backtop


Print 94 comment(s) - last by Piiman.. on Dec 29 at 1:55 PM

There's also nary a mention about Microsoft's pro-security switch to a walled garden model

Online newspaper Inc. has published a pretty interesting account ripping into Windows RT, which it calls "Doomed".  The author, Geoffrey James, has a big warning to business -- "inherently unstable and insecure."

The author lauds Apple, Inc.'s (AAPL) iPad as the new paradigm of glorious computing and security, while lashing Microsoft, writing:

I used to work in an operating system development group. One thing I learned back then is that any OS that allows applications to modify the OS will be inherently unstable and insecure.

Since Windows is designed to allow that to happen, both computer viruses and the gradual "rot" of the software installed on a Windows system are both inevitable. There is no way to fix the problem because it's inherent in Windows's design.
...
I'm a case in point. While I'm still using a Windows machine for most of my writing, I'm serious thinking of "taking the leap" to only using my iPad simply to avoid the support headaches that are inevitable with Windows.

In short, the Surface is doomed because the entire concept behind it is flawed. Even plain Windows is getting so old and creaky that it's getting to be more a bother than its worth.

But the columnist misses (or at least never mentions) that the device he targets in the byline (Surface) is currently only being sold with Microsoft Corp.'s (MSFT) Windows RT (Surface Pro -- the x86 version -- isn't expected until next month).  And not a single piece of traditional Windows malware can run on Windows RT without recompilation, as it runs on a fundamentally different architecture/instruction set (ARM) versus past versions of Windows (x86).


Surface RT can't run traditional x86 malware.
 
In other words, the columnist's negative experience of getting his laptop penetrated by a "root kit" is drastically less likely to occur in Windows RT, particularly while it enjoys such a peachy (from a security perspective) low market share, compared to traditional Windows.

Another thing the columnist seems to miss is that both Windows 8 and Windows RT Microsoft offer perhaps the biggest pro-security (but anti-openness) shift that has helped protect the iPad -- the switch to primarily using a "walled garden" model of software distribution.  In Windows 8 you primarily buy apps through Windows Store.  Microsoft verifies each of these apps and can yank any app at any time if it is later discovered to pose some sort of security risk.

Windows Store
Microsoft now uses a similar pro-security "walled garden" model as Apple, pushing certified-safe apps from the Windows Store. [Image Source: ZDNet]

Granted, Microsoft does practice a laissez-faire policy regarding Windows 7 legacy software (which won't run on Windows RT, but will generally run on Windows 8) and plug-in based distribution models, such as the Java-based Valve client.  In this regard it differs from Apple who strictly prohibits such freedoms. But increasingly from here on out users will be getting their apps from a single secure source -- Microsoft.

Additionally, the apps in Windows 8 are nicely sandboxed.  They simply are not allowed to "modify the OS" as the author suggest.  Windows 8 and Windows RT have robust protection against traditional attack vectors like memory injection, protections that rival those in the OS X tree.

Some criticisms of Windows 8 have been more level-handed pointing out perfectly valid opinions that many share about places the ambitious user interface redesign may have gone too far.  But some criticisms -- such as the argument to buy an iPad instead of a Surface RT because Windows is "unstable and insecure" -- are simply bizarre to the point where they almost appear to be a comedic caricature of misconceptions surrounding the Windows platform.

Source: Inc.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

You have to ask
By corduroygt on 12/4/2012 11:30:19 AM , Rating: 5
Did Microsoft do a good job between distinguishing RT and 8 with their marketing?
Sadly, many people will be even less informed than this journalist.




RE: You have to ask
By Nortel on 12/4/2012 11:50:23 AM , Rating: 4
Most people think 'more words' = better. "Windows 8" vs "Windows 8 RT", RT must be better!

I'm sure 95% of people don't even know what "RT" means and they made the OS' look exactly the same so good luck differentiating based on a graphics rich ad campaign.


RE: You have to ask
By Shig on 12/4/2012 12:09:01 PM , Rating: 2
This is the new Microsoft cadence. Bad OS -> Good OS -> Bad OS -> Good OS

XP = good, Vista = bad, 7 = good, 8 fragmentation = bad

Windows 9 will hopefully unify their classical PC interface with touch in an elegant way. For now I'm staying with 7.


RE: You have to ask
By Netscorer on 12/4/12, Rating: 0
RE: You have to ask
By OnyxNite on 12/4/2012 2:09:22 PM , Rating: 5
You can bet that Microsoft wants everything to go to the new Windows 8 Apps. This is because they control what gets into the store and what doesn't and they get a cut of everything that goes in there. If consumers reject the store then they won't be able to make the switch because people won't upgrade to an OS that doesn't run most of the stuff they use. I agree MS isn't going to simply go back to the Windows 7 interface but they need to make a middle ground where devs can make Windows 8 style apps and give them directly to consumers without having to get MS approval or give MS a cut. Until they do that then I strongly advise every consumer to vote with your wallet and don't buy Windows 8 and if you can't avoid it (new PC's all come with WIndows 8 now with no easy option for older versions) then just don't buy stuff from the Windows Store. Windows 8 will run your Windows 7 software just fine in the vast majority of cases.


RE: You have to ask
By Lerianis on 12/4/2012 11:35:18 PM , Rating: 2
It's more about controlling the applications and making sure that applications don't have viruses in them, not about 'their cut' which is plenty reasonable.


RE: You have to ask
By gladiatorua on 12/5/2012 2:36:16 AM , Rating: 3
No. It's all about taking a cut from sales.


RE: You have to ask
By mcnabney on 12/5/2012 5:21:30 PM , Rating: 2
Visa/Mastercard barely get 1%, if that, for the convenience. MS is going to get 20-30% of all software sales on RT now. They will get the rest later when Win9 comes out without the ability to install from any source other than the Microsoft Store.


RE: You have to ask
By Piiman on 12/29/2012 12:31:44 PM , Rating: 2
Yep MS wants to be just like Apple and get a cut of everything that runs on its OS. I can't see a business going with this BS, turning a good productivity OS into a Phone OS, and still expect it to be used in Offices is insane! I expect to see Ballmer fired soon and then they'll change course to something more tradicional for the desktop. Hell all they really need is a switch to installit with a desktop OS or tablet OS or a hybrid. They made their fortune on being flexable and trying to take that way isn't going to fly IMO.

If they don't I see no reason to stay with them.


RE: You have to ask
By JediJeb on 12/5/2012 7:51:23 PM , Rating: 2
This may hold true for the tablets, but for work PCs I don't think they can try to switch to app store only type anytime soon. Industrial settings would be a nightmare if that happened, especially with the custom control programs used for machines and such. Most of those programs are still 16 bit stuff running on top of whatever version of Windows you happen to have because the manufacturers don't take the time to rewrite software for controlling expensive equipment when there is already something that works. Even the newest software we use from Agilent(HP spinoff of their analytical instrument division) is shipping with a 16 bit software that has just been tweaked enough to allow it to finally run on W7, up till a couple years ago you had to try to find an XP box to even run it, and those had to be pre-SP3 or it would not run. We had equipment worth over $100,000 that we had to keep old computers around for because if one cheap computer died we couldn't replace it with anything new. If they try to drop legacy support on W8 or later W9 it will be a nightmare for those like us when we have to spend $100,000 or more simply because a $400 computer dies.


