Microsoft to offer SIX (6) versions of Vista ?

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by Puck, Mar 3, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Vigsted

    Vigsted Starter

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,266
    Well it's not worth a whole lot. I don't know this Robert Cringley, but to suggest that Microsoft doesn't have some of the best scientists in the industry is just dumb.
  2. Vigsted

    Vigsted Starter

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,266
    The problem isn't that they can't solve it. The problem is they can't solve it without sacrificing interoperability between their various programs, which they don't want to.
  3. Starkiller

    Starkiller 9

    Joined:
    May 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,957
    And just how well have they done in making Windows secure? The best they seem capable of is patching 6 month old critical flaws once a month (but god forbid they patch one any time other than the 2nd Tuesday of the month...) while more and more security holes constantly emerge.

    And yet viruses and spyware still roam free over the average computer user's machine.

    Yep... they're the best...
  4. Vigsted

    Vigsted Starter

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,266

    Well, sorry Puck, looks like somebody just took first place in the most ignorant statement in the history of ignorant statements.

    Do you honestly believe MS would be where they are today if they didn't have some of the top scientists in their employ? Did it occur to you that the whole patching deal is a business decision, not made by the developers who work on it? Reason being that businesswise it's more costefficient to group a number of issues together, than to release fixes here and there.

    And actually, I can't remember having to fix a serious security hole in months. Besides don't tell me OSX isn't constantly patched, I know we're currently holding back on the new update because it breaks some of our current progams.

    Again, users like myself and Gunny don't have that problem, only people who visit suspect sites, agree to run suspect programs and fail to have any kind of virusprotection have these issues. Secondly if anyone is to blame for spyware and viruses, it's Microsoft's Internet Explorer and Outlook departments, because those are the programs executing harmful code with the users credentials without the users knowledge, not Windows.

    Actually, if you're up to it, you could do a little research: Find out how many of the Windows Update "critical" patches are actually for Windows and how many are for higher level applications, WMP, IE, Outlook, Messenger, etc.

    Bottomline is, Windows is a great OS, however many of Microsoft's other programs are horrible. Which is why you won't catch me using IE, Outlook, Messenger, WMP, etc.
  5. Starkiller

    Starkiller 9

    Joined:
    May 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,957
    You must be nominating yourself...

    I'm sure they have some excellent programmers at MS. But the fact remains that Windows is rife with security holes.

    I'm sure it is business in large part. Microsoft is a business. But you can't honestly believe that the reason that patches only come out on the 2nd tuesday of the month is because of business. When a major security flaw is revealed, you don't think it's bad business to hold back a patch for weeks just because that's what their schedule says?
    OSX gets occasional patches, but much of it is performance upgrades. Few of them are simply security patches. But historically, where most of the security patches have been required, the security holes required that the hacker actually be in physical contact with the computer to exploit it. That's not a problem for the vast majority of people.

    OK, so why is it that Mac users don't have problems with these suspect sites that infect Windows? Certainly it's not because Mac users never go there. And why is it that Mac users don't even need anti-virus software if Windows is so secure? Or anti-spyware software?

    I hate to break the news to you, but IE is a part of Windows. It isn't a separate application. Just ask Microsoft. So any IE security hole is a Windows security hole. EVERY modern version of Windows requires IE to be installed.

    As I've said, IE is not separate from Windows. Any IE security hole is a Windows security hole. And Outlook Express, ships with every version of Windows as the default email app (unless you upgrade to Outlook) and uses IE to read email messages, so therefore every IE hole and separate OE hole therefore affects the vast majority of Windows users. So as far as I'm concerned, it's a Windows problem by extension.

    As for other MS apps like WMP and Messenger, Microsoft has done everything they can to tie them directly into Windows. Any security hole they have affects every copy of Windows right out of the box. Therefore, it's a security hole in Windows.

    Plus, you're the guy who says that MS has such great programmers. Are you saying that the only good ones are working on Windows? Do they intentionally keep their good programmers away from other projects? It that why Windows is so perfect and all their other programs are teeming with bugs???

    Windows sucks. The sad fact is, out of the box, Windows is completely insecure. Computer users shouldn't all be expected to be security experts just to be allowed to get in the internet. Mac OS X is infinitely more secure right out of the box.

    So tell me how much time you actually spend on OS X? How often do you use it? Do you have any frame of reference to honestly compare the 2? I own both and do tech support on both, and there is no doubt in my mind that OSX is superior to Windows overall, and it isn't even close in terms of security.
  6. Vigsted

    Vigsted Starter

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,266
    I think you should contact the Justice Department (definetly the EU High court) if you have proof of this, because it's been declared illegal for Microsoft to bind them together. So yes, at least in Europe, they are entirely seperate programs.

    And the whole "by extension" is just a lame excuse. That's like saying OSX is faulty if there's a bug in QuickTime, utter nonsense. Besides I'm talking strictly the OS system, not whatever progams people are using, just because they happen to be installed.

    Even geniuses can make mistakes (Einstein for instance was wrong as often as he was right). However I was just pointing out that the article was blatantly biased, because you have to be downright stupid to think Microsoft don't have some of the best in the field. So does Apple, Google, IBM, whatever.

