[ale] "What's So Bad About Microsoft?"

[David Corbin]

On Sunday 14 March 2004 22:28, Keith Hopkins wrote:
> David Corbin wrote:
> > On Sunday 14 March 2004 21:29, Greg wrote:
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org]On Behalf Of David
> >>>Corbin
> >>>Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 9:01 PM
> >>>To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts
> >>>Subject: Re: [ale] "What's So Bad About Microsoft?"
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>"Their product is unsafe."
> >>
> >>No, their product doesn't take into account user error.  There are plenty
> >>of MS networks that are relatively safe just as there are plenty of Unix
> >>networks that have been cracked to death.  PC's are like guns - they are
> >>inanimate objects until a person picks one up.  With proper firewalls,
> >>practices, and usage MS products are what you make of them. No more no
> >>less.
> >
> > Good software doesn't need to allow for user error.
>
> What are trying to say?  User's don't make errors?  (I want your users!) 
> Programs should ignore silly things users type and forge on with what they
> "think" the user wants to do? (sounds like a MS philosophy, right Mr
> Clippy?).  "Good" software is perfect and bug free (does such a thing
> exist?)

I'm not sure what I was thinking when I wrote that.  But let me offer you an 
example of "Their product is unsafe."  They went so out of their way to make 
things "easy" for the user that they automatically run anyold attachment when 
it is first viewed in the inbox.   Have they gotten more secure since this 
first happened, yes.  But it's still not safe.

-- 
David Corbin <dcorbin at machturtle.com>