Andy Martin of The Committee to Fight Microsoft on Tuesday announced his intentions to block Microsoft from releasing its Windows Vista operating system. Martin intends to ask Microsoft for an unconditional warranty that the operating system is free of bugs that could result in security vulnerabilities. He argues that no company in America gets away with selling a “defective” product the way Microsoft does.
Why do people buy their crap (I know they have little choice)!?! It’s like buying a car knowing that the manufacturer will put out multiple recalls for defective parts!
And Linux or just about any other OS have no bugs that could result in security vulnerabilities. Rrrrriiiiight.
but you aren’t charged £300-£400 to use them…
but you aren’t charged £300-£400 to use them…
Ever looked at Red Hat’s (*not* Fedora) pricing…?
Ever looked at Red Hat’s (*not* Fedora) pricing…?
Yes. It’s quite expensive. And none of it is for the product itself.
Red Hat charges for support services. Large companies will pay large amounts of money for a 100% guarantee that whatever they purchase will operate smoothly.
Red Hat acknowledges that there are bugs in its software. By paying them, you place the onus to solve problems on them.
Let’s look at it from another perspective. What warranties can Microsoft, the biggest and most influential software company in the world about the quality of its software? None. Zero. Exactly the same as those “Linux communists” which offer their software for free. Rrrrriiiiight.
Your english is pretty much broken.
Exactly, Andy Martin is a joke and should be barred from the net and all legal activites permanently. Anyone want to start a committe of Anti-Andy Martin? Due to his “defective” speech, he should be barred from talking …
“Exactly, Andy Martin is a joke and should be barred from the net and all legal activites permanently.”
The only funny news in a while, and you want to put an end to it :-p
I’d rather laugh at some nut than read inflamatory anti-<any os here> posts all day. You may not have noticed, but for once the majority of OSNews posters are in agreement in a thread concerning Windows rather than fighting over which OS is better and why.
Well…
I don’t think he’s asking for bug free, just for a reasonable level of workability. And he makes a good point that each big Microsoft release has been plagued:
Win95 was a device driver nightmare.
Win98 wasn’t reliable, it could only run for weeks.
WinXP had huge security problems.
I’m unaware of what WinNT 3/4 had going on, maybe it was good? I know there are fixes in SMB they refuse to backport to it now.
Maybe the company has turned around, or maybe XP is just mature now so they’ve worked most of their stupid mistakes out? I guess Vista will kind of tell us.
Software companies have never been known for being responsible though…
good point raised but its really not practical to release bug perfect code especially with the size of windows, however if this forces them to do more checks on the code then this is good!
By this guy’s logic, Red Hat and Novell shouldn’t be able to release their own distributions of Linux until they can guarantee that their products are that good. What this clueless idiot misses is the obvious fact that Microsoft does in fact handle these holes. Each patch is the equivalent of a small product recall.
No sir your are a moron 68.235.177, if shoplifting is the same in your mind as downloading warez version of Windows.
Then if a product is defective it must pose a heath and safety risk, would you trust Vista if it powered a life support machine? Of course not, the man has a good point.
Also Microsoft could learn from Debian for stable releases.
You are assuming the same logic should be applied to Microsoft and Red Hat/Novell, ignoring the fact that Microsoft is a monopolist and Red Hat/Novell isn’t.
“You are assuming the same logic should be applied to Microsoft and Red Hat/Novell, ignoring the fact that Microsoft is a monopolist and Red Hat/Novell isn’t.”
What heck having monopoly has to do with this? I tell you: it has nothing to do! It only means they can’t do this and that. I mean it’s just juridical term.
You can’t release such a huge piece of code like Windows (or Mac OS or Linux) without having bugs. This guy needs to stop taking crazy pills and realize how computers work.
With that said, I agree that if this causes Microsoft to do more extensive bug and security testing, then it will be good for the industry and consumers as a whole. I just think the guy Andy Martin is a little psycho.
This guy is a total fruit, and obviously doesn’t understand computer software. Something the size of Vista probably has something like 50 million lines of code (XP has just over 40 IIRC). There’s just absolutely no way that something as enormous as Windows can be released 100% bug free.
Hell, even the ~1.5 million line FreeBSD kernel has bugs here and there, and the FreeBSD is quite stringent about code quality.
Ah, lest you young-uns forget –
The Apollo Project (for the youngsters – the 1st human spaceships to the moon and back) had over 5 million lines of code, and they never had a BSOD…
And one day only a few old timers will remember that “freedom” didn’t used to include airport strip searches, library scans, etc.
It is amazing how well people lower their expectations.
America is a fading empire. And it is fading fast. None of this dumb stuff matters anymore. Just get your money as fast as you can before the ship sinks.
Microsoft, of course, excludes any form of guarantees and warranties and so on in the EULA from their software. Therefore, at first sight, this whole thing is ridiculous.
That fits in the copyright system, e.g. you can’t sue a publisher for publishing books with spelling (or even factual) mistakes, can you?
But if you have software patents, software is some kind of “thing” along with all other things like TV sets, microwaves, hole punchers, and so many other things you can imagine.
And all these things have warnings, and a list of things you shouldn’t do with them, e.g.
– Do not put [electrical device X] in water
– No guarantee/liability when the device has been opened
But I can’t recall that I have ever seen things like:
– If you get serverely hurt becausea accidentally 110V was put on all the buttons of the microwave, we are not responsible for that
So if software is a “thing” that you can get a patent on, I think there should be a minimum amount of responsibility for the manufacturer.
“I want all the power but none of the responsibility” is the thing big software houses like Microsoft want – and seemingly have!
What a complete nutcase. “The Committee to Fight Microsoft”? If you don’t like their products, vote with your wallet! Jesus!
Saying this as a LInux user and F/OSS advocate, the guy’s a nut & is doing nobody any favours
Listen, I’m as anti-Microsoft as the next Mac fanboy but seriously, no software company in the world would make such a warranty. Apple, which makes one of the most secure OS’s in the world, wouldn’t make that warranty. No Linux to this date has ever made that warranty. I think people need to stop bitching and if they don’t like Microsoft products, ***GASP***, DON’T BUY THEM!
It’s not that hard. I’d been using Windows since 1992 and when I stopped liking their products in 2000, I stopped buying them.
I’m so sick of hearing people bitch about how evil Microsoft is while in actuality, Linux would have never spread the way it has if the industry was like it was before Microsoft, when every vendor had their own Hardware/Software offering that was completely incompatible with each other. To Microsoft’s credit, it was the interoperability created by everyone using Windows that drove up the volume and drove down the prices of x86 hardware so regular people could purchase computers for the first time ever.
As I said before, I’m not a fan of their software or business practices but this is getting ridiculous. NOBODY IS MAKING ANYONE BUY VISTA!!!
Yeah, nobody’s *making* you buy MS products, but it actually takes some effort to find computers *not* sold with Windows preinstalled.
That said, this Andy Martin guy sure is audacious O_o
Hard to find computers *not* sold with Windows? There are over 100 Apple Stores as well as an Apple section in every Comp USA.
I think he meant from a company that isn’t a poor Microsoft.
“Hard to find computers *not* sold with Windows? There are over 100 Apple Stores as well as an Apple section in every Comp USA.”
The problem with Apple and those stores is that they are all only in very large cities; there are only two places in Saskatchewan where I can get Apple hardware, Saskatoon and Regina. Apple rarely advertises it’s hardware, and I have yet to see one TV commercial about their OS. Tell my why under those conditions anyone would be surprised to see that Apple only has a miniscule slice of the pie around where I live. Not everyone lives near an Apple store, and Apple doesn’t really do much to reach out to people who don’t go looking for it first; considering how easy it would be to walk into the local Staples, FutureShop, TheSource, etc… and buy a Wintel PC, I would say Apple hardware and software is hard to find in comparisson.
There is only one Apple Store in Canada that I know about, the rest of the stores that have Apple hardware don’t advertise that fact and so few people even know it’s there. The last time I saw a Mac around here was when there was one of those G4 iMacs and one iBook at Futureshop, believe me if I had CAD $2200 + tax I would have bought the iMac. Now the only Apple products left in this city are iPods.
“NOBODY IS MAKING ANYONE BUY VISTA!!!”
And nobody makes anyone use WMP. But it is becoming increasingly difficult to find sites which support RealPlayer.
So much for our victory, having RealPlayer for Linux.
Why oh why oh why would you want RealPlayer for *any* OS?
Believe it or not, I was getting better quality news streaming from RealPlayer. But forget it: just tell MS to make WMP for Linux (I bet they won’t)
Do you think people in Lin$ux community will buy? Lin$ux community if full of cheapos who will use substandard tools if its free and will never pay. Let aside enterprise users which anyways won’t need a media player in most cases.
You missed the point altogether: if they make WMP and Office for linux they die.
This is one of those areas where you get what you pay for. Do you want a mission-critical operating system? You probably do, but you aren’t willing to pay for it, accept way less features, wait longer for it, etc. Take Debian as an example. Very few people are willing to run Debian stable on their desktop. Is it less buggy than any Linux distro? Probably, but it’s also old. Most people would rather deal with bugs and security holes. I know I would.
The same applies for Windows. People want a product that works 99% of the time and is up to date with a lot of features more than one that works 100% of the time.
Plus, as someone who does software development, it would just be too difficult to ensure bug-free code. Often times, what looks perfectly innocent can have hidden dangers and it would mean a massive code review that would take ages to complete – way more time than adding every feature any user could want. Imagine a hey stack. It’s hard to find a needle (without a magnet). It’s even harder when you’re told there might be some needles in there, but we don’t know how many and if you don’t find 100% of them, that’s the end of you.
It’s hard to find a needle (without a magnet)
And yet small groups still manage to git er done.
You do remember this is the comapny that invented vaporware? At least made it a household word. This is a company that is at least as interested in aquirering code as in writing code.
Perhaps Microsoft <strong>should </strong>take some time to try to find more bugs prior to selling the next package.
