[nickpsecurity]

The selective reading might be on you although I'm thinking it's how it's worded rather than readers' fault. Anyone reading your link would catch this line:

"But instead we have many uneducated people saying: 'Yes, it increased hardware utilization, and it improved security too'. And that's complete and utter bullshit."

Whereas, as I referenced, many VMM systems did increase security via isolation with something simpler than the arbitrary OS and monolithic software contained. Lowest TCB I saw with minimum necessary features was in 50-100KB range. What's OpenBSD's + VMM's TCB size, again? :P

Taking 2nd link into account, it still has that thing about it claiming virtualization can't improve security posture, prevention or recovery. That was repeatedly proven false in academic and production systems with some surviving pentests by pro's that regularly tore through UNIX OS's and commercial fodder. So, his statement against security potential of virtualization is "complete and utter bullshit."

Note: As with other link, it becomes true if one is talking about common offerings, esp on x86.