Microsoft indirectly responds to Google moving away from Windows

Today, in a blog post from Microsoft's Brandon LeBlanc over on the Windows Team Blog, Microsoft responded to the various claims that were circling the web last night, which asserted that Google was "ditching" Windows for Mac and Linux because it was too much of a "security effort".  The blog post by Microsoft points out that many of these claims were false and mostly out of proportion.

Last night, an article was published in the Financial Times that claimed:

"Windows is known for being more vulnerable to attacks by hackers and more susceptible to computer viruses than other operating systems."

Brandon points out that this is not supported by fact, and goes on to say that many people agree that Windows is making fast and huge progress in the areas of security, as acknowledged by third parties:

"When it comes to security, even hackers admit we’re doing a better job making our products more secure than anyone else. And it’s not just the hackers; third party influentials and industry leaders like Cisco tell us regularly that our focus and investment continues to surpass others."

The blog post also points the finger at the Mac platform too, linking to an article by InfoWorld which reports on Malware being downloaded to users' Mac's and asks if this is something that will be more common in the future. Oddly, the post actually never names Google itself, but instead calls them "one particular company" and doesn't reference them once, other than mentioning how there were reports of Yale University stopping their move to Google Apps for security and privacy reasons.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Portal 2 E3 event cancelled, replaced by 'surprise'

Next Story

Steve Jobs comments on Flash, Google, Microsoft and lost iPhone at D8

93 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

"The best way to accelerate a Macintosh is at 9.8m/sec/sec"
Windows is one hell of an OS. It has changed a lot. Sure there are plenty of viruses, but that is inevitable. The reason why there are so many forms of malware for Windows is due to Windows overwhelmingly popular reputation. Over 70% of all computers in the world run Windows and so it is only logical for malicious hackers to target Windows and not so much the not as popular Linux and Mac operating systems.

It was Google's fault for being attacked by malicious Chinese hackers. Jeez, blame the company that has mentioned and warned consumers many times to keep up-to-date in terms of software. Who the hell runs IE6 any more? WTF type of IT does Google have? Its over 4 years old. Do you NOT expect any vulnerabilities or problems to come from that? No software is impenetrable and like all software it requires to be updated routinely to ensure bugs and vulnerabilities do not surface. Google, when you finally see that it is not Window's fault, try running Chrome on your own f*cking machines...

google is not abandoning windows as if they did they would fall hard, they are just wanting to use something else which is there choice. if they want to use linux or mac or windows then thats there choice but with each os comes a certain responsability. ms and there dumb patent junk and locking you into certain things and steve jobs and macs have too much control and again do lock you into certain things but linux takes a little getting used to.

Everyone seems to be missing the point. Google was obviously trying to set some sort of world record for FUD-induced global facepalm. They have indeed succeeded.

Oh wow, big f-ing deal, Google bitches won't use Win anymore. Let's all hang ourselves.
I'm 100% sure that this is a rumor started by them to hype their cloud OS and, maybe, get some Windows users to follow their behavior. That will happen....when we're throwing snowballs in hell.

TDT said,
Oh wow, big f-ing deal, Google bitches won't use Win anymore. Let's all hang ourselves.
I'm 100% sure that this is a rumor started by them to hype their cloud OS and, maybe, get some Windows users to follow their behavior. That will happen....when we're throwing snowballs in hell.

RRRAARRR! I anger!

I do think Windows needs some hard compeition, it would be good for Linux to get more exposure from Google using it. I'm not saying I want Google to be using MAC, we don't need another shabby company getting a larger control of the market. Linux is free and open source, it would be good to see the direction they take if they get somewhere.

SPARTdAN said,
Linux is free and open source

I often wonder if this is why Linux never has never gotten anywhere on the desktop. The problem with FOSS is that it's designed entirely by people who approach desktop computing from a programmer's perspective. This holds it back from the consumer sphere.

There's simply NO denying that the only times in the past when Linux has come close to be used by Joe Public is when a major corporation (with marketing departments) has sunk their hands into its design.

It's lame, but on its own, FOSS fails pretty hard at being anything but a proficiency test.

Joshie said,

I often wonder if this is why Linux never has never gotten anywhere on the desktop. The problem with FOSS is that it's designed entirely by people who approach desktop computing from a programmer's perspective. This holds it back from the consumer sphere.

There's simply NO denying that the only times in the past when Linux has come close to be used by Joe Public is when a major corporation (with marketing departments) has sunk their hands into its design.

It's lame, but on its own, FOSS fails pretty hard at being anything but a proficiency test.

It isn't only the FOSS failure but UNIX in general will always be fragmented and this is where the problem always has been and always will be.