Yes, you most certainly can use Windows XP and only have 128 megs of RAM on the machine it is on. In fact, you can use it on a machine with much less RAM than that! The question becomes not if it can, but if it is worthwhile for your desires to run it in a given machine configuration and software configuration. You can enable resource-hogging options or disable them to work as desired on a given machine configuration. For example, Windows XP doesn’t require all the fancy menu fades and so on that suck down the system when in use: you can use a Windows Classic theme if you so desire, which greatly reduces the overhead involved. You can also choose to disable many of the things running in the background that you really don’t need.
And really, when it comes to modern systems, how many of the OSS systems aren’t at least as hungry as XP for RAM when it comes to “acceptable performance” which is a user-variable target anyway? IIRC, Microsoft never said “128 megs is all you’ll ever want” for running XP, even if Microsoft stated “128 megs is enough to for XP to function” which are two different things. Because all 32 bit versions of Windows from NT 3.1 to current use virtual memory, they can function (though perhaps slower than you’d desire) on less memory than is optimal for best performance. Then, too, you have to take into account what you’re using a machine for, when you consider the physical RAM you need (er, want) for acceptable performance. You could get away with manipulating huge graphic files scanned in with a high resolution scanner with a machine with 64 megs of physical RAM, as the OS will absolutely do that. Will it be fast enough to be worth the effort and time? Well, that’s an entirely different question!
So, yes, the guy sueing for the reasons stated is a complete moron, and unqualified to argue the case from a technical point of view: all he’ll have to argue with is perceptions of what he’d like to see, which, although they’re a nice thought, far from a reality. Besides, sueing a company for creating software that can be exploited in terms of security issues that occur due to malicious programmers is equivalent to sueing a car company for making it impossible for car thieves to steal their cars!
Not to mention the fact that releasing security updates, for free, is the exact same thing as having a warantee. And Microsoft does guarentee that there will be OS support.
First of all, from a legal point of view, this is unlikely to have any merit.
However, it could bring negative attention to MS such that it either hurts them (good if you’re an MS hater) or it pushes them to make it more of a concern (good if you’re an MS consumer or even fan).
Windows XP already utilizes between 96 and 104 MB of RAM depending on the configuration and most people want to use at least one application without their system swapping like crazy and wearing out their harddrives. Sure, you can probably try running XP on 16 MB of RAM while swapping most of it. However, Microsoft’s claim that Windows XP even runs on 128 MB systems is just another blatant lie.
However, Microsoft’s claim that Windows XP even runs on 128 MB systems is just another blatant lie
No, it would be a lie if it were demonstrably untrue, which it isn’t. Windows *will* run with that little memory – it won’t do anything useful, but it will run.
The difference may be meaningless, but it’s enough for marketing and legal departments to work with.
i’m no fan of microsoft but…. what a fricken joke
now…. i do think that as a proprietary product microsoft should somehow be held responsible for neglecting to patch known security holes in a timely mannor….. for instance if there is a security issue that microsoft knows about upon release but makes no effort to fix it until there is a mass of attacks on that hole, there should be some way to legaly hold them responsible.
while know that is almost impossible to enforce in practice, it at least puts forth a precident to microsoft that there will be consequences for blatent neglect (if it can be prooven)
For me, I find that Microsoft is doing everything they can to prevent me from rushing out and buying Windows Vista *right now*.
By, uhm, not having released it yet.
Most people are forced to use Windows at work, so (IMO) they prefer to go home to something with a different headspace – i.e., Linux or FreeBSD. Myself, I work with Linux at work all day. I find it to be quite a relief to be able to go home to my Windows XP Pro system. And, when Vista comes out, I will upgrade my computer to something with a bit more chutzpah than my current 1Ghz Duron/384MB RAM/2GB-free HD space.
My home server will always run FreeBSD, though
I agree that Windows is shit and that Microsoft is seriously guilty of releasing dangerously buggy code, but come on. Demanding a software vendor to refrain from shipping a product until it is GUARANTEED 100% bug-free is ludicrous. It’s impossible, especially when the OS is as grandiose and bloated as most mainstream OSes are today, MacOS X and Linux included.
It’s not quite the same as with automobiles, where a flaw could be literally fatal. This is software, and while yes in some extreme cases a serious flaw COULD lead to a fatality, for 99.9999999999999999999999% of cases it wouldn’t cause a physical injury (unless it cause the user to get angry and hit or smash his computer with his hands, but the user’s lack of control over his temper is NOT the vendor’s fault).
The sad reality is Vista will ship and people will buy it. Life goes on.
You certainly don’t know Linux if you say it’s bloated. One thing is the kernel, other thing is desktop environment and applications. Linux is not bloated. Desktop envirnoments are not bloated. All is perfectly configurable. I can boot Linux from a 1.44 deskette, so tell me how is that bloated?
>I can boot Linux from a 1.44 deskette, so tell me how >is that bloated?
Wow! Just another bloated useless floppy.
I can boot the Amiga from a single bootblock and run a tonns of software from this setup. =)
I could easily be classified as anti-microsoft, and even I think this is absurd. Of course, I’m sure this is just a publicity stunt, but still…
Andy Martin has a point. Forget it’s software for a moment, and look at this way:
* Windows has shipped with many faults.
* The faults cost billions of dollars in labor (fixing, preventing, lost productivity) and purchasing additional products (antispyware, antivirus, firewall).
* Many faults take months to fix. Many are outstanding today! Search secunia.com. Also notice that MSIE installs spyware easily.
* Microsoft advertises their product as very secure. In one advertisement last year, Microsoft claimed their products are so security they make hackers “extinct.”
* Microsoft has enourmous financial and technical resources for fixing these faults.
* Instead, Microsoft focuses these resources on adding new features. It’s fairly easy to argue a new user interface takes back seat to cleaning up security issues.
* Microsoft is starting services (OneCare?) that profit from their own faults.
“* Microsoft has enourmous financial and technical resources for fixing these faults.”
Ford Pinto.
Andy Martin has a point. Forget it’s software for a moment, and look at this way:
* Windows has shipped with many faults.
Well it’s impossible to do 100% fault free code in such huge project. This most stupid thing to say, Microsoft does shitload of testing for they products.
* The faults cost billions of dollars in labor (fixing, preventing, lost productivity) and purchasing additional products (antispyware, antivirus, firewall).
And those companies makes money and employ more people so money isn’t steaming out in the air, it’s making more jobs. You don’t need antispyware, antivirus or firewall(XP SP2 has one it’s enough) if you know what you do. Most problems are caused by stupid ignored users who don’t know what they do.
* Many faults take months to fix. Many are outstanding today! Search secunia.com. Also notice that MSIE installs spyware easily.
ActiveX, well it keeps telling me that this one wants to install itself, not very easy to come in my computer without my help. Spyware is just another software that stupid ignored users keep installing in there systems, it’s not computers fault if users is such an idiot who installs all kind a crap! And for security holes, Microsoft got to do testing. I know some OpenSource zealot assholes don’t know what the testing is because sometimes you get crappy patches, even Apple did it ones.
* Microsoft advertises their product as very secure. In one advertisement last year, Microsoft claimed their products are so security they make hackers “extinct.”
So you gonna kill whole concept of advertasing. So i can run very fast since i use same shoes as Justlin Gatlin
. This is again one of these dipshit points that you keep giving. You never trust the advertising, McDonalds won’t make you happy with there Happy Meal. Don’t be an idiotic naive person!
* Microsoft has enourmous financial and technical resources for fixing these faults.
And they are using. They have lots of different departments that takes care on different kind a software. And besides it wouldn’t make any difference if they would bring fixes out day before it even exists because stupid ignored people won’t download them. Look at SP2 not all people use it yet and still they keep complaining about they security. I say you are a stupid ignored assholes who should use there brains more.
* Instead, Microsoft focuses these resources on adding new features. It’s fairly easy to argue a new user interface takes back seat to cleaning up security issues.
Now what fuck is this? Ofcourse they will be spend most of times making new features! That would an idiotic to not do. I mean it’s a business company they have to keep making new software with new features! They are fixing problems and developing new features, it’s the only way to survive. As i read your points i see that you don’t understand dipshit about business and probaply even on computers. This is BS.
* Microsoft is starting services (OneCare?) that profit from their own faults.
Wrong, its making profit of people being ignored and stupid. Most of modern day computers are full of viruses because the users don’t know how to use them and act like an idiots in internet. OneCare is just another product that has huge markets because idiot users. I been having system that doesn’t have antivirus or antispyware software and there is no viruses or spyware crap, why because i know what to install what not.
While I don’t care for MS’s business practices his actions are wholey naive. Anyone who does coding knows how difficult it is to have a bug free product. The more complicated the more likely a bug or exploit will slip through.
This would also set a bad precident since anybody releasing an OS would be held to having a bug and explot free release.
This fellows expectations are somewhat detached from reality.
Code Is Art
You do not buy a Rembrandt[1], Monet[2], or Durer[3] painting with a _unconditional guarantee_ that you will love it in all aspects. You must accept the painting for what it is, and hope that it ages with time well.
This type of legal precedent could very well put me out of business before i start. I am a very capable writer, but if i have _one_ mistake, it could bring my business to it’s knees and possibly close it after the first release.
Oh, and i use Linux quasi-religously. So, no, i’m not a fan of the Windows platforms, but i AM a fan of not having to explain every strange nuance of Linux to someone who doesn’t care (“Just go use windows and stop asking me questions…”).
[1]http://images.google.com/images?q=rembrandt&hl=en&btnG=Search+Image…
[2]http://images.google.com/images?complete=1&q=monet&hl=en&btnG=Searc…
[3]http://www.google.com/search?complete=1&hl=en&lr=&q=durer&btnG=Sear…
I’m no fan of Microsoft, and I think this is cool! I still want to sue my cable company, since they don’t support anything BUT Microsoft, so if anything bad happens as a result, they FORCED me to use it. I love when people sue.
Andy Martin of The Committee to Fight Microsoft on Tuesday announced his intentions to block Microsoft from releasing its Windows Vista operating system. Martin intends to ask Microsoft for an unconditional warranty that the operating system is free of bugs that could result in security vulnerabilities. He argues that no company in America gets away with selling a “defective” product the way Microsoft does.
What a nutcase. I am a Linux user and advocate, but seriously get real. Next headline:
Andy Martin of the Committee to Fight Microsoft has called on everyone to boycott Microsoft because Bill Gates sneered at the BSD Devil and Linux Penguin, as well as stepping on an Apple
I know that is a stupid example, but when you have a name like the Committee to fight Microsoft, it is very clear you are going to attack them over every stupid little detail you can find.
I also am willing to bet that Andy Martin couldn’t find ANY Operating System in the world that didn’t have at least one security bug. Red Hat just released 4 or 5 patches for packages contained in RHEL4 today. Novell releases them quite often too. Apple releases security fixes, as does SCO (albeit 10 months late quite often for SCO), Sun, IBM and HP. I’m not even a programmer and I can see this guy’s request is ludicrous. I can only imagine programmers world-wide rolling around on the floor laughing at this guy.
Why was this posted to OSNews, its just some complete wack-job trying to make himself look powerful and important?
This whole thing is just a big PR stunt to get this guy’s name in the press. Like any group of activists, they take an extreme stance on some issue then send out press releases. And what usually happens? Either no one cares or people get tired of hearing about the activists and rebel against their cause.
Sort of like when the “parent’s television coalition” (or whatever they’re) called tries to protest the “vulgar” content in some prime time show. The ratings for the show always go up.
So if anything, he’s simply giving free press that Microsoft is coming out with a new OS and that security is supposed to be one of their main goals.
———
If I was Microsoft, I’d release a statement saying:
“We’ll release an operating system with zero bugs right after laywers stop bringing frivolous lawsuits.”
http://www2.theregister.co.uk/1999/12/22/crazed_microsoft_antagonis…
Then you will all know who he is
“http://www2.theregister.co.uk/1999/12/22/crazed_microsoft_antagonis…..
Then you will all know who he is
“
At least if Microsoft takes this guy to court for libel, he’ll be able to make a convincing insanity plea. 🙂
I’m as much a M$ hater as one can be, I use Linux all the time, I install it wherever I can, and I truly hate Bill Gates, but even I say that this is just ridiculous! As someone already stated, it’s impossible to create something that is completely bug-free. How many cars are there that *always* work as expected, without a hitch? Probably none o_O Linux also has bugs, but far less of critical ones, and updates always come in a short notice. But why? Well, as Windows is a proprietary product, it isn’t really possible for anyone outside of Microsoft to provide patches or even notice possible bugs and backdoors. Also, Microsoft has it’s own way of doing things and their way usually doesn’t follow the standards, and then happens the same as to IE7: they aren’t going to make IE7 fully CSS compliant, because it would break compatibility with earlier versions! If you go the wrong path for too long, it becomes impossible to get back…This has also happened to Windows: they can’t just abandon everything to build something new. But, perhaps they should?
-WereCat
On the other hand, an entire industry is depending on their faults and none of their bugs are life threatening.
Asking to tone down their claims would be useful, but asking them the Moon is just stupid. It’s impossible. I would like to note that the guy is a lawyer. Given his case, allow me to doubt its knowledge and his competences on computers…
people don’t you see, this is all a big publicity stunt by this guy “Andy Martin”, whoever he is. regardless of the out come this will give the guy a better image, and help him become in his run for senetor!!!
He’s bringing up a very good point. Microsoft has this trick of having an EULA that people think they can trust, but in fact there’s no warrenty in there that protects you the customer. If it breaks, well tough budy. Open Source has no such tricky, no warrenty flat out up front.
hehe….. lets sue Apple, IBM, and the various Linux and BSD companies out there to…. heck…. lets sue everybody
this reminds me the southpark episode with sexual harassment panda…. the court case…. everybody vs everybody lol
and yes…. I do work in the industry, and no I am not young lol
First of all, BetaNews is very much pro microsoft, MS fanboy site. Even the title “Anti-MS Group Aims to Block Vista” has a biased tone. Obviously they are just pandering to their core readers with that sort of title.
I just think some folks are asking for some accountability and honest advertisement by a monopolist company. Imagine this. If you bought locks from a company that claims that it’s secure and you find out millions of people who bought the same locks have gotten their bike stolen, I think you have a good reason for a class action law suit and get your money back and maybe even cost of your bike. You trusted the company’s claim and purchased their product and if they knowlingly sold product that didn’t perform, they should be held accountable to that. It’s a well known fact that Microsoft advertises their product to be very secure product. It’s obvious it’s no where close to that. I think people do have the right to take Microsoft to court for false advertisement. If Microsoft want to keep selling their software that’s fine but if they claim that their software is secure then it’s false advertisement.
It sounds more like a campaign slur, than real investigation, they do this a lot in england to win voters.
Perhaps a friend of bill gates is running against this guy,i don;t follow us politics.
It may bring to the public who are not really knowlegable about computers, that why are they paying for something that has bugs, of course bugs are immeniant, when there start to hear that linux and bsd are free, even though they have bugs, they would rather pay nothing and have bugs than paying and having bugs.
No publicity is bad publicity
Lobbying for less restrictions and privacy intrusiveness (DRM, MS Spyware, Windows Genuine Advantage, etc.) would be a sound idea. Microsoft should not treat it’s customers like pawns and criminals. The DRM technology in Vista is worse than wearing an electronic ankle braclet. And the way they can manipulate their “Trusted Computing Platform” to kill all the applications they don’t like, like Firefox and any F/OSS stuff on Windows is absurd!
Microsoft is killing fair use of YOUR applications and YOUR computer with Vista, in turn for making it THEIR computer and applications you get shiny new themes and a “better” desktop experience? Sounds like a real good deal to me! </sarcasm>
Everyone at one point has had issues or been indirectly affected by Windows serious flaws.
Either speak up and demand better solutions or live like a door mat.
It’s time to do something!
These guy is out your minds?
But this is just retarded.
Yep, this ought to be the final straw for MSFT. They might as well turn out the lights.
What is he smoking? I want it too!
Everyone says that MS fixes bugs, and that it is imposible to release bug free software. I think the same thing. but I think that this guy has a good point too. MS only fix bugs they want, they even take months to fix critical security bugs.
MS and any software vendor (even vendors of paid Linux/BSD distributions) must give a warranty for a reasonable time, that the bugs found in their software in that period will be fixed within a reasonable time. as any hardware vendor do, if you find a malfunction it will be fixed or replaced.
Software vendor tricks their customers in EULAs: “you can return the package if you are disatisfied with it”, but MS is a monopoly, sometimes you can not simply return it because you need Windows (because that monopoly force you to use software that is available only for Windows). They must be forced to fix something always, not if they want.
But what’s your point? I use develop for windows because generate me cash! And use openBSD in my router because is free and is good for me. If you need something that not is free, you have to pay for it. I don’t pay my windows copy and I will try to maintain that position until last moment.
If you have to jump from NYC to LONDON in 12hs you have to pay your ticket, and are you sure in 100% you will arrive? Any Airlines will put his best efforts, but airplanes still having accidents. Is this monopoly too? It’s little extremist my example, but think about it.
I think in our days are a lot of important things to resolve than worry about Microsoft Vista, XP, or if one is better than other, etc etc. If you want pay for it, if you like pay for it, if you need you have to pay for and if you don’t like to pay, find a solution usefull for you, or if you are all disagree with my suggestions, don’t pay anything. You have always the last word and choice 🙂
My apologizes for english, it’s no my mother language.
Have a nice day
But when airplanes have accidents and property is damaged or people die, they DO get sued!! The day is approaching when MS can’t just wash it’s hands anymore and still keep their tidy profits. Imagine if you bought a new car from GM but the doors didn’t lock [but looked like it] and people easily stole your stuff…or carjacked you… “real” product vendors got nabbed a long time ago with nasty tricks like that.
I do agree holding up an entire release is a bit over the top, but what else is there. MS IS a monopoly… once they start selling it, most OEMS are compelled to start paying for it on their machines. We had a 5 year anti-trust trial for nothing… trying to draw attention to all those details just before a new flagship release is just fine.
“But when airplanes have accidents and property is damaged or people die, they DO get sued!!”
Really? Do you think that? You have to read a little, any company, or insurance company try to pay less or nothing. And if you have a car you, like my car or anybody’s car you must know or I think you are knowing, the list of defects, you can see with daily use. Do you think that an airplane have no defects??? you are wrong, I live with them, I Flight them and posibly you flight with them, and latent defects still here, until for any reason appears. And you pay a big lot of dollars.
I am not pro MS, neither Pro *nix, I’m pro “ME”. Sinceraly I like *nix, but today I need M$, Tomorrow will be another day, and who knows. As I said before, you have the latest word, it’s your choice, this is a neverending story. If you don’t like windows, find alternatives, don’t use it. If you love *nix use it. But think when you say MS this, or MS that, if you are disagree with MS comercial politics, develop you soft or use free options (I do ). You can do that. I have to pay 150 u$s for any copy of windows. I didn’t, but when the moment arrive, I will have to pay, and it’s too much for me (exchange equivalent in my national money). I see this idiot worrying about things that not happend now. This guys smoke a big PIPE, who knows with what kind product inside…. Don’t give food to the lyon.. It’s irrelevant..
As said before, sorry for posibles mistakes, english is new to me.
See you..
bye
What this guy wants is absurd. But then again, Microsoft is being absurd.
There are many reasons why I will never use Windows ‘Vista’
1) Really no new features that are worth anything to me. The few features that they were working on, like WinFS, they dropped. And really, who cares in a business environment if the GUI looks ‘pretty’. In every case, the first thing I do after installing XP is to change it to the classic theme.
2) The DRM, Trusted Computing… Yeah, like I’d trust MS with anything? Their OS likes to install things by itself and not let the user know. Sorry, not my cup of tea.
