Why can't Microsoft build a secure operating system?

Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by MACDRIVE, Jan 22, 2007.

  1. MACDRIVE macrumors 68000

    MACDRIVE

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Location:
    Clovis, California
    #1
    Not that I really care, just curious. What about this new Vista, do you still have to load it up with anti-spyware software? Seems like they've had plenty of time to build a virus proof operating system. :confused:
     
  2. mad jew Moderator emeritus

    mad jew

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #2
    Not that simple mate. They've gotta make an OS that's compatible with as much stuff as possible, from the latest hardware to the oldest software. The more things change...
     
  3. Scarlet Fever macrumors 68040

    Scarlet Fever

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2005
    Location:
    Bookshop!
    #3
    i heard someone hacked Vista two weeks or months after its initial release.

    Looks like Vista is just a skinned XP...
     
  4. Bobdude161 macrumors 65816

    Bobdude161

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2006
    Location:
    N'Albany, Indiana
    #4
    It sure is. CTRL-ALT-DELed the Vista display at Best Buy and it's running the SAME processes as XP does. Just a few more are added to support Gadgets and shiny-glass-mode. What a ripoff. I put a nice note on the Gadget thing saying "Welcome to a Mac OS X ripoff!" Can say the manager in that department wasn't too happy to see that.
     
  5. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #5
    I would argue that the reason they don't is because they don't have to do so. When you have 90%+ of the market (or however much it is these days, still an overwhelming majority) and brand loyalty ingrained, you can put out substandard product and the people will still buy it.
     
  6. redAPPLE macrumors 68030

    redAPPLE

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Location:
    2 Much Infinite Loops
    #6
    a colleague installed vista a few weeks ago. he is still configuring it right now to make it work with our system...

    i don't think the company plan to support vista (at least in 3 years at the earliest).

    the company has just started deploying xp pro last summer.
     
  7. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #7
    I think that is a huge part of it. M$ had to make sure it would work with 90-95% of the software that was out there so that can leave some issues.

    Unlike apple M$ cannt really start over. Apple had the advantages of being very small and having a very very small market share so making OSX and starting over was not a huge deal. They pretty much said screw all the old software and threw it out. This allowed apple to fix a lot of problems from there OS that was pre Internet age. M$ still has to deal with issues and holes from pre Internet that are hard to plug.

    Also to top it off M$ OS easily get over 100 times the attention in trying to find holes and problems than the other OS so the chances of finding a new one are greatly increases as well.
     
  8. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #8
    Well, they can and eventually they're going to have to. There's something in their pipeline called "Singularity" which appears to be a brand new operating system. Not Windows, some brand spanking new operating system.

    It's with this new OS I think Microsoft will draw a line in the sand much like Apple did with OS9 - OSX.
     
  9. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #9
    if so it is about damn time. I wondering if Vista is more of a stop gap than anything else. They had to get it out the door and more than likely going to be at least 1 more OS on top of that before they are able to start over. But it would be a much needed start over.

    Just remember M$ has a much higher requirement on software compatibility than Apple ever had so it is 10 times more difficulted for them to do it.
     
  10. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #10
    That could be Vienna... but it means nothing to me. ;)
     
  11. Compile 'em all macrumors 601

    Compile 'em all

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    #11
    There is BIG MONEY made from the business of providing software for "securing" MS Windows. That is why Windows will always be insecure. Help me help you...
     
  12. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #12
    I agree that M$ will dump Windows eventually. But with most of the marketshare, new problems will soon develop. Third Party software and all that.

    It seems Microsoft is cursed...
     
  13. someguy macrumors 68020

    someguy

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Location:
    Still here.
    #13
    That's all it is. Nothing more. Look at the registry. Nearly identical to XP's. It's the same OS.

    I believe most of the existing malware for XP runs just fine on Vista as well. You still very much need to load up on anti-malware programs. I still cringe at the thought that there were articles declaring Windows Vista the "most secure OS ever". Are people out of their ****ing minds? Do they not realize that Windows is basically the only non-secure OS available?
     
  14. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #14
    well M$ did get one thing right with XP SP2 that help solve a lot of there problems and they are going to keep this in Vista and that it they change the default setting for installing updates from telling the user that they are downloaded and ready to install to installing them automatically and at one point there was a rumor that in vista they would remove the users ability of choosing to prevent critical updates from installing. But I do know they are going to make the default for updates install automatic.
    This will solve a HUGE number of the security problems with windows because a lot of the famous worms out there where using exploits that M$ had match a month or more before it hit. Just people did not update there computer and so they became easy targets.

    Change that one little thing does a lot to reduce the security problems in windows.
     
  15. beatsme macrumors 65816

    beatsme

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    #15
    this is the reason. Apple doesn't have to support nearly so many hardware configurations as Microsoft does. There are going to holes.

    btw, MS does build a stable OS. It's on the XBox.
     
  16. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #16
    Ah, but Microsoft could have easily instituted real administrative password protection for system-level changes, but they opted for easily dismissed drive-by verification instead. Backwards compatibility and hardware have nothing to do with this failure. Microsoft doesn't need to care, so they don't. It's the old story all over again.
     
  17. Zwhaler macrumors 603

    Zwhaler

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    #17
    Right on. I agree that Vista is XP with a new paint job. :rolleyes:
     
  18. YS2003 macrumors 68020

    YS2003

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Location:
    Finally I have arrived.....
    #18
    The question of this thread could be "why pigs cannot fly?" Let MS to MS....
     
  19. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #19
    I'm skeptical. MS is still controlled too much by some element of their company that values focus groups and foot-dragging technological troglodytes.

    They're so concerned about selling their newest OS to a company that still uses software written in 1995 that they'll refuse to overhaul their system for the modern era.
     
  20. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #20
    If OS X was say in 95% of all homes would we be complaining that the OS is way to insecure and be demanding Apple fix it.
     
  21. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #21
    If you knew anything about Windows and Mac OS X security you'd know that's a ******** excuse bandied about by Redmond apologists.

    An insecure OS is insecure whether it has a 0% marketshare or 100%.

    Windows is an inherently insecure OS. Period.
     
  22. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #22
    What Im saying is that Im sure that OS X is not 100% secure either.
     
  23. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #23
    Of course not. Such a thing is not realistic. But Windows is full of holes that are irrelevant to how popular it is.

    Its marketshare doesn't explain or excuse its problems.
     
  24. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #24

    you know by that argument Tiger is just OS 10.0 with a few new fancy things in it. So if you go by that line of though then people could point to Tiger and just call it 10.0 with a a few new things but really the same OS.

    And we both know that the statement about tiger is not true and it is the same with Vista. Tiger is bases 10.0. Vista base is from XP Sp2 and built from there. Just like Tiger is from 10.0 and built up from there.
     
  25. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #25
    That's funny, I don't remember 10.0 working on x86.

    Come to think of it, I don't remember 10.0 working very much at all.
     

Share This Page