amrinders87 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 OMG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neostyle Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 A public interest lawyer who is also intending to run as a Republican in the 2006 Illinois gubernatorial race is taking his fight to Microsoft in hopes of preventing the company from releasing what he calls "bad code."Andy Martin of The Committee to Fight Microsoft on Tuesday announced his intentions to block Microsoft from releasing its Windows Vista operating system. Martin intends to ask Microsoft for an unconditional warranty that the operating system is free of bugs that could result in security vulnerabilities. "Bill Gates sells the public defective products, and then expects us to spend years being his guinea pigs, while he corrects the myriad of defects and vulnerabilities in his defective code. This is mass consumer fraud." Martin argued. "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." Windows 95 was a "disaster" and Windows 98 only created new vulnerabilities, Martin said. He argues that no company in America gets away with selling a "defective" product the way Microsoft does. Also called into question were Microsoft's claims that Windows XP could run on 128MB of RAM, encouraging the sale of underpowered computers by its partners. "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. BetaNews had not received a response for comment on Martin's allegations as of press time. Martin is a public interest lawyer from Chicago who has worked on several consumer rights cases, including antitrust lawsuits dealing with network television affliation agreements in 1969 and his own antitrust effort against Microsoft in 1998. He announced an exploratory committee to run for the Republican gubernatorial nomination in Illinois in January of this year. Source: BetaNews 586351956[/snapback] ahahahahhaha ........... :rofl: :p great stuff .... :woot: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightRider Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 i think he is a overly-paranoid freak against MS. I understand that windows has sucked in the past but vista is just amazing and nowhere near the level of being defective. even the early LH builds have been amazing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9LaD1aT0R Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 so basically hes saying any software that gets regularly updated is a bad product written with bad code...heheeh this is so funny :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 His campaign bumpersticker should be OMGMSFTBOBISTEHEVILZ What a dweeb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZKABAZ Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Well... If Windows was a Car... and the Car had as many bugs as XP... i.e. locks not working, bonnet falling off etc... I'd be ****ing angry. In fact, software is the only product that I can think of that people buy knowing that it will need lots of patching and have heaps of bugs. So... In theory I support his campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattimeo Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Wow...I am just amazed that some people are stupid enough to agree with this guy. People just fail to take the entire picture in and limit themselves to just a few variables....the ones that only affect themselves. And that he is a Republican...that might be the first time I vote Democrat. Heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Septimius Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 figures hes a republican...douchebag 586353457[/snapback] I've seen way too many comments of this type, folks. His political affiliation is beside the point. Let's at least have enough common sense to realize this, rather than pointing it out like it's somehow the entire reason for the lawsuit and human stupidity in general. :no: Yeah, the guy's an idiot, but it doesn't require a political label to make that distinction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZKABAZ Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 (edited) Wow...I am just amazed that some people are stupid enough to agree with this guy. People just fail to take the entire picture in and limit themselves to just a few variables....the ones that only affect themselves.And that he is a Republican...that might be the first time I vote Democrat. Heh. Wow I am just amazed at what an arse you are. If I bought a car that was as buggy as XP I'd sue the **** out of the car manufacturer and I'm sure you would too! At this current point of reality, perfect software just isn't going to happen hence "In theory I support his campaign." I don't support all he is saying just the basic idea of a problem free product. Perhaps if you had better interpretive skills and weren?t so eager to increase the size of your e-penis you would be able to understand where I am coming from. Edited August 10, 2005 by AZKABAZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megamanXplosion Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Like it has been repeated numerous times, there is no such thing as a bug-free software application. Expecting Microsoft to find and fix bugs that were not reported by the thousands of beta testers is a pipe dream at best. I do believe Windows XP was released with a lot of bugs still in their bug tracker though (otherwise they wouldn't have incorporated more rigorous testing and fixing in the development process used for Windows 2003 Server and Windows Vista.) Releasing a version of Windows with known bugs, that negatively effect the operation of the operating system, should not be encouraged or allowed - in my honest opinion. Microsoft appears to feel the same way now. The new development process was used for Windows 2003 Server and it proved to be very successful in improving quality and security. The new development process was so successful they decided to adopt it for all future versions of Windows, consumer editions too. Windows Vista will not ship unless it has 0 active, real, bugs in their bug tracker. In light of these facts, it is only logical to assume the lawsuit will end soon because he will feel like a moron. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panacik Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Talking about cars and other consumer products which are faulty is a completely different thing. Talking about software which is faulty falls under a completely different catagory. You can buy a car which has been prooven as safe and that will stop theives from taking it, yet as much as there are good car manafacturers there are good theives. There will always be a way to steal a car. The same applies to software of any type. You can make software which is "un hackable", but hackers (the car theives) will always find a way in. If this guy is truly going ahead with this, then he will be taking all other software manafacturers to court also. No software is unbreakable and free of bugs. It just depends on how many people target that software. This guy really stands no chance at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Whilst I'm firmly on the side that this guy is a complete fool, especially when expecting something as complex as an OS to completely bug free, if you take his comments and apply them to the entire software industry as a whole, he DOES have a point too. I work in the software industry myself and have observed this even at my company. There seems to be a prevalent attitude these days towards getting the product out the door as quickly as possible and patch it later, once you've made some of your investment back. This is a pretty poor attitude as it's the consumed who has to deal with the faulty software until the developers can get around to fixing it. It applies to OS's, application software, and games. Look back over the years and you'll see what I mean. There's been a gradual increase in the amount of post-release patching made to all kinds of software. You can argue that each new generation of software is more complex that the last, and you'd be right. But it also means that current testing procedures are less rigorous that previous procedures. In most cases, these attitudes are being driven by the bottom line, profit, and the willingness of the public to put up with bugs and accept patches later. Maybe if the buying public refused to buy software with known problems at release time, we wouldn't have this problem? Anyway, trying to sue a company for doing something that ALL software companies has slid into doing isn't going to work. What is needed is an attitude readjustment in the entire industry. One that says to stop listening to the accountants and start listening to the consumer intead; only release a product when it 100% complete, instead of 80%... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigapixels Veteran Posted August 10, 2005 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2005 Alright, I do agree that Windows does contain quite a few bugs, but I don't think it should be expected that Vista be released "bug-free." It's impossible to do such a thing. I hope that MS can lower the amount of bugs contained in Windows to a minimum, but to be bug-free is not in the nature of software development. Any piece of software I've ever tried has needed bug fixes after release, and anybody will find that normal. It's obvious that this guy does not understand software and the software development process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted August 10, 2005 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2005 Wow I am just amazed at what an arse you are. If I bought a car that was as buggy as XP I'd sue the **** out of the car manufacturer and I'm sure you would too! At this current point of reality, perfect software just isn't going to happen hence "In theory I support his campaign." I don't support all he is saying just the basic idea of a problem free product. Perhaps if you had better interpretive skills and weren?t so eager to increase the size of your e-penis you would be able to understand where I am coming from. 586354339[/snapback] Please see my earlier response to this ridiculous comparison here: https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?show...ost&p=586354133 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted August 10, 2005 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2005 There seems to be a prevalent attitude these days towards getting the product out the door as quickly as possible and patch it later, once you've made some of your investment back. I can tell you that, from what I've seen, this is not the motivation at Microsoft. What you suggest makes sense for start-ups designing their first product... they need revenue. Microsoft, on the other hand, is less concerned with the short-term. It seems to me that the driving force behind getting products out the door is: 1) Getting great new features to users in a timely fashion. 2) Competition. Software developers, at least the ones I work with, love shipping great new features to their users. The driving force for us is making our product better and more useful. If you had a choice between shipping a great new feature that 70% will love (and the rest won't notice) meanwhile converting new users to your product, or tracking down one possible bug that affects a handful of people in obscure circumstances... which would you do? As for releasing perfect software... it's not like we don't try. If someone else could do it better they would. But everyone that has tried writing software has found the same thing: It's never going to be perfect. It isn't a physical thing that you can say "Yes, given the laws of physics, this mechanism will always work. This material here is indestructible. The product works now in a vacuum and always will work once you buy it." Instead software is more like an entity. It grows, evovles, adapts to new environments. Sometimes it falls down. Sometimes it gets beat up or mugged. So you try to make it as smart of an entity as you can, and protect it to the best of your ability. But in the end, once it leaves the vacuum, you can't possibly predict what's going to happen to it "out there." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farstrider Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 If I may add my 5 cents I would agree that companies Like Microsoft should I feel, be a little more circumspect when delivering a product like Windows XP or in the case of "Vista" when it becomes available to the public! In countries other than the US this software costs an arm and a leg and I do agree that they should be held a little more responsible for their product, as you never own it, you just own the licence to use it! The software is never yours to change or do with it what you want! So yes, they must be more responsible! :whistle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mouldy Punk 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. Well, that's stupid. Nothing contains no potential security holes. I think that English guy who hacked the US military computers or what ever he did proved that. That even military grade security isn't hack proof. It has security holes 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. I doubt that Microsoft would release buggy software on purpose - then release fixes for it anyway. More likely: They release software (that they admit will have some bugs because of trying to reach time limits) and fix the bugs afterwards when they become known. Eg, when hackers start comprimising systems. Windows 95 was a "disaster" and Windows 98 only created new vulnerabilities, Martin said. He argues that no company in America gets away with selling a "defective" product the way Microsoft does. Win 95 was a disaster? Who are these people? Win 95 was my favourite OS. I was young at the time and I just couldn't get my head around Win 3.1. Windows 95 was a huge leap for computer operating systems. I can't really remember it security wise-but it probably followed the same pattern as all other windows' OSs: 1. Initial release 2. Security fixes - after people find them 3. Service pack to sort out alot of security problems - perhaps add a feature 4. Patch any security holes in any new features they just added or holes they didn't previously know of. Also called into question were Microsoft's claims that Windows XP could run on 128MB of RAM Are they trying to say MS were lying? Win XP could run on 128mb of RAM. Not as well as it would in 256 - naturally. But it still ran. MS didn't make any false claims. I'll be a witness to that. I installed XP on a machine with only 128mb of RAM. Martin is a public interest lawyer from Chicago who has worked on several consumer rights cases, including antitrust lawsuits dealing with network television affliation agreements in 1969 and his own antitrust effort against Microsoft in 1998. Martin sounds like a public attention lawyer to me who does not know of which he speaks. Until Martin makes something better, 100% bug free, totally secure, working on minimum requirements (still not sure how that was a problem): Sit down and shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megamanXplosion Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Are they trying to say MS were lying? Win XP could run on 128mb of RAM. Not as well as it would in 256 - naturally. But it still ran. MS didn't make any false claims. I'll be a witness to that. I installed XP on a machine with only 128mb of RAM. I'll be a witness to that as well. My parents computer is an old HP computer with an ~800mhz Pentium and 96mb of PC-133 (PC-100?) RAM and Windows XP runs fine on it WITH the visual styles and cleartype fonts :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chlorpromazine Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 This lawyer doesn't have a clue about coding and developing an OS, that's for sure. By the way: it would be really better is MS relases his next OS with much more less 'known bugs' :happy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mufdvr3669 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 (edited) Well... If Windows was a Car... and the Car had as many bugs as XP... i.e. locks not working, bonnet falling off etc... I'd be ****ing angry. In fact, software is the only product that I can think of that people buy knowing that it will need lots of patching and have heaps of bugs. So... In theory I support his campaign. 586354271[/snapback] Ok since we're playing the analogy game. Imagine you have a car, you don't lock the doors to the car, someone steal it. Is it the car companies fault cause you don't know how to secure your car??? NO. Another car analogy, let's say I want to soup up my car, so I put a performance chip in there. The engine blows up, is it the car companies fault I didn't know what the hell I was installing? Anyway, this car analogy stuff is ridiculous since you can't really compare the two. You know what you do if you don't like a specific car, buy another one. Kinda like what you can do with operating systems. Nobody forced anybody to buy Windows. Edited August 10, 2005 by mufdvr3669 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ichi Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Nobody forced anybody to buy Windows. 586355751[/snapback] Unless you buy a laptop or a computer from dell (or similar OEM). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Unless you buy a laptop or a computer from dell (or similar OEM). 586356004[/snapback] That's a choice you make too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 I bet the foo was browsing porn sites and got himself some virus that deleted his precious porn collection. So now he is ****ed at MS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tronmaster Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Once again we have politicians who are doing things for their own benefit and not the public. If you have a complaint with "bad code" from MS, you should see the entire computer software industry. While your at it, why don't you check Hollywood and their "bad movies" and the music industry for their "bad music". Ugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slimy Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 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. 586353963[/snapback] i remember gmail having a security problem. it was in bpn too. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts