Microsoft founder Bill Gates, 49, talks about the thorny issues of computer security, competition, software bundling and how he lives with the downsides of his wealth and fame. In addition to being the world’s richest man, Gates is the founder of the world’s most powerful software company.
Bill Gates on Spiegel
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
In addition to being the world’s richest man
Was the Ikea guy not richer????
Was, yes; is, no.
I especially like the “but your stuff is insecure crap” part where BillGhee changes the subject, as always
. Oh BillGhee interviews are always the highlight of my day; the man has no business in product development…but he’s a great PR man.
I suppose it depends on whether Bill is buying furniture, or the Ikea guy is buying computers this year.
Bill said that other OSes have problems like viruses and security issues. prove it Bill! I dont own virus software and my Mac OS X computer is more secure then computer running generic Windows.
Windows is not attacked, since it has a larger desktop share, its attacked because of the open doors left by Microsoft.
I like when the interviewer almost choked on one of Bill’s answers. and said “pardon me”.
Is Bill serious when he talks about how slow the Linux community reacts to problems? In most cases it only takes a few hours maybe a day for a fix in the Linux community, for Windows it took years to fix the problems in IE alone, and those still arent all fixed. Second saying the Linux and OSX are likely to contract viruses like Windows, is just a flat out lie and he knows it.
Oh yeah, as we all know Linux is more affected by virus infections than Windows
Come on, just the usual FUD, nothing new under the sun.
I am not sure but i think Bill laid it on a bit too thick this time. He talks around the point and avoids questions rather bluntly. “Windows is the most affected i terms of viruses?” “no we just are the largest target” ” so you are the most affected” ” in terms of size no, a certain os from apple is also vulnerable”? .. i dont know he is trying to hard to point fingers.
yet he wants us all to communicate more freel without mistrust etc. Well open the communications protocols so others can interface with your software, we might actually communicate more freely then. Or implement more standards.
And where did he come up with companies with a single OS type are less vulnerable then ones with multiple OSs?
weird article to read.not sure if its FUD or panic.
//FR
http://www.2blocksaway.com
Billy is great for FUD and PR, his software is insecure and expensive, but I don’t see Linux as a serious threat for his business on the desktop. OS X will dent a little market share with the release of the Mac Mini. If I were Billy, I wouldn’t be afraid of Linux at all
I liked this bit:
SPIEGEL: When one puts the sentence “Bill Gates is the devil” into the Internet search engine Google, one gets thousands of hits. Does this bother you?
Gates: I have never searched for such a sentence. Plus: if you understand the search engine properly, it doesn’t mean that you will find exactly this sentence on these pages.
I tried it myself in Google with the quote marks included to match the exact sentence and got “Results 1 – 10 of about 5,250 for “Bill Gates is the devil”. (0.15 seconds)“, so who doesn’t understand the search engine properly?
“I tried it myself in Google with the quote marks included to match the exact sentence and got “Results 1 – 10 of about 5,250 for “Bill Gates is the devil”. (0.15 seconds)”, so who doesn’t understand the search engine properly?
”
He’s talking about his search engine, which doesn’t hold a candle to Google
Don’t like WindowsXP because its still beta quality software. This Windows edition must be in the early beta stage because it contains so many bugs/features and vulnerabilities. I think they’ll have to clean up most of these before they get a stable-release candidate of the Windows OS.
I heard MS charge for this mass beta testing of their OS too right?
Does anyone know when the first stable-release version of Windows will be out?
[i]Gates: The truth is: the fewer operating systems there are within a company, the better it is from a security point of view.
SPIEGEL: I beg your pardon?[i]
Gates: Simply because one must spend billions of dollars to ensure the security of each individual system. Our company has an unbelievable number of people who are solely responsible for this type of security around the clock.
—
Sure Bill, how many billion dollars does it take to turn off UPnP from listening for internet connections on a default install? Microsoft always gives this exact answer to security questions, but if I paid someone 100 bucks to secure my home PC and I was still able to nmap ANY port on it when they were done they would be fired.
How is it that after billions spent on security, they still don’t block harmfull attachments in outlook express?
MS could fix 80% of the problem in about 2 days if the people making decisions knew the first thing about computer security.
[/rant]
Gates: Simply because one must spend billions of dollars to ensure the security of each individual system.
A frank admission of the costs associated with securing a Windows system. I wonder if Microsoft included those costs when comparing itself to the Linux TCO in it’s ‘Get the Facts’ campaign?
>> I suppose it depends on whether Bill is buying furniture, or the Ikea guy is buying computers this year. <<
Now that’s cleverer than it looks, heh, heh – nice
“Sure Bill, how many billion dollars does it take to turn off UPnP from listening for internet connections on a default install?”
No time and no money at all under SP2. About thirty seconds to do it company wide on a properly configured AD network. Pennies of an administrator’s time.
How long does it take to configure the same services on thousands of Linux computers across a company?
“How is it that after billions spent on security, they still don’t block harmfull attachments in outlook express? ”
They do. They have done for years. Unfortunately thousands of clueless computer “experts” (just like you) tell others to turn those protections off.
Second saying the Linux and OSX are likely to contract viruses like Windows, is just a flat out lie and he knows it.
Bending the truth would be more accurate, I think. Most Linux distros follow the same model for security as Win XP. They both use users, groups and permissions to control what a user is allowed to do. So in some sense he is right.
However, if you asked people who run both windows and Linux you would probably find that, they had better sucess in running windows than the average windows user. Why?
What protects Linux today, is that its users generally are better educated. They don’t open every attachment they get in the mail from unknown people, perhaps not even from known people. This saves the day for Linux, but as Linux get more popular it will attract less educated users that will have risk prone behavior.
Luckily, by the time this happens, most Linux distros will use good SELinux policies that makes life very hard for viruses and other malware. So why worry,..
Quote “About 30 years ago I founded Microsoft together with Paul Allen because the capabilities and possibilities of computers back then frustrated us.” – and because we saw an opportunity to make money like never before. You see, back then there was no one yet to provide an affordable and crapy OS for IBM compatible systems…. actually it was IBM first… and if it wouldn’r have been for mom, IBM would have never given me that contract. As for dad, he got me out of allot of $h1t.
————————————————————–
Seriously folks, this guy is good at it, he’s in it to make profit, and he’s got allot of fun doing it. I guess it’s envy, just plain envy, why people hate him so much. Every other CEO or chairman or whatever claims that they are the best and everybody should use their product. Hint: see Schwartz. They however will not last forever. Everything that has a beggining has an end, Matrix. However, Linux aint really that big of a competition on the desktop, especially now that a distro release costs as much as a copy of windows. Actually, I’m trying to say that with a distro purchase, you’re locked in into using whatever came with it… or compile compile….. Painfull for Joe Sixpack. Go Gates, go!!!
Security pasted on the outside will never work well, and this is the Windows method. The real problem with this is that once through the hard outer shell you own the system. The very ability to do just this what makes Windows the Target of choice of the thieves of the Internet, not the size of market share. Mac OS 8 and 9 had many viruses and worms that could attack it – why – they used the security model used by Windows – “Hard shell only”. OS X used the UNIX model of hard throughout – no viruses for it. So it is not that Linux and OS X have such a small market share – (OS 8 & 9) both were just as small as OS X and Linux today – therefore whats the difference. I can say in view of this it that the easy target will draw the crackers regardless of the size. This not just something that happens on the web. A while back was a story in our local paper about a couple of thieves that went from back door to back door of houses in one of the better neighborhood looking for unlocked doors.
Yes, it is possible to break into Linux and OS X machines its just harder and you get less – Yes, someone will try it sometime (there are about 14 worms that can attack older versions of Linux) and Linux and BSD Internet servers come under attack all the time and some of them succeed – However, the the big losses do to crackers are mostly Windows based machines. The dump of Windows codes, Banks being successfully robbed of their customers card numbers, and have pishing redirects placed on their own servers, and automatic Trojan down loads. The fact is that the next great security breach will hit Windows – and not because there is so many Windows machines – but because like the doorknob rattlers – Crooks are mostly lazy people and will go after the easiest target.
So let MR Bill babble about security all he wants – Windows will still draw the bulk of the attacks until they become truly involved in security and toss all the security busting features that they are unwilling to do anything about at present. Not likely anytime soon – now that Microsoft owns its own subscription type anti-virus and anti-spyware service I do not see that happening anytime soon.
On a second note:
Bill and Allen predate the IBM PC – MicroSoft started out making Altar Basic (MS bumbling played no small role in the demise of Altar). That Basic became known as MS Basic which was replace with Visual Basic. It was MS Dos that made him his early money though.
Security pasted on the outside will never work well, and this is the Windows method. The real problem with this is that once through the hard outer shell you own the system. The very ability to do just this what makes Windows the Target of choice of the thieves of the Internet, not the size of market share. Mac OS 8 and 9 had many viruses and worms that could attack it – why – they used the security model used by Windows – “Hard shell only”. OS X used the UNIX model of hard throughout – no viruses for it.
You have NFI what you’re talking about.
Was the Ikea guy not richer????
Microsoft makes crappy software, and ikea makes crappy particle board furniture.
I see a trend here in becoming rich. Don’t forget the Waltons.
>Microsoft makes crappy software,
Unified clone X86 HW PC model was Microsoft’s one of the weapons against the fragmented 68K PC market.
I swear, OSnews is being invaded and infected by more and more uninformed people from /.
I liked jlg’s insinuating smile more than gates’ stretched smile.
Browse over to http://www.secunia.org and compare Red Hat to Windows. The type and number of vulnerabilities is comparable.
Similarly, OS X is comparable. Read this.
http://www.techworld.com/security/news/index.cfm?newsid=1798
Of course, the zealots among you are going to badmouth both of the sources — like an unproven accusation against someone means anything — but facts are facts. Windows is no more or less vulnerable than any other OS.
IBM wanted programming lang. ie. Basic for their IBM PC so they went to MS who already was famous for writing Basic for various machines on the market. Then IBM asked MS if they could write an OS for it as well but seeing how tight on schedule IBM PC was MS said they couldn’t and sent them over to Digital Research and their CP/M OS. Digital wasn’t interested in unproved IBM PC machine and didn’t sign IBM NDA. At the same time that guy from seattle computers was making his own cp/m os clone and sent his os to MS. He was making a x86 mobo card for that 8 bit altair 100 bus. I think he wanted MS to write Basic for it too. Thus the reason for giving MS access to his os. Then MS licensed his os that they licensed to IBM. Since MS signed IBM NDA they couldn’t just talk about IBM hw/sw stuff. Over months, that guy sold all his rights to his DOS over to MS and got paid million bucks for it. Not 50K like that movie showed. He also went to work for MS after seattle co. bankrupted since people moved onto ibm pc. I think he left MS but returned and now works there again. And I don’t think Gate’s mom had anything to do with it because IBM wouldn’t be stupid to talk about their PC openly like that. They chastised their and outside devs for leaking news. IBM was very paranoid. And why would IBM have to go thru Bill’s mom when their florida pipe was plugged into MS before any OS talks took place. MS+Intel+IBM were working on the IBM PC from beginning. Making specs and software for it.
Ok, about this interview, did you guys really think that bill would spill the beans and tell everyone to run linux or point out flaws int winxp? Come on. He will do anything to put his company in good light like everyone else would if they were in his spot. He has to spin the truth for his and shareholder’s sake. That’s business. I don’t like it but that’s life.
I agree. Most that post here are trolls and are uninformed. I know a lot here don’t even work in this field, and if they do, it’s only to the level of Help Desk cronie (but you have to start somewhere).
The fact of the matter is most of the time windows is insecure because of the user, not the OS. Linux is no better. Neither is MAC. Of course they aren’t targeted by the virus and spyware coders because of their lack of popularity.
I have worked at places where they wouldn’t let me roll out patches on the network to our servers and clients for fear of “breaking” something. Then we get infected by a virus that exploits one of the vulnerabilities I wanted to patch and they blame Microsoft for writting crappy software. Go figure……
“I have worked at places where they wouldn’t let me roll out patches on the network to our servers and clients for fear of “breaking” something. Then we get infected by a virus that exploits one of the vulnerabilities I wanted to patch and they blame Microsoft for writting crappy software. Go figure……”
Of course, I have worked at a couple of places where the patch was (finally, after months of testing) rolled out as “mandatory”, but a few lazy admins didn’t apply the patch and got nailed by the virus.
I agree that the user (or admin) is a large part of the problem, but it is folly to say that the user is the entire problem. While every OS has vulnerabilities and bugs, not every OS has as many that are remotely exploitable at the “root” level. A more secure base would help minimize the amount of damage that could be done.
I was reading this question;
SPIEGEL: Did you underestimate the security problems? A few years ago, the chief concerns of your industry were making computers more efficient and hooking up as many houses as possible. Now security is of chief concern. Even Microsoft seems to have first become aware of the danger after Sept. 11.
And in the middle of the question i thought; yeah it would be real cool if bill gates would have an honest reaction to it, admitting the obvious truth. I remember thinking; that would really earn a bit of my respect.. But then what does he do?
Gates: The terrorist attacks in 2001 just showed people up close where a lack of security can lead. Problems with computer security have more to do with the unbelievable success of the computer itself. The more successful the PC became, the more the downsides also became clear, such as: how can I prevent someone from stealing my credit cards off the Internet? In some areas, the bad boys are also terribly clever — and occasionally more crafty than we had expected.
He starts to change the issue SO OBVIOUSLY that I was perplexed.. Who can ever trust this guy? Comon.. it’s OBVIOUS that he underestimated the questions. I quote Bill gates saying “That vulnerability is completely theoretical”.. The whole win9x system is not flawed but UNFIT to be connected to the net. Only with winnt they got more serious about their security. That’s just *proof* that microsoft underestimated security. Really amazing.
@Uno
I open *any* attachment sent to me.
Come on man, if you tinker with linux you know that nothing gets open unless you type in explicitly ./<file> or sh <file>
(and that file was granted execute permissions +x)
and even then for a rootkit you are still confined only to your user account
add that with various security models and you pretty sandboxed or protected.
@Tom
Noone likes lies. Noone likes misinformation.
If Linux was just as insecure and vulnerable – believe me – I would be the first to shout about.
Like recently when I spoke about the possible dangers of plugins and polyplatform viruses. I was condoned of spreading FUD .. no, I care about one thing – the truth.
The security advisories displayed on the page – are mostly not critical
still have you bothered to compare that with the Windows ones?
Also there is a difference between an advisory and an actively exploited vulnerability.
For example there was a critical advisory on WordPad which enabled a hacker to take control of a computer remotely.
Was that exploited, was a virus written? No.
Has the problem being solved .. took a while but yes.
Many other holes are still unpatched though.
Compare that with some kernel vulnerability (last year) that froze linux.
I remember people shouting:
“Where is your God now? Linux Zealots!”
That exploit worked like this: you had to download the source code, compile and then execute it. Result – you will experience that thing people experience mostly in Windows – everything freezes.
http://linuxreviews.org/news/2004/06/11_kernel_crash/
Such an uproar … Why the bother?
If you want to freeze a linux box – just type any infinite forking script in bash damn it – no big deal.
Lastly RedHat is not Linux.
RedHat is but a vendor – a distributor.
A vulnerability in RedHat is not by any means universal.
But if you want to follow your own parameters, feel free to compare:
(Windows XP Pro)
http://secunia.com/product/22/
with
(Red Hat 9.0)
http://secunia.com/product/1343/
—
Uno Engborg: Not true. Windows installations are mono-culture. It’s too easy to “predict” what applications most windows users use. Also, most windows users don’t just open viral attachments, their faulty software does. Linux is very diverse both in distributions, compile-differences of used programs, configuration differences, kernel versions and processor architectures. It is so diverse that it is not only a moving target (many users upgrade, switch distributions, upgrade distributions to completely new systems, etc.) but it is also too diverse to make a succesful worm or virus. Add to that that most (none?) programs in the Linux environments don’t allow scripting the way windows does. Windows integration may have its advantages, but VBS, activex and stuff have created a breeding nest for worms. Microsoft essentially built the Worm-API for their operating system.
Linux will get more interoperable and stuff, which could mean it would be more susceptible to an automatic attack such as a worm, but I think they’ll try to avoid the problems windows users have. Worms/Viruses are NO natural things of computers.. it is unheard of that they are possible. I mean, if an automatic program can infect your computer, then its a piece of cake for any hacker with a specific target to hack you.
I happen to do research into security for years, I see that many clueless people open their mouth with their opinion on this issue while not having any knowledge for themselves.
In any way, users should never listen to people like bill gates, microsoft or me when it comes to choosing their OS. They should do some research themselves. But allow me to advise: make the choice, don’t die with windows unless you choose to.
Bill seems so in love with his OS that he totally discounts the security problems as something that political entities will have to take care of. What?!? He acts like virus creators will someday just dissapear by themselves. No senator or EU is gonn take care of that!
I could care less about spammers, they suck but c’mon!! I’m more afraid of my computer getting compromised and/or spyware and adware on my pc than stupid prescription drug and penile enlargement emails.
And one last comment: What consumer group supports MS taking good software OUT of windows? I love the fact that I get a pc that can burn cd’s natively and can play mp3s. Who doesn’t?
“You could look at that in many ways. The speed with which, for example, the Linux community reacts to problems is not especially high — that’s because this system, unlike ours, simply does not keep thousands of people on standby to deal with problems”
What’s *the linux community” ? MS can’t keep up with their own speed of resheduling (postponing) release dates.Thousands of people standby to help with problems,why does it take so long to release fixes for currently high risk vulnerabilities,known but still no patch for it.
Good move from them though to get more involved with 64-bit&AMD.Next one:Longhorn based on OpenBSD (security) technologies,?
If the US Govt. had open sourced their security problems with the American people after WW2 through the mass-media, they might never have been in a position to spend USD 300 billion per year to not detect security flaws which any reasonably functional group of high-school kids could have found and fixed for free. That and the 2nd amendment was what the founding fathers of America originally hoped back then would get the job done, it’s called democracy.
While it’s true that rich kids get preference for opportunity through contacts, connections or background in America, it’s also true that those kids tend to be more talented and motivated than the others; they still have to execute in whatever position.
Is Linux a competitor to MS? I predict that within 5-years time, we’ll see that it isn’t. OTOH, the rapid spread of OSS/FS does tend to indicate that American firms like MS are most interested in controlling product demand creation cycles in contradiction to what implementers see as essential.
“The world’s richest man says not all his wishes have been fulfilled.”
Yeah…being happy is one of thoses