Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Microsoft and Security. Ha!
- Thread starter mcmav37
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
microsoft just wants to control the world, so they are going to push thier virus protection down people's throats and people will buy it and they will be a step closer, except for us untouchable mac users who only use Office
Are you kidding?
What if car manufacturers did this?
Customer: "My car was broken into because the locks you installed were shoddy and unlocked at random."
Dealership: "I'm sorry, did you triple lock them, install a security alarm, a club and park in a guarded, well lit area?"
Customer: "No, I was parked on the street in front of my house."
Dealership: "Oh....I'm sorry, but we consider that your fault. You should have used all the previous security precautions."
Customer: "Well, had the locks worked, they would not have been able to open the car door."
Dealership: "We offered no guarantee your car would be protected against theft."
Customer: "Isn't that a given? What are the door locks for then?"
Dealership: "You door locks prevent unauthorized entry, but anyone with a screwdriver and 15 seconds to kill can open them. We can't protect against everything."
Customer: "Uh...that seems a little too simple to do. Why wasn't I told this?"
Dealership: "It's common knowledge that nothing is truly safe. We have determined that a small fraction of a percent of our cars are broken into that quickly."
Customer: "But you are the market leader. A small fraction of a percent is still a HUGE number. What can you do for me here? I would like my locks fixed and my belongings replaced."
Dealership: "I'm sorry, we are not liable for any damage due to accidental damage."
Customer: "You just said you knew anyone with a screwdriver and some time could get in."
Dealership: "Sir, would you like to sign up for our security service? We offer round the clock protection for your vehicle, but we would need to periodically slow down your car to five miles per hour to run security checks."
Customer: "What if I am driving at the time?"
Dealership: "You said you wanted security, right? Oh, and you'll have to bring your car in every week or so for an hour of security updates."
Customer: "Every week?"
Dealership: "Yes. How would you like that to be billed?"
What if car manufacturers did this?
Customer: "My car was broken into because the locks you installed were shoddy and unlocked at random."
Dealership: "I'm sorry, did you triple lock them, install a security alarm, a club and park in a guarded, well lit area?"
Customer: "No, I was parked on the street in front of my house."
Dealership: "Oh....I'm sorry, but we consider that your fault. You should have used all the previous security precautions."
Customer: "Well, had the locks worked, they would not have been able to open the car door."
Dealership: "We offered no guarantee your car would be protected against theft."
Customer: "Isn't that a given? What are the door locks for then?"
Dealership: "You door locks prevent unauthorized entry, but anyone with a screwdriver and 15 seconds to kill can open them. We can't protect against everything."
Customer: "Uh...that seems a little too simple to do. Why wasn't I told this?"
Dealership: "It's common knowledge that nothing is truly safe. We have determined that a small fraction of a percent of our cars are broken into that quickly."
Customer: "But you are the market leader. A small fraction of a percent is still a HUGE number. What can you do for me here? I would like my locks fixed and my belongings replaced."
Dealership: "I'm sorry, we are not liable for any damage due to accidental damage."
Customer: "You just said you knew anyone with a screwdriver and some time could get in."
Dealership: "Sir, would you like to sign up for our security service? We offer round the clock protection for your vehicle, but we would need to periodically slow down your car to five miles per hour to run security checks."
Customer: "What if I am driving at the time?"
Dealership: "You said you wanted security, right? Oh, and you'll have to bring your car in every week or so for an hour of security updates."
Customer: "Every week?"
Dealership: "Yes. How would you like that to be billed?"
i don't know about controlling the world. but charging for this kind of software in the future is a sure way to tick a lot of people off. you buy a faulty OS, and then you have to buy software to fix it's problems. this sucks more because MS has access to more of the inner workings of the OS to offer a better solution than its competitors. it's these things that really turn people off of Windows. i'm surprised they aren't trying to avoid this kind of behavior. they already pulled that - we fixed Internet Explorer, but only if you upgrade to XP - crap.
appleretailguy said:
Thanks for that appleretailguy, had me in stitches! It's funny cause it's true!
Your a little off beat here. Think about it: Is it Microsoft's fault that there are viruses and spywhere? No. Macs would have this stuff too if it were more main stream and hackers cared to take down the apple world. If someone put a bunch of nails on a street and you rolled over them unknowing, is it Ford's fault? No.
grapes911 said:
No, but if my neighbor drives down the same street in his car and has no problems with the nails, then there is something wrong with Ford. And if Ford is aware of this problem, and instead of just fixing the tires on all of their cars, they decide to sell me some extra protection or repair plans for the inevitable flat tires I will get with their product, the problem is even worse.
mcmav37 said:
Ford can be very aware that a nail can cause a flat, but they can't do too much about it. If the nails are placed in the right place any car can be a target. If people don't put nails, glass, etc. on the road things will be much better.
I can see it now. You going to your car dealer saying you want you tires replaced for free because you have a nail in your tire and the car in front of you didn't.
Yes, but...
Yes, I see your point. But shouldn't Microsoft focus on building a better OS than devising a way to protect it?
Think of modern medicine...we have treatments and pills for many, many diseases, but isn't the best way to prevent having a disease in the first place a sound mind and healthy lifestyle?
grapes911 said:
Yes, I see your point. But shouldn't Microsoft focus on building a better OS than devising a way to protect it?
Think of modern medicine...we have treatments and pills for many, many diseases, but isn't the best way to prevent having a disease in the first place a sound mind and healthy lifestyle?
grapes911 said:
the problem is though, that OS X is more secure already beacuse of the way in which it handles installations and the like, im sure people have tried to write viruses and the like for Macs, its not only because the OS isnt mainstream that there are no viruses, its that its much harder to crack this system than Windows and rather than fix the problem MS is just going to try and patch it
grapes911 said:
Well, my entire extrapolation of your analogy was based on the fact that other cars did not experience the same problem, so Ford should be able to do something about it. You are right, though, that if the nails equally affect all cars, then Ford is not at fault and does not produce inferior products.
PlaceofDis said:
It is a harder to crack the bsd sub system of os x, than windows I agree. But if more people used it and people hated Jobs like they hate Gates, then there would be more problems with it. But thats not the point here. Glass is easier to break than plastic. Should glass companies be responsible when the glass breaks because some 3rd party broke it? Why is it so shocking that a company would charge you for them to fix their probuct when the company didn't break it? This just seems like standard business practices to me.
mcmav37 said:
So the car example wasn't the greatest, I was just trying to find an example when something bad happened that wasn't the manufactures fault.
grapes911 said:
I know what you are saying. In fact, I agree that if the Mac gains market share, then there will probably more problems. But more problems compared to now, not compared to Windows.
I don't think anyone is saying that Microsoft is reponsible for viruses and spyware. But, even you admitted that OS X is less susceptible to these types of threats, so they are not universal. That being said, Microsoft is aware of this problem, and is certainly aware that they could be doing better, but instead of fixing Windows -or- building these "extra" programs into Windows to provide the protection, they are planning to sell them separately.
Sure, if someone breaks my window, I'm not going to expect the glass company to pay for it. But, now that I need to fix my window, if there is the technology available to make that window less susceptible to being broken in the future, I would expect that company to offer it, or I would go to a company that does. This, of course, necessitates that people know there is another option. I was just talking with 3 people at school yesterday who asked what type of antivirus I use for my computer and they couldn't believe that I don't have to worry about that stuff. If Apple releases miniMac and does some good marketing to educate the public, they could have a huge thing on their hands.
Agreedmcmav37 said:
True, they could do better. But that would raise the costs of windows computers because of the cost of new development. They make a lot of money and hold a large share because they are cheaper than Apple. Its like buying the cheaper TP, sure it hurt my ass, but then I can buy more apple products.
grapes911 said:
Yes, I believe this is a big part of it. The price/quality disparity between Windows and Mac has always been present. With 10.4, the quality disparity will only increase, but hopefully with the miniMac (fingers crossed), the price disparity will be minimized and people who have always recognized the former, but could not overcome the latter will be able to join the Mac community.
microsoft has plenty of money for the R&D, they dont have to worry about hardware solutions as well as the software, they only do one, so they have much more money to spend than Apple does in development, its a factor of know that they have a market lead that makes them a lot of money, and they dont want to lose it, and they want to milk that lead for all they can
The sad thing is that a lot of 'non-techy' Windows users will be really glad that Microsoft are doing this so that they don't have to figure out anything to do with Norton/Black Ice/McAffee etc and that they can just get everything from one company. The thought that the company should be making things more secure in the first place probably wouldn't occur to them.
The other thing is that there are a lot of people who don't realise there is an alternative to being infested. I mentioned in passing to a guy at work (who's reasonably tech savvy) the other day that there weren't any viruses in the wild for OS X. He didn't believe me and went off to prove me wrong. An hour later he came back and said he was amazed. He's now considering an iMac for his very untech savvy mother.
The other thing is that there are a lot of people who don't realise there is an alternative to being infested. I mentioned in passing to a guy at work (who's reasonably tech savvy) the other day that there weren't any viruses in the wild for OS X. He didn't believe me and went off to prove me wrong. An hour later he came back and said he was amazed. He's now considering an iMac for his very untech savvy mother.
Not sure if this has come up in another thread today, but this is brilliant.
http://www.microsoft.com
Even they know the best way of avoiding spyware is to use a PowerBook.
Someone has to get fired for that.
http://www.microsoft.com
Even they know the best way of avoiding spyware is to use a PowerBook.
Someone has to get fired for that.
"New Virus Released!"
This Virus attacks the Windows XP anti-viral software. It will damage the virus definition files, as well as disable the auto update features. This virus makes it easier for other viruses to infect a computer, however it does not cause any data loss on its own. It should be considered extremely dangerous.
How long before we see that appear?
This Virus attacks the Windows XP anti-viral software. It will damage the virus definition files, as well as disable the auto update features. This virus makes it easier for other viruses to infect a computer, however it does not cause any data loss on its own. It should be considered extremely dangerous.
How long before we see that appear?
Glad I don't have to worry with all of it on MY computer!
But most of us probably have to use Windows in some form at work. The set I'm on is still Windows 95!!
I know that security problems keep a whole department busy here, and they are so paranoid about everything. Our machines (even when I was on an XP laptop) are so locked up that they become vitually useless for anything other than internal email and MSOffice, and even then we had to save everything as '95 because half the company couldn't read XP docs.
The world would be a better place if everyone just used a Mac.
Then again, what would we have to be smug about?
Woof, Woof - Dawg
But most of us probably have to use Windows in some form at work. The set I'm on is still Windows 95!!
I know that security problems keep a whole department busy here, and they are so paranoid about everything. Our machines (even when I was on an XP laptop) are so locked up that they become vitually useless for anything other than internal email and MSOffice, and even then we had to save everything as '95 because half the company couldn't read XP docs.
The world would be a better place if everyone just used a Mac.
Then again, what would we have to be smug about?
Woof, Woof - Dawg
MacDawg said:
Win95... fun... Win98SE is IMO the best Windows OS there is. And it sucks. But it runs Firefox... but it sucks. But it runs a number of the current programs out... but it sucks. Oh well. I love my PowerBook.
We can be smug about the fact that we were right, all along.
Isn't that just a bit ironic?
I considered starting a new thread for this post but decided against it.
This new anti-spyware program MS is offering in beta form, takes you through a "Windows Validation Process" before download. That's right, in order to download and run this anti-spyware software; MS requires that you submit information to them via the internet about you and your pc.
EDIT:
As a follow up.. I drove two hours to my parents place tonight to fix their pc that has been mangled and rendered useless by spyware and popups. When I got here I moved the pc into my sis's (she has high speed) and booted. I downloaded the MS beta, Spybot S&D, and Adaware.
I first installed M$'s. Ran it (A shallow and deep search). Grabbed a screen shot of the results.
Without reparing anything I ran Spybot. Grabbed a screen shot.
Again without fixing anything I ran Ad-aware. Grabbed a screen shot.
The results are very interesting... here's the break down:
Ad-aware found 17 "critical items"
Spybot found 11 "problems"
MS Anti-Spyware found 0 threats, 0 infections.
Nothing, MS says... zilch.
That's funny... cuz I'm getting a popup every 5 seconds, there are 10 processes running that I don't recognize and the pc is crawling (P4@2.66).
Go figure, eh?
I considered starting a new thread for this post but decided against it.
This new anti-spyware program MS is offering in beta form, takes you through a "Windows Validation Process" before download. That's right, in order to download and run this anti-spyware software; MS requires that you submit information to them via the internet about you and your pc.
EDIT:
As a follow up.. I drove two hours to my parents place tonight to fix their pc that has been mangled and rendered useless by spyware and popups. When I got here I moved the pc into my sis's (she has high speed) and booted. I downloaded the MS beta, Spybot S&D, and Adaware.
I first installed M$'s. Ran it (A shallow and deep search). Grabbed a screen shot of the results.
Without reparing anything I ran Spybot. Grabbed a screen shot.
Again without fixing anything I ran Ad-aware. Grabbed a screen shot.
The results are very interesting... here's the break down:
Ad-aware found 17 "critical items"
Spybot found 11 "problems"
MS Anti-Spyware found 0 threats, 0 infections.
Nothing, MS says... zilch.
That's funny... cuz I'm getting a popup every 5 seconds, there are 10 processes running that I don't recognize and the pc is crawling (P4@2.66).
Go figure, eh?