Amiga.org

Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: Tomas on July 26, 2003, 02:32:14 AM

Title: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Tomas on July 26, 2003, 02:32:14 AM
Quote
Gates Provides Windows Crash Statistic
cybercuzco writes "In an otherwise innocuous article at they NYT (FRRYYY) Bill Gates says that according to error reporting software in windows, 5% of all windows installations crash two or more times every day. Gates goes on to state that Microsoft is looking at charging for some of its software updates that it now distributes for free."


read more.... (http://slashdot.org/articles/03/07/25/1920251.shtml?tid=109&tid=187)

new york times article... (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/25/technology/25SOFT.html?ex=1059710400&en=960b24f81ca368cb&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE)

btw... i dont find this statistics very convincing either  ;-)
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Ni72ous on July 26, 2003, 03:22:37 AM
@Tomas
Quote
Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches

Microsoft want to take over every appliance in yours and everybodys house lol.
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: weirdami on July 26, 2003, 03:22:49 AM
What that says to me is that only 5% of windows users send in the error reports. Most people don't bother.
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Ilwrath on July 26, 2003, 05:51:30 AM
Quote
Gates goes on to state that Microsoft is looking at charging for some of its software updates that it now distributes for free.


That'd be great... If it weren't for the fact that the damn software needs to be updated every couple days because of the latest security flaw.  And, of course, the patch is only available for the latest version of everything.  So you have your choice.  Old, insecure, and sometimes buggy, with no piece of mind, or new, insecure, and often buggy, but at least you know you're "current", for what that's worth.  

I had enough of the Microsoft update treadmill a while back.  Linux powers most everything for me now, except my video game addiction.
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Wolfe on July 26, 2003, 06:32:31 AM
Looks to me that Micro$'s weekening market is starting to nibble away at the seems of the Evil Empire.  :-D

Tell me if this sounds about right:  I am going to charge you for all my mistakes in my software.  :hammer:  :-o

And, if you don't pay you could end up screwed.   :-o

No wonder so many places are starting to look for other solutions other than Micro$.   :-D  

Micro$   :destroy:
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Ni72ous on July 26, 2003, 10:30:30 AM
This will be like a pyramid scam, you pay for one bug to be fixed, but two more are introduced an so forth.
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Roj on July 26, 2003, 12:00:58 PM
I gotta ask, are Microsoft products really $6.9 billion per year better than anything else? And where would Amiga be with that much money budgeted for R&D?
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Linchpin on July 26, 2003, 01:57:21 PM
I agree - its time half decent OS's like miggyOS had a bit of money, thing is its like a slippery slope, no money = buggy software = less users = less money etc etc... but thats obviousley wrong.. otherwise micro$oft would be skint by now... its brainwashing i tell ya!!

Kinda reminds me of the VHS vs Betamax war,, betamax cheaper, better quality, more reliable than VHS, but who won? VHS...

Kinda pays off to be crap i think lol :-P

AMIGA
:python:
WinDOHS

A Perfect World :-)
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Mad-Matt on July 26, 2003, 02:07:22 PM
Quote
What that says to me is that only 5% of windows users send in the error reports. Most people don't bother.


Im sure all windows try to send the error reports, but the ms servers just cant take the load so they never see 95% of em ;)
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Linchpin on July 26, 2003, 03:26:57 PM
lol@matt

Your proberbly right heh
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Jost80 on July 26, 2003, 04:26:16 PM
Charging for updates might be ok (like updating from IE 4->6) but charging for security and(or) bugfixes is wrong.
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Vincent on July 26, 2003, 06:29:48 PM
Oooookaaaay.

We've got to pay for Windows.  Fine (not really but you know what I mean ;-)).

M$ makes mistakes in programming Windows.  What's new? :-P

We've then got to pay M$ for fixing things that they've programmed wrong? :-x

They're making money out of their inefficiencies and crap programmers.

If they had any sense (ha! :-P) they'd fire all their crappy programmers (i.e. all of them :-D) and start from scratch.  Or they'd just wait and test (ha! again) something fully before releasing it.

