Re: What about this!!!
From: Michael J. Pelletier (mjpelletier_at_mjpelletier.com)
Date: 01/19/05
- Next message: John E. Carty: "Re: What about this!!!"
- Previous message: donnie: "Re: What about this!!!"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: What about this!!!"
- Next in thread: Leythos: "Re: What about this!!!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 18:37:30 -0800
Leythos wrote:
> In article <6IiHd.5948$Nu.2295@fed1read04>, mjpelletier@mjpelletier.com
> says...
>> Leythos wrote:
>>
>> > In article <88hHd.5939$Nu.2307@fed1read04>, mjpelletier@mjpelletier.com
>> > says...
>> >> Robsten wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > It,s the most dirty so far about Microsoft,
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/292
>> >> >
>> >> > Don,t use Microsofts antispyware
>> >>
>> >> That does not surprise me. More and more MS is pushing people away by
>> >> using bad tactics and bad software. It is time to look for other
>> >> solutions. UNIX (Red Hat, Mandrake, etc) now make an excellent
>> >> desktop. Apple just released the Mini Mac (for 499)...
>> >
>> > While I run a Fedora Core 3 box and a Mandrake box, are you suggesting
>> > (either of you) that MS should encourage pirating of their software?
>>
>> First, my degree is in software engineering. I am not encouraging
>> software piracy.
>
> I'm in there with you, I started in the 70's and moved to designing
> boards and micro systems by the late 70's/early 80's.
>
>> It is not that MS wants to eliminate piracy as it is how they try to do
>> it. Many non-technical users are getting ripped of with keyloggers, etc.
>> These people should be protected. MS does not care about it customer's.
>> It only does something if they get something in return. Instead of fixed
>> their code, they try to sell you more software. Or tell you to "upgrade".
>> Enough is enough.
>
> I think that MS does care about it's customers, in so far as customers
> mean money - if your customers leave you don't have money. This is the
> same with any for-profit business, very few have a real soul behind
> them, and fewer let the soul guide their business interactions.
>
> As for the customers being ripped off - come on, you can't blame MS for
> stupid users. Every flaw has been published, many even reported on
> prime-time news networks, and we've been told how to secure our systems
> for years. I've been running MS platforms since DOS days and never been
> infected with a virus - it's about stupid users.
No, not every flaw is reported. Furthermore, many time recently the while
world knew of a security flaw but MS took to much time developing the fix.
Furthermore, many flaws are not fixed until there are so many compromises
that MS can not ignore it anymore. Of all the software companies, can you
really dispute that they have had the worst history of security flaws? How
can a company has big as Microsoft only have 1400 developers? If nothing
else this proves that they are NOT serious about the quality of their
software.
>> My frustration comes from MS releasing software then using it's customers
>> test the software. It used to be that software companies did their own
>> software testing before releasing it. MS has changed all of that. People
>> are tied of their machines getting infected. Getting spyware, etc.
>
> Actually, most companies release beta software as RTM and do so because
> of the bean-counters pushing for profit/money. If programmers controlled
> the releases, few products would be problematic. I don't see where there
> are any more problems with the updates and OS than with other products -
> the ratio of issues is about the same from I can see.
This is a habit that has developed over the last 10 years. It is unfortunate
but has been popularized by MS. And yes, I do see a problem with it.
>
>> > From the article "But what Microsoft is doing is different. It is
>> > requiring that, as a condition precedent to being secure, you must
>> > establish that different software -- in this case, your operating
>> > system -- be properly licensed."
>> >
>> > It seems to me that the only beef in the article is that MS want to
>> > eliminate updates for illegally installed systems - where's the problem
>> > with that?
>>
>> The problem is that they tried to sneak some software onto people's
>> machines. Again, MS has lost touch with it's customers along time ago.
>> Finally, people are starting to wise up to it.
>
> I see it as MS wanting to provide service to valid customers, and valid
> customers, with valid licenses, had no problem with it. It was also part
> of the Beta, which most customers did not take part in. So, it only
> impacted tech's, thieves, and people that like to run the latest and
> greatest software and know enough to expect problems.
The point is, again, they do not care about developing good software. They
look for sneaky techniques to promote their anti piracy policies.
Personally, I do not blame people for pirating MS software as I do not
believe if is worth the top dollar they force you to pay.
> What would be create is if there was some timer that phoned home to MS
> and reported compromised machines (in addition to pirated ones) and
> removed disabled TCP/IP on those machines - would sure cut down on spam,
> relays, viruses and worms :)
I disagree, I do not want a "Phone Home" software on my PC. When I surf the
web or whatever, it is my business and not some company's. Furthermore I
HAVE THE RIGHT to be autonomous if I choose. This is my choice and not some
company.
-- Michael
- Next message: John E. Carty: "Re: What about this!!!"
- Previous message: donnie: "Re: What about this!!!"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: What about this!!!"
- Next in thread: Leythos: "Re: What about this!!!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
