Gates on Spyware and OS Competition 690
Ant writes "CNET's News.com has an article that says Microsoft plans to offer its own anti-spyware software." prostoalex writes "Both OsNews and InfoWorld talk about Bill Gates' speech at the Computer History Museum in California. Gates is noting that Linux is taking over, and claims that 10 years forward Linux and Windows will be the only OSs left in the market."
Re:Mac OS? (Score:5, Informative)
*tears out another Dvorak article, wipes, and flushes it down the toilet*
RTFA! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:640K is enough.... (Score:5, Informative)
I'm too tired to find the links right now, but a minute or 5 of google should clear it up for ya.
Re:800lb Gorilla (Score:-1, Informative)
Before I worked at Microsoft as an intern last summer (I'm a college student), I was under the same impression about the amount of brainpower they had.
I worked specifically for MSN Ads, and everywhere I looked (I also talked to my friends in other departments) I found sloppy coding practices, FUD, and general CYA-motivated B.S.
9/10 people I met didn't know what they were doing, but they were too good at political maneuvering for it to matter. The people that knew what they were doing were extremely cynical and didn't think things could change. Oh how I wish I could comment on specifics. Damn NDA.
I was really hoping Microsoft would be a cool place to work, but I was severely disappointed. Behind closed doors, I couldn't find a SINGLE person who would actually recommend taking a job there.
When they made me an offer to join after my senior year (this year), I turned it down. I just can't deal with companies that are too laden in management and politics to even attempt agility and quality of work. Maybe it's just the idealism of youth, and I'll learn my lesson the hard way some day.
I'm sure there are specific people and groups in Microsoft that do a bang-up job, but I think they are much fewer in numbers than they were 20 years ago (before I was born).
I think spyware exists (mainly) because of a flaw in the architecture of Windows and the development methodology employed by Microsoft in general. I sincerely doubt they will be able to address the problem-space of spyware. They can't just turn on a dime anymore. At least, the Microsoft I know can't.
Probably it will just turn out to be a technologically half-assed job that the phenomenal Microsoft marketing team turns into the next revolution of computing. </sincerity>
Re:640K is enough.... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:800lb Gorilla (Score:2, Informative)
I think that's probably the biggest complaint about it outright.
Get your facts correct (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The Road Ahead,,,, (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Mac OS? (Score:5, Informative)
Rolls Royce still manages to sell cars.
Re:Too much control? (Score:5, Informative)
They do have it working. The really scary thing is that they actually explicitly PREVENT it from reporting to Windows the status of the AV software. If you try to change that, it pops up a window which says (something along the lines of) that "Norton AV is monitoring your system", and there's a check box which says "Report status to other systems (recommend that you DO NOT do this)".
Kind of shitty of them really. Especially as you have to go through hoops to get their LiveUpdate system to automatically download AV signature file updates - it's not enabled by default.
Lame lame lame lame lame.
Re:800lb Gorilla (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Mac OS? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Mac OS? (Score:2, Informative)
Why would it be based on Debian? Not only is its kernel not Linux (so no, MacOSX is not Linux either, again), and not only does the GPL make it impractical, but it wouldn't really make sense anyway, since Debian's real unique functionality is apt*, something completely useless in this case since no Linux binaries would run under MacOSX.
They could also have sprung from NetBSD (or OpenBSD?), which would probably have been easier since it already supported their architecture pretty well, but I'm sure they had their reasons.
Re:800lb Gorilla (Score:2, Informative)
Also, it doesn't require activation, a real "big brother" feature I dislike about XP.
Re:800lb Gorilla (Score:5, Informative)
My advice as a veteran is to stick with smaller companies. Not only will you make a bigger impact but you'll also be appreciated. You definately wait till you are married and have kids before you get your soul sucked out by a large company. Of course by then you'll have lost the will to live anyway so it won't matter so much
good luck.
Re:I hate to say it (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Mac OS? (Score:4, Informative)
I think they would be completely missing their target market if they did that. People who buy Macs are getting them because they "Just Work". One of the big reasons why they "Just Work" is because Apple has complete control over the hardware they're using, they can test the software on exactly what the end-user will be using it on and make sure it all works. Furthermore, they can test upgrades on hardware identical to what the end-users are using.
Whilest it's possible that they may eventually ditch BSD in favor of Linux if it looks like Linux will be beneficial for them, I doubt they will ever start shipping it as a stand-alone piece of software rather than a soft/hardware combo.
Re:Paranoia (Score:3, Informative)
While there is no shortage of people who believe just that, those aren't exactly companies with a rock solid history of nothing but underhanded, slimy, and unethical practices like MS.
There are few universal truths. But here are a couple. If there is something bad that could be done, people will accuse Microsoft of doing it, whether there is evidence or not. 99% of the time, those people are right
Did everyone miss the critical point? (Score:5, Informative)
From the OSNews article:
This is a real issue. Red Hat and the Linux companies have little incentive to make products which require less support, because this could cut into their support contracts.Microsoft then can show a lower TCO by putting lots of resources into making management easier and do-able by lower level cheaper employees.
They could win (at least temporarily) with this strategy if we aren't careful (and don't get administration on Linux to be as easy and automated as possible).
Re:640K is enough.... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:800lb Gorilla (Score:4, Informative)
Are you saying it doesn't work? 'Cause in my tests, it seems to consistently deny connections from externally, which is, after all, the point. It will prevent pretty much any external worm attack, in fact. I think that's hard to describe as "yields no benefit whatsoever".
Re:Mac OS? (Score:2, Informative)
Your opinion depends on the assumption that all computer users would know about the shortcut keys from the get-go. Admittedly, I don't like using the mouse PERIOD when it comes to anything application related (I was losing hair rapidly until I discovered SHIFT+F10)... but having access to decent menus and a mouse cuts the learning curve dramatically. A user with a mouse can still still be vastly more productive than a user without a computer (or the knowledge to use one).
Let's not even start on the REAL reason I use a mouse: games.
Re:Mac OS? (Score:3, Informative)
* Based on everyone I know.
YMMV
The Mouse (Score:3, Informative)
It's especially interesting because the user interface looks clunky -- but well-trained people with experience on the system can still use it far faster than anything new.
I remember thinking the same thing when I saw my company's old accounting system, which we had to dump for a Windows-based solution because it wasn't Y2k compliant. It took about 10 times as long to enter data on the new system than the old.
It should be profoundly embarrassing to us that we have largely regressed in the speed in which an experienced user can work.
D
Re:What's left in 10 years (Score:5, Informative)
Linux is, and has been ready for the desktop for at least 5 years or more. I've been using it full-time on my desktops and workstations here for at least 7 years.
Don't blame the kernel for the lack of userland applications. The peripherals, ports, and external devices are all supported (and in fact, more devices and peripherals are supported under the current 2.6.8.1 Linux kernel than on Windows and OSX combined).
Linux was never "meant" for the desktop. That is the job of distribution manufacturers and userland application authors. Talk to them. The rest of us "desktop Linux users" are waiting for them to catch up.
This isn't a race against Microsoft. Linux solves my needs, and gives me much more flexibility and power and choice than the alternative OS that might run on my hardware.
Incidentally, Windows and OSX don't support 90% of the hardware out there that Linux has happily been running on for several years to over a decade. See my previous post [slashdot.org] for a more-complete list.
Re:800lb Gorilla (Score:3, Informative)
Perhaps it's because they realize that whatever doors you're talking about do not matter, and that most users install malware on their computers themselves, often after clicking through the EULA for it.
Re:800lb Gorilla (Score:1, Informative)
Hardly "you could have been rooted while thinking what to click".
Re:Mac OS? (Score:3, Informative)
Macs are clearly made to last. One of my clients still runs its business off of Macs that are 6 years old. They've upgraded the memory and the peripherals over the years, but those workhorses are still plodding. Admittedly, they are now starting to look at new stuff which can run OS X
Re:Paranoia (Score:2, Informative)
Believe it or not, this was common knowledge 10 years ago even before NATAS (first true polymorphic virus) came out. Just skip the Norton part. Norton was a hardware hacker who wrote excellent IBM PC books. Maybe you don't know, but at the time, McAffee was an antivirus MONOPOLY. And there were about 50 new virus strains appearing EACH MONTH. Don't you think that's a little *suspicious*? Think about it. Creating your own market. This ain't new at all.
Of course, in those times, you couldn't get infected by opening a normal document. Viruses were only the result of doing some "unhealthy" activity (warez). So if a company did something such as writing viruses, they might have (secretly) be appraised by governments.
Things are different now. Viruses are written by either anarchists or script kiddies, and against specific targets (Outlook, IE6, etc). Writing viruses is now no longer profittable for a company.
But please remember: There WAS a time...