pax13 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Well actually the car comparison can have an analogy, you also have car hacker, they find a way to open your door and steal your car, because the door protection was flawed, no car manufacturer gets sued for that, unless "maybe" if it's proved to be a really badly designed system & shipped knowingly!. With an os it's even nearly impossible. You can argue a case for a better security & patching system. trying to put some kind or liability on the software developer, but still you will lose, many things are not even properly bugs, because they do not influence the normal operation of the system, many are only possible to be maliciously exployted, & that even in the best hardware is possible to happen. I can just see cisco trembling in fera of being this guys next target for not being 100% safe. lolol Now if he can prove microsoft intentionally left unpatched situations without telling anyone & covering it, & that caused major problems is a different view of the subject, & more likely to be taken to courts seriously. ( cisco (blink) apple ( cough ) ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SweWiLLiE Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Well, I could imagine Vista having 40 bugs... 586352964[/snapback] The most stupid quote this week goes to.... ShadowPHP. Congrats. I will haunt you with those words when vista is out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MulletRobZ Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 As much as I dislike Micros*it, that is the lamest excuse ever for blocking Vista as there are bugs in virtually every software available! Even Linux has a few bugs concerning user-friendliness and the odd program error, although they aren't as severe as the bugs in Windows. As for Mac, I'll remain impartial until I buy an Apple iBook around Christmas time to decide, but I'm pretty sure there are even a few bugs in Mac OS X 10.4 as well, even though they may be minimal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pax13 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 (edited) As much as I dislike Micros*it, that is the lamest excuse ever for blocking Vista as there are bugs in virtually every software available!? Even Linux has a few bugs concerning user-friendliness and the odd program error, although they aren't as severe as the bugs in Windows.? As for Mac, I'll remain impartial until I buy an Apple iBook around Christmas time to decide, but I'm pretty sure there are even a few bugs in Mac OS X 10.4 as well, even though they may be minimal. 586353382[/snapback] Few bugs is quite a laugh! it was patched only a couple of days after release because of critical security problems, & is still nowadays constantly plagued with networking problems! wich appled said to try to iron out for leopard! Also it's a much more closed system than windows, running mainly on proprietary hardware wich is also quite know to have several callback over the years, particularly iBooks & batteries! *nix is quite plagued as well, also it's less common the very critical ones because of the way the kernel is designed, being closed, also any developer in the community can fix the bugs & upload them for verification, the beauty of open source. The linux people also generally don't shot at the seven winds at every bug they found, otherwise there would be raining linux bug reports everywhere. The closed kernel also makes it having to update the kernel to add major features & recompile much software & drivers for it as well! Nothing is perfect, & microsoft is a living embodiement of it, but as actually believe they try their best in an economical balanced way to repair it as quickly as possible, otherwise people would eventually ditch it. Still I reckon He should sue them not for the os but for ie, it's got so many known bugs for years :woot:t: .:wacko:o: Edited August 10, 2005 by pax13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Septimius Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 ....okay. And HOW many other software companies sell products with "bug fixes" or "updates"? Hundreds? Thousands? Hundreds of thousands? He's fighting upstream with that argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geo Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 I thought being a lawyer required some form of intelligence... this guy seems to not show that at all. Bill Gates should offer him to do his job for a day, might be a good reality check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betasp Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Bugs aside. Microsoft has the right to release software and you have the right not to buy it. Actually you cannot expect to release a product that costs companies hundreds of millions of dollars in damages because of bugs and expect to have no liability. This is what the lawyer is saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paustin Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 figures hes a republican...douchebag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erftek Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lav-chan Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 "It is unacceptable corporate behavior. Over four years after Windows XP was released I still receive regular 'updates' and 'bug fixes,' which reflect a product that was originally scandalously defective." 586351956[/snapback] MAN I STILL GET UPDATES WHAT IS THIS CRAP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mADneSs Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 "The Committee to Fight Microsoft is launching a legal action effort to bar such practice, in advance, for Windows Vista. Bill Gates, you are on notice," Martin said. Hrrmmm. CFM = "The Committee to Fight Microsoft", eh ...? CFM = "Clueless F'ing Morons" is perhaps a bit more accurate. Ah, well. As the saying goes, "There's no such thing as bad publicity." Lack of ethics, ulterior motives and shameless self-promotion are an altogether different story, however. Bleh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jak0bk Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Oh good <insert your deity name here>. Just another lawyer trying to make a buck and get someone to look his way. EDIT: Fixed my political correctness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drshdw Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Actually you cannot expect to release a product that costs companies hundreds of millions of dollars in damages because of bugs and expect to have no liability. This is what the lawyer is saying. 586353442[/snapback] What bugs do millions of dollars in damages? If they had that much on the line, they wouldn't be using a $200 OS. Go buy a HP Integrity NonStop Server. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betasp Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Does anyone disagree the product is defective? Can someone explain why a sfotware company should be different than every other company? Can anyone else cite a non-software company that can release a defective product with no liability? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slimy Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Can someone explain why a sfotware company should be different than every other company?Can anyone else cite a non-software company that can release a defective product with no liability? 586353498[/snapback] because there are many more variables. updates are released. people can still choose whether or not to buy it. look at junk food, it's bad for you. it shouldn't be allowed to be out there. it is. and it's selling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiveMasterT Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Does anyone disagree the product is defective?Can someone explain why a sfotware company should be different than every other company? Can anyone else cite a non-software company that can release a defective product with no liability? 586353498[/snapback] you are missing the point. ugh, no one reads what i say in this thread. all products that are released may have bugs that are discovered as they are coming off the assembly line. a company then has to sit down and evaluate the cost of the different methods of fixing the problem... a car company that discovers the windshield wiper motor fails prematurely on a certain brand of car is not going to have 10,000 cars shipped back to the factory to have it fixed. they are going to have it handled through dealer recalls, which you get a notice about and you have the option of going in for the free recall work. likewise with a peice of software... if 100,000 cds come off the line and it is discovered that there is a bug in a certain thing they could destroy all of the cds and create a new installer with the fixed code. but they wont. its a waste of money. then they will sit down, write the patch, and as soon as you connect to the internet then you will see the notice for the update and bam! it's fixed. ALL companies are held liable for bugs in their products, no matter when they are discovered. it is up to the creator of the product to figure out how to fix that bug, be it a product replacement, or a fix. i dont see how i can make this any clearer. MS, like all companies is doing this. its what they are required to do. disagreeing with this is just like arguing for the sake of arguing. if you dont like the way these types of things are handled by microsoft, mitsubishi, fischer price, hitachi, etc etc. then make your own stuff because if you dont then you will never be happy. humans are not perfect, and neither is nothing they create. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drshdw Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Does anyone disagree the product is defective?Can someone explain why a sfotware company should be different than every other company? Can anyone else cite a non-software company that can release a defective product with no liability? 586353498[/snapback] Cigarette companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Jean Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 First of all, I only read the first couple pages of the thread, so my apologies if I missed something. And secondly, read the ENTIRE thing if you are going to start. Alright..I read a certain analagy comparing how a car cannot be shipped defective therefor, why should software by allowed to be sold defective? Now, I give you credits for that analagy, but you cannot compare an operating system to an automobile. It is IMPOSSIBLE to make an operating system bug free, and that goes for ANY software. I do not mean NEARLY impossible, I mean IMPOSSIBLE. You can fix every bug that is found as it comes to your attention. But you can not assure that your program will be compatible with every peice of hardware in a computer, and every peice of software that could possibly conflict with it. But the real issue isnt the bugs for an Operating System as it is for software. Its the EXPLOITS. You can not tell me that your automobile has HUNDREDS of people that spend hours exploiting your car now can you? That is the difference. It isnt that XP comes with bugs (Which I am not saying that it does, I GAURENTEE you that it does!) its the fact that people exploit it...they MAKE bugs. If your car came with two doors that worked, and somebody beat one off with a sledgehammer, you wouldnt call it a defect. And you could also put your car in a garage...but someone could still get in the garage and beat a door off. And then you could also put up gun turrets but somebody could get passed those! It is impossible to prevent a OS from being exploited, just as it is to prevent a car. The thing is...people dont spend all day trying to sledgehammer peoples automobiles like that do for windows. Isnt it enough that Windows provides patches to fix exploits as they are exploited? Im sorry, but anyone who is for this law suite OBVIOUSLY has never written a program. If this lawyer wins, then EVERY peice of software should have the same case held against it. - Norma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betasp Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 ALL companies are held liable for bugs in their products, no matter when they are discovered. it is up to the creator of the product to figure out how to fix that bug, be it a product replacement, or a fix. You are correect, and it is up to the lawyers to sue. Car recalls spawn consumer law suits (see dodge ball joints) and bad toys spawn lawsuits. Now, bad software is spawning lawsuits. What is the difference? Why should the standards be different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ichi Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 its the fact that people exploit it...they MAKE bugs. 586353599[/snapback] Bugs are there no matter if people make exploits for them or not. Eg. copying data to memory without checking it's length is a bug, no matter if someone writes an exploit for it or not. You cannot rely on the data being correct, let alone the intentions of the one feeding it. It is IMPOSSIBLE to make an operating system bug free, and that goes for ANY software. Agreed (to some extent, see below *), but releasing code depite of bugs to meet deadlines and then releasing patches afterwards is becoming a trend that (IMO) should be stopped (not talking just about MS here, most software developers do this nowadays). Back in the day you didn't see patches being released for games, nor any need for them anyway. To me that shows that software design hasn't evolved as fast as the coding part. *try finding a bug in qmail. You'll earn $500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Jean Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 True, not everything is an exploit. But if I leave bugs in my code when its only about 1,000 lines long...How can you expect Microsoft to remove ALL the bugs from millions of lines? Not to mention it has millions of people to find those bugs. And as for software not getting more advanced...It is and thats the problem. The more advanced software gets the more problems will develop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hangin67 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 What makes people think they can tell microsoft what kind of products to sell? Do these people think they own microsoft? If they want to release a defective product its there choice. If its junk and dont work dont buy it. They own the program, nobody else does. If you dont like the taste of doritos, go buy a can of pringles! Microsoft does not have to patch, update, fix, repair or do anything if they dont want to. They might not sell anymore products but its there choice. This retarded old man, and alot of other people, have been wining and complaining for years about microsofts products, yet they still use them everyday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ichi Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 And as for software not getting more advanced...It is and thats the problem. The more advanced software gets the more problems will develop. 586353706[/snapback] Software does get more advanced, it's the design process what lags behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devyant Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Perfect software? Never! Not when there's still people wanting to circumvent security measures, break them for the sake of monetary gains or personal satisfaction. This war will go on forever, and never end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ichi Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Perfect software? Never! Not when there's still people wanting to circumvent security measures, break them for the sake of monetary gains or personal satisfaction. This war will go on forever, and never end. 586353791[/snapback] As I said before, check qmail security guarantee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts