, but BP ought to put safety first.

No version of Windows is secure and Vista 7 scepticism continues to be published, even in Microsoft-sympathetic sites like ZDNet. From days ago:

In conclusion, I think a lot of companies are just continuing on with business as usual, waiting to see what Microsoft does with Windows XP. The OS is almost a decade old, so I can understand that the plug needs to be pulled at some point. Any migration (XP to 7, Windows to Linux) needs a lot of work, time, money, and lots and lots of patience. But companies need a list of good reasons to move forward with the migration. And so far, I haven't seen too many good compelling reasons that show this migration should take place anytime soon.

Actually, many GNU/Linux distributions are released several times per year. This too makes them more secure and robust. If a company leaks millions of barrels of oil into the ocean because it runs Windows (probably XP based on photos), there is no valid excuse. ⬆