That... Sounds like their problem. Like, I get that they have way more api surface, legacy code to support, etc... But they have a budget and manpower to match. If they can't test changes, that's their fault.

I think it's vastly easier to use budget and manpower to increase the scope of testing than it is to speed it up.

The only reason they should have a particularly long test cycle is scope.

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if the scope of windows testing is larger than any single application in history.

Microsoft fired their testers in 2018 [1]. Since then we've seen a surge of pretty serious bugs, some of which had to be pulled [2]. Not saying this is related, as this is a vulnerability and not a bug in an update, but 100 days to release a patch is telling.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17830381

[2] https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/13/18090982/microsoft-windo...

>"The number of apps in its Windows Store had dwindled to 13 percent of the 1.1 million offered in 2014, the company said, and it needed less bug testing from Lionbridge, according to a January 2017 memo obtained via a FOIA request."

Nothing to do with Windows desktop or Server.