Found this article on BetaNews through Neowin.
“Computer security depends on diversity and innovation in the field of security software, (and) such diversity and innovation could be at risk if Microsoft was allowed to foreclose the existing competition in the security software markets,” explained EU spokesperson Jonathan Todd.
In other words. “We got paid big time by security software vendors to make sure their business model stays profitable. If Microsoft actually makes their operating system secure, the Norton family will hunt us down.”
As Samuel L. Jackson would say, “I’ve had it with these ****** commissioners on the ****** EU.”
if it was only that simple. I think the EU is mainly concerned about the fact that Microsoft will include an anti-virus package in their OS and effectively pushing other anti-virus developers out of the market.
Of course it does raise a few questions:
1) why can’t MS make their OS safe enough so anti-virus software isn’t required in first place
2) if anti-virus software is required, do we really trust Microsoft to release products which will actually work
It’s quite amazing really… this whole Microsoft VS. EU thing… you could compare Microsoft with the American government in some ways.
The American government wonders why so many people in the Islamic world hate them. Microsoft wonders why the EU seems to “hate” them.
The American government repeatedly pushes their agenda through manipulating various regimes in the middle East and eventually getting rid of them if they don’t play nice. Microsoft plays nice with other companies as long as it seems fit. As soon as they see a way to make enough dollars in any given industry to make it worth their while they bully their competitors out of business… see Netscape, RealMedia and soon Symantec.
In the end both know why the other party hates them. They see “collateral damage” as acceptable for as long as it serves to reach your long term goals.
In end why can’t they all just play nice? Maybe we wouldn’t have viruses in the fist place. But perhaps as someone said to me the other day… it’s already too late for that.
You can’t make something perfectly secure. You can make it hard enough to crack feasibly, but that doesn’t mean its perfect.
Why wouldn’t Microsoft release quality products? I mean I’m sure no one on the Windows team actually wants to make an insecure operating system. And no one on the OneCare team would want to make an incompetent virus scanner.
Of course you can’t make things 100% secure. Linux isn’t secure and Mac OSX isn’t secure… and neither will be Windows Vista. But I truly believe they didn’t have security in mind when they put the OneCare team in place.
And because they soooo desperately insist on staying backward compatible Windows has grown to an uncontrallable monster. Similar things have apparently happened to Adobe’s Photoshop which is why they are completely reworking it. Ok so Windows is a little bit more complex than Photoshop but Microsoft does have a truck load more resources available to them.
Personally, I feel they really are just aimlessly trying to protect revenue. To scared to make Windows Vista something truely great.
“why wouldn’t Microsoft release quality products?” That’s a good question… you tell me… the only quality product they released in the last few years is the Xbox360. But why in the world didn’t they learn from the xbox lessons and transfer some of that knowledge into the Windows world? Hell, they didn’t even bother to plaster the Microsoft name all over the xbox advertising. It’s the xbox360… not the Microsoft xbox360. I think the bottom line is that Microsoft has some great talent they just don’t seem to know to get all that power onto the road. Perhaps a middle management problem.
I used to truly love M$ but they seem to have lost a lot of relevance in the last couple of years.