“Microsoft, the world’s most valuable software company, is looking like a player in one of those computer games who is being zapped on all sides by alien missiles – and as soon as one is disabled another takes its place. Yesterday the Seattle-based giant announced a warning of yet another flaw in recent versions of its Windows operating system that is resident in over 95% of the world’s computers,” The Guardian reports.
[MacDailyNews Note: 95%? Prove that figure, please. Source(s)? If you’re going to report it as fact, proof is expected here.]
The Guardian reports, “[This latest flaw] lies deep within the code and could give potential hackers ‘complete control’ over computers. Microsoft was warned about this flaw months ago but, understandably, waited until it had a fix before confirming its existence in case potential attackers got wind of it. This latest outbreak is separate from the havoc caused in recent weeks by the MyDoom virus that has led to widespread criticism of the company.”
“It would be wrong to heap all the blame on to Microsoft for the damage caused,” The Guardian reports.
[MacDailyNews Note: Correct. Microsoft is only about 99.99% responsible for the damage its swiss cheese family of OSes has caused. And “it’s understandable” to The Guardian that Microsoft took over six months to create a patch for their junk? Just what exactly is The Guardian smoking?]
“The main reason it is being targeted is that it is so big. Its main competitors (Apple and the free operating system Linux), though more stable than Windows, are too tiny to attract the attention of virus writers and hackers,” The Guardian reports.
[MacDailyNews Note: Wrong. Mac OS X is simply more secure than any version of Windows. Period. 70,000 Windows viruses and worms vs. 0 (zero) for Mac OS X attests to that fact. We’ll repeat the facts until they stick.]
“The real villains are the vandals who wreak enormous damage on computer networks on which the stability of business and, increasingly, personal life depends. Corporations are clearly not taking the proper precautions by downloading the fixes that are regularly posted on the internet, let alone installing filters to ensure that the affected mail does not reach employees. Users, corporate and personal, are also at fault because if they took simple precautions – like not opening email attachments without proven provenance – then the problem could be contained,” The Guardian reports.
[MacDailyNews Note: Blaming everyone and their mother, and hardly mentioning the real problem – those who created the messy, slovenly, and bloated operating system – is pure crap. Yes, crap.]
At least The Guardian finally regains a modicum of sanity to print Microsoft “has fallen short of the standards expected of such a powerful company. It has been found guilty in the US courts of illegally maintaining its monopoly (though not of illegally acquiring it). It ought to be throwing as much of its cash mountain as it takes to provide an operating system that is secure. If it does not then it should be unsurprised if there are fresh calls for it to forfeit its monopoly.”
Full load of B.S. here. As you read this, The Three Stooges – Enderle, Thurrott, and Dvorak – are probably trying their damnedest to get Windows to print out this steaming pile of manure from The Guardian for framing.]
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Is Mac OS X really inherently more secure than Windows? – August 26, 2003
BusinessWeek’s Haddad gets it wrong; thinks low market share spares Macs from viruses – August 28, 2003
Shattering the Mac OS X ‘security through obscurity’ myth – August 28, 2003
Fortune columnist: ‘get a Mac’ to thwart viruses; right answer for the wrong reasons – September 02, 2003
New York Times: Mac OS X ‘much more secure than Windows XP’ – September 18, 2003
Columnist tries the ‘security through obscurity’ myth to defend Windows vs. Macs on virus front – October 1, 2003
Gates: Windows ‘by far the most secure’ system; tries to use ‘Mac OS X secure through obscurity’ myth – January 27, 2004
Mac OS X has no viruses; what’s wrong with Windows? – February 11, 2004