RE: You have to ask
By invidious on 12/4/2012 4:00:49 PM , Rating: 3
Windows 8 RT is not Windows 8, it is completely seperate. "Legacy" x86 apps are W8 apps assuming that you are on an x86 machinere. Windows 8 has a new user interface and a new (and optional) app store. Microsoft does not force anyone to use their app store and it is extremely unlikely that they ever will. Gearing the OS towards the app store makes sense for user convinience and for their bottom line, it has nothing to do with platform support.

Windows RT is Microsoft extending their already open platform OS to support another chipset standard. I dont see how this effort of increased OEM and consumer options could possibly be viewed as them restricting you in any way. If you prefer ARM devices there is a windows for you. It doesn't support your x86 apps which is unfortunate, but that's not Microsoft's fault, they didn't design the ARM standard. Either way, you choose your own platform.

If you don't like ARM then get an x86 tablet and use your "legacy" x86 apps. Or if you love ARM then get an ARM tablet, and a touchscreen ARM laptop and a touchscreen ARM desktop and live a happy little ARM world. Point being that Microsoft isn't restricting you, quite to the contrary, they are giving you more choices. I dont see how you get upset about that.


RE: You have to ask
By nocturne on 12/8/2012 4:59:27 PM , Rating: 2
Tiles is just an alternate shell, more of a launcher than anything.. while most basic users will end up using it in the end, there will always be a desktop for those who actually have to do work.

MS would never kill the desktop.. it'd be the last nail in the coffin to drive the rest of us over to Linux.


RE: You have to ask
By perspicacity on 12/7/2012 9:10:53 AM , Rating: 2
But Windows 2000 was great.

The cadence still works if you consider XP as two operating systems. When XP first came out, it sucked... it was clumsy and it was the first to subject us to "activation". Later, XP SP2 was so significant that many called it "XP2".

2000=good, XP1=bad, XP2=good, Vista=bad, 7=good, 8=?


RE: You have to ask
By nocturne on 12/8/2012 5:23:03 PM , Rating: 2
I still don't understand how people conceive this 'cadence', other than if you take only hype and media image into account.

Windows 1 and 2.. they were what they were. Really, their inadequacies is what gave Apple so much success with the II series and Macs. Somehow Windows became ubiquitous with v3.x.. bundling their software with nearly every sold pc, while the superior OS/2 could never get off of the ground.

Win 95.. and 98.. 98se (usb support).. ME.. all horrible. Revolutionary, but horrible. So bad that probably 90% of the populace knows what a BSOD is.

Win XP was incredible from the enterprise standpoint alone.. Unless you wanted to spend millions on a Unix IT department, nothing beat having a common system platform that worked fairly flawlessly on all levels.

Vista.. honestly, I ####in' loved it. By the end of XP's reign, having tried every so-called 'tweak' out there and the sadly ported win xp x64.. real world performance increases hit a ceiling. Vista, despite the aero frustrations for novice users, was incredible. Hardware support was unparalleled, stability was unimaginable, and security was finally being taken seriously (though you still complain over UAC, even though it's easily disabled if you just like being unprotected from hidden processes).

Win 7.. good leap, though still miss some of the features in Vista I'd judge as halfway from xp->7.

Btw.. interesting factoid. Win XP is v5.0. Win Vista is v6.0.. 7 is v6.1.. 8 is v6.2. Just check the versioning sigs in any built-in Windows app. Storm, update for next year, I imagine will be v6.3.. and wondering what Windows 9 will be.


RE: You have to ask
By Piiman on 12/29/2012 12:35:35 PM , Rating: 2
Visa just got a bad rap because they changed the driver model and many manufacturer decided to make us upgrade to new hardware instead of writing new drivers. Once you had the proper hardware (new) or got new drivers its was just fine.


RE: You have to ask
By polishvendetta on 12/4/12, Rating: 0
RE: You have to ask
By dark matter on 12/4/2012 3:06:50 PM , Rating: 4
Yours doesn't even make sense.


RE: You have to ask
By RufusM on 12/5/2012 10:07:53 AM , Rating: 2
The difference is that Apple didn't start marketing the iPad as OSX RT, in which case, they certainly would have users buying them and wondering why they couldn't install traditional apps on it.

As an aside, I like the direction Microsoft is going with Windows 8; they are just working through the transition pains. I've recently used a Samsung ultrabook laptop with a touch screen and it was a great experience. Touch the screen for those things that make sense and keyboard/mouse for everything else. This is purely speculation, but I think the next rev of Windows will be a big improvement on Windows 8/RT and will be closer to their vision of a single OS for type and touch.


RE: You have to ask
By Piiman on 12/29/2012 12:43:27 PM , Rating: 2
touch screens for Office or home desktops sucks, period. How close do you sit to your desktop? Mine is over an arms length away. How fun do you think it will be to slide an app down a 24' screen to close you app? Other than good exercise its going to be a pain. And dont' start with all the keyboard shortcut blah blah blah. I've spent years using only the mouse and now I'm supposed to use a keyboard like I did in the DOS days?

On a laptop or tablet it may be fine, heck on a laptop I'd prefer it to those tiny touch pads, but not on my Desktop please.


RE: You have to ask
By Arsynic on 12/4/2012 12:08:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Did Microsoft do a good job between distinguishing RT and 8 with their marketing?


It doesn't matter what MS calls it. They called it: "Windows" and it looks like the desktop version, so that will negate any user education that they do.

The "Windows" brand is a double-edged sword for MS. They get the brand awareness from the PC but in turn they get the brand awareness from the PC.


RE: You have to ask
By Breakfast Susej on 12/4/2012 12:28:29 PM , Rating: 5
I have adopted the opinion that Microsoft should retire the Windows name entirely. Particularly where trying to make inroads in mobile and tablet space.

The thing that strikes me as what I dislike about Windows 8, is that it hearkens back to Win95 and the mishmash of DOS against Windows in an unholy union that didn't really become something good until arguably Windows XP.

I have enthusiastically tried every Microsoft operating system over the years, used and liked Vista, I even used ME (liked, not so much), But Windows 8 just strikes a chord of dislike with me to the point I have no interest in it.

I think my growing obsessive compulsiveness just flies against the spirit of the Metro interface itself. I don't want to have big busy noisy icons shat all over my desktop and filling the entire thing, I want a simple start menu and task bar where I pin only the apps I use and that's it.

I realize at the same time, many people like what Windows 8 offers, and I don't share the opinion of others that there will be a Windows 9 that is back to business and just like Seven, I think if anything the next Windows will strip away more if not all of the Seven interface and move further in the direction of Metro.

What it comes down to, I fear I am becoming one of those curmudgeons I blasted for decrying Vista's flaws years past, as I now sit in judgement of Windows 8. I am a Linux user in the Workplace, and were it not for the fact I still game, I would be a Linux user at home too.


RE: You have to ask
By InsGadget on 12/4/2012 1:02:40 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
I don't want to have big busy noisy icons shat all over my desktop and filling the entire thing, I want a simple start menu and task bar where I pin only the apps I use and that's it.


But you can! I upgraded to Win8 on my laptop a few days ago, and after some adjustment I've come to love it. I stay in the desktop interface 95% of the time, and just use the Start screen every now and then, just like the old Start menu. It's really not that big a deal once you give yourself a day or two to make the mental shift.

Also, every existing program I've thrown at it works fine, including games. Compatibility is not an issue at all.


RE: You have to ask
By ReloadAO on 12/4/12, Rating: -1
RE: You have to ask
By nikon133 on 12/4/2012 2:58:06 PM , Rating: 2
That really doesn't make much sense.

If you moved from XP or 7 to 8, all your apps are desktop apps. If you don't like Start screen, you can easily change that to classic Start menu.

All the standard features of Windows are there; Control Panel, Programs & Features, Device Manager... last time I tried Linux (briefly), I could not figure out how to install a program. Experience was completely alien to my previous Windows experience. Compared to that episode, moving from windows 7 to windows 8, for me, was just a walk in a park.

So what is actually your problem with 8?


RE: You have to ask
By Norseman4 on 12/4/2012 7:30:24 PM , Rating: 2
I had to purchase a laptop recently (old one finally gave up the smoke one Friday, and I had to remote into work the next Monday) and it had to be a quick purchase. Went to the bane of tech-stores (BB) looked at what they had and even tried some of them out. (They were all unlocked.)

There were a few there with touch screens, but most without. I had played with W8 in a VM for a few weeks before and the non-touch screen versions equally underwhelmed me.

The touch-enabled LTs though ... completely different story. Love the one I got, though I still have to get rid of a lot of bloatware. (Thinking about getting a W8 license/download and going from scratch ... won't have lost anything at this point.)

My main rig will not go to W8 anytime soon, but my file/media server may, since W8 also introduced Storage Spaces that looks to me to be very similar to WHS's Drive Extender before it was removed. (Don't know if the individual drives can be read directly if they are ever unmounted from the space.)

Windows 8 isn't for everybody, nor, IMO, is it for every rig unfortunately. (Removing Media Center from all distro's [irkes] me though.)

{note: reading through this I have to wonder if I stayed on point enough.}


RE: You have to ask
By Mike Acker on 12/9/2012 7:31:46 AM , Rating: 1
good job!! you got modded to -1

which generally results from posting the truth instead of reflecting the virtual reality that advertisers project -- and too many people seem to prefer

yep the jump to Linux is pretty easy. I'm 100% now for my stuff although I still help windows victims when they ask

check in with FSF and ask the question: who does my system belong to and what are *they* using it for ?


RE: You have to ask
By Breakfast Susej on 12/4/2012 1:59:21 PM , Rating: 3
I can accept the fact that people are able to adjust to Windows 8, for myself, I just cannot find a desire to.

I realize there are under the hood improvements over Windows 7 that would be a benefit to me, and I also realize that as they did with 7 Microsoft will eventually force a choice by not releasing a new DirectX for 7, and with games being the only reason I use Windows at home, I'll be stuck adapting to it.

Still, I just don't like the feel of it. I find the experience of shifting between the start screen and the desktop leaves me feeling like it is a disjointed experience. It's jarring and unnecessary to me. I think if I could put it down to a sentence I would call it "The worst of both worlds", much like Win95 and it's transition from DOS gave you two compromised experiences to work within.

I understand the position Microsoft is in, and the reasoning behind their decision. Still for me, Windows 8 is a painful training wheels step that is symptomatic of Windows greatest weakness, the need to support an absolutely awful legacy ecosystem of software.


RE: You have to ask
By Fritzr on 12/4/2012 5:05:17 PM , Rating: 3
Add Classic Shell (Free opensource) to emulate the Win7 Start menu. There are also some paid software Start menu emulators available for the Win8 desktop. If you don't like the Start screen, just replace it. That is one of the advantages of a real Windows OS over the various ARM OSes today (multi-tasking with independent displays [windowed] being another major advantage)

Classic Shell homepage
http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

Also the Win7 keyboard shortcuts are still available in Win8 desktop
(Some will also work in Metro mode, experiment to see which are useful)
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows7/Keyboa...


RE: You have to ask
By Breakfast Susej on 12/4/2012 6:00:13 PM , Rating: 3
Really that just makes it worse. If I have to download third party software to mask the poor experience I am simply not going to bother and continue to use seven.

The thing is, I like seven, a lot, it's really pretty great and leaves me wanting for nothing. I have always been for trying a new OS to see what it offers that is new and move forward. If what it offers is uninteresting, and I have to install third party apps to retrograde the interface, it makes me even more displeased with the thought of using it.

Windows 8 may be fine for others, but for me every step of it's involves some kind of compromise, resulting in a hacked together and ultimately unsatisfying experience. For the first time since 1995 my answer to the latest version of Windows will remain, pass thank you.


RE: You have to ask
By MrRuckus on 12/6/2012 2:28:23 PM , Rating: 2
Have you tried it? My profession requires me to be familiar with most of the new tech, so I fired up my technet subscription and downloaded Win8. Win8 out of the box is different, but as others have stated, you can get passed that with a simple 3rd party app. While it may inconvenience you for 5mins to install it, after that its all done. At that point its 90% the same as Windows 7. You get the start menu back and all the things you are use to. You can also switch to metro and mess with it as you wish to learn it at your convenience. I picked up Star8 from Stardock which was a whopping $5. The interface runs as smooth as Windows 7, I see no difference. The only difference is the Start button is shaped as a little windows symbol instead of the windows circle in Win7.

It took me all of 5 mins to get Windows 8 the way I wanted it.


RE: You have to ask
By NellyFromMA on 12/4/2012 1:04:05 PM , Rating: 1
I get what you mean, but honestly, there probably isn't a single more recognizable tech brand or icon out there. Even Apple is not synonmous with Windows or Microsoft despite their elite status.

Windows is simply too powerful a brand to let go of.

On the other hand, I have thought for a long time Microsoft should perhaps stick to businesses and make a new 'brand' or company or branch for consumer toys.

No one is ever going to think Microsoft is edgy and cool if, you know, its called Microsoft. I think there's more stigma with that than Windows itself.

That said, Windows 8 is personally a joy for me to use even without touch on my PC so idk, the overall angst I see is almost entirely exclusive to these forums and fanboy's such as this article reports on.

Just my opinion.


RE: You have to ask
By NellyFromMA on 12/4/12, Rating: -1
RE: You have to ask
By twhittet on 12/4/2012 4:11:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
the overall angst I see is almost entirely exclusive to these forums and fanboy's such as this article reports on.


And you wonder why you were downrated?


RE: You have to ask
By NellyFromMA on 12/10/2012 2:26:21 PM , Rating: 2
Did I say I wondered why? No, explicitly stated why, then replied when I confirmed what I knew would happen and made a joke about it. It's still true


RE: You have to ask
By Just Tom on 12/10/2012 11:37:41 AM , Rating: 1
Why do you care whether some anonymous person downrated you or not? This is not kindergarten where mommy puts your paper with a gold star on it on your fridge.


