MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Yes, this does seem like a massive conflict of interest, having the same company that makes your OS sell you protection against its flaws.

However, calling Microsoft, "Mafiasoft" makes MDN look like a bunch of idiots. Still it plays to the audience eh?

Bend over guys, Redmond drives!

pog,

I believe that in this case, MDN has every right and is totally correct to call them "Mafiasoft."

pog, I guess you do not get it.

It IS Mafiasoft in the sense that they make you pay for troubles they are ultimately responsible for.

As Mafia, it sells protection to customers from problems that ultimately comes from ... the Mafia itself. Ever heard of pizzo? It is the *insurance protection scheme* against *accidental* explosions of your business. So the picciotti sells you *protection* so that they will not put bombs into your shop.

Sounds pretty much the same scheme to me.

Watch for next news of Microsoft being sued by McAfee, Symantech et als.

I'm offended and I don't even use Windows...
It is Microsoft's responsability to protect it's users, how can it charge them for it?!

BTW anyone notiece the corporate branding mess of MS? They had to put their security thing in with Windows Live.
That's exactly why MS isn't nimble anymore, because EVERYTHING inside of it is tied together: Formats, messenger, even their damn MSN site!

MDN wrote:

This is like McDonald's selling undercooked hamburgers, because they can't figure out how to cook them properly, and then charging customers an annual fee for E. coli vaccine.

Exactly.

Does this now give the consumer the right to SUE the arse of them if it doesn't work?

Leo

After all a virus that crashes your hard drive and eats all your data has gotta be worse than a little scratch on an iPod? right!

Leo

SUE us? Nope, it will allow us to say that virus problems are only due to those idiots Windows users not willing to pay for our revolutionary OneCare program.

You do not pay for OneCare, then why Microsoft should care about you, idiot!

Isn't that a brilliant scheme to milk even more our abused users? AND THEY'll EVEN THANK US!

UHUHAHAHAHAHUHAUHHUHAHHAUHHUHAHUHAUHU

There is absolutely no reason for Microsoft to improve its operating system if it can get people to continually pay to protect against its flaws. They can actually profit from new security problems!!! The more security problems discovered, the more likely people will pay for protection. I don't understand how they can get away with this...

it seems exactly the kind of solution a marketing guy a la Balmer could come up with when told from engineers "We can't protect us, Windows is a convoluted mess. We should rewrite from scratch"

Balmer "ehhhh uhhh ahhh how could I turn a failure into another success....
F**k, seems nobody cares but me in here. Oh wait, nobody cares, I do care, one does care... YEAAAAAH: OneCare program. We sell the code we have stolen from Symantec for virus protection. BRILLIANT"

Is this your first time here, Pog?

Do you understand nothing of the EXTORTION RACKET the world calls "Microsoft"? Apparently not, for you have the temerity to call MDN and its readers "idiots"? Something about a pot and kettle comes immediately to mind, sir or madam, for IMHO you are one of the most uninformed, puerile, and arrogant people ever to grace these pages. (And I use that term advisedly.)

This really isn't that big of an issue. It's really not much different than the extended warranties that many companies offer.

Now if MS were to make it so that Windows works only with their software protection and not the competition's, then you would be justified in calling them Mafiasoft, but that is clearly not the case here.

Pog is Ballmer. LOL


If Pog can't grasp the concept of how MS is

making more money off of holes in thier own

product, then he is just hopeless. It is the

essence of the mafia, except the mafia gets more

respect.

The major software makers rarely guarantee their software. Apple sure doesn't.

realist,

Microsoft has absolutely no incentive to improve their code. They will leave in the OS flaws and charge their customers a subscription fee to protect their computers.

They will use their monopoly to put their AV software on every new computer sold and literally 'Netscape' their AV competition. It's their AV competition that has been keeping them in business the last 3 to 4 years.

And you think it's not that big of an issue. You have to be a Windows pundit or IT weenie. Only someone who makes a living off of Microsoft's BS could say something like that.

Me, I work in the Oil and Gas industry and I cheer when the price at the pumps goes up as well.

Realist, I disagree. If you are Microsoft and you put out a product that is flawed, you should fix the flaw. You should not create a new product that protects you from the first flaw that you knew existed, and charge money for that flaw in the first place. If anything, you should put out an antivirus product for free, since you created the flaw in the first place. Of course, Symantec and McAfee would not be happy with you, but that's the way it goes.

