Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 27th Sep 2006 23:06 UTC
Anti-malware company Symantec has accused Microsoft of withholding key information about its upcoming Vista OS, in an attempt to gain an unfair advantage in the security market. Symantec claimed this week that Microsoft is refusing to hand over the APIs for Windows Defender, its anti-spyware product which will be included in Vista. Without the APIs, Symantec claims that it isn't able to ensure that its own security products are compatible with Vista. Microsoft, though, insisted on Wednesday afternoon that the APIs are now available.
Permalink for comment 166355
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-03-03
OK, let's all jump in the wagon and make a secure Linux distro, as everybody complains about Windows
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Microsoft freak/guy/addict/fan/whatever, but why See-man-tech/Make-a-fee/Nor-tons/... are so willing to stick with an operating system that does not need them anymore ? Why not securing something else ? If Windows don't wanna be secured/patched/... and users installation gets bloated, I think it would cause quite some harm to Microsoft and people will soon switch faster than expected to another operating system (MacOS X for the most).
What I want to tell is that it's Microsoft's choice to release something secure or not, it's not third-parties' task to do this part of the job. If Microsoft don't wants to open this to other people, I think it's their right, and they'll suffer from it.
I also think there is not 'alternative' to Windows in term of usability, integration, support, ... When you buy your copy of Windows, of course everything isn't as polished as it could be (otherwise XP would have been released in 1985), but you still have a 10000-man task product in the hands. MacOS X is done with less ? Ubuntu is done with less ? So why people are still sticking to Microsoft ? I thought it's currently a case being trialed in EU...
Of course, Windows is such a big mess of code that flaws would ever exists. Which code isn't after all ? It's not by allowing third-party vendor that are as crappy or even more to replace Microsoft's components that you will secure things more. It's forcing Microsoft to stick and respect the standart and pass some unit testing to ensure these are respected. In this case we could ensure the code will behave in such a way that seems secured.
Kochise
Edited 2006-09-28 12:27