“Microsoft, whose Windows operating system is often knocked for flaws that leave it vulnerable to malicious computer viruses and worms, is developing a program to protect against such attacks,” Holly Sanders reports for The New York Post. “The company has been pushed to improve security after being plagued by epidemics such as the Blaster worm and Sobig virus in recent years. Those attacks crashed people’s computers and led to widespread slowdowns in Internet traffic.”
“The irony was a bit much for some Windows users, though, who questioned why the software behemoth would sell a product to deal with viruses that take advantage of problems within its own operating system,” Sanders reports. “‘That’s like buying a car with a leaky gas tank and having to pay the car manufacturer to have a fire engine drive alongside,’ one irate user wrote in a posting on a chat board site.”
“The usual defense is that Windows is the target of so many attacks because just about everyone uses it. But computer experts contend that the software has inherent shortcomings that make it an easier hit than rival systems such as Mac OS X and Linux,” Sanders reports. “‘Many of the perceived security problems with Microsoft products are real,’ said Richard Ford, a computer virus expert and professor at the Florida Institute of Technology.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: How ’bout just fixing Windows first? Or is that too much to ask? With this news, we have the answer; obviously it is too much to ask of the Redmond monopoly abuser. Our advice? Get a Mac. You can thank us later.
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
Spyware, adware plague Windows users online; Mac OS X users surf freely – April 19, 2004
Gartner: Worms jack up the total cost of Microsoft Windows – May 07, 2004
Apple exec: Mac OS X is ‘more secure than other platforms, certainly more secure than Microsoft Windows’ – June 14, 2004
How can you trust them to write anti-virus software when they couldn’t write the fscking OS properly in the first place!
I’d be more angry, if I wasn’t rolling on the floor laughing my ass off.
And the IT people in thousands of companies will leave behind their current AV software that’s been working to incorporate this, only because of the manufacturer. Don’t worry, in 2006 (or 2007 or 2008), it will be built into windoze and antitrust suits will prove to be a slap on the wrist (again).
MDN says “How ’bout just fixing Windows first?”
Please you must be joking…
There is nothing wrong with the MS Windows operating system. Throughout the entire business world Windows is the OS used daily. Why would you think that windows needs to be fixed. The whole world uses windows and the IT departments of all most all major corporations use windows.
Windows is the standard for corporate and personal computers. We are all very happy with the products MS provides.
�
That’s great! They make money coming and going… coming and going, and going and coming… and always too soon ~ Blazing Saddles.
Wow …
W_users will get it from either end
No matter which way they bend.
You tell ’em, Sput.
Reprint from SteveJack from this very site:
By its very nature Wintel cannot be the best
Wednesday, September 18, 2002 – 04:37 PM EDT
Some would have you believe that popularity and marketshare mean their OS and hardware are the best in the world. By that logic…
1. Budweiser makes the world’s best beer.
2. Ford makes the world’s best car.
3. Dominos makes the world’s best pizza.
4. McDonalds makes the world’s best hamburger.
5. Britney Spears makes the world’s best music.
6. Intel makes the world’s best computer processor.
7. Microsoft makes the world’s best operating system.
Now, although the list above succinctly makes the point, some may still beg to argue. So, I asked a Windows-using acquaintance of mine to review the list and then attempt to disprove the logic by providing an example where the best product of any category was also the most popular. The following is a transcript of the conversation:
“Titleist golf balls,” the Wintel Guy shot almost immediately.
I thought for a second. “It could be argued that the golfer who has the most victories over the past several years and seven of the last twelve major tournaments is the one using the best golf balls, namely Nike golf balls,” I said.
The Wintel Guy paused for a moment and then stated flatly, “Tiger Woods wins because he is one of the best golfers. The golf balls he uses have VERY little to do with it.”
“But, Jack Nicklaus used MacGregor Tour, and later Maxfli golf balls, not Titleist, en route to being named the Athlete of the Century by Sports Illustrated,” I countered.
The Wintel Guy asked smugly, “So does that make MacGregor Tour golf balls the best? Or Maxfli’s? Or Nike’s? Or does it just go to show that your premise that Wintel cannot be the best is illogical and inconsistent?”
I had him right where I wanted him, “No, it only shows that the absolute best golfers do not choose to use the most common, best-selling, or the most popular golf balls. They use the Macintosh of golf balls.”
Thanks Fred, that’s one to remember!
sputnik trade names with me
Link to that SteveJack article, “By its very nature Wintel cannot be the best”
http://www.macdailynews.com/opinion_comments.php?id=P627_0_2_0_C
For those that want to use it somehow.
…I think we’ve found Bagdad Bob…he’s Sputnik!!!
dummy,
sar�casm��(s�rkzm)
n.