MDN yells at Apple for insulting PC users, but MDN calls them "stupid" every day?

I look forward to MDN reaching puberty and settling down. Maybe they'll stop turning off potential Switchers left and right, and stop giving all Mac users a bad name.

Think what they could be then! Great Mac news---check. No more driving away Windows users who are interested in Macs? Check!

Best headline from MDN ever!!!

Love the headline and take, MDN. Keep it up! Too funny. This site makes my day go by much faster.

This is bloody classic! Wow, my head is still spinning at this marvellous stupidly. And this is being marketed as a good thing? People are paying for this? Wow, a sucker every M$ minute. I’m sure it’s a matter of time before whackos sue the buggers when it doesn’t work out. Should start a pool to see when this service will have its first flaws discovered, besides the obvious fee.

I seriously despise M$. How willing would people be to pay an extra fee to have their car to actually work? Shouldn't it just work right from the start?

Honestly, how can people buy into this system they've created? It makes me want to scream big girly screams and pull my hair! That is, what's left of it...

Ha ha, I'm Balmer. Like it.

For the record I currently own 4 Macs each less than 3 years old and 3 iPods, and I also have a loaned B&W;G3 in my office right now, so you might say I'm a bit of a Mac zealot.

However, I'm also someone who thinks that you can report on the ridiculous actions of Microsoft without resorting to petty name calling.

I'm sure that MDN will run into troubles for calling Microsoft "Mafiasoft.
But again, MDN has no credibility when it comes to commenting news. Immaturity rules the mind of those nerds making MacDailyNews the Microsoft/Dell & Thurrot daily news.

If you sit back at look at the whole mess that is called Modern Capitalism, you'll see it is largely based on waste and artifical scarcity. From disposible armaments, people, packaging, cars, computers, to entertainment, while energy alternatives are shelved, money is privately issued with interest, and a monolithic software thief allows for scarce security so he can profit with a 'solution'. Create problem>provide solution>screw people.

You know, "Mafiasoft" may not be the mafia after all. Hear me out.

Suppose Microsoft has business partners that make millions off their Windows software. Suppose MS comes out with competition to that: they've just threatened the livelihood of those business partners.

Now suppose they give their software away as a part of XP. They've just totally kneecapped their business partners, and destroyed their businesses. Suppose MS *wanted* to give this software away with XP, but realized the consequences would be DIRE for these security companies?

Then it's not a protection racket. It's deliberately charging for something to preserve the businesses of the security companies, who may even have TALKED MS INTO this strategy.

So this strategy is OK for MS and at least for now preserves the business models of the companies. "Money for nothing and your chicks for free."

Boeing777: Get in trouble.. Huh?? wtf - MDN is spot on dude!

"... to make its operating system less vulnerable to crippling Internet attacks."

Not really, they just want to recoup some of the wasted money they invested into continuously PATCHING the fuckin' thing. It costs money to play catchup, and MS is not going to continue to use theirs.

You know I've been watching you guys

Apple doesn't nearly have the market share of our operating system. And if it did, it too would be having the same sort of problems we have.

Just look at the facts, Apple started increasing their market share and what happened? over 60 exploits showed their little heads and Mac's beloved security was destroyed.

Mac OS X has been the most insecure OS of anything else Apple produced.

Why does Apple sell Symantec right next to brand new Mac's in their stores?

Why doesn't Apple promote it's security? Because the truth is they would be just as insecure as our software if they had the 95% market share like we do.

Then after chasing after so many bugs, they too will incorporate a paid anti-malware system just like we do.

So flip things around.

Don't talk security unless you've got market share as big as we do.

Ignore my above post, I am a Mafiasoft and especially a Balmer fanboy. Rock on Microsoft!

Ballmer,

Apple does promote Mac security:
http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac_ads1/viruses_480x376.mov

"Word to the Wise: Windows running on a Mac is like Windows running on a PC. That means it’ll be subject to the same attacks that plague the Windows world. So be sure to keep it updated with the latest Microsoft Windows security fixes."
Source: http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

Oh, yeah, almost forgot: Go fsck yourself, you slimy bald bastard.

Big Al,
"Microsoft has absolutely no incentive to improve their code. They will leave in the OS flaws and charge their customers a subscription fee to protect their computers."

- That's a very simplistic view, and I disagree with it. Do you honestly think that large corporations (the primary market for MS products) are going to be satisfied with a simple software protection program that pales in comparison to what the company is already using? Of course not. They want MS to improve the code, and if MS wants to keep their customers, then they will continue trying to improve it.

"They will use their monopoly to put their AV software on every new computer sold and literally 'Netscape' their AV competition. It's their AV competition that has been keeping them in business the last 3 to 4 years.

- Highly doubtful. Trying to avoid the monopoly issue is probably the main reason why MS hasn't already just bundled this software into the OS.

"And you think it's not that big of an issue."

- What incentive does Apple have to make high-quality, long-lasting iPods if they can just get people to pay for AppleCare? It's not that big of an issue because this type of thing is a fairly common practice. The market usually corrects this type of thing eventually. If the product is not that good, the market eventually catches up, no matter how much the company tries to capitalize on the product's weaknesses.

"You have to be a Windows pundit or IT weenie. Only someone who makes a living off of Microsoft's BS could say something like that."

- Hmmm, interesting assumption; I must be paid by MS in order to rationalize an issue in a way that doesn't portray MS as the AntiChrist. Interestingly, I just updated my webpage on my .mac account before visiting MDN.


Jimbo,
"If you are Microsoft and you put out a product that is flawed, you should fix the flaw. You should not create a new product that protects you from the first flaw that you knew existed, and charge money for that flaw in the first place.

- Although I might argue over the definition of "flaw," I do agree with that statement.

A guy came up to me and said, "For $1,000 I'll gaurantee your house doesn't burn down." I didn't pay him and my house burned down. Bill says, "For fifty bucks a year I'll gaurantee you won't get a nasty infection." Is Bill subsidising the virus/worm/malware writers of the world?

Pog,

Fair enough, you are a Mac Zealot that thinks

name-calling is idiotic and lacks tact. This

site BTW is not an ice cream social. This site

is a perfect medium for people to vent thier

frustration on an extortionist bully outfit like

MS.

the problem with the E coli analogy is that you have a small chance of getting E coli from undercooked beef, but you are GUARANTEED to get a virus without help

I hope someone in the US have the guts to file a class action on this.

Microsoft is shipping a defect product (XP) only to sell another product that fixes the defects in the first product.

Microsoft has all the knowledge in the world to combine the code of these two products into one that has the aggregate security of the two products in question.

This is nothing but a scam. As someone said above, the more flaws Microsoft leaves in the first product (XP or Vista), the more people will be willing to buy the second product (Windows Live OneCare.)
Someone please go after them in your court system.

Microsoft traditionally has had it's customer go through contorsions to use its software but this time they're really asking them to bend over, touch their toes and spell RUN.

Guys, it's purely logical. Microsoft is shipping a product that it cannot fix. It then charges people for protection against abuse of that product. This is not a one-size-fits all warranty against production defects, like say an automobile warranty, or a toaster warranty, or an iPod warranty. It is specifically a monthly, recurring fee based upon exploit of the product by *other people*. This recurring fee provides a real benefit whereas the warranty is usually a "peace of mind/once in a blue moon" type thing. This recurring fee is designed to make money and do so on a massive scale. Warranty schemes do not last long before the company gets investigated for fraud. Granted that Apple's manufacturing seems to be developing some blotches as of late, it's still nowhere near the level of "warranty fraud." This is obvious.

No other OS company charges for this, not even companies involved in mission-critical arenas. To say that Microsoft is charging for issues it should have fixed, and/or winking at the virii writers of the world is not a stretch. After all, remember those tens of thousands of known issues that Win 98 had?

Realist, you're wrong.

Your analogy with the extended care is flawed.

When you buy an extended warranty on a computer or an iPod, it's if something mechanical breaks on it. Due to the manufacturing process, flaws can happen and lemons can make it out. Maybe a chip doesn's sit right, etc.

An operating system is not the same. Windows is flawed in its design. For Microsoft to charge its own customers to be protected from that flaw is a bit arrogant. There isn't an incentive to fix the issue if you're making money from Joe Sixpack who doesn't know any better. If this was any other product, there would be class action lawsuits like crazy, but somehow, people just accept it with Windows. Sad...

It would be like buying a Pinto and Ford selling you fire insurance instead of fixing the flaw.... that's just not acceptable.

realist, I too feel the need to point out a glaring hole in your logic.

Hardware companies sell extended warranties to ensure that their device will work properly and relatively worry free for at least 'x' years. Since the laws of physics DO exist, it is completely accurate to state that no mechanical device has an indefinite life-span.

Software companies, however, have a different set of rules. Software cannot wear out over time... it is a virtual product, it is lines of code, friction will not erode it away. Therefore, anything that happens to it is the simple result of a flaw somewhere in the code that causes anywhere from minor bugs to gaping security holes to rear their ugly little heads.

Selling a service to your customers to protect them then against what really boils down to a misspelled word here and there (to be "simplistic") is completely ludicrous. If they have the ability to essentially fix the problem, then that's what they should do. I know that no hardware company would continue their same manufacturing process if a significant design flaw was discovered. After all.. it actually costs a hardware company when a customer enacts their extended warranty.

Where are the back-end costs for Microsoft here? Development of this AV software? No, that should already be a part of their OS development. In the distribution of the product? Uh-uh...as this should really be a FREE downloadable update.

This is nothing short of extortion.

Wrong,
Offering a software solution to deter criminals does not eliminate the incentive to improve a product, the same way that an extended warranty offer does not mean a company no longer cares about making a product that is built well enough to last more than 90 or so days. Like I said earlier, there are plenty of incentives for MS to try to improve their OS.


It would be like buying a Pinto and Ford selling you fire insurance instead of fixing the flaw.... that's just not acceptable."

- Interesting analogy, but let's extend it a bit. A Lexus is designed to make travelling relatively safe, but it will not prevent a criminal from shooting a bullet through your window. However, for an additional fee, they will put in bulletproof windows. Sure, they could have installed those as standard features, but no one's complaining that they are charging extra for that.

It all comes down to what you may define as the purpose of the product. The fact that Windows will work fine in an isolated environment suggests that MS is not responsible for the actions of malicious criminals. Should they improve their OS? Most certainly. And if they don't, the market will eventually work itself out.


Willie G,
Security holes is a weakness, not necessarily a flaw in the code. As I said earlier, it all depends on how you define the purpose of a product.

"Since the laws of physics DO exist, it is completely accurate to state that no mechanical device has an indefinite life-span."

- No one said they were intended to last forever. But it is quite apparent that some products do last longer than others.

Love the title, thats great. I can't imagine why people still buy Windows PC's.

realist:

“…if MS wants to keep their customers, then they will continue trying to improve (Windows).”

If Microsoft wants to keep their customers then they will have to ensure that Windows meets certain minimal standards of excellence not simply continue their meager and faltering efforts to enhance the function and security of Windows.

After a decade of butchered attempts, Microsoft decided to rename their putrid digital scraps of Longhorn Vista. Microsoft’s had promised years ago a succulent filet mignon but now offers a rancid piece of headcheese for PC users to feast upon. This offal may be good enough for a person with your unrefined palate and lowered expectations, but this grub won’t be served in my home.

Realist,

Microsoft designed Windows 95, in the pre internet days, to provide open access to the OS by other programs. Several programs took advantage of this open access to produce very useful and very lucrative results. Open access was a very successful feature.

Now, with the internet, being online 24/7 has turned that open access feature into a serious flaw. It's still there, in 98, ME, NT, XP, 2000 and in the soon to be Vista. The whole code base that is built around open access should be scrapped and a new OS should be built from scratch or rebuilt around Unix or Linux.

Microsoft can't fix their present code base. They can only build a moat around it with AV software and restore the OS to a previous date or condition type software.

Microsoft is selling a deeply flawed operating system that cannot work out of the box in today's internet world. Then Microsoft is charging the same customers who bought that OS more money annually for AV software to make that OS work in today's internet world.

If that isn't an extortion racket, what is?

"If you're stupid enough to pay Microsoft $50 per year to "protect" the operating system that Microsoft should have made secure in the first place, then you deserve to use Windows for the rest of your life."

That's a riot. Great stuff.

But lose the ads in the text. It's tacky as heck.

OneCare? woncare...wonkere....wankere...wanker!