    And I don't know why Outlook and IE are so riddled with problems, I don't have access to the code, but fact of the matter is that it's IE and Outlook that causes viruses and spyware to infect Windows PC's. If you use Windows with say FireFox and Thunderbird (like I do) you won't have any issues.
  7. Starkiller

    Starkiller 9

    Joined:
    May 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,957
    You don't know what the hell you are talking about. MS, the DOJ, and the EU have all agreed that IE is an integrated part of Windows.

    Microsoft itself has said that IE is an integrated part of Windows.
    http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/1997/dec97/opposingconpr.mspx
    http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/1997/nov97/dojpetpr.mspx

    The final US Department of Justice ruling never forces MS to de-integrate IE from Windows.
    http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f200400/200457.htm

    And the final ruling from the EU monopoly case also never forces MS to de-integrate IE (it specifically forces WMP out).
    http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/42124/42124.html

    And if you are so smart as to say they are all wrong, you tell me how to strip IE6 from Windows XP and still be left with a functional OS...

    If there is a bug in QuickTime, it is a problem for every OS X user. So it is an OS X bug. And they have had to patch QuickTime in the past.

    IE is part of Windows. And while I agree that OE and WMP are not specifically part of Windows (just like QT on OS X), they come bundled with it and every Windows user is vulnerable to those bugs right out of the box.

    That part of the article is based on the words of a Microsoft-employed security expert who said that it has become impossible to completely clean many Windows infestations without a fresh reinstallation. Cringely isn't always right, but he isn't biassed. He calls out Apple when he thinks they screw up and praises MS when they do something right.

    Plus, no one said that MS doesn't have good programmers. All the big companies have good ones. I'm just saying that Windows sucks...

    I use Mozilla products as well, but they aren't completely secure either. But only about 10% of all Windows users use Firefox, and far fewer use Thunderbird. The vast majority of users still use IE and OE because Microsoft bundled them in. Therefore, they are vulnerable to any of their security holes.

    And all that aside, just taking a Windows computer out of the box and connecting it to a unprotected internet connection is dangerous. Without ever opening a web browser, the Windows computer can be infected with malware within as little as 16 minutes.
    http://isc.sans.org/survivalhistory.php

    And you never answered my question of how much Mac experience you had...
  8. Vigsted

    Vigsted Starter

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,266
    I'm pretty sure there was a ruling seperating IExplorer from the Explorer shell. I'll have to go look it up though. But you'll notice they're 2 seperate application (although they may share code) namely Iexplorer.exe and explorer.exe. The ruling stated that IE was not allowed to make use of any API's that weren't accessible to other programs. It's not that forced them to make versions without IE, like they did with WMP.

    I might also add that it is actually possible to surplant the Explorer shell with your own, if you should so choose.

    Go to the Add/Remove Programs, select Add/Remove Windows Componenets, selects Internet Explorer to be uninstalled.

    Well, our defition of what is an OS bug is obviously quite opposite then.

    So if I sell you OSX with a bad steak on the side, OSX is bugged? Ridiculous, yes, but basically what you're saying.

    I'm not arguing that statement at all. I took offence with the following crap:
    To me that's exactly what the above says.

    Yes, but that's not a flaw with the actual Windows Operating System, rather Microsoft's higher level software and their decision to bundle it with Windows.

    I only spend around 2 hours every week on Mac, since I don't develop for them, and I'm not the system adminstrator. I just help out when issues become more tehnical than our superusers and administrators can handle.
  9. Starkiller

    Starkiller 9

    Joined:
    May 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,957
    People who know what they are doing can do that, but the average user would not have a clue how to do that.

    That doesn't do squat. All that happens is the icons and shortcuts to IE are removed. IE is still there. It is built into XP and can't be removed.

    Any bug that affects any normal user's copy of Windows is an OS bug in my book. If MS chooses to bundle a program with Windows, and that program's security holes directly affect Windows right out of the box, then it's a Windows bug to me.

    We're not talking about some programs that a user can choose to add on later if they want. And we're not talking about a program that has security holes that only affect itself and not the operating system. Programs like Outlook Express and WMP are set by MS as default programs by default and that's why millions of people use them. And when a hacker explots a hole there, it hacks into Windows rather than just OE or WMP. So it logically has to be a hole in Windows to allow itself to become infected.

    If OE holes only affected OE, I wouldn't be so dead set on this. But Windows allows OE holes to infect Windows. So it's not just an OE hole, but a Windows security hole as well. That's the problem with integrating a program so tightly with the OS.

    And my point is that, despite all of Microsoft's great programmers, Windows is still full of bugs. They simply can't find any way to make it a secure product. Why? Because Windows sucks. It's such a steaming pile that no amount of work can fix it.

    Even the world's best automotive engineers can't turn an AMC Gremlin into a Rolls Royce. The same is true with MS programmers and Windows.
  10. avvie

    avvie Ke ali'i o na okole Tip Jar Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2003
    Messages:
    8,524
    [​IMG]


    OOPS...that's the Matador. Ugly name. Lemme try that again...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.