3) Compatibility. Let’s face it, every time they release a new OS, it breaks older things. Which is expected, and happens in *nix as well, but just what is Office 2003 going to look like in Vista? And with being in a corporate setting with a budget, we’re not going to want to upgrade both Windows and Office when it comes out, we’re looking into switching to linux, because it’s so much more cost effective.
4) The interface (from the screenshots I’ve seen) are just plain ugly. It doesn’t look like it even brings anything new, just some shiny widgets. And how many business computers are even going to have the 3D hardware to run the new windows? It’s kind of pointless to put Geforce 6 cards in a computer that is only used for email/web/word.
5) The name ‘Vista’ is just so lame!
6) There is no number 6
7) Useability. Unless they change their menu structure to be something more like KDE/Gnome (no more Program Files -> everything under the sun). I want my games to be under games, and Office under Office. Get some menu standards in there!
8) Really, there is no reason to upgrade to Vista. Where is the incentive? There isn’t exactly a plethora of new and exciting things in it.
It was called “Hello World!”
After that just about everything else has had bugs…
My attempt Hello World crashed so I guess I guilty of releasing bug ridden software too. :/
I’m a MS hater myself but there is no possible way anyone can release 100% bug free software not even if the developement spent 100 years working on it.
maybe XP is just mature now so they’ve worked most of their stupid mistakes out?
====================================================
And in another story from OSNews today:
Microsoft Fixes Six Flaws :
Microsoft has released six patches for its Windows operating system today. Three of them are rated critical, one important and two moderate. The three critical ones are related Internet Explorer, Print Spooler and PnP. They all three fix issues where your machine could be taken over completely.
====================================================
Three more “your machine could be taken over completely” security holes.
Oh yes, it surely sounds as though “XP is mature” and MS has “worked most of their stupid mistakes out”. =8-O
-Gnobuddy
I haven’t read any more comments of TFA, but no one on teh first page made the point that this guy is not holding MS up to the same standard as other manufacturers. The obligation (in most countries – not sure about US) is that a faulty product must be fixed, replaced or refunded – the government can not ban a product, unless there is some public safety issue.
Whethere Windows security breaches amount to a public safety issue, I’d personally say yes – but I doubt beaurocrats would agree.
Wow. I’m stunned. Speechless, even. If I lived to be a million years I never thought I would see this. The OSNews linux/anti-MS and MS/anti-linux camps seem to agree on something. Mostly, anyways.
I’m a little bit scared right now…
TIP FOR OSNEWS.COM USERS #51: Bathe often, as personal odors are offensive to others.
TIP FOR OSNEWS.COM USERS #51: Bathe often, as personal odors are offensive to others.
Well that’s a relief, at least someone finally got around to telling you. We were a little uncomfortable with bringing it up ourselves.
A wonderful repartee!!!!!idiot
I’m not sure what’s funnier. the guys who think he’s got a point or this article.
Maybe it would be good that they work harder. (how much harder can they work tho!?!)
Ok so you’ve found a security problem. Now we gotta fix it. Can we ensure no program breaks? No, We’ll gotta figure out a way to make them not break then.
There is a lot they have to do. I’ve read quite a bit about what they have to through over the years.
While I won’t use their products if I don’t have to. I don’t really like them. But I will tip my hat to them on what they have done. There are many features in windows that I’d _love_ Linux to have. (such as if I compile something now.. I want it to work 5 years later also. Oh.. did I also mention that I’d like it to work on any Distribution out there?
How about when I click an email link in firefox kmail pops up?
or perhaps a torrent link and azureus picks it up?
Integration just isn’t there for the most part. Windows has that.)
why is every other OS more secure? 100 times more pairs of eyes looking at the code comes to mind.
Why are their bugs so much more severe? I’d have to go with More users using it?
I’ll say it again also. I don’t like MS. I don’t use their products. I find their products buggy. But this article is just mind boggling on how dumb this guy this.
“A public interest lawyer who is also intending to run as a Republican in the 2006 Illinois gubernatorial race”
Yeah, show. A PR stunt. Some politican trying to get into the press. Nothing more. Suppose no need to get overly excited whenever politicans open their mouth and nonsense evaporates.
On the other hand, the article provided me a good laugh. So it isn’t completely bad.
I think people saying “this is stupid” take it too literally. Of course it is not possible to guarantee something as complex as operating system will be bug-free. But this is not the point; the point is to force the manufacturer to accept some responsibility for their product – and that is not a stupid idea at all.
It is a fact that companies like Microsoft want all the power and none of the responsibility… and why not, you’d probably want it too, if you could get away with it. It is up to us, consumers to make sure this doesn’t happen. Sometimes it takes voting with our wallet, sometimes it takes legal action, and sometimes a stunt can help, too. These are all weapons we can, and should use.
Besides, Microsoft has a very short history of innovation, and very, very long one of litigation. I for one would be very happy indeed for them to get the full taste of their own medicine.
From a brief scan of the article, I don’t think his point was “MS is buggy, Linux is better”, it was just “MS is buggy”. The software industry does seem to manage a rather larger compliment of flaws than other industries for a number of reasons (some of them good).
He’s just protesting the flawedness of popular modern software, not advocating alternatives. Many would expect to hear he was pro-FOSS but I don’t think that’s the issue here.
What happened to just not buy it if you don’t like it?
DON’T BUY THEIR PRODUCTS..if you don’t like Microsoft…But, I have a to keep a dual boot system, Linux for coding etc and Windows for web-browsing because there are sites that only look fine on IE.
half the worlds problem are not even Microsoft faults. Errors in design of open standards gave us spam (flaws in SMTP design), DOS attacks (flaws in IP design), phishing thru cache poisoning (flaws in DNS design). And don’t forget the great security design of telnet, ftp, and NIS. The early days of computing and the internet were truly far more innocent days. Computers were rare and slow and only the good guys had access to them. 8 megs of ram was considered awesome. Encryption was jumbling letters around. Technology has since evolved but it takes time to make all the necessary changes. Give Microsoft a break, every system they have released since Windows 95 has gotten dramatically better.
They have so much money in the bank they could hire a thousand critical systems engineers to mathematically test, fix and prove that their software is correct. They could do this with everything but this guy isn’t even asking for everything, he just wants them to offer a warrentee on the security critical elements of their operating system. Don’t claim that bug free software cannot be written. It’s written every day by engineers in the safety critical software community. Don’t claim that it’s too expensive, Microsoft can afford it.
Quote: “Andy Martin has a point. Forget it’s software for a moment, and look at this way: ”
Absolutely. I’ve been saying this for years. Software companies want to charge extortionate amounts of money for their products, but don’t want the responsibility. If a Microsoft product fails, and you lose data, you *should* have legal recourse. That is only logical. After all, it’s the failure of their product that has caused the issue. If they don’t feel that they can offer a suitably stable product, then they shouldn’t be selling it. Period.
Quote: “* The faults cost billions of dollars in labor (fixing, preventing, lost productivity) and purchasing additional products (antispyware, antivirus, firewall). ”
Amen. You are totally correct.
Quote: “* Many faults take months to fix. Many are outstanding today! Search secunia.com. Also notice that MSIE installs spyware easily. ”
Amen. You are totally correct.
Quote: “* Microsoft advertises their product as very secure. In one advertisement last year, Microsoft claimed their products are so security they make hackers “extinct.” ”
Again, you are correct. Why are government fair trading bodies not taking action against Microsoft for false and misleading advertising? Why are they not behing held responsible? If Ford said that their “new car is so good, it’ll never have a accident”, they’d be in serious trouble. Why is it different for Microsoft, and many other software vendors? The software and hardware related sectors have had it too easy, for too long. It’s time that they had the same degree of regulation as other manufacturers and the same levels of responsibility.
Quote: “* Microsoft has enourmous financial and technical resources for fixing these faults. ”
That’s right, and the reason why it doesn’t fix them is more profit! More reason to keep the shareholders happy, who are vitally more important than the actual people who buy the product!!! Oh the irony of capitalism!
Quote: “* Instead, Microsoft focuses these resources on adding new features. It’s fairly easy to argue a new user interface takes back seat to cleaning up security issues. ”
Agreed. However, Microsoft will say “this software belongs to us, we can do whatever we want to”. This is why the software industry needs to be more heavily legislated. In fact, the whole IT industry needs to be more thoroughly, and heavily legislated.
Quote: “* Microsoft is starting services (OneCare?) that profit from their own faults.”
Well, yeah…I don’t think any country has legislation to deal with this type of “misbehaviour”. Pity. Again, profits come first!
I’ll add to your list – EULAs should be made illegal. Their is no need for any license, other than copyright.
Very good points, I’ve long said the same thing about Microsoft and other software cronies.
Dave
For starters anyone who uses ‘M$’ should be ignored
for being on a child’s IQ level.
Come on, it is a operating system who cares, if you
do not like it stay away from it. You cannot touch
big Corporations, so get a life and start working
on your own.
If Linux was half as good as the hype, it would have
taken off like a rocket. Problem is, people spend
all day griping & complaining about Microsoft. If
you want to use something else, then by all means
go for it. But stop complaining that Microsoft is
the cause for and blame for everything under the
sun.
The funny part is, like all big Corporations,
including Microsoft, Redhat, Novell, they are in
it for the money, the nerd in the basement does
not exist nor will he ever amount to anything.
Because they spent all day bitching about
stupid stuff like this.
For starters, fix Firefox it crashes all over the
place in Linux. Have some decent email apps, other
than Evolution that actually work without a million
bugs. Real Player is one word, HORRIBLE, send it on
down the road to the land of cobbled coded crap.
Stop trying to copy Windows, if you hate Microsoft
so much, why does everything act just like a Windows
Box??? *** That is the Million dollar question ***
Linux has as many, if not more bugs than Microsoft
but they will never succeed at fixing them because
they spend all day bitching about Microsoft software
and how horrible it is. Meanwhile, they continue to
grow and move on with life. Unlike some nerd living
in Mom’s basement writing useless articles and
using code to build this ugly Osnews website off
sourcepuke…….
Walter Williams
[email protected]
So how does your bitching then differ from everyone elses? And you’re clearly not aware of what you’re talking about. Maybe firefox crashes for you, but I don’t know anyone who has any problems with it or evolution either. RealPlayer actually looks fine and good, it’s far better than it’s Windoze counter-part. Oh, and Gnome isn’t trying to copy Windoze, Gnome has taken alot of ideas from Macs, actually! If KDE looks like Windoze to you, then don’t use it.
Quote:
“Linux has as many, if not more bugs than Microsoft
but they will never succeed at fixing them because
they spend all day bitching about Microsoft software
and how horrible it is.”
That is just so annoying! Geesh! Have you ever looked at the Linux kernel mailing lists or changelogs? Did you know they’ve added ~1.5 million lines of code since last year? If everyone was “bithing about Microsoft”, how could they have released anything at all? Besides, just take a look at some truly honest comparison, and you’ll see that Windows has alot more of bugs, they are far more often critical and they don’t get fixed as soon as under Linux..I’m not here to bash on Microsoft, but I’m not taking crap from people who don’t know what they’re talking about..
-WereCat
I sincerely doubt a company like M$ will offer anything. This is from twenty years of observation.
We all know M$ is unstable and not secure.
There are actually more things to worry about. For example: Live Windows (there is one that does exist), BSD, and Linux CDs or USB keys. It’s time to start securing BIOS settings to prevent booting into production systems from the hardware.
If and when, history being an indicator of Empires and Corporations failing and falling, M$ will fall and it will leave a very large vacuum.
Go drink stallman pee. Come back when Linux has > 10% desktop market. MS will succeed because it is a very aggressive company. People there don’t sit on their ass like SUN and hope things will change. They act. If it was not for MS, i would still be buying expensive hardware like apple’s.
People like you should be shot and killed. You fuckin assholes just because you hate Microsoft doesn’t mean you can come here and bard. Your breed has the lowest moral values.
In hindi i will call you chutia and if you think this author has a point that you are biggest chutia.
Andy martin is maha chutia…lol
bunch of morons, who i bet have never done programming, come here and say its possible to write bug free software. Sorry sir, no its not possible. Even missions like rover which are so critical with very small code base had bugs so let aside a huge general purpose OS.
Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris all have bugs. Damn man these Lusers ( QuantumG and aGNUstic et al) should be drilled in their ass and let bleed to death.
Windows Server 2003 was rated the best server OS by many technical websites. So shut your twat up and stop lying for your mother sake.
For once, we all came together and actually agreed on something on a thread here…that this guy is nuts, and that *any* software project of this scale simply cannot be bug free. Group hug?
You sure are a royal dumbass. Lets see now your analogy. If you install Windows as you get it on CD from Microsoft, then there will not be any bugs. But you install 100% of software so who knows what causes the bugs. Will you go out and install any damn thing in your car? No sir, you will not. You will go to a mechanic to fix it and mechanic will give you gurantee *only* for the repair he did.
Software is inherently more complex and it is not an exact science. It is more of an ART. Anyone who says they can write bug free software is either a liar or has never developed complex system software.
Or may be he is some dumbass like you who tries to give his shitty comments here without any logic or knowledge.
Am I?
Quote: “If you install Windows as you get it on CD from Microsoft, then there will not be any bugs”
Bullshit.
Firstly, as the original poster that I replied to mentioned, all software has bugs. That’s unavoidable. To expect completely bug free software is idiocy. I never said that. Re-read my post.
Secondly, what I’m saying is that the software industry is not policed, and is seemingly above any fair trading/consumer laws in nearly every western country. Why is this so? Why can this industry avoid responsibility when every other industry has to comply? I’m sorry, but I simply don’t buy it. It’s called responsibility. Software vendors should be responsible for problems that their software causes. That’s just being reasonable. You’re looking at it from the corporate business/share holder view point, I’m looking at it from the rights of the user. I think I know who has more rights.
Your reply to my comment is basically inferring that Microsoft Windows and other Microsoft software has no bugs of its own, and that all problems are caused by installing 3rd party applications. This is, of course, nonsense. Furthermore, an operating system that becomes unstable because you install 3rd party applications, and in effect, can only remain stable if you don’t install anything is useless.
Quote: “Software is inherently more complex and it is not an exact science.”
Duh. No shit Sherlock.
Quote: “Anyone who says they can write bug free software is either a liar or has never developed complex system software. ”
Did IQs just drop? Did I say that? No. Read my comment above.
Quote: “Or may be he is some dumbass like you who tries to give his shitty comments here without any logic or knowledge.”
Well, looking at your post, you ain’t no bright spark either. Who’s the bigger dumbass, the original dumbass who posts, or the dumbass that replies with very poorly thought out replies?
Dave
Ok much better post from you this time and i agree my last post was in anger since instead of using term software companies in general, you were specifically targetting Microsoft.
You never named any other company like Redhat who advertise in same way as Microsoft and RHEL has its share of bugs. Or Oracle which puts ads like Unbreakable when they don’t fix bugs for 2 years.
Anyways i too think that software companies can do better, but i think they can never take responsibilities for the loss of data. Like with any equipment, you have guidelines to use it. With software guideline is “Take freakin backup”.
Quote: “You never named any other company like Redhat who advertise in same way as Microsoft and RHEL has its share of bugs. Or Oracle which puts ads like Unbreakable when they don’t fix bugs for 2 years. ”
No, I didn’t, because:
1. The article was about Microsoft
2. I mentioned Software vendors several times (which sort of implies them all 😉 )
Of course Software companies can do better, that was the whole gist of my argument. How much better? That’s a good question.
I personally believe, that if a loss of data is as a direct result of a bug, then the software vendor should be responsible. The act of backing up data isn’t necessarily easy. I think one has a reasonable right to expect a reasonable level of reliability (and security for that matter).
Microsoft’s “get the facts” campaign has been full of blatant, twisted misrepresentations and untruths. Microsoft has knowingly hired, and engaged with 3rd parties to praise Microsoft software in a high level of falseness. Is this right?
Anyways, glad you understand my point (and point of view).
Dave
About get the facts campaign, i don’t think Microsoft asks consultants to praise themselves but instead they may be comparing good things of windows with not so good things in Linux.
Any company will do that, this is what we call advertising. Even Linux guys do that. Oracle’s Unbreakable Linux campaign is an example.
Also by the way, Osnews rated Windows Server 2003 as best server OS and so did many other sites i think.
Frankly have you ever used Windows Server 2003 Standard edition? It is really nice software. I wouldn’t say its better than Linux or not since it depends upon the need. Small business server based on 2003 was a huge success for Microsoft since it catered to the needs of small businesses very very well. So there is place for Windows servers as well as for Linux servers for low-end and mid-end servers as well as Solaris etc for really high-end servers. But if you come out and say that Windows Server 2003 is nothing as compared to Linux then i will disagree.
Also there is an independent analysis from a guy Mark Russinovich (search for: A Tale of Two Kernels) It will really give you insight on how 2-3 years ahead Windows Kernel is as compared to Linux.
Morgoth:
I have a couple of questions for you.
First, you’ve stated that the software industry essentially has no responsibility to consumers. While I don’t know wether or not this is true from a legal perspective, I do know that it *is* in their best interest to be responsible to their consumers. However, I think legally requiring and enforcing such liability laws to any industry opens a Pandora’s box of legal problems. Frivolous lawsuits come to mind – how (or why) should companies create and sell software they can’t hope to defend in court? Where do you draw the line between “bug” and “normal operation” (puns aside, please). I can envision plenty of people deleting their family photos, emptying the recycling bin, and then wanting to sue because they couldn’t recover their deleted files (I’ve had to do this for plenty of pissed off people in the past “Why isn’t there another warning when I empty my recycling bin?”). It seems to me that the support they offer/sell with their products is a good faith effort at responsibility to their consumer base.
Anywho, what would such a policy mean for the F/OSS software community, who’s legal slogan may as well be the following:
“This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.”
If the Linux kernel crashes your Red Hat server, do you sue Linus, or Red Hat?
I agree with all your premises, but I can’t imagine how you could force Microsoft to be liable for the operating system. There’s too many gray lines; is this a bug, or is this intentional, is a poorly written driver from company X Microsoft’s responsibility?, and what about hardware vendors?
While I’d like to see software companies back their software with a “No bugs, guaranteed” policy, I think that in this age of legalese mumbo jumbo it’s simply an impossibility. I do, however, feel that companies should be required to make a good faith effort at supporting software products they produce, and I think that Microsoft has fulfilled that role (such an opinion is, of course, subjective, and will no doubt vary from person to person.) What are your thoughts?
You pose some very good questions. I don’t expect bug free software. But we all know that, by design, Windows 95-Windows XP has serious design flaws. Security cannot be a valuable requirement of Microsoft whilst default user accounts have full root access. This is something that Microsoft, as software developers, should [and did] know for a long while. This is one of the reasons why viruses have become prevalent on the Microsoft Windows platform. Couple this to idiotic users, who in reality should *never* be even using a computer, and you’re in real trouble. Microsoft has dumbed down Windows to make it usable to the average person, the average person who isn’t interested in learning the basics of computing, etc. I don’t expect people to be gurus, far, far, from it. I do expect people to learn the basics. If you’ve ever worked in IT support/helpdesks, you’ll know what I mean.
Microsoft is vastly responsible for most of the mess that they are in, by very poor design of their operating system. There are no ifs, buts or maybes. It’s fact. Microsoft lies about patch times, it even tries to alter the way patching is reported to the public, so that it can doctor patch response times to favour itself. A good example of closed source issues is the recent Cisco fiasco. Also, with closed source, how can I tell if they’re not using GPL’d software and not abiding by the law of the license? mmm? I can’t even see the src code legally to check it.
With basics of responsibility, you have to use some basic common sense. US laws are reknowned for not exactly using common sense. I refer to the example of a gentleman who bought a touring caravan, fell asleep at the wheel, and successfully sued the manufacturer – why? Because no where in the van’s manual did it mention to not fall asleep at the wheel. Can you honestly tell me that a country that uses such weird common sense with law makes sense? In Australia, we have the idiot clause. If you do something that is really idiotic, and you suffered from it, when you try and sue, you lose, because you did something truly idiotic. Obviously, this type of philosophy would need to be applied to any changes to legislative control over the software industry. I’m not saying it would be easy to introduce, but it can, and should be done. I see no reason why the software industry can stamp it’s feet, snort and say to the rest of the community “we don’t have to play by your rules”. This has partially led to Microsoft having a very poor reputation for security/reliability et al.
If a company has made a good faith attempt at a quality product, that’s cool with me. I firmly believe that Microsoft hasn’t, and has a lot to answer for. IE 7 only for Windows XP and above? Please. That’s just more blackmail attempts from Microsoft to force you to update from Win98/98se/me/2000 to Windows XP etc. I can’t really think of any other industry that can employ such underhanded tactics legally.
The GPL is no different to any EULAs from commercial offerings in terms of warranty etc. Why should it be? GPL’d software, for the most part is either free, or much, much cheaper than anything Microsoft or other commercial software vendors offer. And in many cases, it’s better software. The Gimp does 95% of what I need, why should I pay au $1600 for the latest Photoshop (or similarly X amount of money for other “commercial” alternatives). And I’m not even taking into account the morality of open source, and the GPL/FSF philosophies (which are the real reason why I use GPL/FSF software).
It’s good to have a common sense discussion about this with you, rather than the hot headed replies of some others here, especially those that should know better and represent osnews.com with a bit more professionalism.
Dave
He is a Chutiya so forget him guys. Chutiya like him seek cheap publicity without realizing that they are letting the whole world know that they are chutiya. Was Bush not enough that now a chutiya like Andy is thinking of becoming president?
people are actually supporting this guy’s thoughts. I can’t believe some people are so mindless that they are defending this guy….
I bet they all voted for G.W. Bush.
Secondly, what I’m saying is that the software industry is not policed, and is seemingly above any fair trading/consumer laws in nearly every western country.
True,take any OS or software product and you will notice something like:”We are not liable for harm done by the use of this product,by using this product you agree with this”.
What if you would buy a car and there’s a sticker on the dashboard that says:We are not responsible if we screwed up,so we can’t garantee the brakes will work,by driving this car you hereby agree with the above”.
It’s simply impossible at this thime to release any big project without bugs in it.But you could demand that there’s not more than a certain amount of bugs.
VISTA = Viruses’, Infections, Spyware, Trojans & Adware.
Lol, it’s already an old joke I know – but what is the betting just like everything else MS do that it will be just as true as it has ever been within maybe a few months of Vista’s release?
I’m willing to put some pretty big money on it.
Any takers?
GJ
Frankly have you ever used Windows Server 2003 Standard edition?
Yes as matter of i did (amd64),i got never passed the login screen.Or do have to run everything from the task manager?To me everything that doesn’t run is bogus.
I don’t want to make you look like a liar, may be you had a genuine problem but for me AMD64 Windows Standard Server 2003 installed easily and runs really really good. Did you try to diagnose the problem?
Perhaps he should have used “Flawed by Design” rather “full of bugs” – that would make more sense as all systems have bugs but most are designed correctly, Windows seems to be the only exception
First dude, get a name and don’t be Anonymous “Coward”. Secondly, if you say that Real Player is better than Windows Media Player then i would say yeah you bet, in fact Bhutan’s Economy is much better than American Economy.
As for rest of your comments, you just want to believe that Linux is better to for which no one can do anything about. But one thing i would like to tell you, as soon as Firefox got popular, the number of vulnerabilities and bug count increased a lot. I don’t think the day will ever come but if it ever come that Linux is popular, you will see how people exploit it. Right now exploiting Linux is no fun since:
1. A very less number of users will be affected to no fame.
2. Users on Linux side are more technical than average users on Windows so people keep their system patched, use firewalls etc. Windows has the largest user base of non-techie users hence chance of attack succeeding are more.
3. Linux has many flavors with many versions so having a common exploit for all of them is hard though i don’t think having that many versions and flavors is being advantageous to Linux.
1. Myth – attack linux successfully and you down a very large portion of the internet – monster fame.
2. Myth – Windows is flawed by design hence its easy. i mean a VB script that can autoexecute to trash your system? Auto-execution is not possible on *nix systems – something to do with smart design.
3. Myth – they all use the name basic underlying system software so if you needed to attack something critical the possibilities are there.
1. Windows Server 2003 is not affected by most of the vulnerabilities and also mostly servers are protected by firewall etc and kept up2date so no, attacking servers is difficult that attacking joe users desktop
2. Ok i agree that some things Microsoft has done stupidily thinking they will make it easy for users. It did make it easy but also prone to user errors.
3. Still chances are less, even hackers have hard time creating a common exploit for Windows XP, XPSP1 and XPSP2 so you can understand that every minor change in an OS can break and exploit.
Linux has many flavors with many versions so having a common exploit for all of them is hard though i don’t think having that many versions and flavors is being advantageous to Linux.
I don’t agree with you.Besides being an advantage from the security point of view the great diversity of the Linux eco-system could bring more new features and view points that otherwise get stuck in the hierarchy.For example someone develops a certain new piece of software but his lead dev sees nothing good in his proposal and denies any further existance.Joining a fork or other distro might have brought new interest and thus a chance the app can approve itself.Maybe it wasn’t so bad after all and it makes it to the main line.
M$ is pushing for their software to go into airplanes and automobiles, I don’t know about you, but I certainly don’t like the idea of some script kiddie turned terrorist who wakes up one morning and decides to fly jumbo jets into buildings using his laptop.
Another thing is this, Vista is going to need a dual core Intel chip due out in 2006 in order to run, if not right away soon afterwards with OS updates.
I have voted with my wallet and dropped M$ like a hot potato long ago.
My reward? Only 1 virus in 21 years, never hacked, almost got trojaned (downloaded but didn’t run the app by email attachment).
Now how much malware have you had to clean off your filthy winbox this week hmmm? how many years has M$ played you for a fool?
“Oh we will fix it” never happens. Why? because M$ has to support legacy programs, they don’t have the balls to say “We need to change things and you just have to buy new software to go with it”
Vista is just a pretty XP, look carefully, it’s just a skin, it’s still the same garbage underneath.
http://homepage.mac.com/hogfish/.Pictures/InDesignScreenSnapz002.jp…
It just something that bothers me. I’ve used Mac and Windows a lot and Mac is different than Windows, but hardly better. I find Windows is much more productive for coding, graphics, and video because it has ClearType and better multi-monitor support. The hardware is also much speedier than Mac as Mac went to some cheapo mid-grade components for the G5.
For Windows, if you don’t run IE or Outlook, have anti-virus, and use a hardware firewall, you are at a comparable “safety” level to Mac.
Of course this doesn’t count the spyware Microsoft has built into Windows, but Apple could very well have the same spyware. They are both closed source companies although Apple does put out a little bit of code as a lollipop to the open source community.
Yes, Windows sucks but I don’t know of anything available today that sucks less. I wish Apple would go full open source and make OS X work better for advanced users and then that would be an easy choice. I’ve been really happy with Tiger. I don’t see Linux as ever doing well on the desktop until Linux is redesigned for human beings.
Anyhow, you raised some good points. Microsoft is bad for the world and Apple is still the little evil vs. the big evil of Microsoft. So as a small step forward, it is a better choice than supporting Microsoft Vista.
Apple is less evil because it is smaller. Apple is no way better than Microsoft. It is out there for business and it will do even worst things than Microsoft. Look how they try to lock-in their iPOD users to apple store.
I am not a big fan of Apple. They run their shop like a a small version of Microsoft.
However, a small version of Microsoft is easier to combat than a big version of Microsoft.
So choosing the lesser evil of Apple would still be a reduction in evil vs. everyone being a herd animal and mooing to the Microsoft beat.
All it will take is to reduce Microsoft from 95%+ share to 80% share. And then Microsoft will fall apart.
Bill Gate should personally pay me for every second I spend trying to clean my Mum’s laptop of Malware.
I modded you up by accident :-p
Although you do have a point about being payed for cleaning up the laptop, Gates shouldn’t be the one to do it because as others have said it’s impossible to write large bug free applications, and a bug free OS isn’t even plausible right now. Besides that nothing is stopping her from using another OS.
Dude i am using Windows for last 6 years, my reward, a lots of extra bucks, no virus till date, few spyware once because i chose to install kazza.
What it took, a little carefulness, but far less than i take when i drive my car so it was fine.
And yeah did i tell u, from the saved bucks i could buy the cool XBOX, and with windows i had access to the latest and greatest software and could use the best development tools like Visual Studio, Soft-Ice, IDA Pro etc?
I really can’t believe that people here actually support this fruitcake.
According to this guy’s logic, I can sue politicians because they lie their assess off (maybe he should sue Bush and Blair because there weren’t any weapons of mass destruction, even though they said so) ?
According to this guy’s logic, I can also sue company X because they claim their new recipe made their product even tastier, while in fact I didn’t notice a difference.
According to this guy’s logic, I can sue everyone because everyone makes mistakes and produce lies!
What a total idiot.
Under the US laws as they exist today, the guy is correct and you are wrong.
Look up the statutes for “truth in advertising” and “fraud”.
For example, “fraud” —
“Intentionally deceiving another person and causing her to suffer a loss. Fraud includes lies and half-truths, such as selling a lemon and claiming “she runs like a dream.”
Thus claiming that pies made in a factory with machine-produced trans-fats are “homemade” is fraudulent. It is not true. And yes, you can sue.
The US is a very corrupt country. The system has produced many laws to protect the customer and consumer. If each consumer/customer had the wealth to work his or her case through the legal system, there actually would be many politicians and companies in prison. However as the courts are not friendly to the poor, many issues never make it to court.
You are absolutely correct. And Thom – politicians are voted by the people, for the people. They *must* be responsible for their actions, or inactions. That is a *true* democratic society. If you believe otherwise, then that’s your problem. Like most of the rest of the world, you are a sheep, nothing more, and nothing less. You jump when the politicians say jump, you even ask politely “how high would you like me to jump?”. Pathetic.
The guy has a series of valid complaints, both against Microsoft, and the software industry in general. Just because you don’t agree with it, doesn’t mean he doesn’t have valid points. Of course, we all know that OSnews.com staff are allowed to do what they want, don’t we?
Dave
The guy has a series of valid complaints, both against Microsoft, and the software industry in general.
Would you say the same when someone sues Red Hat on the same grounds? I highly doubt so.
Like most of the rest of the world, you are a sheep, nothing more, and nothing less.
Because I disagree with this guy– I’m a sheep. Right. Very sane logic, I must say.
You jump when the politicians say jump, you even ask politely “how high would you like me to jump?”. Pathetic.
And can you be so kind as to provide me and the rest of the readers with information backing this up?
Just because you don’t agree with it, doesn’t mean he doesn’t have valid points. Of course, we all know that OSnews.com staff are allowed to do what they want, don’t we?
Right. That *really* explains why I posted this newsitem, even though I disagreed with its content. Really, you are making less sense each time you post. Just do and the rest of the readers a favour by trying to make a little more sense next time.
“Would you say the same when someone sues Red Hat on the same grounds? I highly doubt so.”
I fail to see the relevance of this accusation for the subject at hand. If you don’t think he has valid points, point out why they aren’t valid, but trying to paint people you disagree with as biased is only a bad substitute for an argument.
I’m trying to expose the hyppocracy that’s rampant in these sorts of matters. When someone sues MS, it’s by definition on valid points, but when someone sues “Linux”, it’s by definition always based on nothing. When someone breaks a commercial license (ie. Apple and OS X for x86) it’s all great and a victory for freedom, but when someone violates the GPL, it’s death and decay.
That’s what’s pissing me off. Badly.
Thom, really, this is just childish.
Though there are certainly more than enough hypocrites out there, this doesn’t justify accusing someone whos point you seem to be unable or unwilling to answer of hypocracy. IIRC correctly the poster you are accusing even pointed out that he thought the software industry in general also included people like RedHat.
Further, you should really read your post again. You are engaging in the same kind of oversimplification and hypocracy you accuse others off.
If you are unable to really engage in any kind of meaningful discussion if someone says something negative about MS, because you are convinced that there always has to be some kind of hypocracy behind this criticism, which you must expose, please, don’t engage in discussions at all.
Ralph, when you let the bias come in a discussion, the discussion is gone. I gave last example, now swear on your dad and if you lie, he die. Replace Microsoft with Redhat, do you feel the same way? If not, your are dishonest.
“Ralph, when you let the bias come in a discussion, the discussion is gone. I gave last example, now swear on your dad and if you lie, he die. Replace Microsoft with Redhat, do you feel the same way? If not, your are dishonest.”
Huh, you obviously failed to grasp the content of my post. Read it again please, thanks.
How do you fail to see the logic? Why not hold RedHat to the same scrutny that you, adnd Andy Martin, is trying to hold Microsoft acountable for. Redhat — Linux in general — has as much, if not more security issues and has the same challenges when it comes to providing a secure and stable OS as Microsoft has. Both have a large user base and have to account for multiple configurations.
The truth of the matter is you are bias against MS.
Jim
Sure I am biased against Microsoft. Let’s see why:
1. Poor products
2. Overpriced products
3. Poor security/reliability
4. Lack of serious effort by Microsoft to ensure that their systems are secure, and patched quickly
5. Monopolism
6. Anti competitive.
7. Dishonest, with a habit of screwing over technology partners and stealing their technology, and then using their much larger financial ability to squash legal claims.
I think that gives me good cause to be biased against Microsoft. If you want to believe in the US dream, and corporatism, and that you don’t have any rights in this world and can be screwed over without a 2nd thought, then go ahead. I don’t, and I won’t.
We all know that the US DOJ did fuck all against Microsoft, and at the behest of Bush jr I might add, and that is not in the bests interests of the public. If you consider how much damage a monopolist like Microsoft has done to the software industry, then Microsoft should be held totally, and utterly responsible.
If you don’t like me being biased against Microsoft, tough shit. I ain’t changing for the likes of yourself, or Thom. Or anyone else. There’s this little thing called freedom of speech. You do know what that is don’t you?
That being said, you really didn’t read my earlier posts did you? You read Thom’s and that was about it. I said the software industry. Go back and read it again for your homework please.
Dave
If you consider how much damage a monopolist like Microsoft has done to the software industry, then Microsoft should be held totally, and utterly responsible.
okay… i hate microsoft. use gentoo and avoid windows when I can, but you’re a retarded zealot.
they were a huge part of bringing computers to the masses whether you like it or not, and drove down hardware prices in an unprecedented manner.
Quote: “they were a huge part of bringing computers to the masses whether you like it or not, and drove down hardware prices in an unprecedented manner.”
That doesn’t make it right for them to be a monopolist.
Quote: “but you’re a retarded zealot.”
Now now. Is that really the best that you can do?
Dave
Quote: “Would you say the same when someone sues Red Hat on the same grounds? I highly doubt so.”
“both against Microsoft, and the software industry in general”
I think that sums it pretty much up, you quoted myself and then [deliberately?] tried to misquote myself in an attempt to bolster your own argument.
Quote: “Because I disagree with this guy– I’m a sheep. Right. Very sane logic, I must say.”
No, because of the very arguments that you presented in a previous post, which is what I replied to. Just because it’s a large, corporate company, or has lots of users, doesn’t mean it’s either right, or good. Your previous post inferred that.
Quote: “And can you be so kind as to provide me and the rest of the readers with information backing this up?”
Your original post said that (and I’ll quote):
“According to this guy’s logic, I can sue politicians because they lie their assess off (maybe he should sue Bush and Blair because there weren’t any weapons of mass destruction, even though they said so) ?”
And basically implied that it was wrong to make politicians accountable. That is why I called you a sheep. Like most other people in society, it’s now become acceptable to ignore the lies that our politicians sow, because, we just want to “live our own lives”. Only if a political issue directly affects us, do we become upset. If it doesn’t affect us, we don’t care. We ignore it, because with ignorance, we feel better. If we ignore a problem, we don’t feel bad, because we don’t have to worry about the problem, or why the problem exists, or how to fix the problem. You cannot fix something, unless you recognise that it has a fault. Of course, in order to explain this logic to yourself Thom, I’ve had to wander right off topic.
Quote: “Right. That *really* explains why I posted this newsitem, even though I disagreed with its content.”
You posted it [I suspect], because there was nothing better to do, it’s sensationalism at it’s best, and that attracts readers. More readers, means more advertisers, which means more money. At least osnews.com is posting anti Microsoft news, it makes a good turn from the anti Linux, anti GPL, anti FSF, anti Richard Stallman stories that usually abound.
Quote: “Really, you are making less sense each time you post.”
I disagree. I think you’re disliking myself more and more each time I post. Not that I really care what you think about me, or my beliefs.
Quote: “Just do and the rest of the readers a favour by trying to make a little more sense next time.”
Funny thing is Thom, you seem to be the only person that took offense to [any of] my posts. In fact, several of them got modded up by others. That usually happens when people agree with your comments, thoughts, beliefs or ideals.
I find it hypocritical that osnews staff can post, and say what they want, but not be responsible and be part of the modding system, and be modded down where necessary. But then, I find many things hypocritical these days.
You really must try better to construct valid arguments 🙂
Dave
Your original post said that (and I’ll quote):
“According to this guy’s logic, I can sue politicians because they lie their assess off (maybe he should sue Bush and Blair because there weren’t any weapons of mass destruction, even though they said so) ?”
And basically implied that it was wrong to make politicians accountable.
Huh? Look at what I’m saying: “maybe *he* should sue…” You are mis-interpreting my words there. Nowhere in that post did I say politicians *should not* be held accountable; I used politicians as an example because he himself basically is one. Get it?
You should really read my blog sometimes if you think what you posted above about me being a sheep. You’ll be pleasantly (or not pleasantly? I don’t know your political viewpoints) surprised.
You posted it [I suspect], because there was nothing better to do, it’s sensationalism at it’s best, and that attracts readers. More readers, means more advertisers, which means more money.
In case you don’t know, we don’t get payed here at OSNews. We work on a voluntary basis. I couldn’t give a rat’s ass about imaginary income. The only income I care about is the cold hard cash that’s on my paycheck from the shop I work at.
At least osnews.com is posting anti Microsoft news, it makes a good turn from the anti Linux, anti GPL, anti FSF, anti Richard Stallman stories that usually abound.
Really? We do? Funny, in that anti-Microsoft thread a few weeks ago we got accused of being anti-MS… And in that KDE thread to be anti-Gnome… And in that X thread that we’re anti-Y…
*Sigh*.
Ah, the osnews staff wheiging in on the subject with yet an other noninflamatory, well thoughtout post.
“I really can’t believe that people here actually support this fruitcake.”
I really can’t believe that an editor of this site is either unable or unwilling to read the posts by those people supporting “this fruitcake”. You know, they pointed out why they thought he might have a point or two, calling him fruitcake doesn’t make these points go away.
“According to this guy’s logic, I can sue politicians because they lie their assess off (maybe he should sue Bush and Blair because there weren’t any weapons of mass destruction, even though they said so) ?”
Nope, the “fruitcake” doesn’t say anything about you being able to do that. And in case you didn’t notice, there is a difference between a company selling a product and a politican.
“According to this guy’s logic, I can also sue company X because they claim their new recipe made their product even tastier, while in fact I didn’t notice a difference.”
Nope. Yet according to laws in many countries you can sue companies that make false claims about their products.
“According to this guy’s logic, I can sue everyone because everyone makes mistakes and produce lies!”
Nope. Yet according to laws in many countries you can sue companies that make false claims about their products and you can sue companies that deliver defective products.
“What a total idiot.”
Funny, I was thinking the same thing.
These Lusers i mean Lin$ux Users are desperate. They are hear no evil see no evil army of Lin$ux monkeys when it comes to Lin$ux and always see evil, always hear evil when it comes to Microsoft. A lots of double standards and hidden agenda, these guys have. They can’t be honest to themselves, let aside to other people
According to this guy’s logic, I can sue politicians because they lie their assess off (maybe he should sue Bush and Blair because there weren’t any weapons of mass destruction, even though they said so) ?
In Some countries you can sue anything.I think you can sue politicians as any other person for negligence and or keeping information secret with the result that innocent people die or suffer severe losses which could have been prevented if just the right info wasn’t withdrawn.
Sir no one is going to trust Lin$ux or FreeBSD either on a life-support system. On such mission critical systems, you would chose a vendor even if its microsoft, get your hardware, chose your OS components and drivers, test it thoroughly and deploy. Since you will only use it for fixed purpose, it is very likely that most modern OS will be ok.
If you think someone is going to browse internet on the life support system, then no OS will be trusted anyways.
Wrong again, CtazyDude0 don’t cry it’s alright to be flat out wrong. Just don’t became a Doctor and never come near my family.
http://www.fsmlabs.com/digital-rights-management-3.html
Says it all.
And yeah did i tell u, from the saved bucks i could buy the cool XBOX, and with windows i had access to the latest and greatest software and could use the best development tools like Visual Studio, Soft-Ice, IDA Pro etc?
While you busy pecking your keyboard, I was busy pecking something else and still had time to start my own buisness make money and buy the most expensive Apple hardware possible.
I wasn’t a fool trying to be cheap, I was saving time and applying it in the right direction.
It’s people like me that decide to invest and hire people like you to do some assine thing with a piece of plastic crap PC and Windows.
Do you really believe yourself? How said i spent time pecking my keyboard? Oh you mean coding. Yeah, in fact i developed a cool software and because of large windows user base, i could sell 1 million copies of it. Glad it was not OSX or may be i could only sell 100 copies
Anyways your last post seems angry so take it easy. Its not always necessary for you to be right
However, I think legally requiring and enforcing such liability laws to any industry opens a Pandora’s box of legal problems. Frivolous lawsuits come to mind
Every sane person in the knowing is aware of the fact that you can’t make any OS or piece of commercial software absolute 100% especially when millions of code lines are involved.That’s not the point.Of course the artcle writer is extreme and it’s certainly no solution for the given case at hand.
Still it’s desirable to have a sincere independent quality mechanism governed by agreed standards with which we can govern quality of code.
Never heard anything more stupid…
This was my last visit on OSNews.com
Yeah, in fact i developed a cool software and because of large windows user base, i could sell 1 million copies of it. Glad it was not OSX or may be i could only sell 100 copies
Could? You haven’t retired yet I see…
But really you win. It is easier to find a 1 million suckers on windows than mac’s. After all almost a 100,000 viruses and they still go back to the same old vomit. Win developers who have millions of P2P users steal their programs.
We will see when the triple booting MacTels arrive huh?
Then we get to pirate your code too.
good luck and get rich quick, buy some real estate, a nice car and a Mac just like Linus did…
You’ll see what we mean.
http://homepage.mac.com/hogfish/.Pictures/Ineedmorepower.jpg
Keep on pecking….
I’m a bit more cynical than you – I’m positive that Microsoft has both bribed reporters, etc, to be glowingly positive to Microsoft products, and also has paid them to acknowledge only the good points of Microsoft Windows, and compare them to only the bad points of GNU/Linux.
Quote: “Any company will do that, this is what we call advertising.”
I’m very well aware of what advertising is. There is such a thing as misleading advertising. In fact, I believe most civilised western developed countries have legislation to deal with misleading advertising. Most countries choose not to take action against Microsoft because it has so much money, that it can afford to take on an entire country and generally win!
Quote: “Also by the way, Osnews rated Windows Server 2003 as best server OS and so did many other sites i think. ”
I believe it’s a very good product from what I’ve heard, I personally haven’t used it. That said, I refuse to support a monopolistic and anti competitive company such as Microsoft based on morals and personal philosophies. “Best” is alway a personal interpretation anyways, and it’s not always entirely holistic, or accurate.
I have certain ‘design beliefs’ with server software, and a server should NEVER need a GUI. It’s a waste or resources. Configuration tools should be present, easy to use, and comprehensive, and available from the command line. But, that’s a personal belief. I still believe that the average Windows sysadmin is far less competent than a similar Unix sysadmin, both in knowledge, and terms of abilities, and the quality of their work. You can call me a nut, an elitist, or just a plain idiotic moron, but those are my thoughts.
GNU/Linux is very powerful, a fraction of the cost of a traditional Unix system, has far superior hardware support, in many ways outperforms traditional Unixes, and is just as reliable and secure. GNU/Linux currently lacks ‘stability’ for API/ABI, and backward compatibility with libraries for older software etc, and that is a big thing that must be fixed. It also lacks serious tools, unlike AIX or Solaris, which both excel in this area. That said, the nature of Linux means it is very high in the area of taking an existing idea, re-working it, and adding some areas of originality and improvement. That’s a bonus of the open source development method.
Dave
This is one of most matured arguments i have seen on this site for some time. Yes you are right. There is no way you can clear this legal jumbo wombo
You missed the point altogether: if they make WMP and Office for linux they die.
Though it would be nice to see MS transferring their marketing dept to disneyworld and start making software that really doesn’t need multi-million dollar add campains to sooze the customers.
Anyone eager to block Vista til it has a real support of OpenGL there ?
Haven’t read the article but the news item says it all, really stupid to ask for a bug free os, and no, this won’t stop the launch.
I’ve just skimmed through the posts here and I mostly see pencilnecks with no ability to think for themselves.
The idea is crazy, but so was Einsteins relativity theory when it first was published. I think I only read one post where just one person really understood the article.
If this makes Microsoft bug test Vista even more, that is just great. The most buggy and useless OS I’ve ever used is Windows. And Microsoft is a big company. They have many users, and should not get away as easy as they do.
And Windows is hyped beyond recognition compared to Linux. So check your sources before you say Linux is overhyped.
And telling people they have a low IQ because they use M$ is just like saying you are smarter then everyone. You are just shotting yourselfe in the foot. Calling someone an idiot makes you the bigger idiot.
If you love MS and Windowsthat much you even like it more the pr0n, then continue. Let us who want a better product continue our fight for our right to do so.
And I know for a fact that Windows is adviced not to be used in a critical system. That should say it all. And why people do things like sueing them for making a faulty product.
And to top it of, let us use the great car analogy. Who would by a car with so many ‘bugs’ that Windows has? It would be not allowed to be shipped.
It’s time MS started totally from scratch, again. Maybe they can do something right.
– xen ix
http://info-ninja.net/
Never have I seen 1 person make so many defend windows. I think his absolute stupidity is having the opposite effect to what was intended. Atleast to anyone who knows a little about tech.
Let’s speak about the requirements for a standard desktop Linux
I could survive with a stripped down XP on a P2-266 w/128mb
This guy is a troll playing over Linux Zealots, and he’s even “able” to get listened… All he wants is attention – and he got it. Wow
Better dead than use Microseft!
You cant garrentee that a product is free of bugs. All you can do is assure a product is a Quality product. What is quality is normaly decided by the produce. No doubt MS follow certain quality standards… what more do you want? Its software… its not like we’re building a bridge! We’re still learning!
This is the kind of Rubbish that drives me crazy. No software on the face of the planet is bug free; especially no operating system. At least Microsoft does not make you pay for patches (ala OS/2) and security updates.
They still provide updates for some legacy products and not only that, they provide utilties to manage updates free of charge; WSUS and SUS.
Their knowledge base is probably the best out of any corporate software provider allowing their user base to pretty much fix issues free of contacting them and free of charge.
Even Apple who has hardware that is pretty much not changed much still has issues in providing an 100% stable and 100% bug free environment. Microsoft, along with Linux, has a unique challenge of being a large isntall base on multiple configuration of hardware. Personally, they are doing a dang good job with stability now and are on the right track for security.
FYI I am a Linux and OS/2 user, but I am getting sick of all the Microsoft FUD that has become popular these days.
Jim
andymartin.com describes himself as the ” people’s attorney general”, he is apparently talking about running for governor or senator in Illinois in 2006.
Self-styled gadfly, uses law degree to advance lawsuits on behalf of consumers, against corporate interests.
Finally someone is going something against Microsoft and the crappy “product” they are pushing on us with their shady and mob-like business tactics such as illegal bundeling and strongarming computer vendors. Excellent job!
…are quite clear if you consider he is running for senator in illinois. free advertising of his name.
Nobody on earth can guarantee to ship software product without bugs. On the other hand, Microsoft should do something about the updates. It very unconvenient for a person with 56K modem to have regular updates.
DG
What a fucking freak with no life. He and his 3 friends are out to stop Microsoft.
#1 who cares
#2 he will fail
What a fucking freak with no life. He and his 3 friends are out to stop Microsoft.
#1 who cares
#2 he will fail
many people care. maybe he will fail. or maybe he won’t.
one thing is sure; if people keep trying sooner or later they will succeed. and the evil empire will crumble.
Lets change the news and replace Microsoft With Redhat. If you are really son/daughter of your own mom, then come here and say that he has a point. If not, then shut up. Just because its against Microsoft, doesn’t make it right. Period.
Sure it’s crazy to insist on 0 bugs in a shipping product, but…what’s so crazy about insisting on a warranty against those bugs?
The logic seems to be: how can we give a warranty against defects that are practically impossible to eradicate? But suppose your company makes teapots instead of software. Defects in your inventory are also virtually impossible to prevent. But you still have a warranty against those unavoidable defects.
It’s not like people will return the software in masse once a bug is found. As long as the product provides needed functionality, and as long as the user is better off with the software installed instead of an empty PC that just sits there and a small refund for his OEM license, the warranty is not going to be invoked.
In fact, it might be good PR to brag that your new release contains a warranty against bugs. Who else offers a warranty against bugs?
Caj