But why do that when you can get loads of money from selling a crap very buggy bit of software for a lot of money then charge them extra to fix the problems that they've caused.

It does make business sense (paying for the extra work to be done for the updates) but it's stupidly ineficient.

I guess they're just proving that M$'s offices are as inneficient as their programming :-D
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Karlos on July 26, 2003, 06:36:20 PM
Nothing about this surprises me....
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: jeffimix on July 26, 2003, 07:14:54 PM
Some analysts have said that Longhorn may not arrive on the market until 2006.

WTH happened to 2004? YAYAYAYAYAYA!!!!!

Windows Xp is okey dokey software, but features are where most big software companies put their budget, they pay reliability a lot of lip service but don't really try to keep it up.

It's like old American cars versus the Japanese cars, sure our  v8's were great when fuel was 25c a gallon but when OPEC created the oil shortage, Japanese cars grabbed the market with good 4 and 6 cylinder engines.

Something of this regard happening in the computer market today could be a big break for Linux, Amiga, Apple.
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Waccoon on July 26, 2003, 07:15:26 PM
Quote
Gates goes on to state that Microsoft is looking at charging for some of its software updates that it now distributes for free.

I believe that applies to accessory updates, like new versions of IE, Windows Media Player, and so on.  You know, new versions that have more bugs and security problems than older versions.  I *seriously* doubt this applies to any kind of critical update.

Quote
From NYTimes article:  The computer industry "experienced a boom that I don't think we'll see again in our lifetime," Mr. Gates said in describing the Internet boom.

What do you expect?  It's all hype!  The only thing that really boomed was graphics.  Networking has really sunk.  Yeah, I want to use a GUI written in HTML, and use it in a web browser, so it will look different and have different rendering problems on EACH machine, and nobody can accept responsibility because the browser is "not their product".  Grr...

Don't forget digital cameras and memory cards, either.  I'm a photo finisher, and we have about a 50% compatibility rate for memory cards.  God, memory cards SUCK.  The fact that Windows treats them like removable hard drives, and tries to cache them and write data to them when write protected,  doesn't help.

...And don't even get me started about USB and Plug 'n Pray.

Quote
From NYTimes article:  Its competitors have said they fear that Microsoft will govern that arena in the same way it attacked Netscape and came to dominate browser software

Netscape sucked.  Microsoft has an obligation to equip their own OS as they see fit.  Survival of the fittest.  Boycott if you don't like it.  'Nuff said.

Quote
Mr. Gates acknowledged today that the company's error reporting service indicated that 5 percent of all Windows-based computers now crash more than twice each day.

Is that Windows itself, or Windows applications?  I haven't seen a BSOD or a lock-up in almost a year on my machine, except when I swapped my motherboard.

Quote
Wolfe:  And, if you don't pay you could end up screwed.

Yeah, you might actually have to take your business elsewhere!   ;-)

Quote
NitrousB:  This will be like a pyramid scam, you pay for one bug to be fixed, but two more are introduced an so forth.

Isn't all software like that?  You would die if you saw what kind of apps I have to use at work.  If you think Microsoft is the worst software developer out there, you should seriously try some Kodak software.

Quote
Roj:  I gotta ask, are Microsoft products really $6.9 billion per year better than anything else? And where would Amiga be with that much money budgeted for R&D?

The same place as Microsoft.  No company deserves $6.9 billion for revenue, never mind R&D.

Quote
_LinchpiN_:  Kinda reminds me of the VHS vs Betamax war,, betamax cheaper, better quality, more reliable than VHS, but who won? VHS...

Tape length was more important than quality, and Sony was too slow at working out the idea of movies and rentals on tape.

Verdict:  VHS *was* supirior, but only in marketing and format, not quality.  Bad products rarely succeed on their own without top-notch marketing.  Just look at the iMac.  :-D

Quote
Karlos:  Nothing about this surprises me....

Same here, but where's the competition?  BeOS is gone, MacOS needs custom hardware, so does OS4, OS5 is anyone's guess, and Linux (or rather, GNU and XFree86), blows chunks if you want a halfway decent GUI and a good, standardized design.  Anything else is just a clone of UNIX, and embedded OS, or a hobby project.