RE: You have to ask
By NellyFromMA on 12/10/2012 2:25:13 PM , Rating: 2
I guess you must think I stay up at night thinking about this crap. Calm down just tom, can't have you stroking out on us now.


RE: You have to ask
By Breakfast Susej on 12/4/2012 2:02:15 PM , Rating: 2
Yet if anything, assuming you could call me a fanboy, it would be a Microsoft fanboy. I spent entirely too much time, as an admittedly younger and less mature man arguing the merits of Vista to it's detractors.

I have nothing against Microsoft, but I feel I just cannot find any way to objectively find a like for Windows 8. I hold out hope that they will find their way and make a more unified and compelling experience on the next iteration.


RE: You have to ask
By NellyFromMA on 12/10/2012 2:30:17 PM , Rating: 2
Not saying all people who don't likeWin 8 are fanboys of something else.

Just saying, in my experience (I participate in IT, tech support, web/software development for ourselves and our customers as well as personal use in my household and talking with friends) the only time I hear angst its for reasons that really just boil down to "it's not where it used to be".

Honestly, I went in with low expectations and personally think now its better than Win7. I do predict once RT can stand on its own legs the old start menu will be an option again IF a large userbase continues to groan. Honestly, again in my experience, 1 week tops and everyone I've dealt with like its better.

So, no, not saying all 'haters' are fanboys. Just seems that way from over here from the complaints I've heard.


RE: You have to ask
By Piiman on 12/29/2012 12:59:42 PM , Rating: 2
I am honestly interested in what about it you find "a joy"

I'm using it as like you I need to know this stuff but I find no joy in it all and simply put up with it.

The funny thing is that the few times I do go to the metro startmenu half the time it kicks me back to the desktop screen. lol Hey win8 don't you know you're not suppose to use that desktop? LOL on top of that once it does that little kick back it takes several restarts of the Metro app to get it working correctly again. BUGGY!

Its also ugly as F%^&

In short I use it but had it not been for the 14.99 upgrade price I probably wouldn't be using it. Which says a lot since I am a technerd and this is the only MS OS I didn't really want to try or use.


RE: You have to ask
By DT_Reader on 12/4/2012 3:16:44 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
I have adopted the opinion that Microsoft should retire the Windows name entirely. Particularly where trying to make inroads in mobile and tablet space.


Especially when you can't open multiple windows, and every "window" is full-screen. They should call it MS Window. Calling it "MS Windows" is false advertising.


RE: You have to ask
By Fritzr on 12/4/2012 5:11:13 PM , Rating: 2
Hopefully a Windowed Metro will be part of SP1 or Win9 ... without that the Metro interface will be of limited use on anything more powerful than a basic tablet.

This first iteration of W8 is WP with keyboard, much like Apple did with iOS.

Everyone start sending Microsoft "I miss my Windows" emails & maybe they will get the message.


RE: You have to ask
By Fritzr on 12/4/2012 5:13:54 PM , Rating: 2
On the name...

Desktop mode: Microsoft Windows
Metro mode: The Microsoft Tile

At least until they realize that they are missing the feature that makes Windows useful anywho :D


RE: You have to ask
By NellyFromMA on 12/4/2012 1:00:17 PM , Rating: 2
Obviously, this guy isn't going on information at all, whether misinformed, uninformedx, or any version of that.

He's smearing his least favorite software brand for his most favorite.

Honestly, I don't know ANYONE that's confused, except for the people constantly mentioning people will be confused.

Idk, even my neices and nephews (you know, the young consumers the new OS is really all about) can tell the difference...

The older folks who never had much of a chance warming up to PCs or tech in general are in the same boat they always were.

It's not hard, you just make it an issue by hypothesising a problem that seemingly doesn't exist as far as I or anyone I know can tell.


RE: You have to ask
By corduroygt on 12/4/2012 1:03:25 PM , Rating: 4
You are giving FAR too much credit to the average consumer, I guarantee you. Not everyone's a tech nerd like you or some people around you. The general public knows jack squat about computers.


RE: You have to ask
By SPOOFE on 12/4/2012 2:28:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The general public knows jack squat about computers.

Which also means that they don't give a damn about minor quirks in their OS, as long as it works.


RE: You have to ask
By dark matter on 12/4/2012 3:11:40 PM , Rating: 3
Yet we are talking about TWO different operating systems that apparently look the same.

They will give a shit then when they make a mistake and buy RT thinking it will run desktop programs.


RE: You have to ask
By 91TTZ on 12/4/2012 4:14:37 PM , Rating: 4
I disagree with you. Most young people I talk to are familiar with the usage of computers but are not familiar with their operation. In fact, I'd say that your average computer user is less technical now than they were 20 years ago. The reason is that computers have become easier to use so you have far more end users now than you ever did. But 20 years ago you probably had to at least have a working knowledge of DOS.

The average person has no idea what kind of processor or memory is in the system or what the difference between Windows 8 and Windows RT is.


RE: You have to ask
By pixelslave on 12/5/2012 1:09:54 AM , Rating: 3
Being a journalist, it's his job to find out the facts. If he couldn't do his job, he should just shut up.


I love how....
By EasyC on 12/4/2012 12:31:08 PM , Rating: 5
People who get these "rootkits" and virii all blame Microsoft for their troubles. When really, all they need to identify the problem is a mirror.

A little self reflection or thought process can go a lonngggg way to keeping a system secure...

"Gee, do I really need to see an albino goat screwing a midget in a viking suit?"

or...

"Hmmm! Do I want to try 27 cent penis enlargement pills from a company called 'Please YoUR Wom4n With MAXXX SIzE'?"

The fact is most of virii or malware attacks are based from the user doing something stupid or visiting a shady site. Microsoft can't fix the user. That said, Windows 7 is a boat load more secure an OS than any of the fruity company's offerings...

This is just an iSheep...being an iSheep.




RE: I love how....
By Argon18 on 12/4/12, Rating: -1
RE: I love how....
By Flunk on 12/4/2012 12:40:27 PM , Rating: 3
Other than just making wild claims, do you have anything to back that up? Like say, the number critical bugs discovered in OS X security last year vs Windows 7? Or the time to patch critical bugs?

Go look that stuff up, and next time you want to make a point bring some research to the table.


RE: I love how....
By chµck on 12/4/2012 12:57:01 PM , Rating: 5
you ever read that quote at the end of article pages that says something like "windows is like a house with bars on its windows in the bad part of town. OSX is like a country house with no locks on the doors in the middle of the country"/?
There's a reason for that.


RE: I love how....
By nikon133 on 12/4/2012 3:04:11 PM , Rating: 2
True, but that countryside is not what it was only a few years before. More and more shady faces in the countryside every day...


RE: I love how....
By Camikazi on 12/4/2012 12:57:48 PM , Rating: 4
Been running Windows for years now and the only time I get a virus is when I am doing something where I know there is a high chance of getting a virus (even then it rarely happens). Windows is secure as long as you are not an idiot who clicks every popup and link that shows up on your screen. BTW I believe it is OSX that gets hacked first pretty much every year at hacking tournaments or did I imagine that year after year?


RE: I love how....
By anti-painkilla on 12/4/2012 2:56:20 PM , Rating: 2
Haha totally agree. I ran Win7 with no anti-virus and the firewall disabled for 7 months.

I thought I had installed anti-virus software but had forgotten. I go to some pretty crazy sites so I just assumed that the anti-virus was doing its job. Soon as I realised, I installed and thoroughly checked my computer and no problems, not even adware installed.

Win7 is pretty amazing.


RE: I love how....
By Akrovah on 12/4/2012 1:50:40 PM , Rating: 3
Windows pre-Vista you might be right, but you know what? Vista had an almost complete re-write of the security aspects, which is one of the reasons Vista took so long to be released.

Now OSX/Safari are consistently broken first in hacking contests.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/pwn2own-2009-sa...

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/safarimacbook-f...


RE: I love how....
By degobah77 on 12/4/2012 12:44:39 PM , Rating: 4
In the 15 years I've been using a PC, the one time I ever got a virus (and a bad one it was), I knew exactly when and how I got it, and yes, it was all my fault. And then I removed it myself and restored everything in a matter of minutes, thanks to Windows.


RE: I love how....
By AlphaVirus on 12/4/2012 1:14:08 PM , Rating: 3
I did get a good laugh out of your post because obvious malicious programs are obvious.
On the other hand there is a major push for very tactful coding and the social engineered code.

One example is what I call the cluster***k of malicious codes. YouTube, Google, and Facebook, three of the most popular websites yet people constantly get bombed with bad code from these three. I had a client searching for a kitchen fridge on Google and clicked the first link (highlighted feature area), and the website was bugged.

So generally I completely agree that it's the user's fault, there are some cases where the user was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

In the past 10 years I've gotten bugged only when it was intentional.


RE: I love how....
By Cheesew1z69 on 12/4/2012 1:59:24 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
and clicked the first link (highlighted feature area), and the website was bugged.
Anddddddddddddddd this is Googles problem how exactly? They coded that website? No?


RE: I love how....
By Fritzr on 12/4/2012 5:23:28 PM , Rating: 2
He is not placing the blame on anyone. He is highlighting the fact that the user was not at fault. Ordinary, almost always safe, sites do get ill also. If you happen to visit such a site before it recovers from it's illness, then you may also catch the virus.

Nothing to do with Google, Bing, DuckDuckGo or even a careless user. It can be done by careful placement by the virus creator. The builtin security (which Windows does better than most) along with a good AV defense minimizes the damage, but connecting to any source that you have not personally sanitized runs the risk of exposing your machine to an infection. Yes that includes logging onto computers running incompatible OSes as they may be vectors for another OS' illness.


RE: I love how....
By firstone on 12/4/2012 4:46:05 PM , Rating: 2
Man, I'm 100% with you on all you've said. Most of the people blame Windows for their own stupidity. Well, go buy a FRUIT computer and do your screw ups on them. You can always call their support and they will always tell you there are NO VIRUSES on their computers........ Yeah right......
I see users doing the stuff you mentioned plus using PIRATED copies of Windows (which some jack ass installed for them and warned the happy user "Don't update or it will stop working"), trying to download pirated content (mostly movies, music) or pirated software. Hell, you are asking for it !!!!!!!!
Windows is a very solid product, it's mature and yes, Microsoft screws up sometimes, guess what: THANKS GOD!!!!!!!! It's where we have the great and neat programmers out there offering great utilities to the rescue. Go find that in a FRUIT computer.......
Windows runs in mostly ANY hardware you have out there, EVEN ON FRUIT computers.
Stop bashing; go do some training on how to use a computer. People believe that computers should do all the work for them, this is a HUGE mistake. The MORE you don't understand about them, THE MORE HOSTAGE to the technology you are.
I don't want a computer that does not allow me to understand ABSOLUTELY all that's going on with it at all times. My LIFE's information is stored and processed there.
We as humans used to LEARN new things, to study, to improve ourselves, today??? Not really.
This journalist knows ABSOLUTELY nothing about computers; it's a very biased guy to tell the least.
Windows 8 is probably the best incarnation of Windows (it still has rough edges, sure). If you want the OLD START MENU, you can have it, download CLASSIC SHELL, it's ABSOLUTELY FREE and it will make your Windows 8 look just like Windows 7 (not the AERO looks though, but the start menu in all of its glory and VERY CUSTOMIZABLE).
The new "ModernUI", or MetroUI or tiled UI for some is just fantastic for touch devices and it is even great for some corporations if you wish to LOCK your users out of trouble. Just enable a couple of icons that they are supposed to use and disable the old START SCREEN completely. Your users will log on and run ONLY what you make available on the new desktop.
So, stop complaining and LEARN, STUDY, don't be a HOSTAGE to your gadgets or they will come back to bite you.
Hell, why are there so many hackers out there??? Because there's a TRUCK LOAD of suckers connected to the Internet and BEGGING to be fooled..............
Oh, by the way, why the HELL didn't he talk about the little green ROBOT system??? Yes, that one that's TOP of the list in ALL major vulnerability list and NEW VIRUSES list being published??? That thing beats Windows in vulnerability and number of viruses/rootkits, etc.......


Traditional programs won't run either...
By Magnus909 on 12/4/2012 12:23:57 PM , Rating: 2
Which is really the point.

It's the same with Linux.

Windows programs won't run without some treatment with Wine (and even then many won't work).
The system gets less popular due to this and isn't a popular target for malware creators because the user base i small.

What's the point anyway to run a virus free system if it doesn't have the apps you want to use.

Not a good seling-point.
It is really secure, but you can't run anything interesting on it....

And if it gets more popular it will be attacked and the users will have a false sense of security, like what happened a while ago to OS X.




RE: Traditional programs won't run either...
By Argon18 on 12/4/12, Rating: 0
RE: Traditional programs won't run either...
By GatoRat on 12/4/2012 12:49:30 PM , Rating: 2
I took his point as being that just because a virus can run on operating system X, doesn't mean it will run on Y. Thus, when there is an alert, it's specific to an operating system.

The fact is that UNIX style operating systems are impervious to Viruses. They don't exist. Not for Linux, not for OSX, not for AIX, HP-UX, Solaris, the BSD's, etc. You get the picture. The only way to infect these types of machines is with a trojan - aka social engineering.

Absolute, utter bullshit. The first viruses WERE on UNIX. Linux is not nearly as secure as you believe and Windows is much more secure than you claim. You are a parody of the article writer the author of this article was mocking.

The comment about social engineering misses the boat; being completely pedantic, actual computer viruses are extremely rare. Trojans, however, are not and make up essentially 99.999% of the problem.

Your comment about the registry is laughable. Once you get access to Linux root, you're equally screwed. The fact is that if you have administrative rights to a system, that system is at risk every time you log on. Period.


RE: Traditional programs won't run either...
By andrewaggb on 12/4/2012 12:59:44 PM , Rating: 3
wow. linux systems get hacked all the time. Often because operators have failed to apply the latest security patches and often because they mistakenly believe that they can't be hacked....

There have been openssl and ssh vulnerabilities, apache vulnerabilities, etc that open you up to hacking. Linux has some interesting stuff, like SELinux, and they are more likely to run a service as a separate user than a windows program is (though microsoft is good about doing this for many of their own products). Anyways, most browsers are sandboxed, internet explorer even has a low privilege mode that reduces it further in case something breaks out of the sandbox.


By Breakfast Susej on 12/4/2012 2:09:36 PM , Rating: 3
You've just run across one of the more unfortunate aspects of the Linux community, Arrogance and an unrealistic appraisal of reality.

With great power comes great annoying behavior and smug superiority. As one becomes accustomed to Linux, starts to learn about it, it is quite easy to get a little full of oneself with ones own ability. Tech oriented individuals are often very susceptible to this, frequently being socially awkward and unable to relate to people.

The Linux community as a whole would do well with a dose of humility.


RE: Traditional programs won't run either...
By bsd228 on 12/4/2012 2:08:55 PM , Rating: 1
> Absolute, utter bullshit. The first viruses WERE on UNIX. Linux is not nearly as secure as you believe and Windows is much more secure than you claim. You are a parody of the article writer the author of this article was mocking.

The first 'virus' was the Morris worm, yes, which took advantage of a lot of loose security standards from an era where that wasn't really a concern of the internet. The code maturity of these established protocols has advanced considerably since 1988, and the buffer overflow vulnerabilities were fleshed out quite a while ago. It's also important to note that this worm was not malicious in intent, but propagated much better than intended, resulting in a DoS attack.

The fundamental flaw in Windows security, particularly compared to unix, is that the running user typically has active Administrator rights. Unix users do not run as root. In Vista they tried to solve that by asking permission for every action, but that was such a pain that it was silenced in 7. I have no familiarity with what has changed with 8, but the app store by itself isn't enough. Windows users expect to be able to install things from any source.

I don't buy that RT is safe just because a recompile is necessary. Aside from targeting volume, hackers attack companies that annoy, and MS has always been a big red target.


RE: Traditional programs won't run either...
By Fritzr on 12/4/2012 7:54:59 PM , Rating: 2
The most important feature of a computer virus is the ability to self-replicate (in a sense every self-replicating program can be called a virus). The idea of self-replicating programs can be traced back to 1949, when the mathematician John von Neumann envisioned specialized computers or self-replicating automata sitting on modern office furniture, that could build copies of themselves and pass on their programming to their progeny.

Similarly the internet complete with a (very) intelligent search engine was first described in "A Logic Named Joe" by Murray Leinster, (Astounding 1946) included in the Baen book of the same title. Logics are now called PCs & frames are now called pages.

Star Trek season episode 15 was the first television production demonstrating the problems caused by "worms" (The Trouble with Tribbles) written by David Gerrold (1967)

A short story by David Gerrold appearing in Galaxy magazine was the first appearance of the term virus as applied to a computer program. (1969) The short story series was collected and released as a novel "When HARLEY was One" (1971) Revised and rereleased as "When HARLEY was One: Release 2.0" (1988)

The first documented virus was on a DEC PDP-10 running the TENEX operating system. Creeper (1971)

The second documented virus was on a DEC PDP-10 running the TENEX operating system. Reaper.
The malicious payload of Reaper was designed to delete Creeper :P

The program commonly credited as the first virus (actually a self spreading trojan) was run on UNIVAC. The OS was Sperry Rand's Exec 8. Creeper (1974)

The first IBM 360 virus (actually a fork-bomb type worm) was Rabbit on the ASP OS (1974)
Rabbit is now a class of virus (fork-bomb) that is found on any OS that allows a program to initiate a new process. In this sense, Rabbit is very much a problem on Unix and Unix clones such as Linux and BSD.

The term worm is coined (Shockwave Rider by John Brunner, 1975)

The first Apple virus was on an Apple II. Elk Cloner (1981)

VAX 11/750 virus demonstrated by Frederick Cohen. Cohen also uses the term "virus" for this type of malicious code. This is the beginning of this usage. (The actual origin was Cohen's teacher Leonard Adleman) (1983)

MS-DOS/PC-DOS/DR-DOS trojan horse ARF-ARF that deleted files, distributed by BBS (1983)

Infectious C compiler created that adds a login backdoor to a freshly compiled Linux OS. The login insertion is added to a recompilation of the compiler from source without a trace of the backdoor code. Author: Ken Thompsen. Document in the paper titled "Reflections on Trusting Trust" (1984)

Brain Boot sector virus running on IBM PC compatibles was the first true virus for MS-DOS and DOS clones. (1986)

First full stealth file infecting virus was BHP for the Commodore 64 (1986)

Burger for MS-DOS and clones was the first to infect multiple file types (EXE & COM) (1986)

First anti-virus programs available to anyone other than their developers came from IBM (1987)

SCA boot sector virus running on Amiga OS (1987)

CHRISMA EXEC (Christmas.exec) multi-OS network worm infected computer networks using the REXX scripting language (1987)

The Morris virus (worm) running on VAX 4BSD and Sun-3 (Unix clones) is credited as the first worm to use the internet to spread (1988)

Festering Hate was the first malicious virus for Apple II and created an Anti-virus industry for the Apple II ProDOS OS (1988)

Frodo was the first full stealth virus for MS-DOS and clones (1989)

Staog is the first Linux virus. Note that it targets Linux specifically rather than Unix clones generically (1996)

Cabir is the first Symbian (mobile phone) virus. It uses Bluetooth to spread. It requires Symbian on Series 60 phones, but will infect any Bluetooth device that supports "Object Push Profile" (2004)

Mabir is a Cabir variant that uses the MMS messaging service to spread.

RavMonE.exe is an iPod malware that attacks Windows systems each time the iPod is connected (2006) This was distributed using iTunes videos for 6 days in September of 2006. Apple's explanation was that a Windows PC used in iPod production (The Quality Control computer :P ) was covertly inserting the code.

A quote from a Spamlaws.com article
quote:
The Truth about Linux Viruses

One the biggest vulnerabilities of the Linux system are the users who have the misconception that it cannot be infected by computer viruses. Several people believe that any non-Windows system is secure and doesn't need the aid of additional software to ward off viruses. This is far from the truth and a major reason why more viruses are being written for the system.


From the developers of Ubuntu
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Linuxvirus
quote:
The Reality

If you are going to trade files in a Windows world, you'll need to scan those files for viruses. You won't get infected, but you may help infect someone else. There are two ways to do this:
Run all the files through a server which checks for you. GMail, Yahoo mail, and Hotmail all have wonderful checking software.
Check the files for viruses yourself.

You can install a program called ClamAV. Install the package. It won't appear in the menu. Run it by getting to a command-line and type in "clamscan -h" to get some help on how to run it. If you really need to use a gui front-end and don't like the command-line then just install "clamtk". See the AntiVirus page for other antivirus packages and more detailed instructions.

Even if you do not trades files with the Windows world it is worth staying reasonably well up-to-date with normal updating procedures. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/InstallingSoftwa...

