angrynorth

I just noticed this on the Microsoft homepage and it speaks volumes about the quality, security and general state of their operating systems.



There are plenty of alternatives out there now, Linux, Unix, Mac OSX even bloody Lindows.

Take a look at this forum and people are having sooo many problems with Windows.

Why are people sticking with something that is continually breaking and causing havoc?

Don't give me that jibber-jabber about there being more software for Windows either. The only extra software there is is generally nasty shareware programes that are badly written and only contribute to the unstableness of the machine.

(The lack of 3D Max on any other platform is noted, but there are alternatives to that too)

Exchange 2003 Disclaimer

XP Pro and changing PC config?

Is this a Java problem??

Computer keeps rebooting ????

PC is playing up and changing .exe files

xp problem

New Laptop / Projector setup

"Socket not found" WTF ??

Markus

Lindows? don't you mean Lindash?

People use windows as it's seen as the 'standard' and due to it's dominance, it's hard to get away from it.

Having said that, a few large corporations are considering a move to macintosh due to the current spanking they've had with Blaster and Mydoom. And I don't blame them. I manage network of 10 macs (inc 1 mac server) and 5 PC's (three of them W2K servers) the macs, I hardly have problems with, any probs I have will be due to bugs we're working out in our software, or something silly I have done to mess around with the OS.

The PC's on the other hand, they just seem to screw up, and it's not like they are being pushed to extremes, it's crazy. I used to do PC support for friends but gave it up as it's too much hassle, took way to much time to fix things, plus was not being paid for it. I do know a fair bit about PC's and how they work, but I seriously would not like to support them, and we're looking at putting out one of our products for Windows, and I've commented that I do not wish to support it, as most of the problems will NOT be our product but the OS.

One does partially wish for Mac OS X for Intel, it'll never happen though

angrynorth

Thats the annoying thing though, if someone was continuously hitting you in the head with a large heavy cod, would you try to avoid it and move on to a more friendly person? Or do people really like pain?

If your delivery driver was regularly breaking stuff, would you fire him or keep him because you were used to him?

As if I need further ammunition, take a look at this latest Windows problem.

I despair

GaryK

an,

Yes a good question and one I am seriously asking myself! Having recently bought a powerbook Im sold on OS X. I do some dev. work and for that I will keep a Win32 box because thats what I mainly target and the IDE I use kicks any other regardless of platform. Aside from that there isnt nothing I cant do on Mac OS X and the two main machines in the office are shortly going in favour of 17/20" imacs.

The thing that is pi$$ing me off is the virus situation, myself and my colleague get between 3-10 emails *a day* that contain viruses, sure our AV software blocks them but it is still annoying, as I get popup dialog windows and I cant see the situation improving its just going to get worse!

Im with you all the way! OS X = hip....hip....hooray Win32 = yah boo sucks!

Gary

chiark

Windows, despite not being perfect, makes it easy for any idiot to use a PC. Unfortunately, this means that any idiot uses a PC. The same idiot will open executable files when mailed to them.

The same idiot, if running Linux, would merely log in as Root at every opportunity then run attachments emailed to them, however the attachments would run as super user. The exploits would be just as bad as anything on Windows.

At the moment, the application support on Linux just isn't what people expect. This isn't just "nasty shareware", and I'm quite stunned that you could think that it was!

For example, show me Microsoft Office on Linux or Photoshop CS on Linux, to name but two productivity packages that are well known, that work without messing around and effectively installing Windows within Linux.

Take a different office suite, add Firefox and a decent mail client, then add choice applications such as the Gimp and you've got a hell of a system. However, Joe Public is going to have to invest time and effort to move to that OS, learn its paradigms, and then face interoperability issues when they want to speak to the rest of the world.

The fact is that Windows is still the easiest choice, which is why the majority of people use it. And it isn't all that bad either.

IMHO, a revolution is coming as more and more people realise that a) MS Software is buggy and b) proprietary closed source software costs a hell of a lot of money. I do know that a lot of people are waiting on the SCO nonsense to settle before committing, too.

There is at least choice. Just because someone makes a different choice to you doesn't necessarily mean that you or they are wrong.

ozzy

But Nick, the world is full of Idiots. If the world was run on Linux or Mac OS, it would still have to be user-friendly for any idiot to use. They would still open attachments and e-mails without knowing the source.

Developers of viruses will exploit any dominent system, whether it's Unix, Linux, Mac OS, Windows, etc..

Nothing is bullet-proof.

I just wish these software companies would give us a decent product instead of playing on the fact that most IT folk want the newest version (regardless of any business/user benefits). Seems the focus is all smoke and mirrors for some MS products these days.

Stefan

class_A

Flamage suprisingly low around here

For me, it started with Windows 95. Like it or not, Windows 95 was a good product and didn't have the associated premium hardware cost that Macs at the time did. It provided many of the benefits of the Mac with the ability to bring your own kit to the party. The success of Windows 95 effectively locked many people into Windows for years.

It's only very recently that the big gun support for Linux (IBM et al) and the reinvention of Apple (Mac OS X) that people are having the confidence to look elsewhere.

Roland_STI

Because knowledge of the other products is minimal. Support is minimal. And for gamers, games are minimal

Dont say there is support etc, to the advanced user yes, but not your average joe.

ChrisB

It only breaks for some

My W2000 Pro dual-CPU which is my desktop at work is on it's original install of W2000 and that was done in June 2000. I get 30 to 40 days uptime between reboots.

I'd disagree that Sober.D is a Windows problem (which I take to mine MS's fault). It targets users of the Windows platform, most of whom are just too stupid not to open strange attachments. Windows has brought computing to the masses and a lot of the masses aren't that clued up unfortunately...

boxst

Hello

I have worked with computers for a long time, and Windows just makes life easy. I remember having to mess about with autoexec.bat to get an extra 2K of upper memory to get some application to work. No thank you. Windows changed all of that. I can write a document in Word, a presentation in Powerpoint and most people in the world can read / see it. I can plug in some bizarre device and it will most likely work without me having to do very much.

Linux looks interesting. And certainly better for webserver / application server type stuff. But I really don't want to mess about so much to get a device to work and scratch around trying to find a piece of software.

Steve.

angrynorth

OK as a Mac user I am going to reply to you with cases of what would happen on a Mac.

If someone sent you a malicious AppleScript (similar to VB script) in an email, you chose to open it. It would open (not run) Apple script editor. 99% of people would see all the code and **** themselves and close the editor. I can't see many people clicking "RUN" ? If it was sent as a application package OSX tells you "Do not open this file, as its whereabouts cannot be determined" Would you open it? Even if you were an idiot?

If you know your way around Linux, even as a novice, you wouldn't be logging in as root and running code.

I don't get what you mean here, I said that many of the programmes not available of alternative platforms are shareware/freeware.

Linux is not the only alternative option. Mac OSX has 10,000 applications, the whole Adobe Creative Suite and Office (which is better on a Mac ) are available.

Users are already struggling to understand Microsofts paradigms and learning the OS. Changing OS wouldn't cause a massive problem.

Its the easiest choice but bloody hell, people say Mac users are blinkered. Windows users aren't even prepared to evaluate the alternatives properly.

This I agree with

I wasn't saying I was right or wrong, merely questioning why people still use something which is plainly annoying them. Why do people have massive problems with their computers, then just shrug their shoulders and think there is nothing they can do about it. This is how MS became complacent and let their products slip.

BTW I was very, very anti Mac until March last year when I quite rightly had enough of Windows breaking all the time and switched to Mac OS X. I had used OS 9 and hated it. But OSX is a revelation.

angrynorth

You really should try a Mac. All of that would work.

boxst

AngryNorth:

I used to work for Apple a long time ago writing the Operating System.

I like Macs, but they just do not have the software support.

Steve.

angrynorth

Which software?

I use on a regular basis
Potatoshop
Illustrator
Flash
Office (Inc, MSN, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Entourage, MSN Messenger)
Maya
IE (not so much anymore with FireFox about)
That covers virtually anything that your average joey wants.

dsmith

virtually every reason people like Macs would be eroded if everyone used them.

The more people who use a platform, the more effort virus scum will go to find ways in. The more people who use it - the more software will appear. This will get developed quicker and be buggier and bloatier like windows.

If I used a Mac and Liked it, I'd tell everyone I could find to stick with windows in a desperate attempt to kepp muppet users and those who like to exploit them away.

Deano

angrynorth

Not necessary true, security through obscurity is not a valid excuse.

Also UNIX (which the Mac is built upon) is much more secure than Windows could ever be. This is why the same problems wouldn't occur.

class_A

The Mac was meant to be the computer "for the rest of us". As Chris says, look how it's turned out.

IBM didn't get MS-DOS exclusivity, Compaq engineered a PC compatible BIOS and the rest is history. Competition between manufacturers and the availability of a standard OS gave MS momentum and a hardware price advantage, even if the software product was inferior.

Price always wins out, especially in the enterprise.

Apple won the print/2D graphics business as PageMaker, the LaserWriter and the Mac were cheaper than anything out there. Together, they brought publishing to the desktop.

When Windows 95 hit, the combination of low hardware pricing, an OS that was "good enough" and the self destrictive nature of Apple meant that the war was essentially over.

Now everyone has a PC; parents, grandparents even. Computing has left the enthusiast niche and gone mainstream. Just as not all car drivers are mechanics, not all PC users are able to perform maintenance and diagnostics of their computers. People need educating about virii, firewalls etc. but this isn't provided in schools or IT courses.

Even if MS cure their security shortcomings, how do we deal with users blindly clicking attachments or using spyware?

CTR

Why do I use Windows, or even Microsoft software for that matter, cause I like it, and it works! Software which I use(I work in Computers) which contains most problems is hardly ever Microsoft stuff. I cannot remember the last time my OS crashed. But then I dont download a load of **** off the internet and install it(You do know if they are not written correctly they will **** up your OS causing it to fall over, often). As for worms and viruses, get a firewall, the software ones are free, that covers some of it. As for viruses, I ran Win2K with a software firewall for over a year, and did not get one virus or any spyware on my PC. I have recently brought some virus scanning software just in case(and checked)! And your point about people not being stupid enough to run any old attachment they get in the mail, they will!

Now Apples, Linux, and all that other **** really sucks

I also reckon if worm and virus makes spent as much time writing worms and viruses for any other OS, there would be just as many, but people hate Microsoft so target them.

chiark

So, basically, if I read this right, you're suggesting we all go out and buy a Mac to run Mac OS X?

You're on commission aren't you ? Mac OS X is so much better than the classic OS that it really does deserve to do well. I'd love to see it released for the x86 platform.

Without quoting your every response...

If virus writers obfuscate code, people would click the "run" button to see what it does even if they don't know what it does or who it is from. This is a social problem that software cannot fix alone.

I know noobs who do run everything on Linux as root. They thing they're being clever, as they have to ignore their window manager's warning... Honestly, we do *not* want this type of idiot migrating to Linux, as the virus writers will follow and with the services that these people will run on their machines, we'd be in a worse situation than with Windows.

Mac OS X requires closed, proprietary hardware rather than these commodity PCs that can be bought for pennies nowadays. In reality, that isn't an option for many people who have already invested in hardware.

You say that people can't be bothered to evaluate the options, and I disagree in some instances... With live-cds for Linux, such as Knoppix, available people are now seeing that they can do what they want on other platforms. People on this BBS who are annoyed with MS should spend the time to boot one and see what they think. People who cannot find their **** with both hands and a map when it comes to computing will not even realise other OSs are a viable option for them whether they've bought a Mac, or a wintel box.

The thought of a badly patched Linux machine sitting on broadband is pretty chilling... There's some users that we don't want migrating! To be honest, these people probably do need a Mac

An interesting debate. I have no axe to grind, as I run Win2K primarily on 3 machines, MacOS 9.21 on another, a Linux distro on another and occasionally boot into Knoppix on my laptop. I may change one of the machines to a Linux distro, but at the moment everything works, the Linux firewall protects me from the worst of the MS stuff , I have enough clue to know not to run attachments even if they promise me free sex and beer, and everything does what I want.

If systems do what I want, why change?

One thing, stupid as it sounds, that holds me back is the lack of a common decent text selection facility throughout Linux apps. Pressing ctrl-arrow key skips a word in all windows controls. Shift ctrl-arrow selects. This simply doesn't work on some other OSs, and there is no substitute functionality. I refuse to pick up a mouse unless I absolutely have to...

but you're right. If people are bitching about Windows, there's plenty of options that they should look at to make sure that their current choice is still the most appropriate for them.

Cheers,
Nick.

GaryK

Yes but that has been one of win32s biggest flaws, the fact that applications can overlap with files used by the OS Kernel, certainly those used to render UI widgets its a friggin joke! It might make for good design and good re-use of code but it is flawed. In other OSes there is a layer of abstraction between application software and OS software so that (in theory) no one application (intentionally or by accident) should crash the OS. It also well known that the message queue system and passing of handles between window objects can be comprised to breach security.

Dont get me wrong I dont hate M$ they do great stuff and not so great stuff and yes if people didnt hate them so much there would be less viruses but they do! and this hate will go on and on and on. Its scary to think there are people so angered they have nothing better to do than keep launching attacks. I mean we all get pi$$ed off with software but thats extreme.

Gary

Markus

Interesting debate.

Steve - interested in what you wrote and when for Mac.

Mac OS X is good, but not as good as it could be. 10.3.x is what 10.0 should have been and 10.3.2, or even 10.3.3 is not without it's problems. Jobs went on about "all you have to do is recompile your app for X and it will work" Yeah, if it's a simple app that does not go anywhere near the OS. If it's secuirty software that has to integrate with the OS it'll need a complete re-write and possible changes when Apple decides to change the way something works.

Most people thought 10.2 - 10.3 was a bit of a speed bump, a few cosmetic changes, but there was a LOT under the hood that the end user knew nothing about, but us poor developers had to work out and change our code to work with. hell, stuff that works fine on Jaguar (code name for 10.2, and it is NOT Jag-wire - a note to ******* yanks, Jobs included), does not work on Panther (codename for 10.3 - what's next, snow lepoard?), and the changed code then is not backward compatible with Jaguar, so we end up having multiple instances of functions. OK, that's life, but when one of the problems happens to be a change in the way the package installer works, and an installer is a pretty fundamental bit of getting your software onto a machine, you have to wonder if they know what they are up to?

We have had occasions where we have talked to DTS (Developer Tech Support - think seriously cool beanie hats ) and asked them how this is meant to work and they have said, and I kid you not "oh, we are not sure how it's meant to work!" and these are the people who wrote the thing! The flipside of this is that we sit down and work out how things should work, and then tell Apple "hey lads, here's how we did it, maybe you'd like to do the same thing?" crazy!

rant over

angrynorth

I really wish people would, or at least look at something else thats a bit more stable. My post comes from the fact that an IT department I work very close with are suffering massive problems with downtime and virus attacks. I merely suggested they took a look at alternative options, I mentioned the X-Serve and I got this look like I was some kind of idiot to suggest they used something other than Windows.

This pissed me right off, because they are wasting money on something which is clearly not working for them, yet are prepared to do nothing about it because they are so stuck in their ways.

Like I say I used windows from 3.1 up didn't touch anything else until one day in 2001 when I briefly used OS 9 and thought it was crap. Went back to Windows. Got annoyed that my system was unreliable, difficult to manage, full of bugs (Software not virus) and just a general mess. I started a new job where they had Macs. I was really not looking forward to having to use them, but you know what? My Macs have not crashed once not even an application has fizzed out once in over 8 months. Myslef and a colleague sat at work one day, the only 2 people in a building of 1000 people who were still working after a virus brought down the works network. But our IT guys still think that we are the idiots ???

The point you make about people evaluating other options isn't happening because of too many narrow minded IT professionals who are too quick to slate systems they don't know enough about to have an opinion on, but still recommend people don't use it WTF

I'm not trying to sell a particular system, although I'm way happier on a Mac than I ever was on a PC (even if it took me a week to learn it). I just want more people to be aware that there are other options that they may have dismissed in the past that are way better than they used to be and are moving forward. I include UNIX Linux, and MAC in this. Whilst MS is moving backwards just look at XP Reloaded ROFLMAO and massive delays on Longhorn.

angrynorth

Oh just to add, I don't hate MS. I love my Xbox, and some of the software is very clever. Its windows I have a problem with.

CTR

Agreed Gary.

Does anyone know if XP comes with a firewall? A lot of these attacks could be stopped if Microsoft built a firewall into their operating system, that doesnt let anything in or out unless the user agrees to it. Trouble is they would be accused of anti-competitiveness, and users would still agree to let any old thing onto their computers, and when it went pear shaped, blame Microsoft, they cannot win. I can sort of see the arguement for anti-competitiveness, but adding one would solve a lot of these worm attacks.

BTW I dont really think all the other things like Apple etc are ****, but I rarely use anything other than Microsoft OS, I just think people hate Microsoft for hating Microsofts sake, kind of like BMWs!

Edited to say, angrynorth you posted while I was typing, but the funny thing is, I know some people who really hate Microsoft, but guess what games console they use, XBOX! Which has just triggered another thought XBoxs are stable(I think, I havent got one), and they use a cut down version of W2K is it, but people cannot go install any old thing on them, so dont corrupt it.

Markus

maybe I'm daydreaming, but I had a feeling XP SP2 was going to have more 'security' built into it and this meant a firewall of sorts? firewall for xbox would be very cool.

boomer

There is a very interesting article at http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/36033.html with some good arguments as to why the Microsoft way of doing things is soooo bad )hence the trojans and viruses and crashes that mess up everyones lives).

mb

what would scooby do

Folks, don't forget Apples long term strategic plans seem to be for lifestyle products so no more mac OS's and hardware - just different shades of Ipods

ozzy

Why go from one Monopoly to another Apple's famous 1984 advert where they rebell against the uniform state (IBM at the time) is a bit ironic if we all buy into the Apple lifestyle and if you want to run apple OS, you need their hardware.

I see they've even digitally added an iPod into the 1984 video.

Stefan

ChrisB

Without wanting to sound big headed, but... IMHO they don't know what they are doing then.

Virus attacks are PITA but a properly designed and set-up system will just keep eating them up with no danger to the users.

Downtime... could be a multitude of reasons.

I'm not saying MS haven't put crap products on the market but some of their stuff is very good.

GaryK

Markus,

Interesting to get a perspective from someone who goes 'under the hood' on OS X. I think M$ have been very good in the past with their Win16 and Win32 API by keeping legacy functions in so it doesnt break code. However they do tend bring stuff out to market quickly then revise the spec as they go along (SOAP comes to mind).

I think reading the posts people are passionate about what they know/use and thats great you're always gonna get windows devotees that think everything else sucks and vice-versa and it makes for interesting threads, now how about why the fvck would anyone write software using visual basic???