Where's the competition?

That's the only reason I still follow what's going on the the Amiga world, BTW.  I don't see any hope at all elsewhere.
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: seer on July 26, 2003, 07:42:03 PM
Some analysts have said that Longhorn may not arrive on the market until 2006.

AFAIK, M$ released a RC1 (Release Canditate 1) recently, if so, it pretty close for a release soon..
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Tomas on July 26, 2003, 08:52:29 PM
Quote
Some analysts have said that Longhorn may not arrive on the market until 2006.

I really hope that is true... Its stupid to pay big amounts of money to "upgrade" to a unfinished and buggy OS.
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: mikeymike on July 26, 2003, 10:13:56 PM
Waccoon, you really need to brush up on your browser/OEM history :-)

re: where's the competition - my thoughts are much the same.  I hope to God that AOS4 is a good one.

re: no new MS OS until 2006 - yeah, right.  MS can't wait that long after the .net flop.
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Ilwrath on July 26, 2003, 11:52:19 PM
@Waccoon-
Quote
I believe that applies to accessory updates, like new versions of IE, Windows Media Player, and so on. You know, new versions that have more bugs and security problems than older versions. I *seriously* doubt this applies to any kind of critical update.


The problem is that Microsoft rolls the SECURITY updates INTO feature-updates.  For example, many times the only security update available for a product is go to the next feature release.  If the next feature release is charged for... Well, it's essentially then the question of...  do you pay up, or do you go lax on the security?  Gee...  Thanks.
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Doobrey on July 27, 2003, 12:23:52 AM
Quote

Ilwrath wrote:
For example, many times the only security update available for a product is go to the next feature release.


Yeah, I`ve been caught by that one recently..the trouble is, I don`t agree with the later EULAs that MS put on their stuff.. and they`re expecting people to pay for it ??
 Whatever happened to the law that says products have to be fit for the purpose they`re made for..oh I forgot, the EULA signs away that bit...

 I can`t wait to ditch Windows, I`ve had enough. I`ve been  using it since the 3.1 days ( you know, when PC`s could quite happily run on 4mb of RAM, and a top of the range gfx card had 512kb on it !!) and all I see is MS making a big balls-up of things, and thinly veiled PR crud trying to hide their greed.

 The trouble is, what system do I switch over to for my main workhorse??
 Linux? it`s a nice stable OS, but it`s a pain in the neck to keep upto date, or get drivers for new HW.
 Mac? expensive HW, and the OS is too idiot proof...(even for an idiot like me.)
 OS4 or MorphOS, the lack of memory protection is my main concern,
OS4 has HW available, but the actual OS isn`t out..
MorphOS is out, but there`s no HW for sale...

Maybe I should give up and just use  pen and paper  ;-)
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: DarkHawke on July 27, 2003, 04:17:54 AM
@ Waccon:

Quote
I believe that applies to accessory updates, like new versions of IE, Windows Media Player, and so on. You know, new versions that have more bugs and security problems than older versions. I *seriously* doubt this applies to any kind of critical update.

We need to clear up the language here.  I would consider an "update" to be the kind of typical bug/security fix that you get with any app, e.g. going from Netscape 7.01 to 7.02.  An "upgrade" would be something where actual functions and features are added, e.g. Netscape 7.02 to 7.1.  Now if you're gonna charge for an upgrade, okay, but for an update?  HELL no.  The actual story said "update," so Billy Boy needs to clarify what he means by "update."  In some cases, it would be ludicrous to charge for updates since the original program, like IE or Windows Media, are free-for-nothin' to begin with.

Quote
I haven't seen a BSOD or a lock-up in almost a year on my machine, except when I swapped my motherboard.

Interesting, 'cause just installing the last set of Win XP updates on my machine provided regular and successive BSOD visits till I uninstalled the update.

Quote
No company deserves $6.9 billion for revenue, never mind R&D.

"Deserves?"  They were just given this cash?  Or was it ruthlessly taken from other companies against their will?
 :-D   They HAVE that much money for R&D because they EARNED that much money and allocated it for that task.  So long as they're not breaking any laws to do it (which arguably they did in the past), it's not a matter of what they deserve!

