Microsoft trying to squeeze others out?

One of my points was...due to the nature of "computers"..in how they're used, both home, and business, etc....IMO there has to be one big popular one. Wether it's Microsoft, or whoever...I think the nature of this industry forces things to be where there is only one big player.

That reason is..."Compatibility". Think about it....lets first look at home users. Lets take it to the example of..say...a computer game. Whatever game, your favorite game, my current favorites are Battlefield 1942, Battlefield Vietnam, Battlefield 2, etc. Whatever game, if you like the Quake series, or some flight sim like Combat Flight Simulator, or some role playing game like Everquest. They can write the game for Windows...and that's all they need to do.

Just think of the impact on game software companies if they had to support a dozen different operating sytems. (And I don't mean counting Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows 2000, and Windows XP as 4x operating systems, I'm talking about totall different..such as Windows, CrApple, *nix, BeOS, etc)

Just think of the nightmare for ISPs..to support a dozen different operating systems.

Printers...drivers for your favorite HP Printer
While on the subject of drivers...wow...I mean, for most new games now, venders like ATI and nVidia do monthly rollouts of updated drivers for Windows. I can't imagine the burden, well, they simply wouldn't be there.

Lets flip over to the business world. The IT department. Not long ago, for the more common business networks, you had Novell, Artisoft LANtastic, and Windows as 3 of the popular networking types. Now things have gotten fairly focused around Windows networks. But wow...to have this allowed to run nilly willy with no standard platform...I can't picture the horror. Not to mention trying to find your main business application, choices would seem so limited if there was no universal operating system.

 

Almost 20 years ago they taught two OS's in school. They taught IBM in collage and MAC in highschool.
I don't know, maybe they were teaching Linux also at some point but since kids have become way more educated, They choose their own ways.

I just tried out the new DSL ( damn small linux ) it is a 50 meg download and works fast and efficient. I guess it works off USB stick also. Includes firefox for a browser, some games an editor, FTP server ect. How easy is it to put a CD in your computer and turn it on ? LOL

You need to remember some OS were made for buisness and NOT home to begin with. Sun Microsystems played in the buisness section for years. At present I see only 4 possabilities. Sun, Apple, Linux or Windows.
Has anyone mentioned Apple yet? I think an Apple version is made now that works on Windows LOL and from what I heard it has some awesome video editing qualities.

In the early 80's it was impossiable for home users to JUST reformat their HD.
way too complicated. In 2006, every 6 year old can as you say. That is if they know what time zone they are in

controler

 

BASIC. I took that for a few years before Fortran and Watfive.

 

Was well aware of the differences before posting. It's not THAT big of a gulf. What's the big browser threat of 2005? Java. Any java based browser, which includes FF, is not immune to this. IST.bar was one of the big ones to hit this. FF users would still infect Windows with IST.bar if they came across it on the web.

This shows my main point..of exploits finding other vehicles into the system that don't HAVE to be Microsoft based. MS gets the heat because it's in the spotlight...but as other avenues become popular, the exploits will adapt/change. People are so quick to hop on the "Bash Microsoft bus" because it's so trendy. But in reality, whoever is in the spotlight will get it. The malware writers out there wish to do damage, they will always adapt.

 

I forgot to simply the statement...when I mentioned "updates", I thought people could follow what I meant...not the OS itself, but components. Lets take Internet Explorer...over the years, you've gotten upgrades...from 3.02..to 4.0...to 4.1...to 5.0...to 5.1...to 5.5....to 6.0 (I'm sure I missed a few versions in there). How about Windows Media Player? How about the firewall in Windows XP....from original, to sp1...to the vastly improved firewall in SP2? How about MS Antispyware? On the what...3rd program version now?

 

There's been a lot posted in this thread so I will try to make my answers brief...yeah right.

Well first thing, most people are not going to search for alternatives unless they have a problem with what they currently have - this applies to products and services generally, not just computer software.

So if Firefox offers tabbed browsing, fast search engine access, a shedload of extensions and faster page display, this means nothing for most users until they encounter a problem with IE (which will most likely be spyware related). So what is the harm in this? It means that IE has a marketshare which is gained on inertia rather than product quality - it means that Microsoft can dictate web standards (and their neglect of CSS2 support in IE6 effectively froze the use of this standard since most webmasters had to restrict themselves to the lowest common denominator). Ditto with Media Player and DRM.

And if MS bundles an AV with Windows, even if it is a pile of horse dung, it will still get 90% market share because the vast majority of users won't take the effort to research alternatives (and some of the threads in here going on about "heuristics", "unpacker support", "proactive defense" would likely be too technically intimidating for many casual users looking for advice).

Eh? You never heard of the Apple Macintosh - the first consumer computer whose interface included windows, icons and a mouse? You never heard of the Acorn Archimedes which was the first to offer a taskbar and anti-aliased fonts? The Atari ST and Commodore Amiga which both provided far cheaper (and more usable) alternatives to the PC, with fully fledged GUIs when Microsoft was still working on Windows 1.0?

Microsoft's role has been to take ideas and implement them on hardware that became the most accessible - however their innovation is scant (try naming one part of the Windows UI that is original aside from the Start button - and even in XP they seem to have messed that up). In terms of cost, Windows has to be considered grossly overpriced (especially so for developing countries), being the only part of a system to have continually risen in price over the last decade.

Yes, this thread has gone beyond discussion of AV products - but in the context of discussing the harm that can arise from bundling, which is a very real likelihood with MS-AV, especially if included with their One-Care service (which new users would doubtless receive multiple popup reminders of, just as XP users do for Microsoft Passport).

Because you always have the choice of doing without the bundle, removing the stereo, alarm, sun-roof and air conditioning and receiving a discount. With Windows, not only do you have no such option but in the vast majority of cases, you have no choice but to pay for a copy of Windows with a new machine regardless of whether you use it or not! If every car came with an AT&T mobile phone (plus contract) and you had no option to exclude it, this would be considered an outrageous example of monopolistic behaviour so why are some posters seemingly so happy to ignore similar conduct in the computer world?

More to the point - why should you be required to have a specific browser to access Windows Updates? It is unnecessary and done solely to force people to use IE - and you seem to consider it a benefit?

Well in Windows' case it wouldn't require a great many changes to increase its security:

• Autorun on CD/DVDs could be disabled by default - or the users at least prompted about whether to run a program when a disc is inserted.
• File extension hiding should be disabled, preventing malware writers from disguising their .jpg.exe's as .jpg files.
• XP Home should create new users with Limited Accounts by default, not Owners/Administrators.
• Internet Explorer and other network accessing applications should be run with minimum privilege, regardless of the account used.
• Windows Services that can receive incoming unsolicited connections (DCOM, UPnP, etc) should be disabled by default.
• The Windows Registry should use fewer locations for storing startup programs.

These sort of changes would make Windows far more secure and would require little change. The problem isn't Windows' core security, it is the careless and sloppy handling of applications running on top (IE notably) plus the emphasis on ease of use over security (particularly inappropriate in the file extension hiding).

As mentioned above, have you been able to buy a new computer without a copy of Windows included? Until this is possible from major manufacturers, people can't be said to have a real choice in dealing with MS.

Linux has come a long way on the desktop in recent years though. As long as you don't have hardware made by a manufacturer that obstructs Linux support, there should be almost no problems (certainly no need to write your own programs!) and in terms of applications, the only general area that Windows can claim supremacy is in games. That is the only reason I am still using it and I don't expect this to continue indefinitely - neither, seemingly, does MS with their determined efforts to create a separate console platform.

Since Java is a separate application offered by Sun (with JRE's available from other sources too), it seems a little unfair to consider it a "browser" problem. Furthermore it is an option for Firefox/Opera, unlike IE's ActiveX equivalent. However even if you add the Java vulnerabilities to Firefox and Opera, they still score far lower than IE.

IE was only offered free in an attempt to crush Netscape and development stopped (with IE6) when this was complete. IE7 appears to be offered more as an "upgrade" incentive though since it is WinXP only (amazing how Opera and Firefox can support Windows back to Win98 yet MS can't...). As for the firewall and other features in XP SP2, yes they are improvements but they also are not available to Win2000 or NT users. MS Antispyware is still in beta so regular updates are to be expected.

 

.



here is just one of many computers that can be purchased with linux installed here

HP and Dell are supposed to start offering alternative Os's to windows if they haven't already.

 

Dell don't seem to be unless you are a business customer as also seems to be the case for HP. While Walmart is a singular exception (and one which may break the stranglehold MS has elsewhere), could they really be considered a computer manufacturer when they are reselling Microtel PCs?

 

you don't have to buy Microtel from wal-mart you can buy from Microtel direct Here

 

My clarification still flew over you... I clearly stated "This shows my main point..of exploits finding other vehicles into the system that don't HAVE to be Microsoft based." thusly did not direct this towards any browser, I was illustrating how threats evolve to still get to people.

The gulf of threats between IE and FF, as of October this year, was 86 for IT, 25 towards FF. (Taken from PCMagazine Dec 2005 issue, referencing Secunia) That so called "gulf" will narrow, just watch. Reason? Other browsers such as FF will start to share that spotlight. The bad guys still need to do damage..they will find alternative ways, such as the Java example illustrates.

 

It doesn't matter "why" it was offered, I was illustrating that it was indeed offered. In a prior reply, you tried to state that Microsoft did not offer upgrades for free, I countered that with examples that yes you did some "upgrades..by your definition". I along with millions of people got new versions of Internet Explorer without paying extra money to Microsoft. I, along with millions of other people, downloaded new versions of Media Player without paying extra money to Microsoft. Etc etc.

Windows XP SP2 features should not have to be available for Windows 2000 or NT 4.0 or NT 3.51 (I'm assuming you meant NT 4.0 when you simply stated NT..more on that later)...as it's a service pack for WinXP. Windows 2000 is still Windows NT..it's just NT version 5. Windows XP is still Windows NT..I'll let you find out what version it is. The firewall was not developed for 2K because 2K was meant to be a business grade OS, as they didn't get the multimedia API fully compatible for the home users..hence the miserable last minute rush of Windows ME. However XP was designed for both markets...hence both flavors of it.

 

My point was that "other browsers" give you more opportunity to reduce related vulnerabilities. The Firefox download (at 5.0 MB for Windows) does not include Java by default so users have to install it separately.

If IE has less than double the vulnerabilities of Firefox in a years' time, I will concede this point. However do also note the seriousness of the vulnerabilities - 15% Extremely and 28% Highly critical for IE compared to 4% and 23% for Firefox. Unless and until MS "unbundle" IE from Windows, I don't see any likelihood of it coming close to Firefox's levels, let alone Opera's.

 

Not paying directly no - but you would have paid via your Windows licence, most likely several times over. This raises another issue with bundling which is the ability to obscure product costs and to cross-subsidise with a guaranteed revenue stream. If Microsoft is allowed to throw money from Windows sales into other products, regardless of whether they make a profit or not, then this is also unfair competition which will harm consumers in the long term (due to the removal of choice) even if they seem to benefit in the short term.

 

P2K, as you know i am not a member of the MS fanclub,
but one thing POSITIVE i must say regarding this , is that
there wasn't one OS-release in history that you had to pay for,
that had such a long lifetime as XP has, it is now 6 years old,
and it can perhaps live another 4 years before a new RELEASE is out.
Even a car is replaced faster then a MS OS now.
So $400 for XP PRO in 10 years is $40 per year.

Oops that is still very expensive... certainly when you know
that there are still people buying this old model for the new price...

 

Basic AV and FW should come with the OS, and good for the lifetime of the product. This is the best way to control baddies over the internet. Those who wish to add bells and whistles can purchase their own AV and FW.

The best defense against baddies is the USER. No layered system is going to stop all malware. You wouldn't take the family sedan to go off-roading. Unfortunately, most people pay no attention to the websites that they are clicking.

 

No changing the OS would be better.

It shouldn't be possible for malware to be installed via your browser
in the first place. The browser should not have the permissions to do that.
This was whe way the browsers and OS-es where developed
in the first place, before MS came in this field.

And as a matter of fact, every normal installed Unix or Linux version
still works that way.

That was in the time when Sun Microsystems advertised
with 'the network is the computer' and Bill Gates told us
that the Internet had no real value for the future...

 

Well no kidding, duh? Now your issue is...you somehow expect Windows to be free? Unless you're a non-profit....that's highly unlikely.

You see...you keep back peddling here. You tried to state that Microsoft gives you program upgrades. I countered saying the yes, in some cases you do indeed get that. Not always full programs or suites, but some components/programs..yes.

Now you go saying in a gruff under the breath manner..."well..yeah...well..you...uhm...yeah..you paid for it several times over...rofl rofl rofl".

Comon..stand firm.

 

Yes IE still has quite a few more. And a while ago Microsoft stopped doing their Java...so new computers, no matter what browser they use, have to go to Java.com and go download the latest Java. And hopefully pay attention to the "Java update notification" just like everyone should pay attention to the "Windows Update notification", and ...oh yes....the "Firefox Update notification".

Active X will be an achilles heel, I'll beat ya to that one. The people wanted more functionality over the web...Microsoft delivered...and it got abused.

Now we have AJAX (basically dynamic HTML...go checkout Office Live and MOOL) we'll see if that gets abused.

 

It is more expensive then any other OS out there,
including those used for Supercomputers.

The price for XP and MS office are extreme high,
compared to other products.

And that is the reason why lots of people are switching to
Openoffice, Staroffice or others.

But in the near future this problem will soon be solved,
you'll use the office software of your ISP.
Which is of course more logical, that way you can select
the applications you need at your ISP and only need a thin client,
with a webbrowser, almost any application can run at your ISP.

They (ISP's) will take care for the updates etc.
Just like it happens in a lot of large companies.

And it doesn't matter which kind of client you use,
MAC/Windows/Linux/FreeBSD etc. etc.

If your computer is broken, you can go to any other computer
in the world and go further with your work.

Google will be an interessting party in this.

A lot of the above is already in use now, lots of companies, have all there business software already running at their ISP,
And are only using webmail, a remote word processor, spreadsheet,
games etc. etc.
So they don't have to worry about virusses or malware,
they can run their own OS from a rom, cdrom etc.

If you think about what you really HAVE to run on your system,
and can't be on a server it isn't that much.

For serious applications, this is a reliable system,
for hobby there still will be your old fashion Windows system.

 

I agree. My previous statements were vague and didn't address the point - the point being your original "OS updates and fixes are free from MS." statement. Assuming we both agree that neither IE nor Media Player are part of Windows, then both your statement about application upgrades being free and mine about OS upgrades being charged for are correct. Happy?

Java delivered before ActiveX and with far more robust security. The real reason for ActiveX was that MS wanted something to compete with Java that was also tied to Windows itself (to counter the possibility of "thin" Internet workstations not running Windows, as was being evangelised by Oracle and Sun).

Since AJAX is based on Javascript, it should have all its strengths and weaknesses. However even in cases where a browser can be hijacked, the damage done will be limited to what access it has to the rest of the system - so as long as IE is integrated into Windows (rather than being a separate application like all the others), the consequences - and the seriousness of any vulnerabilities - will continue to be higher.

 

It's my opinion that any company that becomes the mainstream OS...would do that. If it wasn't Microsoft, it'd be someone else.

Apple isnt' all that much cheaper (what...50 - 60% the price of Windows, something like that..eh whatver..I don't like to think about Apple)..and they're far from a majority player.

The open source *nix distros are free-to-very cheap...because it's based on the rebelious crowd against MS. If MS wasn't in the picture, I'd wager most distros would cost some money...not expensive I'm sure, but we wouldn't find them as freely...free as we do now. And I run it on my laptop...before someone tries to chime in that I bash *nix or I'm anti-*nix.

Agreed....Office is expensive (for regular businesses). But then again most businesses that have been around for a while using computers, are used to paying 3-4-ish thousand (US) per workstation setup, for the past 6-8 years or so. Computers have come down sooo much...that cost is still down below that. Things wash off.

I'm not sure about the online applications. Agree that they're coming, well, they've been here. I have quite a few business clients that Remote Desktop to a TS or Citrix box to run some specialized business application. And Microsoft jumping into this with fury this year with Office live, and MOOL, etc. It's a nice alternative...works for some businesses who don't want to deal with a lot of servers, and worrying about maint and backups on the servers. However there's still a rise in cost in putting in a solid high availability internet connection like a flavor of T. Or they can gamble with broadband..cable or DSL, however when there's an outage...business stops. And over the long haul, you'll end up paying more.

For the home user? Eh. Gaming I don't see doing that, I don't see how mainstream popular FPS games like Battlefield 2 or Quake 4 or whatever could run well on a thin client.

 

It's the opinion of others that this would not necessarily be the case.
You seem to have a low opinion of big business if you think they all would act like Microsoft.

 

A recent article in the Inquirer that covers many of the points discussed here:

What's wrong with Windows XP N, and how to put it right

 

it has nothing to do with anything but filling their own pockets! incase anyone don't know the "EU Court of Auditors declined last November to approve the EU's budget for the eighth year running, admitting it can only guarantee that 5 percent of taxpayers' money is being spent properly" that means for years only a very, very tiny amount of money (about 5%) can be accounted for. that's the way the EU is and will always be. there are countless incidents of the MEPs stealing money. like the way they steal travel money.

read this:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/europe/story/0,11363,710411,00.html

 

Great article Paranoid.

Laughs out load at the idea Microsoft isn't after our money.
There is a law that you can't 'sell' things at a loss and what Microsoft do by bundling things is make it nigh on impossible for third party vendors to compete.