From Peter Radatti at Cybersoft.com is this intro to his paper on viral problems with a specific focus on Linux. Note the 1991 publication date. The first identified Linux virus arrives 5 years later.
Updated 1994 with comments on Unix viruses
Updated 1996 noting the release of Unix AV programs from companies that had been declaring "No need for AV if you run Unix" & MS-DOS boot sector viruses infect and destroy IBM PC clone Unix installs.
http://cybersoft.com/whitepapers/paper_details.php...
quote:
Copyright © September 1991, March 1996 by Peter V. Radatti All rights reserved.

This paper is intended to inform the UNIX and computer communities about formally undocumented computer virus problems. My observation of these problems were made at heterogeneous UNIX network sites and confirmed by discussions with system administrators at other sites. I believe that these problems are not limited to UNIX or heterogeneous networks. Furthermore, I expect the problems to expand in complexity, scope and virulence.

I have observed non-UNIX personal computers attached to a heterogeneous network that were infected with computer viruses originating from UNIX workstations. The UNIX systems were not the original point of entry for the viruses. The viruses were dormant while on the UNIX nodes and became harmful when they migrated to their target systems. The UNIX systems acted as unaffected carriers of computer viruses for other platforms of computers. For the sake of simplicity, I have coined the phrase "Typhoid Mary Syndrome" when describing this problem.


When looking up the history of viruses, the one thing agreed on is that Linux and other Unix clones are less vulnerable due to a lack of cross compatibility. The same thing that prevents the existence of simple cross-platform load & run program libraries for all *nixes is the cause of the dearth of cross-platform malware for *nixes.

The major strength of Unix & clones is also it's worst feature when considering it as a Windows mass market replacement :D

There is a lot of history available if you want to look for it :)


RE: Traditional programs won't run either...
By Gondor on 12/5/2012 12:50:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Infectious C compiler created that adds a login backdoor to a freshly compiled Linux OS. The login insertion is added to a recompilation of the compiler from source without a trace of the backdoor code. Author: Ken Thompsen. Document in the paper titled "Reflections on Trusting Trust" (1984)


Ah yes, the dreaded freshly compiled Linux OS from 1986.


By Fritzr on 12/5/2012 11:29:48 PM , Rating: 2
The point of that particular creation was: Can you trust your tools to generate trustworthy products?

This particular example allows the suspicious user to examine the source code of the compiler to ensure that there is no malicious code.

This vetted source is now used to compile a trusted compiler. However the compiler used to compile the trusted source generating a trusted binary inserts code that will place the backdoor into a Linux kernal compiled with the trusted compiler.

Since the Kernel source was vetted and the compiler source was vetted then the compromised binary has no backdoor...right?

Nope wrong ... a tool in the toolchain used to create the trusted toolchain was compromised, resulting in insecure trusted secure binaries.

That compiler was a publicized example. How many of your tools are compromised without your knowledge? How do you know that your answer is correct?


By Breakfast Susej on 12/4/2012 2:15:37 PM , Rating: 2
Social engineering is extremely effective. Even in the Unix derived world.

For an interesting insight into this read Kevin Mitnick's "Ghost in The Wires". Much of his hacking was achieved through social engineering the way he describes it. The rest being achieved through ingenuity and unpatched vulnerabilities.


By tech4tac on 12/4/2012 1:26:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The fact is that UNIX style operating systems are impervious to Viruses. They don't exist. Not for Linux, not for OSX, not for AIX, HP-UX, Solaris, the BSD's, etc.


Ummm... yes there are: ever heard of Bliss. Bliss wasn't even the first, just more publicized.

The fact is ANY computer can get a virus... some are just better at preventing/containing infections than others. Malware are just programs written with mischievous intent and viruses are a classification of malware that has the characteristic of replication. In theory, *nix based OSes should contain malware within the users profile, but exploiting bugs for privilege escalation to obtain root privileges can result in system wide infections.


By Piiman on 12/29/2012 1:55:29 PM , Rating: 2
"not for OSX"
Not true

""Macs don't get viruses." You've heard it a lot, and while it's never been true, Apple hasn't gone out of its way to clear the air on the matter"

Linux:
again not true

Linux malware includes viruses, trojans, worms and other types of malware that affect the Linux operating system. Linux, Unix and other Unix-like computer operating systems are generally regarded as very well-protected, but not immune, from computer viruses.[1][2]

And I'll guess that your other claims of no viruses on other linux platforms is also untrue.


By Breakfast Susej on 12/4/2012 12:40:41 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft get's a bad rap for security and perhaps it is well deserved from the days when their security was so bad as to be both laughable and frightening at the same time.

In fairness to them however their security is currently quite good, and they are the target of things that Linux and OSX just do not have to deal with.

As a Linux user, I am not a terribly great fan of wine. My preferred alternative, albeit heavy handed and requiring a license, (assuming you don't wear an eyepatch and sport a peg leg) is to run Windows in virtualbox for the few things that I do need it for.

The majority of my workplace has been migrated to Linux with very good success, and those users that do require office here and there just use a VM as well. I have set up office 2007 to work relatively well in Wine, but it's pretty awful still and popping open a VM when you need it is far better in my eyes.

The best thing has been the administration standpoint for myself, maintaining Linux desktops is a comparative treat.


Surface
By mchentz on 12/4/2012 11:43:20 AM , Rating: 2
Heck I'm in Canada right now visiting the in-laws and they have not even heard of surface. All they know is iPad. Microsoft completly fails on communication.




RE: Surface
By hughlle on 12/4/2012 11:54:53 AM , Rating: 3
And i live with my parents at present and yet they don't know what an ipad is, the term i used in a hope that they would then understand what meant when saying i'd bought a nexus 10. So i guess either you are incorrect in your statement or apple completely fails at communication as well if we're basing things on a single sample.


RE: Surface
By RedemptionAD on 12/4/2012 12:15:23 PM , Rating: 2
Generation gap, not marketing fail. iPad was/is a trend your in-laws may have heard of Surface/Nexus are not "Mainstream" like people referring to all MP3 players as iPods, Or hook-less fasteners as Velcro.


minor correction
By sprockkets on 12/4/2012 4:00:10 PM , Rating: 2
While the article here isn't wrong in what it says, Windows RT does not mean WinRT. WinRT is a new architechure of development and runtimes for BOTH Win8 on the DESKTOP AND TABLET or x86 and ARM. Technically something made under that runtime will run on both the x86 and ARM versions of Win8. That doesn't mean it will suffer viruses anymore than Win7 or Vista did; XP was the last major OS to suffer horribly. Windows RT is the name for Windows 8 for ARM, but the RT there means nothing.

Read up on it on the lenghty writeup on Ars by Peter Bright.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/12/itunes-11-rev...




RE: minor correction
By sprockkets on 12/4/2012 4:02:05 PM , Rating: 2
Wait wrong link, got it from wrong tab.

http://arstechnica.com/features/2012/10/windows-8-...


RE: minor correction
By Fritzr on 12/4/2012 8:21:32 PM , Rating: 2
Completely correct...The WinRT API is the Runtime for Windows (Metro) Modern UI applications and Windows RT is the proper name for the version of Windows that uses WinRT.

