How high will Microsoft fly? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly?

MSFT 510.37

+1.4%

3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: dybdahl who wrote (63889)	12/25/2001 8:45:26 AM
From: Bill Fischofer	Read Replies (2) of 74651

I appreciate that you don't like Windows. That's your choice. But consider these facts: The problem with Windows is that: - It contains too much, too new software or is an old version that has documented exploits. The nostalgia argument is as old as the hills, certainly older than any software. It's a generational thing. When you reach the point in life where you no longer enjoy change you know you've crossed an important threshold. Of course old (unpatched) software has documented vulnerabilities. That's why service streams exist. This is true for all software. Try running an old unpatched version of any OS on a major web site and see how long it goes before being hacked. - Patching with patches from Microsoft has often been dangerous, which often makes it necessary to test the patches before applying them. The same statement could be made (and has been made) about every major piece of software ever written over the past fifty years. Yes, patches sometimes do have unexpected shortcomings, which is why fallback/rollback planning is a standard feature in commercial IT management. Windows XP's built-in design for system restore points makes this easier than ever. - The Windows design inherits too much from the DOS and Windows 3.x design to make it secure easily. No longer true. Windows XP derives from the NT branch of the Windows family tree and has no roots in DOS. That was one of the major goals of XP: to migrate the consumer base off of the old technology and onto the new. - Windows security is often about intrusion into the computer, not protection of one user against another. Windows security has different design goals because its history is rooted in PCs rather than in timesharing terminal-based systems. The Windows multi-user security focus is network-based rather than box-based for this reason. For individual PCs this makes sense since these are overwhelmingly used by single users. Even so, XP-based "kiosk" systems are easy to construct and have the same tamper-resistance as those based on any other OS. And XP's multi-user support is more than adequate for the shared home PC environment. - It is pretty hard to strip down a Windows system to the absolutely necessary software to run e.g. a webserver. XP Embedded makes it easier, but is not targeted at powerful server systems. False economy. Microsoft has always taken Moore's law seriously and has not been afraid to ride this power curve. It's been the right decision to make. I used to be a mainframe assembler programmer so I know all about the joys of "programming haiku" and making tiny ultra-efficient code (anybody else remember 3 card loaders?), but frankly those days are gone forever outside of specialized embedded environments. Merry Christmas to all.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next