Chinese Program Exploits Windows

Quote:

---

Cutty: No offence - but you made me roll on the floor for ages with your "DOS didn't crash" comment.....

---

*Screams out laughing grasping for air* Am glad I gave you a wonderful laugh:).

Tiger Shark I see exactly what you were trying to bring across now and it all makes sense. The discussion was nice. I guess M$ allows the existence of a lot more businesses and services than we care to take into consideration. I will admit, he is a very good businessman in spite M$ bad business planning.

Just one more thing though, do you think that M$ would make a stable OS if say Linux comes out with a user-friendly version? I was just wondering, since that might be in the making. I would appreciate windows a lot more if a little more work is put into it.

Tiger Shark thanks for the great flow of the discussion BTW. AciD we need your thoughts here too.

Guidance...

im sorry! i must have taken a wrong turn. i thought this was the thread about a chinese program that exploits RPC

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Tedob1
im sorry! i must have taken a wrong turn. i thought this was the thread about a chinese program that exploits RPC

---

That was a good comment to make Tedob1! LOL

As for the rest, I would sit and quote most of what both Tiger Shark and cutty wrote, but I think you should go back and read their full posts anyway.

Overall I think we all sit on the same side of the line, we all just see things a little different. Gates has made his money off the backs of hard working people, and will take more if he sees fit. But with all the money he does get he at least has been bringing some new technology to the fore ground of the "typical" user. Plus as TS said of how Gates has made an almost universal OS that works right out of the box. Maybe we should give him a little more credit in that area. I know I still install Red Hat and such and have to do it a few times because there are always buts in the installer.

Running down the time line, it is interesting to see the different platforms and the jumps between each one... DOS, Win 3.11, Win 95/98 compared to NT... the next generation of NT (Win2k), then the all around NT platform for the typical user. But that's nothing compared to the scattered versions of the *nix. So I guess keeping it more centralized helped to keep the work focused and helped to improve it better.

Now cutty brought up a good thought, what if *nix marketed a version that was really user friendly and could be understood by the typical user... think they would catch more of the market? Maybe even Gates eye and give him a scare? I know the Mac OS X uses an old version of the *nix kernal.

And speaking of Macintosh in this whole conversation, nothing much has been said about that? Why is that?

One last thought though:

Quote:

---

It's like to me he says to his developers, 'Just make it look the best it doesn't have to be the best cause they won't know the difference and even if they do we have the market so they have to use our crappie OS anyway' and that's the sad thing about the world. We can be manipulated so easily but there's really nothing one individual can do about that.

---

I think in the end that's why we are mad at Gates and Microsoft, because that's how we feel Windows is made. Maybe we are wrong for feeling that, but like I complained about having to do updates all the time... it makes you think. Though on the flip side I guess without doing the updates then my system would totally be at risk of attack. So am I happy that I have updates or am I mad because Bill should have thought ahead? No one is perfect, but then again how much did they know about these "problems" before hand??

LOL overall there is so much to reply to I don't really know where to start. But I wanted to make a post with these few thoughts nonetheless. Be interested to hear what everyone (especially TS and cutty) think about what I've said!

Just a thought...
~AciD

Acid: Yeah, we are on the same side...... I just get fed up of hearing Bill G. being demonized like he is some kind of intentional Lucifer. He didn't start out to con anyone and I don't think he is trying to do that today. Does the OS have security problems.... Hell, yes..... Does every OS have security problems.... Hell, yes. Is he making a good effort to address them.... Certainly.... Is he doing a good job of addressing them..... I think he is better than average considering the number of people who spend all their waking moments trying to break the OS..... Is that good enough? Well..... That's where the issue is open to question..... Certainly, the fact that he has a lot of money is irrelevant..... Simply spending more does not a secure OS make.... and it isn't Bill doing the programming either don't forget.... In fact I'd be surprised if he can even read code any more....<s>

If linux made an easy, out of the box, OS........ That's Bill's greatest fear and one thing that prevents him from rewriting WinWhatever from scratch. The moment he commits resources to a complete rewrite, (which would take years), Linux will come up with a fancy new system that is attractive to the masses. Then where is he? Remember, it's not just his pocket - he has a responsibility to almost everyone who has an IRA or 401K.... IOW, he has a responsibility to almost everyone in the USA..... He's a businessman now......

While I mention a complete rewrite let's not forget backward compatibility. It is foolish to think that you are going to move a user base the size of M$'s to a new OS overnight. Most people will just stay with what they have because it suits them, (look at the installed base of Win9X still). It's fiscal suicide to commit all the resources for a rewrite and then commit all the additional resources to supporting utterly different OS's. The cost would have to be passed on to the end user which would further slow the conversion process and the total outlay to fix the underlying problems will severely anger the gods of wall street. Then the system has to be able to deal with all the other software we already own..... including it's flaws..... There's your next security nightmare..... Otherwise you are forcing all the major software houses to do a complete rewrite and forcing me to change all my software, (at no small cost), to allow me to use the fancy new OS. The cost to an individual would be high, the cost to business would be phenomenal. Who do you think would end up paying these higher operating costs.... Yep, you and me..... the punters.....

Macintosh..... Well, I think we can safely say that the moment Bill and Steve shook hands a couple of years ago when M$ bailed out Mac that the opportunity for Mac to become a serious competitor of M$ pretty much went out of the window..... (so to speak.... :D )

Fun discussion.......

Oh, Tedob...... Yeah we did go a tad astray..... But the road to China is a long and winding one...... ;)

Quote:

---

Acid: Yeah, we are on the same side...... I just get fed up of hearing Bill G. being demonized like he is some kind of intentional Lucifer. He didn't start out to con anyone and I don't think he is trying to do that today. Does the OS have security problems.... Hell, yes..... Does every OS have security problems.... Hell, yes. Is he making a good effort to address them.... Certainly.... Is he doing a good job of addressing them..... I think he is better than average considering the number of people who spend all their waking moments trying to break the OS..... Is that good enough? Well..... That's where the issue is open to question..... Certainly, the fact that he has a lot of money is irrelevant..... Simply spending more does not a secure OS make.... and it isn't Bill doing the programming either don't forget.... In fact I'd be surprised if he can even read code any more....<s>

---

No arguement from me, he's doing his job. The only argument that I have is I think he could stress the issues more of security. Or better yet, take all that money and build a department that sits and hacks the OS so they know what to look for... the fix that in the next release of Windows. I think he has that much control over the process. Sure I don't think he codes Windows itself, but he is a CEO... that means something in the building process in general.

Quote:

---

If linux made an easy, out of the box, OS........ That's Bill's greatest fear and one thing that prevents him from rewriting WinWhatever from scratch. The moment he commits resources to a complete rewrite, (which would take years), Linux will come up with a fancy new system that is attractive to the masses. Then where is he? Remember, it's not just his pocket - he has a responsibility to almost everyone who has an IRA or 401K.... IOW, he has a responsibility to almost everyone in the USA..... He's a businessman now......

While I mention a complete rewrite let's not forget backward compatibility. It is foolish to think that you are going to move a user base the size of M$'s to a new OS overnight. Most people will just stay with what they have because it suits them, (look at the installed base of Win9X still). It's fiscal suicide to commit all the resources for a rewrite and then commit all the additional resources to supporting utterly different OS's. The cost would have to be passed on to the end user which would further slow the conversion process and the total outlay to fix the underlying problems will severely anger the gods of wall street. Then the system has to be able to deal with all the other software we already own..... including it's flaws..... There's your next security nightmare..... Otherwise you are forcing all the major software houses to do a complete rewrite and forcing me to change all my software, (at no small cost), to allow me to use the fancy new OS. The cost to an individual would be high, the cost to business would be phenomenal. Who do you think would end up paying these higher operating costs.... Yep, you and me..... the punters.....

---

Again I say this is bull. He could build another company subdivision of M$ (plus to get out of the whole monopoly issue) that would be only for rewriting the entire OS... and doing all the things you stated. He could still have M$ itself doing it's job and bringing out with OSs, updates, etc, without committing business suicide. The guy is worth how much money? I think he can invest that back into the business some more and do things right. He can make the software to do what it needs to do without a problem. When you talk about a guy worth that much and then say he can't do something... again that's where I see differently. He's got the resoruces, he has the money to use them, and if I was in his position and had my bills paid and what not that's what I would do. I would rather see the advancement of the OS/busniess rather than personal gain. No one can tell me he can sit and cry because he doesn't have the money to use/do whatever he wants.

Quote:

---

Macintosh..... Well, I think we can safely say that the moment Bill and Steve shook hands a couple of years ago when M$ bailed out Mac that the opportunity for Mac to become a serious competitor of M$ pretty much went out of the window..... (so to speak.... )

---

I have to say yes and no on this one. Mac is still up there, it does a lot of business. I work at a university of 44,000+ students, plus I don't even know how many for staff. I would have to say at least 25% of just the students are Macs, old and new.

Just a thought...
~AciD

Acid:

Quote:

---

Again I say this is bull. He could build another company subdivision of M$ (plus to get out of the whole monopoly issue) that would be only for rewriting the entire OS... and doing all the things you stated. He could still have M$ itself doing it's job and bringing out with OSs, updates, etc, without committing business suicide.

---

Ok.... So, what you are saying is that he generate another entire company to compete with M$. Hmmmm..... How well is Mac, Unix, Linix, Sun microsystems etc. doing against the original Microsoft right now? Oh, that's right.... they are losing the battle..... they have the smallest market share. With that in mind how, exactly, is M$II going to compete. It will still have the same issues that a complete rewrite done in-house would have. High cost, small user base, etc. but now it is in competition. So Bill has to compete back from M$ because his shareholders would expect it, (they don't own the second corporation, (we separated it for anti-trust reasons.... remember), only the first). So Bill is going to pour marketing and development dollars in from both ends....... That's lunacy.... It's like me asking you to pay all you monthly bills twice..... for what gain? Ahh.... So the new OS can take over from the old. That's worse than bad business, worse than suicide and it's not something he, or I for that matter, would or could do, we'd be fired.

Quote:

---

I have to say yes and no on this one. Mac is still up there, it does a lot of business. I work at a university of 44,000+ students, plus I don't even know how many for staff.

---

And that was the downfall of Macintosh...... It was a great idea..... Sell the Macs to the students - get them "hooked" on the OS and they would carry it forwards into the business world for them....... It could have worked - but _only_ if they had paid due care to marketing and development for the business world too. They didn't, and all those students came out of school only to find that their nice shiney new Mac they got as a graduation present was utterly useless on day one of their first job. Heck, they couldn't even take work home to impress the boss till they bought..... Yes..... I'm gonna say it..... A windows box...... ;) So Apple's marketing and sales simply got stuck in the revolving door of the universities and was left for dead as soon as the students stepped off the campus.

I guess in the final analysis it's important to understand the fundamental differences between the *nix community and the Windows community. *nix, (linux really), is driven by people, lots of them, who are computer literate and write and edit, and oversee the code between them. They have no responsibility to anyone but themselves and they have no investment other than sweat equity in their product. If they were going through the constant assault that M$'s code goes through they can easily sit down and say "we need to improve this" and it would get done with no inconvenience to anyone..... The new kernel comes out and everyone D/L's the distro, compiles that baby up and we are all fat, dumb and happy again in the *nix world. OTOH, there's poor old M$..... They are stuck in the corporate world with billions of dollars belonging to millions of people resting on their every move...... With this heavy burden there should be no surprise that this beast moves more slowly and has far more restrictions than the *nix community. Woe betide them if they produce an OS that grannie can't install on her own...... a 1% failure rate would severly damage the product image and greater than 3% would probably kill it without vast quantities of cash being expended to untarnish that image. See, Grannie can't just call her son to have him write drivers for her CD-ROM.... Cos the source code isn't available..... Oh.... and her son is dumber than a box of rocks where computers are concerned.......

It's really easy to sit back and say "I'd do this" or "I'd do that" but until you sit back and understand that, if he had the opportunity you seem to think he has, Bill would probably do exactly what you think he should do. But he has a whole lot more to think about than the OS. I'll guarantee you that Bill is damn proud of what he has created and what he has accomplished. I'll also guarantee you that Bill is painfully aware of his "baby's" shortcomings and that - given a viable opportunity he would do what it takes to make it right..... It's just that viable opportunities for huge organizations to make such significant changes almost never come about. Vast changes are the realm of the small, nimble companies and Bill proved that but moved past that point many years ago.

Guys you are leaving me out of the loop. :)

Quote:

---

Ok.... So, what you are saying is that he generate another entire company to compete with M$. Hmmmm..... How well is Mac, Unix, Linix, Sun microsystems etc. doing against the original Microsoft right now? Oh, that's right.... they are losing the battle..... they have the smallest market share.

---

Tiger Shark:

Microsoft competition maybe losing the battle now but some years down the line they may not be losing. The fact that creating a new company is really not a good idea doesn't give M$ an excuse not to provide better security IMO. First of all, I believe that M$ security went from ok to bad with the transition from win2K to winXP. Now that shouldn't be. You already have the knowledge so any new system should be more secure and not less. So M$ is sacrificing security out of all things for other things. That's really bad. Security is important in my world and I am sure it is in yours' too.

Secondly, M$ has enough money to create a side project (not another company) that can look for loop holes in say winXP and make that OS as secure as possible without sacrificing too much of the user friendly environment. It can be done, how long it will take I don't know, how much money I don't know either but he could invest in it if he wanted to. But, he's not willing to spend that amount of money, because who is he competing with really? As for now no one. So, to him, if he can just keep his market share, then he can make the OS however he wants and there wouldn't be any problem with his clash flow. That sucks big time. I know Bill means us no harm really but he's in the money and he would do whatever it takes to keep the flow.

Quote:

---

See, Grannie can't just call her son to have him write drivers for her CD-ROM.... Cos the source code isn't available..... Oh.... and her son is dumber than a box of rocks where computers are concerned.......

---

Oh yeah, M$ source code is not available. Damn how could I forget that. ;) You see M$ could have a more secure OS if he made just a little of his source code available but he can't do that can he. Hmmm.. What is Bill hiding? Lets see, half of the code in their isn't really his, maybe or is he afraid that he will loose everything if he makes his code open source. Maybe he's afraid some kid from the side of the street picks up his code and makes it a lot better than M$ ever could. Sounds like that movie Antitrust (kill the kids that program from their garage and steal their code). That's kind of interesting and I would really want to know what the real reason is that he keeps his code unavailable. What do you guys think?

I guess the overall idea is to be on top of the market and when it comes to that Bill has done a wonderful job. Am not saying that he didn't contribute to the computer industry, am just saying that being on top is most important to him right now.

Guidance...

Cutty:

Quote:

---

Security is important in my world and I am sure it is in yours' too

---

Yes.... You are correct..... But there are 500 million home users that wouldn't know what computer security is if it came up and slapped them in the face.......

Quote:

---

M$ has enough money to create a side project (not another company) that can look for loop holes in say winXP and make that OS as secure as possible without sacrificing too much of the user friendly environment.

---

I don't disagree with what they should do. Nor do I disagree with what they could do. However, linked to your comment about why we can't see the source code - it might preclude their ability to actually succeed in creating a more secure OS without jeopardizing the ease of use for whch they are "famous". That's a hard question when you consider one of the original premises that a secure OS is a balance between security and usability.

As to how Bill got his source code.... I have some experience of that. When I first came to work here they had a little peer-to-peer network by a company called Web, (owned by Buffalo Software I believe). It was a nice little system but I needed to implement a Novell Network and have both systems running concurrently. With a little bit of "hacking" I managed to set it up so that both systems would run concurrently on the same machine, in such a way that there were still significant system resources remaining, (rememer 640k of RAM and TSR's.....;)) and the Web clients could seamlessly use the Novell resources. I had a little problem remaining, (can't remember what), so I called Web and was talking to a chap called Steve Sweet who, it turned out, wrote the whole system. He was somewhat impressed that I had managed to get a working configuration and wanted to know more because he had clients that were looking for just that functionality but told me that he had to go out of town for a few days. A few weeks passed and I called back to get my issue resolved and talk to him about my config. All there was was an answering machine..... Hmmmm...... A few weeks later Steve called saying that he could no longer help me and I was no help to him any more..... Why.... Web, (read Steve), had been bought by Microsoft. Several months later we got our first copy of Win95 and blow me down..... The networking portion was Steve's Web network. No you can't see it obviously but, had you been familiar with Web you would "feel" it. There is no doubt in my mind that the core networking was based on his work..... I do believe that acquiring other companies is legal....:) and I can't vouch for any other code.... But I'd bet my shirt on this one....

Quote:

---

Ok.... So, what you are saying is that he generate another entire company to compete with M$.

---

No that's not what I was saying, just another part of Microsoft that would be dedicated to rewriting an OS from the ground up. Not something to compete against M$ itself. Making a whole new company would be crazy; I will admit that because they would have a hard time going at each other in the market place. I'm just saying a division of Microsoft that does its own coding, its own thing away from the projects of Windows 2003 server, Windows XP2, etc.

I pretty much agree with you on the fact about Mac not being marketed correctly. It’s not a good idea to go after one direct group... just like Iomega found out (which is a whole other topic in itself about marketing and where it could have been today). If you have a product that would work in all aspects... in the office as well as at school or in the home, then do it. Don't try to sell your product to just one of the other.

Quote:

---

Oh yeah, M$ source code is not available. Damn how could I forget that. You see M$ could have a more secure OS if he made just a little of his source code available but he can't do that can he. Hmmm.. What is Bill hiding? Lets see, half of the code in their isn't really his, maybe or is he afraid that he will loose everything if he makes his code open source. Maybe he's afraid some kid from the side of the street picks up his code and makes it a lot better than M$ ever could. Sounds like that movie Antitrust (kill the kids that program from their garage and steal their code). That's kind of interesting and I would really want to know what the real reason is that he keeps his code unavailable. What do you guys think?

---

LOL yeah I can see it like that cutty. I believe personally that Bill would buy out whoever and take their code/company to make sure they don't interfere with M$ in general. I think *nix would have gone to waste if it wasn't for the fact that universities and educational institutions are basically that got it going from the start.

But on the flip side of that, I can understand not giving out your source code for this reason: hacking. Someone gets a hold of your source code; more people are going to try to hack it... especially if you are number 1 on the hacker hit list. And with 98% of computers using an M$ based OS, well that would be the end of computers if someone found a way to get into most of them through a hole in the entire code. Plus who ever wants to give out their trade secrets? That much I can understand and say I'm cool with.

Quote:

---

I guess the overall idea is to be on top of the market and when it comes to that Bill has done a wonderful job. Am not saying that he didn't contribute to the computer industry, am just saying that being on top is most important to him right now.

---

Very very good closing to your last post! Truly it makes you wonder at times about Gates. That's why this whole conversation jumps both ways from the same side of the line. It's all in how you interrupt things that are going on.

Just a thought...
~AciD

Windoze is like a weak rubber boat full of holes. Everyday a new one opens up and u have to patch it with "band-aid". I guess its weaknesses gotta keep pple working...so that they can provide for their families. if there was no errors, there'd be no people fixing these errors.