Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 29th Jan 2010 16:26 UTC
Microsoft Microsoft presented the results for its second quarter of the 2010 fiscal year yesterday, which ended on December 29 2009. As it turns out, thanks to sales of Windows 7, Microsoft experienced a record quarter, which is especially welcome after the previous two lacklustre ones. It sold 60 million Windows 7 licenses during this record quarter.
Thread beginning with comment 406716
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Fastest for two reasons...
by Teknoenie on Fri 29th Jan 2010 21:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Fastest for two reasons..."
Teknoenie
Member since:
2007-06-07

Oh please ... you're going into the strange loop. It was MS that designed its OS in a way that no privellege separation was a fact. Don't blame software devs for that. Lol!


What does privsep have to do with anything? You do know that in XP you were allowed to create limited access users right? If you did that and tried to run MS Office you would find that it didn't work as expected. There was even a MS knowledge base article about it, advising you against running Office as a limited account user.

I don't blame the developers so to speak, as MS enabled them to continue to write software under the old insecure model for way to long. I *do* blame software developers for making that assumption of administrative rights in the first place. They should have stood back and asked if there was ever a chance that some tin foil hat user like myself would ever consider running as a limited user (something I've done for all my customers over the years).

Reply Parent Score: 1

marcp Member since:
2007-11-23

privilege separation = user account privileges [i.e administrator, limited user account, etc].

I also used to run on limited access user account and there were - in fact - problems with many applications, but again - it was MS fault in the first place! ;)

here's the scheme:
1. MS designs its OS with user accounts, but no real privilege separation [i.e "do whatever you want, get the files from other accounts without giving a password] - Win95/98/NT/2k maybe?
2. MS again designs its OS with user accounts [crippled implementation - it makes YOU an admin by default] - WinXP 'Vanilla'
3. MS once again designs its OS with user accounts [now it's slightly better - "as it always should"] - WinXP Home / SP3 maybe?
4. MS changes the scheme: the previous one + UAC = more problems, more hell and inclarity. Devs are just *confused* ... - Vista / Win7

Of course I'm not talking about more advanced server versions, 'cause this is another thing. It's jus good.

But they couldn't even design their own software to work well on their own desktop OS, which is freaking hilarious!

Regards, Teknoenie

Reply Parent Score: 2

Devi1903 Member since:
2009-11-05

Good old windows bashing! You gotta love it!!

Reply Parent Score: 0

BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

I also used to run on limited access user account and there were - in fact - problems with many applications, but again - it was MS fault in the first place!


Bull, lazy developers are the ones who are at fault for not make sure there applications worked under regular user accounts on NT.

1. MS designs its OS with user accounts, but no real privilege separation [i.e "do whatever you want, get the files from other accounts without giving a password] - Win95/98/NT/2k maybe?


In that first point, you've revealed yourself as completely clueless. NT has had proper user-level security since its first release.

2. MS again designs its OS with user accounts [crippled implementation - it makes YOU an admin by default] - WinXP 'Vanilla'


That statement is even more clueless than the last one, if that's possible. XP uses the exact same implementation of user accounts/security as all previous releases of NT. It wasn't crippled in any way, it only defaulted to an admin account (thanks all the software from lazy/incompetent devs who only tested their applications in Win9x or in admin accounts on NT).

3. MS once again designs its OS with user accounts [now it's slightly better - "as it always should"] - WinXP Home / SP3 maybe?


Instead of making wild guesses, you could, oh, I don't know... try educating yourself? Even just ten minutes skimming the wikipedia "Windows NT" article would make you better informed than you are right now.

Reply Parent Score: 1