shockz Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 People always try to block the windows versions when they come out. Even the courts attempted to block xp (or was it 98) when it was coming out. Vista will be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiveMasterT Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 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? 586353643[/snapback] because those lawyers sue when the problem is not getting resolved. if ford issues a recall, some lawyer isnt going to sue them... why would companies even bother issuing recalls? the same goes for ms. they are releasing updates and patches and that guy says that in the first post up there. MS is doing their part to fix their "defective" software and so why would you sue them? do you want them to stop fixing the software? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Dude's just off his rocker. Prevent Vista from shipping. How silly! Almost as bad as saying BOYCOTT IE 7! Wow, man. These folks is gettin nutty! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mufdvr3669 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 But you car does not ship with them knowing one door does not lock. Your cell phone does not ship with them knowing the 8 key does not work. It is one thing to have a product break, it is another to have one ship broken. That is his arguement. MS ships broken products.I know other venders do too, but Windows has been inherently flawed since 95 and nothing has been done to fix it. Every product since Win95 has shipping knowing there were security problems. GM does not ship cars with known engine problems. 586352213[/snapback] You can't compare cars to operating systems, nice try though. Name one operating system without bugs or that is perfect. Apple isn't even perfect even though they control their own hardware. Now just think about all the different applications and hardware that Microsoft has to deal with. You can kinda begin to see where all the problems arise, especially when you have d-bags trying to wreak havoc by creating viruses and spyware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mufdvr3669 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 As I said before, check qmail security guarantee. 586353802[/snapback] Wow, so you found 1 out of 1 million without any problems. Allright 99.999% of software has holes and problems, that better for you :whistle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted August 10, 2005 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2005 That guy is an idiot for even trying to do such a thing. He obviously knows nothing about programming and pc software. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samoa Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 I believe MS is wrong for even considering selling there Anti-spyware software to it's windows customers. It's not the cusumers fault the Windows has holes in it. MS needs to be held to some accoutablity for their code. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ichi Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Wow, so you found 1 out of 1 million without any problems. Allright 99.999% of software has holes and problems, that better for you :whistle: 586353929[/snapback] It shows that it can be done, doesn't it? Obviously a whole OS is a lot harder to keep (nearly) bug free, but all that "it's impossible to code software with no bugs" (security wise at least) is, so far, just not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Unlike Apple, Microsoft doesn't charge $129 for each point release of their software. :p XP ain't all bad. Been out for years and nobody has had to pay for updates yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mufdvr3669 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 I believe MS is wrong for even considering selling there Anti-spyware software to it's windows customers. It's not the cusumers fault the Windows has holes in it. MS needs to be held to some accoutablity for their code. 586353939[/snapback] Not MS's fault the customer's install all kinds of crap onto their computer without actually knowing what they are doing. I think they should give it free because of the vulnerabilities in their software but then again you should know what you are doing before you do things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drshdw Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 I believe MS is wrong for even considering selling there Anti-spyware software to it's windows customers. It's not the cusumers fault the Windows has holes in it. MS needs to be held to some accoutablity for their code. 586353939[/snapback] When Linux/OSX have 95% of the market, don't come whining, OMFG Linux and OSX are coming out with Anti-Spyware software too!! WTF They should of fixed it in their OS. :whistle: Also, did you even install SP2 for Windows XP? :pinch: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanneh Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 the guy mentioned in the article is just trying to gain some free press for his own personal gains hes a ****in idiot. to think that hes ****ed cos xp still recieves updates i meen seriously if this guy thinks its a bad thing he is teh Super Noob frankly any program that doesnt recieve updates anymore and requires internet access isnt getting close to my pc what this guy in the article is saying is just completely stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivand Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Let's ask him to form a group of programmer and make a 50 million code-lines software bug-free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Not MS's fault the customer's install all kinds of crap onto their computer without actually knowing what they are doing. I think they should give it free because of the vulnerabilities in their software but then again you should know what you are doing before you do things. I do think Microsoft would have been much smarter to lock down the Internet Zone in IE from the get go. If you go visit a site you want all the scripting and what not on, just add it to your Trusted Zone. :) I also think that there should be no scripting in Outlook Express and no ties in OE to IE at all, in fact. Then again, I'm not a fan of HTML emails, so maybe I'm just not being realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drshdw Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 I do think Microsoft would have been much smarter to lock down the Internet Zone in IE from the get go. If you go visit a site you want all the scripting and what not on, just add it to your Trusted Zone. :)I also think that there should be no scripting in Outlook Express and no ties in OE to IE at all, in fact. Then again, I'm not a fan of HTML emails, so maybe I'm just not being realistic. 586354019[/snapback] That wouldn't work, Average Joe and Jane would be like WTF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 That wouldn't work, Average Joe and Jane would be like WTF. They could have had Clippy the wonder Wizard guide 'em through the process! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanneh Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 (edited) reminds me of hillary clinton jumping on the GTA hater bandwagon the silly noodle edited by mod: don't try to get around the swear filter by creating letters with lines and stuff. Edited August 10, 2005 by blackice912 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGSPro Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 he obviously knows nothing about computers and is just using it as a move in his political chessboard. does he think any operating system out there goes without security vulnerabilities or bugs? its impossible with millions of lines of code. what a tool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiveMasterT Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 (edited) You can't compare cars to operating systems, nice try though.? Name one operating system without bugs or that is perfect.? Apple isn't even perfect even though they control their own hardware.? Now just think about all the different applications and hardware that Microsoft has to deal with.? You can kinda begin to see where all the problems arise, especially when you have d-bags trying to wreak havoc by creating viruses and spyware. 586353918[/snapback] um, my point exactly... the whole time here ive been defending microsoft (as much as i dont like them) on this issue, and yet people dont read my arguments and what im saying and they pick apart the details. swap out cars for wheelbarrows and you get the same comparison. Give me a break. You don't honestly believe that do you? 586354133[/snapback] yeah, i dont believe it either. it seems more like there was one or two bugs at release that 10,000, or 100,000, or quadruple-billion people knew about. Edited August 10, 2005 by jivemastert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted August 10, 2005 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2005 (edited) Holy crap, I have said this for years. I don't think he will get a guarantee, but I would like to see a "good faith" release where MS fixes all the known bugs. XP shipped with over 10,000 know bugs in it. 586352002[/snapback] Give me a break. You don't honestly believe that do you? Imagine if you bought a car with only a fraction of know defects, lets say there only 20 known defects and 2 doors that they know do not lock. Would you not want to sue?I know you sue for optimal and take a settlement, I vote for a "no know bugs" release. 586352002[/snapback] No no no... Imagine building 500 million cars. Some of them are never going to have problems, but a lot of them are. That's why you offer a warranty... so if someone has a problem within 3 or 5 or 10 years of buying it, you fix it for them. You also service your car don't you? You put oil in it I hope, that's an "update." Same goes for coolant, transmission fluid, tires, brake/streering fluid, etc. I could show you plenty of Windows XP systems that have never had a single issue. Likewise, plenty of systems DO have problems. Of course, it's not a perfect analogy... you can't issue a "patch" for every car you've sold. But then, you could have a recall... and not everyone is going to go to the dealership and get the work done. So if you're going to compare computers and cars, at least do it in a way that makes sense. Edited August 10, 2005 by threedaysdwn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted August 10, 2005 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2005 In my personal experience, There's also different kinds of "bugs" and "known issues"... The bug database for XP could very well contain things like: "The colors in the About Windows box look kinda crappy in high contrast mode" or they could be features: "Add tab-completion features to Run box." etc There probably even were a few known bugs. Pretty much all software has that, especially software on such a large scale. But you have to prioritize... will the bug affect 1% of people? If you're Windows, 1% is still millions of people, so that won't cut it. .1 percent? .01 percent? Some bugs are like that, so you push them to a service pack or update... because otherwise you'll never release the software. You don't think the Linux kernel developers have a list of things they're going to fix in this version, and another list of stuff to be fixed in the next minor release, the next major release, etc? It's not like they released 2.6 without knowing that more point releases were coming in the future. That's just how software works. Especially core system software like an OS with millions of users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michelonia Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 I agree in the fact that there is no perfect code, yet it seems that testing of the software could remain in house, last for years and a better product would result. The problem is keeping it secret and in house. I think of the poor guy with a dialup account that sits in front of his computer every month downloading the many MB of upgrades and pays for the traffic in addition to the rather high cost of the program. Then of course there is the additional cost of the anti this and anti that software to keep the OS running smooth. Would you not be angry if your suit had to go to the tailor monthly for required alterations just so you can continue using it and you had to pay for the sewing machine to get the job done? The tailor of course would be free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 If Microsoft actually CHARGED us for bug-fixes, I think I'd freak too. But they don't, so I guess that's why I'm not freakin' out. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted August 10, 2005 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2005 Would you not be ****ed if your suit had to go to the tailor monthly for required alterations just so you can continue using it and you had to pay for the sewing machine? The tailor of course would be free. 586354184[/snapback] Yeah but that suit only has to fit one person. The exact same suit isn't digitally copied, sent to 500 million people, and used all day everyday with on hundreds of millions of different people doing millions of different things in different ways. They don't have people constantly trying to tear holes in their suit and find ways to destroy it, abuse it, etc. See, I can play the analogy game too ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revvo Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Martin intends to ask Microsoft for an unconditional warranty that the operating system is free of bugs that could result in security vulnerabilities. Is this guy serious? Does such thing even exist throughout most Operating Systems? Even OS-X probably has some bugs that may result in security vulnerabilities that we may not be aware of.He probably went nuts at home with a bunch of Bonzi Buddies on his desktop pushing him to pursue such goals :wacko: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts