Pay Microsoft to fix Windows Viruses

Dont Ford and GM own or have a major stake in the companies that supply the parts for manufacture of their vehicles as well the spare part supply industry.. In some cases you have to dig reasonably deep to find the connection.
It is like in Australia.. the oil companies OWN better that 50% of the (Gas) Petrol outlets, they determine the daily price at 95% of all..
so with those two examples.. now my comment.. Are ALL Viruses due to a weakness in the security in the operating system? I liken what microsft is doing to GM or Ford buying/building a chain of PAnelBeater outlets across the USA, to repair the dents, VANDILISM, and faded paint specificly in their cars. They are in the open in this situation .. rather than allowing the operations being hidden from the general consumer by the conglomeration of company names and ownership circles.

Note: My comment is to put things into perspective, not as direct support to MS.. and the second part of my Comment:
I wont be paying for a MS AV.. nor a MS Antispyware, no matter how good they make it.. I remember problems ppl had with Netscape in win98, IE worked well. but regular probs poped up whaile useing Netscape (well I noticed in the aussie Market), the only reliable way to fix the problem was to use 98Lite ..

oh yeh... IF your AV isnt detecting Viruses..how do you know it is working?? :) (just threw this one in.. not related)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Und3ertak3r
Dont Ford and GM own or have a major stake in the companies that supply the parts for manufacture of their vehicles as well the spare part supply industry.. In some cases you have to dig reasonably deep to find the connection.
It is like in Australia.. the oil companies OWN better that 50% of the (Gas) Petrol outlets, they determine the daily price at 95% of all..
so with those two examples.. now my comment.. Are ALL Viruses due to a weakness in the security in the operating system? I liken what microsft is doing to GM or Ford buying/building a chain of PAnelBeater outlets across the USA, to repair the dents, VANDILISM, and faded paint specificly in their cars. They are in the open in this situation .. rather than allowing the operations being hidden from the general consumer by the conglomeration of company names and ownership circles.

Note: My comment is to put things into perspective, not as direct support to MS.

---

I see the point you make, and appreciate the perspective.

<DEVIL'S ADVOCATE>
:lildevil:<-:o

How many well known viruses have NOT utilized a flaw, deficiency, or lack of security in the product they attack and exploit? We're talking about Viruses here. Specific, malicious code that attacks your system.

If I buy a television, and it turns out that my TV won't receive Stereo sound when tuned to channel 13 because of a bug in the audio processor instructions, even though the sales hype says "better audio, video, and reception capabilities than ever!!!", do I deserve a patch to resolve this issue, or should I have to subscribe to a service-plan to receive any help at all?
</DEVIL'S ADVOCATE>

OK, yes, might be an extreme simplification, but I agree with other comments that this may be bordering on unethical, if not outright criminal. I'm sure the armies of MS lawyers are hard at work, writing Terms of Service to deal with this though. Read a EULA lately? If so, you've put a Lawyers kid through community college, if not an Ivy League school...

Quote:

---

Dont Ford and GM own or have a major stake in the companies that supply the parts for manufacture of their vehicles as well the spare part supply industry..

---

Yes, car manufacturers have a stake in parts sales because they sell machines with moving parts. Physics dictate that moving parts wear out and must be replaced. This is accepted fact. I haven't seen an operating system wear out moving processes. :)

Quote:

---

Are ALL Viruses due to a weakness in the security in the operating system?

---

No, just like not all autoparts fit all cars.

A better example would be something like this. You agree to write some custom applications for a client. The applications will be used to secure the client's employee data and track changes to HR related info. You deliver the apps but then the client discovers that by telnetting to port you left open (by accident during your development cycle), they can query all the personal info of all clients. They contact you and you decide that you are going to charge them to fix a hole you left open. What do you think the client is going to say?

The point is that Microsoft delivers a product to market and you expect a reasonable level of quality and performance. When that expectation is not met and the company wants to charge you to fix it, there is a serious issue at hand.

I think that you are looking at Microsoft in the wrong way. Let me ask you this, if your car gets a flat tire after you leave the dealership, you think that dealership is going to replace that tire for free? Hell No... There are known risks when you drive off or surf and to sit there and expect a company to fix it every time you get your flat tire (Virus) is Bull. Take some responsiblity in your own actions is what I say. Stay off of sites like Porn, Hacks, Cracks and so on. Microsoft didn,'t make the highway (internet) they just gave you the car (os) to drive down it. Like how I word it? Dont take this as a bitch out, I'm just giving you a point of view. I do find it funny that MS is offering such a service when finding exploits in there OS is hard enough.

Quote:

---

Dont take this as a bitch out, I'm just giving you a point of view.

---

Understood and assume the same from this post, but you seem to be missing the point.

"The point is that Microsoft delivers a product to market and you expect a reasonable level of quality and performance. When that expectation is not met and the company wants to charge you to fix it, there is a serious issue at hand."

Using the continued bad analogy of mechanized devices, if you drive off the lot and the motor falls out of the car for no reason, you'd expect the dealer to fix it. Even better, if you punched it off the line and the motor fell out you'd still expect the dealer to fix it because your expectation is that the motor shouldn't fall out of a new car. Same goes if the radio knob fell off the dash even if you pulled it off, chances are that you're going to tell them that the knob should be more durable.

Viruses and such don't just target those out for pr0n and other shady stuff on the net. If that was the case, remediation and security would be a lot easier to manage. Innocent people get clipped all the time. More innocent people seem to be in the sites of MS "offerings".

Very good points, but I dont think that Micorsoft is overlooking the issue that they need to come up with new patches. Yes if the Engine (OS) falls out of the car then yes they need to fix it, but if you have kids throwing nails on the road (Crackers, Hackers) then I dont see how the company is responsiable to come up with a New tire resistant to nails.

For anyone interested, there is a screen shot of a flow chart, attached. It basicaly shows how software developers can say, Not responsible for the out come of their coding. Its taken from a PDF found here:

http://captology.stanford.edu/Key_Co...CACMethics.pdf

Quote:

---

but if you have kids throwing nails on the road (Crackers, Hackers) then I dont see how the company is responsiable to come up with a New tire resistant to nails.

---

Hehehe. That's when they hand over the job to a vendor. In your example, Firestone's puncture proof tires.

In Microsoft's case, they buy the vendor and then sell you the solution at 3 times the price.

:)

Seriously though, when the vendor promotes itself as security driven and they add firewall services and anti spyware to their offerings, the expectation is that you're getting a secure product. Do you find it odd that MS purchases an AV company and now decides to tell you that they are going to charge you to fix problems caused by viruses?

Interesting I say.

Well...there seems to be two sides to two arguments going on here...

1. Is Microsoft responsible for it's product and it's reasonable maintenence?
2. Is Microsoft responsible for others creating viruses that affect computers not reasonably secure?

As for the first...yes!...if I go to Walmart and buy a defective product...you bet I'm going to take it back and expect a refund! But with the purchase of any product there is a time limit as to how long you have to return it...solution...buy only from those companies or stores that have a return policy.

As for the second part...no!...unless Microsoft is specifically creating viruses to affect their own machines, they cannot be held liable for the maliciousness of others...nor can they be responsible for what sites a person visits or what manner of security, or lack there-of, they have on their machines.

Could Microsoft, with the knowledge they possess now, produce a quality product that is reasonably secure without the necessity of other software? Yes...but they won't...because the mantra they have always lived up to is...

Sell now...fix later!

Eg ;)

the question here should be if MS is responsible for the up keep of their product when holes are over the years. Ordinarily I would say...to an extent. You cannot expect perfect code, and right now they do provide free patches, and all that stuff.

I think the problem only comes into play becase now they are buying a product to fix the holes in their product. this creats a HUGE conflict of interest. This is the problem. Now they have to chose to either spend money preventing a problem or sell a solution to a problem they should have prevented.