I'm Going To Rant

jimmyj68

Senior member
Mar 18, 2004
573
0
0
Nothing more exposes the depravity of America's business operations than the debacle being spawned by Symantec and McAfee. Let's look at this in context.

1. Microsoft designs operating systems they hope are as user friendly as possible.

2. A group of miscreants and neer-do-wells with programming knowledge decide to see how musch they can screw with Microsofts product.

3. Every body jumps on the bandwagon and accuses Microsoft of producing poorly designed products becuase a group of nuts create programs to damage Microsofts products (mainly because Microsoft is so big they make a wonderful target).

4. Microsoft allows a few companies access to the innermost workings of their product so those companies can produce software to protect users from the wrong doings of the evil programmers out there (could the very people tasked to protect also be an attacker? We users pay a pretty penny for the protection that seems to need updating everyday).

5. Assualts on Microsoft's products begin to wreak havoc on individual and business users. Soon Microsoft (the victim) is assailed as a terrible non-caring maker of insecure software.

6. In desperation and self defense, Microsoft starts developing means to protect itself (Windows One care, Windows Defender). And in its latest iteration of operating system software, read Windows Vista, decide to keep close hold on the innermost secrets of its operating system.

7. Enter Symantec and McAfee screaming foul because now they can't insert their programs to protect users from the evil programmers, which they haven't done very well anyway (kept them in business though). Everyone has demanded that Microsoft make a secure product - Microsoft is trying to do so - what's the beef?

(1 - 7) Enter the European Union ( the title tells the tail). Their interest is purely parochial - protecting the interest of European software makers, and now CPU producers, they pick and poke at Microsoft's product to prove in some way that Microsoft is steam rolling their stuff unfairly over lesser European companies. The major idea? Keep Microsoft on the ropes and in the courts fighting charges that they, the European Union have dreamed up. Now the folks in Brussells after years of picking and prodding, and poking, have decided they have enough ammunition to go after Intel. A chip maker! And what is worse? AMD joins the ranks of Symantec and McAfee in saying - Yea European Union - you get the dirty guys at Microsoft and Intel.

One thing is obvious. We want everyone to succeed - just don't succeed too well. If you do, we who once applauded you, will now try to destroy you.
 

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
16
81
Nice troll. Let me guess, you work for poor Microsoft, who is obviously the "victim" in your fairytale.

3. Every body jumps on the bandwagon and accuses Microsoft of producing poorly designed products becuase a group of nuts create programs to damage Microsofts products (mainly because Microsoft is so big they make a wonderful target).

It's not bandwagon effect. Microsoft DID PRODUCE POORLY DESIGNED PRODUCTS, from the standpoint of security.
 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
The problem is, having one company produce 95% of the operating systems is a really bad idea, because competition leads to better products, and Microsoft is partly to blame for why the market developed that way.

As bad as Symentec products might be, the fact is there are dozens of companies making security products, some of them very good.

Going from that, to relying on Microsoft as the sole source provider for yet another aspect of computing, will be an utter disaster.

 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
i thought their complaint of not being able to access the kernel was about their software not accessing the kernel on a running PC. which sounds like an attempt at a security measure (don't provide access to the kernel through so many channels and maybe it's less vulnerable to attacks).

<--- doesn't know what he is talking about
 

xospec1alk

Diamond Member
Mar 4, 2002
4,329
0
0
wtf are you all smoking? here MS is trying to secure their OS, and Symantec and McAffee are claiming that its unfair? why is this ok?!
 

DaShen

Lifer
Dec 1, 2000
10,710
1
0
Meh. The only beef I have with Microsoft is their growing shift into Online OS and monthly fees. That stuff is messed up. Otherwise, even if there OS is a knockoff of other OS's, they grabbed the market early, and also encorporate nice friendly features. No big deal.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
It has nothing to do with MS trying to create more secure products, and everything to do with MS trying to take over the market currently held by companies like Symantec etc.

Just like with the browser, they will simply use the leverage of having the ultimate distribution vehicle (Windows) to effectively drive competition out of the market. Once that's complete, they will reap the benefits of being the sole provider of the OS as well as the add-ons needed to 'protect' the OS.
 

AnyMal

Lifer
Nov 21, 2001
15,780
0
76
Did I miss a memo or was today designated a "Weak and pointless rant" day? There seem to be a lot of whining going on today.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
If MS does not secure the OS, it exposes the user to problems unless the use a third party safety feature.

If MS secures the OS then the user is protected and the third parties suffer.

Who should MS be worried about.

My money would be the end user.
 

Mellman

Diamond Member
Jul 9, 2003
3,083
0
76
welcome to america, and capitalism...don't like it? stfu, door's that way -->

Seriously, you do realize windows would be far worse than it is now if we didn't have competition for them...
 

nace186

Platinum Member
Sep 16, 2006
2,356
0
76
I don't know why Symantec and McAfee are complaining separately. Aren't they merge or one acquired the other?
 

xospec1alk

Diamond Member
Mar 4, 2002
4,329
0
0
Originally posted by: PokerGuy
It has nothing to do with MS trying to create more secure products, and everything to do with MS trying to take over the market currently held by companies like Symantec etc.

Just like with the browser, they will simply use the leverage of having the ultimate distribution vehicle (Windows) to effectively drive competition out of the market. Once that's complete, they will reap the benefits of being the sole provider of the OS as well as the add-ons needed to 'protect' the OS.

a bit jaded are we?
 

jimmyj68

Senior member
Mar 18, 2004
573
0
0
:D I don't now or never have worked for Microsoft or any other software maker. In fact, at times I can hardly spell software.

What I am though is a keen observer of the world around me. I have seen our social structure, that which is considered ethical, fall apart year by year. Added to that is the penchant this society has for blaming the victim. Remember the days when a young woman dare not come forward to report rape because the question would be asked- well what were you wearing? What did you do to entice the man? Remember those days? They really haven't gone away----depending on your social standing.

Such is Microsoft's plight. Too many of us are conditioned to put the cart before the horse and we fail to see, or recognize, or conceive of the obvious. Had no one ever attempted to screw around with Microsoft's operating system, we wouldn't be having this conversation. And McAfee and Symantec would be producing some other kind of software.

Read the paper, watch the news. After 9/11, millions was spent invetigating the government (all of America was victimized) to find out what the government (victim) did wrong that could have prevented the 9/11 attack.

The most blatant and vicious victim blaming is done under the guise of religion by a group of 70 folks calling themselves a Baptist Church. They show up at the funerals of victims of the Afgan/Iraq skirmishes and blame the dead young folks (victims) for their own deaths with some distorted interpretation of the Bibles stance on homosexuality.

Get the picture?
 

JSFLY

Golden Member
Mar 24, 2006
1,068
0
0
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Nice troll. Let me guess, you work for poor Microsoft, who is obviously the "victim" in your fairytale.

3. Every body jumps on the bandwagon and accuses Microsoft of producing poorly designed products becuase a group of nuts create programs to damage Microsofts products (mainly because Microsoft is so big they make a wonderful target).

It's not bandwagon effect. Microsoft DID PRODUCE POORLY DESIGNED PRODUCTS, from the standpoint of security.

Any software product would be deemed poorly designed if every other HACKER IN THE WORLD was trying to turn it inside out.
 

JSFLY

Golden Member
Mar 24, 2006
1,068
0
0
Originally posted by: JSFLY
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Nice troll. Let me guess, you work for poor Microsoft, who is obviously the "victim" in your fairytale.

3. Every body jumps on the bandwagon and accuses Microsoft of producing poorly designed products becuase a group of nuts create programs to damage Microsofts products (mainly because Microsoft is so big they make a wonderful target).

It's not bandwagon effect. Microsoft DID PRODUCE POORLY DESIGNED PRODUCTS, from the standpoint of security.

Its not poorly designed, its just that every other HACKER IN THE WORLD is trying to turn it inside out.

 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
Originally posted by: jimmyj68
:D I don't now or never have worked for Microsoft or any other software maker. In fact, at times I can hardly spell software.

What I am though is a keen observer of the world around me. I have seen our social structure, that which is considered ethical, fall apart year by year. Added to that is the penchant this society has for blaming the victim. Remember the days when a young woman dare not come forward to report rape because the question would be asked- well what were you wearing? What did you do to entice the man? Remember those days? They really haven't gone away----depending on your social standing.

Such is Microsoft's plight. Too many of us are conditioned to put the cart before the horse and we fail to see, or recognize, or conceive of the obvious. Had no one ever attempted to screw around with Microsoft's operating system, we wouldn't be having this conversation. And McAfee and Symantec would be producing some other kind of software.

Read the paper, watch the news. After 9/11, millions was spent invetigating the government (all of America was victimized) to find out what the government (victim) did wrong that could have prevented the 9/11 attack.

The most blatant and vicious victim blaming is done under the guise of religion by a group of 70 folks calling themselves a Baptist Church. They show up at the funerals of victims of the Afgan/Iraq skirmishes and blame the dead young folks (victims) for their own deaths with some distorted interpretation of the Bibles stance on homosexuality.

Get the picture?
Without knowing anything else about you, it's pretty clear that you're a Limbaugh wet dream ;)

Anyway, Microsoft is not any kind of "victim". They've done a fantastic job of marketing their products and making them the de facto standards. I have no issues with that, and I'm certainly no MS hater/basher -- I use MS products all the time. The problem I have is when they use their monopoly position to remove competition. I like competition, it gives us all better products and more choice at a better price. Anything that diminishes competition in a market is bad for consumers.....
 

Garet Jax

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2000
6,369
0
71
Originally posted by: Mellman
welcome to america, and capitalism...don't like it? stfu, door's that way -->

Seriously, you do realize windows would be far worse than it is now if we didn't have competition for them...

We don't really have competition.