Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 8th May 2007 13:19 UTC
Windows Months go, I reviewed Windows Vista, and concluded: "All in all, I am impressed by Windows Vista [...]. Windows Vista is better than XP, and definitely more than just an improved look as many say." After 5 months of usage, it is time to put that statement into perspective.
Thread beginning with comment 238581
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[11]: I agree, fair review
by Supreme Dragon on Tue 8th May 2007 23:41 UTC in reply to "RE[10]: I agree, fair review"
Supreme Dragon
Member since:

"Mark Russinovich tells how hackers would find a way around UAC through social engineering or by compromising applications that run with higher privileges. Duh. No OS is immune to that."

MS was bragging about how secure Vista was, and now they are backing down on security claims. If security is a priority, MS software is not a good choice.

"Man wrote the tool which can enable/disable protected processes. Requires loading a driver, needs to be running with elevated privileges. If you load bad driver in the kernel that's your fault, not OS. Moreover, that binary doesnt work on 64bit Vista."

DRM allowing malware to be installed is a serious flaw. MS could learn much about security from Linux, they should also remove the DRM.

"Windows Defender didnt detect all running spyware. Not an issue since there should be no spyware in the first place. I never had any malware on my Windows boxes."

No spyware? This is Windows we are talking about, the malware writers favorite OS. Considering what people are paying for Vista, they should be getting much better quality than what MS is giving them.

Reply Parent Score: 3