Quote
BeOS is gone, MacOS needs custom hardware, so does OS4, OS5 is anyone's guess, and Linux (or rather, GNU and XFree86), blows chunks if you want a halfway decent GUI and a good, standardized design. Anything else is just a clone of UNIX, and embedded OS, or a hobby project.

Which is the damnable thing of it all, not to mention that all of the above have comparitively limited software and perepheral hardware options.  Hard to boycott Microsoft as you suggest and not pay a heavy penalty.

Quote
Where's the competition?

That's the only reason I still follow what's going on the the Amiga world, BTW. I don't see any hope at all elsewhere.

I don't know that there's much hope there either!  Yes, obviously, I still look in and see what's happening myself, but it looks like we'll only just see OS 4 come out, but only 'cause it's in the hands of other folks than AInc.  If we see OS 5 from AInc, I'll chow down on my big ol' Aussie cowboy hat!  We really needed to see that kind of multi-platform, CPU independent, seamless networking OS two years ago.  It could still work, but AInc ain't gonna be the ones to do it.  One point though: I would not count Sony out of this for a second.  The next update of the PS2 hardware will practically turn it into a multi-media center by itself, and this is before the Cell technology they're developing for the PS3 with IBM and Toshiba.  They also introduced a Linux kit for the PS2, showing at least a cant towards support of non-Windows OSes.  When one least expects it, especially in an ostensibly competition-free market, someone will trot out a brand new idea and BOOM!  The market changes overnight.
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Ilwrath on July 27, 2003, 06:44:08 AM
Doobrey-
Quote
I can`t wait to ditch Windows, I`ve had enough.
Quote
The trouble is, what system do I switch over to for my main workhorse??
Linux? it`s a nice stable OS, but it`s a pain in the neck to keep upto date, or get drivers for new HW.


Honestly, the newer flavors of Linux aren't as bad.  Drivers are much less a problem than they used to be.  Granted, there's lots of hardware that still isn't properly supported, but most key things are pretty good.  Printers, mice, scanners* (if you choose one specifically listed as supported by the SANE system), video cards (ATi/nVidia), USB Storage devices, standard sound-cards, network cards, etc. are all pretty solid and easy.  My strange arsenal of joysticks still causes many problems, of course.

As for updates...  Heck, I run RedHat 9, and it's easier to update than any system I've used.  The RedHat Network is kind of a neat idea, and you get a free single-machine home-use license.  It works kind of like a Windows update, in that it goes out and queries a server on what can be updated... But it doesn't run off and do things on it's own.  You get to tell it to update or ignore certain packages, etc.  Plus it gives some quick notes, and things.  

Or, if that is too close to Windows update for your comfort, you can install APT and the Synaptic GUI for the coolest software updater/installer I've ever seen.  It puts the Windows world to shame.  A single GUI to logically manage network installs and updates.  Plus, it can also figure out which packages you have already installed that have updates are available for.  (even if the packages themselves were originally installed outside APT)
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: Wolfe on July 27, 2003, 06:48:55 AM
I can see the pockets of Windblows users already starting to smoke in anticipation of being scammed, conned and ripped off. :pissed:     As Micro$ begins to inhale green your wallets will start shrinking.  :boohoo:

And why are some looking forward to a new version of Windblows.   :huh:    Just more bugs to fix and more drain on the wallet.   :-D   There's a lesson to be learned here!  :oops:

I've heard some say that Micro$ was the best thing to happen to computers -   :griping:  - But without competition the market suffers.   :whack:    

I don't use anything Micro$ and I don't feel I am doing without at all, but thats just me.  :-D

To bad some feel there is no other choice but Windblows because no other system will ever make a real entrance onto the scene until those fed up with Windblows put there money elsewhere so Micro$ looses its grip on there wallets and the market.   :griping:

Well, gotta go howl at the moon -  :-D  :-D  :-D
Title: Re: Microsoft now wants to take charge for security updates/patches...
Post by: QuikSanz on July 27, 2003, 07:34:40 AM
Sounds like reason number 3562 why not to buy M$.

Chris