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

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.

"I want people to see my movies in the best formats possible. For [Paramount] to deny people who have Blu-ray sucks!" -- Movie Director Michael Bay

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki