The Financial Times created quite an uproar in the blogosphere this week after reporting that Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) is gradually doing away with its use of Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) Windows because of concerns about security. Google's network was hacked in January via a flaw in Internet Explorer 6, reportedly intensifying the company's security concerns.

According to unnamed Google employees, new workers have a choice of using PCs running Linux or Mac (NASDAQ: AAPL) computers, and those who wish to continue using Windows must get permission from management.  Phasing out Windows also gives Google a chance to use more of its own computing products, including the Chrome operating system, which is due out soon.

Microsoft responded in a blog post the next day, pointing out security concerns that have been raised about Google products as well as Mac computers.

"There is some irony here that is hard to overlook," wrote Microsoft's Brandon LeBlanc. "For starters, check out this story from Mashable a few months ago where it was reported that Yale University had halted their move to Gmail (and their move to Google's Google Apps for Education package) citing both security and privacy concerns."

LeBlanc noted that some hackers and other vendors have praised Microsoft for its security efforts. Windows 7 comes with a number of recently added security features, including firewall enhancements, disc encryption improvements, a SmartScreen Filter for Internet Explorer 8, and Address Space Layout Randomization.

Whether Google's reported phasing out of Windows is motivated more by security concerns or competition concerns is a topic of debate. Peter Bright at Ars Technica offers a compelling argument for the latter.  While it's true that PCs running Windows are frequently the victim of broad-based hacks, the January attack on Google was not a garden-variety mass attack. Instead, it was targeted specifically at Google and used a vulnerability in IE6 that had not yet been reported.

"If a hacker wants to break into a specific organization, then that hacker will exploit the specific software that's used by that organization," Bright writes. "So the question of which OS to use changes--it's no longer 'Which OS is less likely to be attacked?' but rather 'Which software is less likely to be exploitable?' and 'Which OS will protect me best in the event that I am attacked?'"

While Linux and Mac OS X would put a company at less risk to mass, non-targeted attacks, they wouldn't be much of a defense against the kind of attack Google experienced in January, he writes.

For more:
- see this Microsoft blog post
- read The Financial Times article
- read Peter Bright's post at Ars Technica

Related Articles:
Windows 7: The first six months
A quick look at the Chrome OS