Gates reports on security progress

TalkBack 26 of 40:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Listen up, OS technology predates MS, that's where they copied it from

Modern OSes will continue to expand and evolve and they will do things that today are not systemically a part of an OS. That is up to the vendor.

Take a class or read a book on OS design. OS simply means provide a layer above the hardware and below the applications. Did you copy or print a file today? That's an application. Did the application use a library function to access the disk? That's the OS. Did the application bypass the OS and read the disk directly by programming the disk hardware itself? That's Windows (DOS legacy) er, I mean Vi-R-Us.

Most OS's clearly make a distinction between User land (applications) and System land (the OS itself or the "kernel"). While most OS's work hard to move functionality out of the kernel for security and performance reasons (less is best) MS grows the monolith with each new release. Ya know all that talk about modules ... hmm, maybe there's a connection ... bigger kernel means more holes, more cost, and worse performance. MS moves IE - with all its bugs -- into the XP kernel and surprise ... security is far worse. Besides, Windows was designed to allow users to bypass security so don't even think you are secure if you use Windows.

Your little cozy description that they moved these functionalities into the OS so they could not be removed is quite correct. They don't want them removed. They want all Windows users to have them available and all developers to be able to assume that they will be. That is good policy for users, good for developers and, yes, in the end good for Microsoft.

Funny thing is if they went to all the trouble to insure "functionality" was there for the developers shouldn't they disclose how it works to the developers? Why go through all the generous effort of building and welding in functionality users don't ask for, are not allowed to remove if it is not wanted or needed, and not even opened up for developers to access as they see fit. MS's roots were in providing an open platform - if you don't see that is not what they ship today then I give up ...

You just simply present no data that users are "increasingly abandoning Windows as a viable server platform..."

I say server you say desktop. We are talking apples and oranges. MS can basically do what it wants on the desktop and as long as it documents the OS properly and stops using API churn and bad design to limit competition noone will care. On the server side, I assure you even the staunch MS supporters who try to run large MS complexes wish they had more control over the configuration of the OS in the field. Imagine, a media player or a browser competing with your webserver or database on a dedicated server ... its just plain ridiculous. Even MS itself admits it ... do your homework ... look into the lessons learned on moving (um, trying to move) hotmail to Windows. MS's own programmers needed access to Windows source and admitted they still could not make things work as optimally as a finly tuned *NIX box. MS will openly admit to you (if you are a big customer) that the GUI gets in the way for big applications which basically should be set up to be remotely managed without a GUI. Can ya do it with Windows ... um, isn't that why they licensed UNIX technology? Is it done right yet .... LOL!


Microsoft's desktop market share (at least a significant measure of customer good will) actually increased slightly in 2003 and for a company with nearly 95% of that market, that's a tall order.

And can ya imagine, with 95% market share they say their biggest competitor is themselves (piracy and legacy installations which refuse to go forward like DOS, Windows98, & WIN2K users).

Don't confuse desktop dominance with Server success. MS is a small player in the back end side of the world.

Posted by: oldskool   Posted on: 03/31/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now
• VMware Infrastructure: A Guide to Bottom-Line Benefits VMware Frustrated by the costs of maintain ever larger data centers?or building ... Download Now
• The True Costs of Virtual Server Solutions VMware In an economic environment that is repeatedly heralding the message "do ... Download Now