1. A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
2. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.
3. The use of sarcasm.
It is laughable, and should be the subject of prosecution, that MS is now going to profit even more by creating a product that only serves to fix the holes in it’s other product. An ethical company would just try and fix the product in question.
But I do give credit to MS for being very astute at making large sums of money. It’s truly amazing, though not necessarily in an admirable way.
MacBuddy, you obviously aren’t familiar with the posting trends of Sputnik. He’s not being sarcastic, he’s being a fuckstick.
8. Microsoft will make the best antivirus software.
They certainly are qualified.
This is so funny!!
Says it all really!
Who knows, maybe Microsoft will actually write one piece of software that will finally work how it should!
I bet all the companies who write/sell anti-virus software for windows are crapping themselves – as this windows software will obviously be part of the new Shithorn OS when it finally comes out.
If I were those guys I would stop writing the software now as microsoft will put something in the new OS that stops you installing third party anti-virus software!
Not to deny that I could be wrong, ‘cuz indeed Sput has made postings that appear to paint him as a ‘fsckstick’.
But man, this smells like sarcasm. (Could be the British, in the BC air.)
–
Will Microsoft make the best antivirus software?
Well, M$ will certainly dominate – with 89% of – the Wintel Virus Software market, it just won’t matter if it’s the ‘best’!
Actually, this is planned to be included in the Windows XP Update slated for later this year. I’m not sure it’ll be sold as a separate product.
It’s been understood that Microsoft plans to add anti-virus to it’s product for well over a year. Needless to say, companies like Symantec are shitting bricks.
[If I were those guys I would stop writing the software now as microsoft will put something in the new OS that stops you installing third party anti-virus software!]
Are you suggesting Windows ain’t done, till NAV won’t run?
And a special thanks to Microsoft for the Joke of the Day.
Wow. That’s all I can say. Either way M$ goes here with this though will land them in a world of shit. They can sell the anti-virus software and look like total asses for charging customers to fix M$’ own problems. Or they can give it away for free as part of the OS and then face lawsuits from every anti-virus software company out there for bundling the software and acting like a monopoly. When will people face the fact that using Windows is always going to be a lose-lose situation just like this one is…
Sputnik wrote, “Windows is the standard for corporate and personal computers. We are all very happy with the products MS provides.”
Does sputnik speak for all corporations? I don’t think so. Does he speak for all personal computer users? Hell no.
If it is the standard, it certainly is a very low one. The decision for some corporations to use windozes is made by the head IT guy. He chooses windozes for one simple reason: job security. Imagine all those software patches to patch, system crashes/freezes/bugs to fix, viruses/worms/trojans to kills, complete system installations to be done over and over again. Of course, he needs a huge team to combat all this, which means more money for him since he has to supervise those people. If corporations had a Mac, his IT team would be him and 2 other people.
And sadly, many consumers buy windoze cuz they are Joe Sixpacks and aren’t well informed of what they’re getting.
Sputnik may be happy for a good enough product (I bet he’s lying when he says he’s really happy), but you’ll never hear any windoze user, including him, say honestly and sincerely that they *love* their windozes computers.
I ***love*** my Mac :o)
Here’s more information courtesy of Reuters:
“Asked if that would hurt sales of competing products, such as Network Associates’ McAfee and Symantec’s Norton family of products, Nash said that Microsoft said that it would sell its anti-virus program as a separate product from Windows, rather than including it in Windows.
Redmond, Washington-based acquired anti-virus technology from GeCAD Software Srl., a Romanian software company, last year to develop its own software.”
The full article is here:
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?storyID=5429092
First with a little good timing, they monopolize the desktops of the world. And now they spring another revenue stream on a public that will probably just pony up the cash. I really don’t understand the mentality in America when it comes to operating systems. Would be be just as happy if all cars were made by microsoft and had to run on only microsoft gasoline. OPEC has nothing on Redmond.
How does the ad firm market such a product?
“Windows is rife with security holes so you need MS Anti-Virus. From the makers of Windows.” Or,
“You can trust new MS Anti-Virus because if anyone knows about viruses it is Microsoft.”
I can just picture it now…..warning windows every time you get on the internet..everytime you go to a different web site…..”Are You Sure You Want To Access This Site? It Could Contain Malicious Code”…..then you just click the check-box that says “Do Not Show This Message Again”…and everything is back to the way it was before.
Nice.
This might be the best switcher campaign yet…no wonder Apple doesn’t advertise a lot…they don’t have to with crap like this as competition.
HEY SPUTNIK…
Looking at your argument above…….well that’s like saying “every fat person I know eats McDonalds….McDonalds is the best because everyone I know eats McDonalds….it makes them fat, so it must be effective….again, because everyone uses it…and on, and on, and on…..