Ah, Microsoft. You’ve been relatively good lately. Then, I read this passage over on ZDNet UK.
Software giant Microsoft has claimed user “complacency” is to blame for malware infections, and denied that its Vista operating system is less secure than Windows 2000.
While I would agree that user education leaves a LOT to be desired this is hardly a way out. And a quote from Simon Clausen,
“Ironically, the new operating system has been hailed by Microsoft as the most secure version of Windows to date,” said Simon Clausen, the chief executive of PC Tools last week. “However, recent research conducted with statistics from over 1.4 million computers within the ThreatFire community has shown that Windows Vista is more susceptible to malware than the eight-year-old Windows 2000 operating system, and only 37 percent more secure than Windows XP,” Clausen said.
Of course Microsoft had to hit back at that one. They’d be remiss if they didn’t react. But, to lay the blame on the users? Sure they help the spread but, not the initial infection. That would be bad code no? Then of course the article has the routine “he said, he said” exchange. We the people will stipulate that every OS has its share of problems. Agreed. The greater the distribution a platform, the greater the bull’s eye painted on it.
It’s not rocket science.
Then again the average monthly percentage of Vista users that we have here on Liquidmatrix is 6%. Coming in squarely behind XP, Mac and Linux.
The article puts Windows 2000 security ahead of Vista. Ouch, that’s gotta sting for a “work in progress“. So, how long until Microsoft does itself a favour and gives Ballmer his walking papers? His comments and bluster remind me of…of…
Oh yeah.
This guy.