UNIX by definition is not a complete set of standards, it is just a concept of handling a few basic rules of OS I/O and how the kernel generally should operate.

Sadly, the UNIX model is OLD which means that even if a solid standard was adopted that covered the other areas of the OS it still would be lacking behind other OS technologies. Take NT vs UNIX for a quick example. NT is an Object based OS with a client server model, UNIX on the other hand still uses a very basic textual I/O model with no object tracking/intelligence. (NT passes objects around at the kernel and user levels, UNIX passes things around with parameters. Go see PowerShell which is the first CLI in history to be OBJECT BASED because it works directly with the way NT is designed, an Object Based OS.)

My own take on the shortcomings of UNIX derivatives is just a general tiredness that we've been using the same fundamental approach to OS backbones for so long now. I guess it's a result of using the same fundamental approach to the desktop hardware model, and I'm not familiar enough with that side of computing to have a relevant opinion on the issue. It just somehow makes everything feel a little less state-of-the-art, is all.

helios01 said,
I don't think Google would really cut off 90% of the market for security risks.

I think you may be confused, they're not blocking Windows users from accessing their sites, they are phasing out Windows-based PCs that they internally use...

Edited by Antaris, Jun 2 2010, 8:57am :

don't worry microsoft, i'll stay with windows... i'll admit i'll try what google has to offer, but it'll be in the same terms as when i installed OS X just to "have it installed" on my computer... to look cool lol... but in terms of usefulness, i rarely booted the OS X partition. come to think of it, i formatted and it's not even there anymore yea.... windows is home sweet home.

Izlude said,
don't worry microsoft, i'll stay with windows... i'll admit i'll try what google has to offer, but it'll be in the same terms as when i installed OS X just to "have it installed" on my computer... to look cool lol... but in terms of usefulness, i rarely booted the OS X partition. come to think of it, i formatted and it's not even there anymore yea.... windows is home sweet home.

"to look cool lol..."

Half the reason right there for Google and Firefox to even exist!! The correct phrase is "fanboy!"

Is Google going to start making apps for JUST Linux and such then also?

I bet some nerdy maniac at Google China started this all. Watching porn at the work place is sure awesome, just like now.

Something weird about this is how people love to talk about viruses in response to this issue, when Google isn't doing this over viruses, but over some sort of hack attempt.

It gets weirder because of the people who are supporting Google in the matter. I mean, seriously, has anyone here (really, anyone at all) ever actually been hacked over the internet by someone? Not just some trojan installed after running the latest WGA workaround or deciding to let that website scan your harddrive, but an actual, honest to goodness, old-fashioned hacking?

Personally I've handled removing a virus here and there in the past (the folks have Drudge Report as their home page, sigh), and I remember the old talks of network attacks as if they were happening ALL THE TIME TO EVERYONE AHHHH but I just don't have any experience with them.

No MATTER what Google is doing internally, whether it is to focus their development on OS X or "eat their own dog food" their public comments about the insecurity of Windows is factually and intellectually dishonest.

I don't care if they want to run PDP or CPM, but don't lecture people that they are moving away from Windows because of security concerns, when at the first time in YEARS, Windows is proving to be the most secure OS.

Google's internal servers and practices have more security concerns than Microsoft, and Google is the company that is supposed to 'do no evil' and purports to protect consumers?

Maybe they meant 'DO KNOW EVIL'.

As for the author, your comments to the readers destroyed your credibility. These forums are not troll grounds for you to be glib or obnoxious, shouldn't you focus on providing more information rather than 'smart' responses with no value?

thenetavenger said,
No MATTER what Google is doing internally, whether it is to focus their development on OS X or "eat their own dog food" their public comments about the insecurity of Windows is factually and intellectually dishonest.

Since when does a rumor count as a public comment by the company? There's been NO official word on this. And even if it were true, we don't have the whole story. Security may only be part of it, or even none of it.

Edited by MrA, Jun 2 2010, 5:43am :

MrA said,

Since when does a rumor count as a public comment by the company? There's been NO official word on this. And even if it were true, we don't have the whole story. Security may only be part of it, or even none of it.

They issued a report, have you not read any actual news?

sexypeperodri said,
Microsoft has low standards in the security area. I don't blame Google from switching to a more secure operating system.

In what way? Windows Vista/7 are quite secure, and they patch any vulnerabilities just as quickly as any other operating system producer if not faster.

sexypeperodri said,
Microsoft has low standards in the security area. I don't blame Google from switching to a more secure operating system.

Compared to...?

sexypeperodri said,
Microsoft has low standards in the security area. I don't blame Google from switching to a more secure operating system.

Now that is just flame-baiting! If you haven't had your head in the sand for the last few years, everything MS has done, post XP, has been more secure. True they haven't always done it in a friendly way, but they realized that all their products needed to be more secure. Win7 is definitely more secure than any of its predecessors.

Let's face it, IF (and i do stress IF) there was a totally secure OS, we'd all be using it. NO OS IS TOTALLY SECURE ... that is a fact and no puffing by any company will change that.

People here seem to be missing how different working like employees at Google do - with advertisers who sneak viruses and malware into ads, who constantly deal with supporting people who have viruses, and so many other factors - is from casually browsing the internet. It's fine to say you don't get viruses. That doesn't make it relevant in this situation.

Yup, they're ditching Windows all because of security......due to an attack by Chinese hackers.....through IE6 on Windows XP.....yeah

If you really believe Google is (allegedly) getting rid of Windows over security reasons, then I've got a bridge to sell you.....

They got attacked by a freaking SOCIAL ENGINEERING attack. You can have every firewall, the strongest encryptions and passwords, and the core of Linux and still fall to a social engineering attack.

cybertimber2008 said,
They got attacked by a freaking SOCIAL ENGINEERING attack. You can have every firewall, the strongest encryptions and passwords, and the core of Linux and still fall to a social engineering attack.

BRAINS == The Best Primary Anti-Malware. Even Zombies agree.

Benjamin Rubenstein said,
Wait, so is Google getting rid of Windows internally, or not?
That's the strong rumor. I don't know if it has been confirmed, but even Microsoft is responding to [u]this[/u] rumor.

Benjamin Rubenstein said,
Wait, so is Google getting rid of Windows internally, or not?
I don't really think they will get rid of it completely. Perhaps they leaked the rumors to make room for Chrome OS hype. I can't think of any big company without running at least some of their operations/processes with Windows.

Benjamin Rubenstein said,
Wait, so is Google getting rid of Windows internally, or not?

They're probably getting rid of Windows-only PCs, which considering how rare they are in the Googleplex probably isn't that big of a move for Google. Their ultimate plan is to probably switch almost all of their machines to some form of ChromeOS (eating their own dogfood, like any other company usually does).

markjensen said,
That's the strong rumor. I don't know if it has been confirmed, but even Microsoft is responding to [u]this[/u] rumor.

According to a tweet from a MS employee I follow, Google moving away from "Windows" Is actually defined as "Google moving away from Windows XP-as they are no longer licensed". I think the original story neglected some facts.

BS. Google isn't going to dump 95+% of the world's computer users.
It's pretty ****ing annoying when pointless bull**** by some ****ty blogger makes global news.

ahhell said,
BS. Google isn't going to dump 95+% of the world's computer users.
It's pretty ****ing annoying when pointless bull**** by some ****ty blogger makes global news.

I think you are misunderstanding... Google isn't shutting out Windows users, they are "possibly" getting rid of Windows in their internal enviornment/operations....

ahhell said,
BS. Google isn't going to dump 95+% of the world's computer users.
It's pretty ****ing annoying when pointless bull**** by some ****ty blogger makes global news.
Do you not read the articles?

Google is not dropping ANYONE.

They are just having all new computers come with OSX, Linux or ChromeOS (which is a Linux kernel).

No need to jump up and down swearing and cussing up a storm.

markjensen said,
Do you not read the articles?

Google is not dropping ANYONE.

They are just having all new computers come with OSX, Linux or ChromeOS (which is a Linux kernel).

No need to jump up and down swearing and cussing up a storm.

And that's internal too....

Owen Williams said,

And that's internal too....
Errrr, yeah. I was thinking "for new employee purchases" in my head, but it didn't seem to make it to my fingers. (sigh)

ahhell said,
BS. Google isn't going to dump 95+% of the world's computer users.
It's pretty ****ing annoying when pointless bull**** by some ****ty blogger makes global news.

Calm down...

ahhell said,
BS. Google isn't going to dump 95+% of the world's computer users.
It's pretty ****ing annoying when pointless bull**** by some ****ty blogger makes global news.

Iiiiiiiiidiot.

they just want to discredit Windows in favor of their Chrome OS and Linux distros they support, that's all. Windows is, indeed, getting safer, just install the updates and you will be fine.

robert_dll said,
they just want to discredit Windows in favor of their Chrome OS and Linux distros they support, that's all. Windows is, indeed, getting safer, just install the updates and you will be fine.

That and Chrome OS is launching. Eating your own dogfood, anyone?

Owen Williams said,

That and Chrome OS is launching. Eating your own dogfood, anyone?

