Forget California, it's time to recall Microsoft

[ixion]

A sign on a Trenton, NJ railroad bridge says "Trenton Makes, The World Takes." In light of recent history, a sign at Sea-Tac airport should probably read "Microsoft Makes, The World Quakes."

For the second time this year, Microsoft is the source of a major internet security event. First was Slammer/Sapphire in January that seriously impacted networks and corporations around the world, including shutting down ATM machines at some large banks. And now, we've got MSBlaster taking advantage of a years-old vulnerability in Microsoft Windows operating systems. But unlike Slammer that only targeted servers, this one goes after desktop computers as well - meaning that ninety percent of the world's computers are potential targets and victims this week. Consumer desktops are significantly more plentiful than corporate ones but less-protected against viruses, worms, and other attacks. As low-hanging fruit goes, they're a perfect target of opportunity for cyber-mischief.



http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/32449.html

now there's a recall I could get behind. :bounce:

[Sirius_on]

1. Microsoft=Computers

Without Microsoft we would have useless PCs today. They made the PC worth while in the mid nineties. I dont understand all the anti-Microsoft crap I always here.

[htuttle]

2. My only problem with Microsoft

is that they are an uber-greedy, predatory monopoly that writes bad software, charges way too much for licenses, and lies to it's customers.

Other than that, I'm fine with them. :eyes:

[spielino]

4. It is not greed

for a company to make money. I'm sorry. You try to outperform your competition. This is not predatory. Why on earth should MS share it's codes with its competition?

[Interrobang]

6. Wrong wrong wrong.

It IS greed to use your position in the marketplace to intimidate other businesses from being able to sell their products (inhibiting competition), and from developing products (homesteading), and preventing other alternatives from even existing by undercutting your competitors. That's why there was an anti-trust finding against Microsoft. Sure, they're in business to make money, but they don't play fairly...which is the whole problem.

[Occulus]

3. For me, it's because

they weld the hood shut on the car before they sell it. Congress ought to require Micro$oft disclose the entirety of the Windows code base. In full.

Then I'll feel much better about Micro$oft.

[Interrobang]

5. Here...

(BTW, you always *hear* about Microsoft...) It isn't like they actually invented any of that stuff, you know. They mostly bought it from other companies. Here's a good listing of why Microsoft needs to be taken down:

http://www.kmfms.com/whatsbad.html

It's a partisan site, but it gives a fairly good overview. You can also check out the Halloween Documents at

http://opensource.ilisys.com.au/halloween/index.php

[ixion]

7. microsoft != computers

they made an unstable shell and released it because the timing was right, and have had a strangle hold on the market ever since, held with strong-arm thug tactics. There were other operating systems that were and are much better, more secure and more stable. Microsoft has lowered the bar on software quality, and made releasing unstable products part of the game. As a software engineer, I think it's particularly bad form.

that's my beef with ms.

[cprise]

8. Windows is the lemming OS

And our weekly virus problems wouldn't exist if this lovely work of art didn't monopolize the OS market.

[bemildred]

9. Their software is unstable crap.

Anyone who has worked outside the M$ box knows this.
PCs are unstable pieces of shit today because of Microsoft.
You can't do stable software on an unstable platform.

[slackmaster]

10. I work with MS and non-MS systems daily

Windows 2000 is extremely stable and so is XP. SQL Server 2000 is rock-solid and very rich in useful features. IIS 5 is an excellent HTTP server and very easy to administer. It supports a wide range of server-side functionality out of the box.

I'd like to see Microsoft stop trying to grab every corner of every market. If they'd concentrate on the OS and a reasonable suite of business applications we'd all be better off.

My company has about equal numbers of Windows 2000 and Linux servers (running Apache, MySQL, and Mod Perl applications). I run the Windows machines solo, while it takes four engineers thrashing around to keep the Linux boxes running reliably. Both systems have strengths and weaknesses.

BTW I've been involved in data processing professionally since 1983 and have worked on numerous different platforms including several mainframes and versions of Unix. Linux is definitely up and coming, but please don't sell present-day Microsoft OSs and applications short until you've worked with them.

[bemildred]

11. Stable is a relative thing.

I run FreeBSD most of the time, and used Solaris a lot.
Linux is OK, but can be as annoying as Windoze to keep up with,
and the learning curve to make it obey is still fairly steep.

W2K was an improvement, as were later NT versions, I've
heard mixed reviews on XP, and have no direct experience.

The security problems seem structural and endemic to all
M$ OSes, although some are worse, and a good deal of it is not
the OS but Outlook/IE and related crap.

I should say I run W98 and find it useful, but it is annoying
and time consuming to make it obey.

Your assessment of where the problem lies in your second paragraph
is right on. I am not trying to disrespect those who toil in the
fields of Micro$oft, I've been there too.

Regards.

[Fovea]

12. wrong

Thank you for playing.

Microsoft has done little for the security or reliability of their operating system in favor of bigger bells and shriller whistles.

CP/M was even a better DOS than DOS, IMO.
Hell, the Amiga was a better OS.

Microsoft does not make the best OS, or even the second best OS. They just have the juggernaut. MSOutlook has become a threat to the whole IT infrastructure repeatedly. I think that there needs to be a huge class action suite for everyone who ever lost money based on a Microsoft OS failure. It would probably equal the GDP of many industrial nations.