The new commercial of Microsoft. 1

[gregor weertman]

We have a commercial here from Microsoft that says:
“Keeps on running” in a song

Then they say that window’s XP and Office XP will keep on running even when infected by a virus.

This looks like a challenge to me.
In my imagination I see certain virus programmers grinning.

Question:
Which viruses will they produce and what will they do to the system?
Is it time to learn a real profession after al?

I hope this is enough for a few good laughs.

Regards Gregor.
Gregor.Weertman@mailcity.com

 

[onpnt]

Question:
Which viruses will they produce and what will they do to the system?
not sure the topic and this question in particular is appropriate for discussion, but I will say there is nothing that can't be broken in simple terms. Of course a marketing scheme is going to tell you differently. That's marketing. Will it keep running? probably, but will it make it even worse then it already is. Hmmm....



Just a suggestion: faq183-874

http://www.onpntwebdesigns.com

admin@onpntwebdesigns.com

 

[apex1x]

I've never seen the commercial but that "keep on running" slogan seems like a lot of marketing gibberish.
Like onpnt said, no matter how secure you make or say you make a system is, a virus can for sure damage it.
Whether or not the system keeps running doesn't matter. If you were driving your car and the transmission fluid went, it might be a good idea to stop, but microsoft seems to think its ok to "keep on driving". ~Apex1x
Miller's Law:
You can't tell how deep a puddle is until you step into it.

 

[sleipnir214]

I can't find any reference to the ad. I don't doubt you saw it, but I'm suprised Mi&cent'ro$oft's legal representation let that one get out -- unless there are lots of small print clauses you haven't mentioned. An ad like that screams "Truth in advertising lawsuit!". Want the best answers? Ask the best questions:

http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

TANSTAAFL!

 

[Tarwn]

Ack, how did I get in the twilight zone, and what happened to the MS we know and...well, we know?



-Tarwn --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

 

[jad]

NEWS: Windows keeps on running ... in comparison to previous versions of windows ...

i have to say though, that if a virus was running on my system, in a lethal (at least to my files) capacity then i'd prefer it to crash so that it didn't infect other systems on my/other networks, pass information to same said networks and generally propogate itself through my files ...

however i have a solution.

Someone rang up from 'Computer Associates' recently and asked if my system was secure from virii ...
I said yes, she asked what virus checker i used, i said 'Solaris'. she asked who made it, i said 'Sun' (she didn't seem to know who sun were ... she asked how often we updated it ... i said 'Never' ... etc.

She sounded a little flumoxed as this didn't fit in with any of the boxes on the questionaire ...

 

[Tarwn]

lol, great!
-Tarwn --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

 

[garwain]

I went through a similar conversation with a potential web hosting client.
phc: how well protected is your server from viruses, I will have a lot of files on my site that I can't afford to loose
me: *thinking: then keep backups* There is a very VERY low chance of the server being infected
phc: whay percautions are you taking
me: lets see, first of all, I'm runing a LINUX server, second, administrators don't use superuser accounts unless its necessary
phc: but if it's a linux server, couldn't a hacker use a DOS attack to infect the server
me: I don't think so....

conversation went downhill from there. I hate it when the EU picks up on buzz words...

 

[gregor weertman]

Making companies accountable
Bruce Schneider, a tech manager at Counterpane Internet Security, said that it's time to consider holding companies legally liable for the security of their software and networks.

"If you run a computer network and it sets off a virus, you are not held liable," he said. "If you were liable, it would be in your best interest to make sure that your network is secure. Same thing for software development.

"Microsoft produces software with systematic flaws in it and nothing happens. If they were liable for the actions of their software, it would be in their best interest to take responsibility ... and not just give lip service."



Gregor.Weertman@mailcity.com

 

[Tarwn]

Ok, I see a coupe thousand software companies closing down because no matter how many times you go over your code there is always something still there...
Especially when you consider how many thousands of lines of code are needed for an OS (did I say thousands? ) and how many people are working on it, and the fact that these are people, and the fact that no one single person knows how all of these pieces will work together, only how they should work together...

-Tarwn ________________________________________________________________________________
Sometimes it is how you ask the question: faq333-2924
Many ASP questions have already been answered, please check faq333-3048 and use the search tool before posting

 

[apex1x]

True. At this point it seems like an unrealistic expectation for companies such as microsoft to make their software water tight.
If you can understand it, you probably don't.

 

[Tarwn]

I don't think it would be realistic to expect them to do so even if Gates had started doing that back when he wrote his first Hello World program, once you get beyond a certain amount of complexity, gremlins are inevitable.

-Tarwn ________________________________________________________________________________
Sometimes it is how you ask the question: faq333-2924
Many ASP questions have already been answered, please check faq333-3048 and use the search tool before posting

 

[gregor weertman]

More budget should go to stability, security and bugs.
How can a company justify a massive investment in “improvement” without hardly any concern about the security and other bugs.
When a firm did everything in its power to make software secure and stable they can’t be held accountable.

It’s a pity that words as “legally liability” have become sickening for people in the states.
There is no relation anymore between the sustained claims and the damage done. It has become a business of its own.

Gregor

Gregor.Weertman@mailcity.com

 

[Tarwn]

What would you consider everything in their power?
It is a great thought, but unless it can be quantified, it becomes a battle of lawyers, like intellectual property and such, completey open to speculation and outlandish claims.
And what if there isn't a company to hold responsible? Should we add the phrase "unless it is open source" to that?
And freeware? etc?

So maybe we can say "If you pay for it the company has to do everything in their power to make the product secure and stable"
Which begs for a definition of secure or stable, these are usually relative. You could say linux us secure and stable, but there are still bugs. Of course that doesn't work because you didn't pay for the OS.

I'm sorry, I think it is a wonderful idea, but I don't see how it could be defined much less put into action.

-Tarwn ________________________________________________________________________________
Sometimes it is how you ask the question: faq333-2924
Many ASP questions have already been answered, please check faq333-3048 and use the search tool before posting

 

[gregor weertman]

On cigarette packages there has to be a text now: “Smoking is deadly” or “From smoking you get cancer”.

Maybe a text like that on the software package.
“You can get hacked”, “Vulnerable for virus”, “Bad memory management” and “inadequate security”.

This can also be applied to the free and open software.

Let the customer know what to expect.

Gregor Gregor.Weertman@mailcity.com

 

[mudskipper]

Yeah, that would work for the computer itself as well....

"Surgeon General's Warning: Use of this computer may cause Carpal Tunnel, repetetive strain injury, eye strain, lack of sleep, internet addictions, gaming addictions, bad on-line dating relationships, posture issues, lack of exposure to full spectrum lighting, and unhealthy stress levels. This machine may be suseptable to any or all of the following: virus, worm, trojan, hackers, crackers, haxors, crashes, software conflicts, resource conflicts, power failures, power surges, xupiter, bonzi buddies, gator, spam, spyware, adware, overheating, underheating, emp emitting devices, hardware failures, your brother in law who 'knows alot about computers'........"

;-) Mudskipper
___________________________________________________________________________________

Groucho said it best- "A four year-old child could understand this! Quick! Run out and find me a four year-old child: I can't make heads nor tails out of this!"

 

[gregor weertman]

You forgot doctor watson and the shrink.

Gregor

It’s like déjà vu al over again.
(Yogi bear)
Gregor.Weertman@mailcity.com

 

[Suraklyn]

You cannot expect a software developer to release perfect programs all the time. It's already been stated. There comes a time when the project is so complex, bugs are unavoidable.

Is it reasonable to expect software developers to release the safest and most bug free software they can? Yes, absolutely. The problem is, the more time that is spent on QA, the higher the price of the product is sure to be. I think that most MS software is too overpriced for as buggy as it is. Assuming that MS and others start to focus more on bug free and secure software, I'm not sure how willing I am to pay even more for a product that probably won't be much more secure than what is already being producing.
--
Jonathan

 

[jad]

most of the potential QA can be worked on with a good specification. QA works better on modules, if you specify a system as modules you can damn well test it better and work with it as if it were a 4GL, or above

if you don't specify the project right, if you have creeping specifcations, or if you don't care then you can't do good QA.

i know that there is usually cross over between 'modules' but if you write the module interfaces right you can eliminate these generally, and it would be almost vital to do this on a major project like an operating system.

having said all that, windows would not be windows if this had happened, the errors have to be backward compatible, some programs rely on them being there.

 

[c0i0nes]

Come on guys. If it lives, it can die, and there's not a lot that can be done after that.
However, if someone can make it, someone else can break it. Until it happens, though, the system works. Oh, and if someone breaks it, someone can fix it, until the next time it breaks. By then someone will have made something better.