That is fine for the technical papers. However in the real world Windows <version designator> is normally abbreviated to Win<abbreviated designator>

Windows 3.0/3.1/3.11 are Win3.0/Win3.1/Win3.11 or simply Win3.x
Windows 95/98/98SE/ME are Win95/95/Win98/98/Win98SE/98SE/WinMe or simply Win9x
Windows XP becomes WinXP or simply XP
Windows Vista becomes Vista
Windows 7 becomes Win7
Windows 8 becomes Win8
Windows RT becomes ... (are you seeing a pattern yet? :P)

Yes the confusion has been discussed many times on tech sites. That does not prevent the usage of the common name that just happens to be identical to the name of a RunTime distribution for Windows. The confusion clears up instantly the moment you pay attention to what is being discussed :D


People are stupid
By Motoman on 12/4/2012 11:32:32 AM , Rating: 2
...which is why you should never take IT advice from a business magazine, or trust a Bose review from Better Homes & Gardens.

Unfortunately...people do.




RE: People are stupid
By kleinma on 12/4/2012 11:50:40 AM , Rating: 3
I was reading a stock advice article this morning that was talking about how "there is no room for a 3rd mobile OS in the market, and iOS is the clear winner". Of course despite the fact that Android is actually beating iOS world wide pretty badly, and that there is clearly enough room for 3, 4, or even 5 mobile platforms. The real kicker though was how when talking about who was even a contender for a 3rd place, they were pitting Microsoft Windows Phone 7 versus Nokia Symbian. This was an article written today. The author has no idea about WinPhone8, that Nokia ditched symbian and is using WinPhone8, then they proceed to give stock buying advice on these companies.


By jabber on 12/4/2012 1:05:33 PM , Rating: 4
I'm amazed how many supposedly respected tech journos have shown themselves up as total idiots with regards to MS/Windows 8 and Surface. Ranging from comments that make you wonder how they manage to get themselves dressed in the morning to just plain incompetence like the guy in the article above.

A lot of the articles have just been plain embarrassing. They all seem to want MS to fail at everything so Apple can become the uber lord of IT.

Oh great, so Apple become the only game in town and then we all have to pay $3000+ for a basic computer and have to wait for the slightly warmed over new models once a year.

Wonderful. Those journos tend to forget that most of them are in such a job due to MS bringing cheap usable computing to the masses and creating an audience for them to write crap for. It certainly wasn't Apple that was bending over to provide computing for all back in the 90's and 00's.




No, viruses don't run on RT...
By jnemesh on 12/4/2012 2:34:25 PM , Rating: 4
But then again, not much else does either!




We question your resume.
By epobirs on 12/4/2012 5:37:34 PM , Rating: 3
Just what did this fool DO in operating system development? Make coffee?




Apps
By Noonecares on 12/4/2012 8:59:44 PM , Rating: 3
I just want to punch the person in the throat that decided to call programs apps. End rant.




OS Rot
By Flunk on 12/4/2012 12:42:41 PM , Rating: 2
The writer also doesn't seem up to date on Windows x86 either. There are several systems introduced in Windows Vista, 7 and 8 to combat the traditional "rot" issue. Win Side by Side (from Vista) solves most of it by itself (by managing DLL versions).




There is room for concern
By CZroe on 12/4/2012 3:09:42 PM , Rating: 2
There is room for concern. Just because no traditional malware can run natively on it dies not mean the relation to desktop Windows is irrelevant. For example, most Windows 8 apps will be written to run on both RT and the x86 flavors of Windows 8, so the user-base incentive to target it with malware will be much higher than if only tablet users were targeted. The iOS web browser PDF exploit used to install jailbreaks was a wide-open vulnerability for abuse, especially with the iDevices ignoring MAC addresses and automatically connecting to any network with the "attwifi" SSID after connecting to a legitimate one once. A similar vulnerability in Windows 8 could lead to widely abused cross-platform exploits.




Don't think: Act!
By drycrust3 on 12/4/2012 4:41:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm serious thinking of "taking the leap" to only using my iPad simply to avoid the support headaches that are inevitable with Windows.

Why think about giving Windows the toss when you could easily do it? Why not take a different path and try one of the popular Linux distributions? I've been using Linux distributions as my OS for several years and found that for the most part they are far less stressful and far more reliable.
Sure, there is a learning curve, but isn't there in everything? And yes, there are incompatibilities, but some of those incompatibilities aren't that difficult to overcome.




We will see...
By Visual on 12/5/2012 5:45:12 AM , Rating: 2
I kinda doubt Windows RT's malware immunity. Nothing is impossible, as they say. So viruses and malware will soon appear for it as well.

Windows RT still has regedit.exe and can "run" reg files; it has cmd.exe and can run bat/cmd files; it has Windows Scripting Host and can run js/vbs files; it has PowerShell and can run ps1 files (not associated by default, but can be started through a cmd/bat file, or the association can be made in the registry). All of these have some potential for malicious use.

Sure, there probably are the usual security restrictions to each of those, so they can not compromise much more than the current user's environment... unless the user cluelessly clicks Yes on a UAC prompt. And we know users never do that kind of things, ever. Right?

Sure, MS can tighten things up even more, and prevent even those tools from working, and make hackers' job somewhat harder. But will it ever be bulletproof when the user is retarded?

Personally, I sort of expect, or at least strongly hope that Microsoft actually goes the opposite direction... I want them to allow me to make desktop mode "apps" for Surface - both as compiled binary executables and as HTA, WSH/JS or PowerShell scripts. I won't buy into that thing while it remains as hostile to developers and homebrew enthusiasts as it currently is.

As to security, it should count more on a functioning brain and common sense and less on walling things up.




By voronwe on 12/7/2012 9:36:56 PM , Rating: 2
There are two problems here.

The first is what the reviewing author pointed out, that Windows RT is inherently insecure. He wasn't worried about current viruses for Windows for Intel architectures, he was worried because RT is insecure and packaging a viral payload for an insecure machine takes hours - it's not that hard to leap architectures, especially to ARM, which has little hardware protection. The operating system reviewer who was once a developer knows what he was talking about.

Unfortunately, Jason doesn't understand his column or the problem at hand and pokes fun, coming off looking like he's been smoking crack. Do your homework, Jason, and stop smoking crack.




By alcalde on 12/8/2012 1:22:56 AM , Rating: 2
> And not a single piece of traditional Windows malware can run on
>Windows RT without recompilation,

Maybe compiling is considered something exotic and reserved for computer science doctorates in the Windows world, but it's not. The only obstacle is if the malware makes calls into the desktop Win32 library. Otherwise, no big deal. Heck, if LibreOffice can run under ARM on Linux, I don't see why Malware would be hindered other than library differences.




Really..?
By nocturne on 12/8/2012 4:56:28 PM , Rating: 2
In all seriousness.. When was the last time any of you got your machine infected..? If so, I'd imagine you were doing something not entirely legal at the time.. x]




FAIL
By guy007 on 12/4/12, Rating: -1
“Then they pop up and say ‘Hello, surprise! Give us your money or we will shut you down!' Screw them. Seriously, screw them. You can quote me on that.” -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng referencing patent trolls














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki