Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Talks Back To Google's Security Claims
Kilrah_il writes "Yesterday there was a piece about Google ditching Windows for internal use because of security concerns. Now Microsoft is fighting back, claiming its products are the most secure — more than Google's and Apple's. 'When it comes to security, even hackers admit we're doing a better job making our products more secure than anyone else. And it's not just the hackers; third-party influentials and industry leaders like Cisco tell us regularly that our focus and investment continues to surpass others.'"
Again we refuse to admit that MS has done anything right, because they still have problems. Improvement doesn't matter, because they're not perfect yet.
Not like OSX, or Linux. No sir. Neither of those products have any security holes. It doesn't matter that OSX is the first system to fall in any form of hacking contest, or that there have been at least 15 articles on /. in the last 6 months talking about how piss poor OSX's security model is. Nope, Microsoft isn't perfect, therefore they have not fixed anything.
Keep on knockin'
https://robbiecrash.me
linux isn't a competitor.
I can't recall the last time Macs around the world were taken out by some virus.
That's because nobody gives a shit about Macs
What you mindlessly anti-MS people are missing is that Windows is the most widely used OS, so 99% of all malicious efforts are focused towards it.
Nothing import is done an MacOSX, therefore there is no reason to attempt to hack it.
Linux may be great, but the market share is so low, there's no purpose in exposing security holes.
No other OS receives the scrutiny from hackers that Windows does.
I went through your links, and one's a trojan masquerading as a form of pirated software (ooo ahhh, how hard is that on ANY system?) and the second link shows that Windows 7 was no more secure under very special specific circumstances. (Charlie Miller apparently is very very good at what he does) The question is, on a reboot or even just a killing of Safari, is the Mac still owned?
And as for your "small number of users" point, I guess that's why Apple surpassed MS in market capitalization last week? Because their number of users are insignificant. Wake up and smell the coffee. MS blows six ways to Sunday. Every other significant OS out there is both better and more secure. MS has falling market share across the board. Then again, there's really no where to go but down from 95%+, to be fair. It's the accelerating decline that's significant and the fact that they can't penetrate any new markets even when they buy customers (Bing).
I'll predict that in less than 10 years, MS will be a footnote in history, as the company that brought us an inferior GUi and managed by hook and crook to steal 25 years of innovation from the world at large. It will also be a case study in universities of the success of marketing vapour. I'm still waiting for Chicago to be released, much less Longhorn or Blackcomb. Although I do note that Windows 7 now has a Panther system directory for its logs.... That's about right - 6 years behind.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Apple is not vendor... It would like to think it is but consider the following ..
BSD OS? Intel Processor? Nvidia graphics? Western Digital Hdds? I think they make the shiny cases at Apple but thats about it.
As for OSX it's based on XFree and if you look at the specs on it's server edition you might as well be running a Linux box. MySQL, Exim, Apache ..
Apple hasn't created an OS from the ground up for a long time, there are a handful of useless applications they create but nothing ground breaking. Adobe offers Mac's most popular graphics tools and Microsoft its most popular Office App.
Microsoft is different than this, in which case it's software is either bought from somewhere else and rewritten, or its built from scratch. Therefore they are a real vendor. Their hardware is pretty much the same as Apples though, rebranded and in some cases from the same factory.