Is there anyone here that actually wants to use ChromeOS? I sure as heck am not using a Google cloud based OS

Frylock86 said,

Is there anyone here that actually wants to use ChromeOS? I sure as heck am not using a Google cloud based OS


I don't care...

Frylock86 said,

Is there anyone here that actually wants to use ChromeOS? I sure as heck am not using a Google cloud based OS

Google isn't forcing you to use ChromeOS. The term "eating ones own dogfood" is about a company using their own products. It is actually a good way to get internal feedback and test the software out under a variety of situations that developers don't often think of.

Frylock86 said,

Is there anyone here that actually wants to use ChromeOS? I sure as heck am not using a Google cloud based OS

Ill try it, but ill never like it.

markjensen said,
Google isn't forcing you to use ChromeOS. The term "eating ones own dogfood" is about a company using their own products. It is actually a good way to get internal feedback and test the software out under a variety of situations that developers don't often think of.

I think Owen understood that--he was more referring to the fact that Google's move away from Windows was a move toward eating their own dogfood (i.e. using Chrome OS) and not particularly related to security issues as the FT asserted.

ascendant123 said,

I think Owen understood that--he was more referring to the fact that Google's move away from Windows was a move toward eating their own dogfood (i.e. using Chrome OS) and not particularly related to security issues as the FT asserted.

I know Owen understood that. Which is why I replied to Frylock86, not Owen.

markjensen said,
Google isn't forcing you to use ChromeOS. The term "eating ones own dogfood" is about a company using their own products. It is actually a good way to get internal feedback and test the software out under a variety of situations that developers don't often think of.

<3

It isn't Microsoft's fault, but right now there are just so many people focussing on blasting Windows-based exploits. All someone has to do is click on a legitimate-looking but malformed email attachment and they now have a silent trojan on their computer.

I'm pretty sure that such an email attachment was the beginning of the very high-profile "Google Hack" from a while back.

Like I said it isn't really Microsoft's fault directly, but right now the chances of clicking on the wrong email attachment are much lower on linux and OSX. That could change, but that's how it is right now.

Stetson said,
All someone has to do is click on a legitimate-looking but malformed email attachment and they now have a silent trojan on their computer.

In other words, Google shouldn't blame Windows because of their employees ignorance.

Edited by robert_dll, Jun 2 2010, 2:53am :

Aaron7pm said,

+1

+1
If you got a job at google, it should at least be expected from you not to open a mail attachment that promises you some nude pics...or enlargement..or money from a nigerian prince...

Working in the industry is a lot different than sitting at home, posting on a few forums and reading a few news sites.

zagor said,

+1
If you got a job at google, it should at least be expected from you not to open a mail attachment that promises you some nude pics...or enlargement..or money from a nigerian prince...

+1

zagor said,

+1
If you got a job at google, it should at least be expected from you not to open a mail attachment that promises you some nude pics...or enlargement..or money from a nigerian prince...

and not use IE6 or any other decade old browser without any patches installed !

thatguyandrew1992 said,
I never get viruses and spyware etc etc. It was Google's fault....Windows is very safe if you know how to protect yourself and browse safely.

+1 Indeed.

thatguyandrew1992 said,
I never get viruses and spyware etc etc. It was Google's fault....Windows is very safe if you know how to protect yourself and browse safely.

+1
Win7x64/IE8/Windows Firewall/MS security essentials.
Never got infected by any malwares~~~

Edited by Field Commander A9, Jun 2 2010, 2:05am :

thatguyandrew1992 said,
I never get viruses and spyware etc etc. It was Google's fault....Windows is very safe if you know how to protect yourself and browse safely.

Another +1 from me.

I never get infected by any viruses, spyware, malware, trojans, or any of the like. All it takes is a little common sense and a decent antivirus application, one which can be obtained at no cost to the user proves to be just fine (Microsoft Security Essentials).

thatguyandrew1992 said,
I never get viruses and spyware etc etc. It was Google's fault....Windows is very safe if you know how to protect yourself and browse safely.

To be fair I did get a virus once. It was 1996 I believe, a boot virus I got from a used shareware floppy disc. Plus that was on MS-DOS, so I've never had a Windows virus. Most people seem to get them through social engineering and not knowing what they're doing.

Edited by Bonfire, Jun 2 2010, 2:56am :

BoneyardBrew said,

Another +1 from me.

I never get infected by any viruses, spyware, malware, trojans, or any of the like. All it takes is a little common sense and a decent antivirus application, one which can be obtained at no cost to the user proves to be just fine (Microsoft Security Essentials).


or Norton Internet Security 2010, but MSE is free so why not use it?

thatguyandrew1992 said,
I never get viruses and spyware etc etc. It was Google's fault....Windows is very safe if you know how to protect yourself and browse safely.

ditto. now that I have malwarebytes. actually it's good to be on the ball and have curve balls thrown at you. Mac users tend to be way way too naive. Can't say much about Linux viruses although they do exist. But Google claiming it's a security issue is fairly stupid. Something else must be at work. I'd hoped Google would be more like Microsoft, but Apple? ick.

thatguyandrew1992 said,
I never get viruses and spyware etc etc. It was Google's fault....Windows is very safe if you know how to protect yourself and browse safely.

I'm in the same boat as you with Windows but that has NOTHING to do with Google getting hacked.


It was not like Google went browsing around the internet with an antivirus and ran into some spyware. It was the Chinese using an IE6/IE7 (maybe IE8 too?) exploit.

Edited by Trong, Jun 2 2010, 4:46am :

thatguyandrew1992 said,
I never get viruses and spyware etc etc. It was Google's fault....Windows is very safe if you know how to protect yourself and browse safely.

same, and it was funny that Google said it got infected because of an IE6 exploit.How even they could claim it was Microsoft fault.

thatguyandrew1992 said,
I never get viruses and spyware etc etc. It was Google's fault....Windows is very safe if you know how to protect yourself and browse safely.

Ditto +1

thatguyandrew1992 said,
I never get viruses and spyware etc etc. It was Google's fault....Windows is very safe if you know how to protect yourself and browse safely.

+1

seriously people need to learn, windows isn't more vulnerable or less secure, there is just a lot more viruses and the likes around and that is due to the popularity of windows, they earn money crating viruses, Trojans and so on, doing it for Linux or osx would earn them as much money...

thatguyandrew1992 said,
I never get viruses and spyware etc etc. It was Google's fault....Windows is very safe if you know how to protect yourself and browse safely.

+1 Windows 7 (default UAC) and Microsoft security essentials (MSE)

Leonick said,

+1

seriously people need to learn, windows isn't more vulnerable or less secure, there is just a lot more viruses and the likes around and that is due to the popularity of windows, they earn money crating viruses, Trojans and so on, doing it for Linux or osx would earn them as much money...

+10

Amen to that.

Leonick said,

+1

seriously people need to learn, windows isn't more vulnerable or less secure, there is just a lot more viruses and the likes around and that is due to the popularity of windows, they earn money crating viruses, Trojans and so on, doing it for Linux or osx would earn them as much money...


I'm not sure, I really doubt this, and it's very hard to verify that what you say is true.

I don't blame Windows security here though, but poorly coded Windows apps. The main issue being that they're still fairly often developed around the assumption that "people run as admins", while this was always a no-no in the *nix world, that is, also including OS X, since it's a *nix OS. So people click away UAC prompts without considering that this thing was, in fact, just a photo sharing tool. Why would it need admin rights? That's how a Mac or Linux user reacts. A Windows user doesn't think. Because he/she knows apps on Windows are usually **** when it comes to this. He clicks away and instantly get hit by a piggybacking trojan.

So this isn't about Windows per se, I think. It's about Windows software. And how Windows users have been desenitized to security threats.

thatguyandrew1992 said,
I never get viruses and spyware etc etc. It was Google's fault....Windows is very safe if you know how to protect yourself and browse safely.

+1

Indeed. Considering this is some moron at the Financial Times with no confirmation from any reputable party or even a tech site...ahem...I'm not sure why this has any traction.

vip said,
let the fun begin ...
I agree. This is the beginning of the OS battle. Google's sending out subliminal messages here.

excalpius said,
Indeed. Considering this is some moron at the Financial Times with no confirmation from any reputable party or even a tech site...ahem...I'm not sure why this has any traction.

your right. The guy is probably a liberal...

I believe it was Apple computers that were the first to fall at CanSecWest three years in a row. When one of the hackers was asked why he targeted the mac he responded:

From "Questions for Pwn2Own hacker Charlie Miller"
Why Safari? Why didn't you go after IE or Safari?

It's really simple. Safari on the Mac is easier to exploit. The things that Windows do to make it harder (for an exploit to work), Macs don't do. Hacking into Macs is so much easier. You don't have to jump through hoops and deal with all the anti-exploit mitigations you'd find in Windows.

It's more about the operating system than the (target) program. Firefox on Mac is pretty easy too. The underlying OS doesn't have anti-exploit stuff built into it.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/secu...-hacker-charlie-miller/2941

There may not be as many people attacking macs because of the low market share but it would seem to me that switching from Windows to OSX will just make it easier and not harder for professional attackers to break in.