On CBS MoneyWatch: Report: Tiger to Pay Wife $60 Million
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 10 of 24:
Next »
« Previous
Excellent comment
But of course I have to whine about something. wink

The only real harm that can occur, identity theft, is almost always caused by user ignorance, not software flaws. It's just that more 'ignorant' users use Windows than any other OS, so it seems like Windows is at fault.

While I agree totally that user ignorance is in abundance and that that above all other reasons is why their own systems are unsafe, that doesn't mean there isn't more that Microsoft can do to help them out. What drives me so nuts about Windows is that it would be SO EASY for them to make all systems safer by simply changing a few default settings. The default installation installs an admin account and one user account that is required to have full admin privledges. Why is that? Why two admin accounts? That makes no sense whatsoever. If they simply had the one admin account and one regular user account, and simply told the users upfront that you NEVER use the admin account unless all else fails, the same way Linux distros tell you, then Windows systems would be so much safer. Of course they'd have to make it easier to install programs as a regular user (by using automatic popup admin password input boxes rather than that right click left click Run As... thing), but that would be simple enough. And in fact I think I have seen a few install programs ask for an admin password, but why some do and some don't I can't figure out, but that needs to be fixed.

So you see, a few SIMPLE changes would make Windows so much safer, yet they don't do it. It's just so baffling as to why they don't do it, and that's why I (and many others) get so frustrated with MS.
Posted by: Michael Kelly   Posted on: 02/11/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

I prefer the longer beta of the crappier software  nucrash | 02/11/05
RE: I prefer the longer beta of the crappier software  richdave | 02/11/05
what does that have to do with anything?  doh123 | 02/11/05
yes, but some companies take it too far  JasonL31 | 02/11/05
nucrash i hear ya on the cell but i don't see it happening  liskanich | 02/11/05
cell cont  liskanich | 02/11/05
Intel cheap compared to sony??  hipparchus2000 | 02/11/05
Society's mentality  Joe Blow_z | 02/11/05
My guess  rapson | 02/11/05
Excellent comment  Michael Kelly | 02/11/05
Mostly agree  rapson | 02/11/05
longer beta = Bigger price  liskanich | 02/11/05
Cars and other complex systems  maxo_z | 02/11/05
Make up your minds...  ejhonda | 02/11/05
What?????  Mack DaNife | 02/14/05
They Are Just Following Microsoft's Example  itanalyst | 02/11/05
Wow! That was really original!  Salman Pak | 02/11/05
Not Trying To Be Original, Just Being Honest  itanalyst | 02/11/05
longer beata would mean higher price not rocket science  liskanich | 02/11/05
Hence The Reason Why Many Abandon Windows For Linux  itanalyst | 02/11/05
Makes them look lazy and non-confident  MIS Master | 02/11/05
At least they are honest and call it a beta. Microsoft quality is lower and  DonnieBoy | 02/11/05
Funny how there is no mention of the longest beta so far that I know of...  Confused by religion | 02/11/05
RE: A long winding road out of beta  austin672 | 10/24/08

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement
Click Here