Microsoft considers taking admin rights from employees

May 23, 2006 2 Comments

From the ZDnet article: As Microsoft moves its internal desktop systems to Windows Vista, the company is contemplating whether to change a long running tradition and take away admin rights from its employees in order to improve security.
This explain quite a bit I think. While some job functions absolutely need admin privileges, every employee at a company as large as Microsoft is a bit much. I think, though, it shows the mentality of the company when it comes to security. That mentality comes though in the end product, which has been historically ridden with security issues. This may also explain why so many applications that quite simply should not require admin privileges do – if Microsoft runs everyone as admin, that's the example that's being set. I've seen many companies give up and give people admin for the sole reason that it's the only way they can get things to work. Enter a decade of viruses, malware and fun. Good to see this mentality may finally be changing, although it's a bit late. Maybe in 5-10 years most Windows software will understand the proper security paradigm and the security issues will calm down. The Vista successor should be out by then ;)
–jeremy
, , , , ,

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Can the ordinary computer user ditch Windows for Linux?

May 16, 2006 1 Comment

That's the questions Mark Golden recently asked in the Wall Street Journal. His conclusion?
For me, though, using the Linux systems didn't make sense. I often send documents and spreadsheets between my home PC and the one at work, which uses Microsoft Office. And the files are sometimes complex. Meanwhile, for both personal and professional computer use, I want access to all multimedia functions.
While solutions may exist to almost every problem I encountered, I was willing to invest only a limited amount of time as a system administrator. Claims by some Linux publishers that anybody can easily switch to Linux from Windows seem totally oversold.
Despite a few minor errors (Linux was really written as a Minix replacement, I'd hardly call Usenet in 1993 a “Web bulletin board”, Linus really is not in charge of maintaining central Linux standards) I think Mark gives Linux a fair assessment (although I think he would have faired slightly better with newer distribution versions). Linux isn't ready for the desktop. But, things really are changing. During the first round of Linux on the desktop talk about 4-5 years ago, Linux wasn't ready for technical reasons. To a large degree, that has changed. It's not ready now mostly due to legal encumbrances, software patents and other non-technical stumbling blocks. For many reasons though, I think these will be much harder to overcome than the technical obstacles were. You see – the Linux community is filled with some really smart people that excel at overcoming tough technical issues. We were bound to fix the technical issues. The Linux community however is not necessarily filled with people interested in marketing and it's especially not filled with people who are willing to concede freedom in the name of marketing. Look at the drubbing Linspire took when they released what from one angle can be seen as a legitimate attempt to fix the problems Mark had.
As you know, I've covered this topic a lot recently. I'm coming to see this situation as sort of the Ying and the Yang or the fire and the water. On one side we have the people who will fight for freedom, do what's right and solve the technical issues. On the other side we have the people that are interested in making things easy and catering to the masses. The intersection is that they both want to help Linux adoption (albeit for much different reasons). I'm slowly coming to an understanding that both groups need each other more than they may think at first. You see, the first group – they want open specs, open solutions and Open Source. But, with the current marketshare, it's not hard to understand why some companies aren't listening. Very few companies are interested in doing the “right thing”. They are interested in maximizing profits. So in come the people who are attempting to market Linux to the so called unwashed masses (ie. the ones who don't see there computer as a tool or something to tinker with, but merely as a way to check email). So, the question becomes can both sides meet at the intersecting point and agree to work to the same end via different means? Can we work towards to end goal of group 1 (which I think in the right one, personally) via group 2 gaining marketshare and mindshare in the main stream while avoiding the binary doomsday scenario? I'm still thinking about that one, but I'm interested in what others have to say.
So, does the fire need water?
–jeremy
, , , ,

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

The Microsoft Malaise

May 4, 2006 Leave a comment

In his usual style Dvorak mixes rational thought with wild speculation to get readers attention. But let's look into the topic, as it's an interesting one. Microsoft is clearly finding it difficult to compete. As mentioned, that will not stop them from making piles of cash for the foreseeable future, but in this industry it's possible for the giants to fall remarkably fast. So what is Microsoft doing right now. It looks pretty clear that Vista is going to be a large disappointment. It will gain some traction on new PC's, but I don't see any kind of immediate must have upgrade potential in the enterprise. The product is so late and the feature list so cut, that if Microsoft didn't have the market share they do, this would have been absolutely disastrous. Second, at a time when OOo is finally coming into its own, Office decides to completely redo the UI from the ground up and release seven versions. This is a bold move to take with one of their two cash cows and with ODF an ISO standard now, this will be fascinating to watch play out. So, with the writing on the wall, Microsoft has started to diversify. The problem is, they are going in too many directions at once, and not doing any of them outstanding. The Xbox360 is nice, but they failed to gauge demand and way under produced, which in the console industry is a killer (just ask Nintendo). MSN has failed to gain any ground in the search space as has most of of the online attempts Microsoft has made. I think all these from Vista to MSN share a common thread though. Microsoft has lost touch with their users. They're concentrating on everything except what their users want. That's a dangerous thing to do.
This brings us to one of the points I partially disagree with in the article. John says Microsoft is preoccupied with Google, who is not even a competitor. That's shortsighted. Google is a competitor. They are slowly proving that the web can be the OS, at least for a large portion of users. Nothing could be more detrimental to the Microsoft bottom line. The partial part comes in because I do think their complete preoccupation has become a problem. It seems every app Google comes out with, Microsoft throws a me-too copy out sometime later. They're losing focus. The irony here is that one of the only innovations to come out of Microsoft in some time, XMLHttpRequest, is the base of AJAX which may plant the seed that finally displaces them. What an odd type of justice that would be.
–jeremy
, , , ,

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Microsoft Admits to Hiding Flaw Details

April 20, 2006 Leave a comment

While it's been suspected for some time now, Microsoft has publicly admitted that they silently fix some vulnerabilities with absolutely no disclosure at all. From the article:
“We want to make sure we don't give attackers any [additional] information that could be used against our customers. There is a balance between providing information to assess risk and giving out information that aids attackers,” Reavey said.
We all know that security through obscurity really doesn't offer any level of protection at all. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for responsible disclosure, but no disclosure at all is just not acceptable. The wrong people will expend the effort to reverse engineer the patches and figure things out. The people that suffer are the helpless Windows administrators. Microsoft has created an admin culture where only the patches that impact an environment are applied by most Windows admins. Part of this is a result of so many patches gone bad. But, if the security bulletin for a patch says it fixes one thing, but really also fixes 4 other things silently, you never know what you're vulnerable to. Now, I'd recommend installing all patches of course, but that's just not reality for most of the Windows world.
This brings up another topic though. A while back I posted about the year-end vulnerability summary that showed Linux/Unix had more vulnerabilities than Windows. So not only did the report include multiple counts for single apps and apps that are not even included in base distros on the Linux side, it also didn't count vulnerabilities that either Microsoft never fixed or ones that they silently fixed during other patches. The worst part of this is that Microsoft uses reports like this in their marketing. So, they don't ever fix some vulnerability, silently fix other and then claim that hey have less vulnerabilities. All in the name of “customer best interest”. Yikes.
–jeremy
, , , , ,

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Vista won't show fancy side to pirates

April 15, 2006 1 Comment

So it appears that Windows Vista is going to do a piracy check and then disable Aero if you don't have a licensed copy. That's right – it won't refuse to run or even cripple functionality, you just won't get translucent windows or animated flips. You see, Microsoft won't admit it, but they need piracy. It's one of the ways they keep the market share that they have. Keeping that market share is extremely important to their business plan. Of course, they don't want piracy to be completely rampant, so they do things like this. Considering most pirated copies of Windows are the corporate versions that don't phone home anyway though, I think there is more to it. By disabling some features like this, it makes the OS seem less like a commodity and more like something special. Once the OS level has been commoditized (something Linux is driving toward) there is just no way Microsoft could charge what they do for Windows. With the trend toward commoditization consistently growing and the Windows market share slowly being chipped away at, you realize how important Vista really is. Add in the fact that Mac hardware prices are falling along with the improvements in virtualization and emulation and things are looking worse and worse for Microsoft on the Windows front. In the end, the average consumer should benefit from this greatly. Not only will they have real choice for the first time in a long time but all OS's will need to remain more competitive. Most Microsoft products have stagnated recently since they didn't need to improve to survive. Luckily, those days are swiftly coming to an end.
–jeremy
Vista, Microsoft, MSFT, Windows, Aero, Open Source, Linux

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Paul Allen and Microsoft

April 3, 2006 1 Comment

I had always wondered why Paul Allen had exited Microsoft so early and so completely. While he remained on the board for years after his departure, for a founder he never really seemed to have any close ties with the company he helped start. I thought maybe the inequitable setup between him and Bill Gates might have rubbed him the wrong way, but considering how he made out finacially in the end that seems a bit far fetched. Cringely offers more details that I hadn't heard before. This article is certainly fuel for flames Internet-wide, but without more context it's hard for me to join in. When you own a company, it's your fiduciary responsibility to make sure things run smooth. While the topic discussed is an unfortunate one and one most people will never have to deal with, it is one that is just reality. That's were context comes into play, at least for me. It could have been a discussion of the “we need to get these shares before this guy croaks” variety or of the “if he unfortunately does not pull through this, we need to ensure that the company survives” variety. Given the personalities involved, it may vary well have been the former but I'm not in a position to know that. I'm guessing only Bill and Steve (and possibly Paul, depending on how good his hearing is) will ever know. Maybe Bill is so philanthropic now as a result of guilt brought on by decisions like these (or maybe he just needs the tax break). To me the interesting question raised here is, what would Microsoft look like today if Paul Allen had 50% and/or had stayed at Microsoft. Their corporate culture would be different for sure, but they may very well have been less financially successful in the short term (having possibly been less shady). The current deep distrust and dislike by many may have been avoidable then though. Less anti-monopoly lawsuits and less “anything to get away from Microsoft” sentiment. That means many less people (from an end user perspective, not a developer one) may have even considered Open Source. Steve and Bill really are creating their own worst enemy in many ways, aren't they. In the end we'll never know. Paul sums things up from his side quite nicely though – “I made out okay”. At least financially, he sure did…
–jeremy
, , , , ,

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Microsoft Delays IE's ActiveX D-Day

March 30, 2006 2 Comments

In a somewhat ironic turn of events, Microsoft is being forced to change how ActiveX works in order to avoid a software patent held by Eolas. So much for proprietary software indemnifying you from patent issues. As a heavy user of the web and a proponent of open standards, I'm really happy to see anything that decreases the use of ActiveX. It's insecure and only works in IE, but that doesn't stop people from using it for some reason. On the flip side though, this is yet another example of why software patents are bad. I'd like to think a light would go on at some companies when a system they support is used against them in a very questionable way, but from some reason I don't think that's going to happen. It should be interesting to watch on April 11th to see how the browser update really does change peoples perspectives on things. Will they start to learn why open standards are good and why software patents are bad? Very unlikely. Will they not care about the technical/legal stuff and simply seek out a solution that just works? Much more likely, which means it could be a good day for Firefox.
–jeremy
, , , , ,

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Hilf speaks about Linux through Microsoft eyes

March 28, 2006 Leave a comment

When I saw the title of this article, I was quite interested to see what Bill Hilf had to say on the topic. As Director of Platform Technology Strategy he's in charge of the Microsoft LinuxLab, which means he must have a pretty interesting perspective on things. Unfortunately, the article was extremely light on what he thinks about Linux or about what Microsoft is actually doing with Linux. It does get a little into what they are doing with Open Source though, which is also a topic of interest for me. The first thing that caught my eye was his reason for pulling out out LinuxWorld AU – “an internal meeting that could not be moved”. Considering his job function, that must be a pretty important meeting. I found his statement about the size of his department quite telling also. “It's a small, experienced and focused team – it usually is around eight to 10 people at any given time.” Reading between the lines a bit, I'd say the department must have extremely high turnover. To be fair, I can certainly see why. The two questions he seemed to dodge, “How does Microsoft plan to make money from open source and Linux?” and “How much does Microsoft view open source and Linux as competition?” were the two I'd liked to have seen answered the most. One thing that comes up in the article is something I've seen said by multiple people from Microsoft from multiple disparate department, both on and off the record. Microsoft is learning from the OSS development model itself and are indeed using some of the methodologies and parts of the paradigm to improve their internal development process. More proof (although at this point I don't even think more proof is necessary) that the model demonstrably produces better code. Even though you know it, it's always great to see it in print in an interview like this. I think an open dialog between Bill and the Linux team at Microsoft could be quite beneficial for all involved. If anyone from Microsoft reading this interested in making it happen, feel free to contact me.
–jeremy
, , , , ,

Filed under Linux, LinuxWorld, Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

More on Vista Delays

March 26, 2006 Leave a comment

The recently announced Windows Vista delays are certainly causing quite a stir, which was expected. The amount of stir being caused within the company itself though seems to be greater than I'd have anticipated. Usually, most Microsoft employees are fairly good at backing company decisions, but many seem to be getting quite frustrated at this point. Some are even calling for exec level firings, which to be honest seem reasonable at this point. They have dropped the ball multiple times now while getting compensated quite nicely. The reality here is that Microsoft has put themselves in a very tight spot. They have really hyped Vista, so when it does come out it has to be good. If it's not the stock price will suffer as will the companies long term reputation. At this point in the game, they can't afford that. I'm sure that's why the painful decision to delay was made. But, the longer they delay, the weaker they seem. The rumblings about whether they can actually produce will get louder and the stock price will suffer as will the companies long term reputation. The proverbial chink in the armor is growing. Now, don't get me wrong, when Vista does finally ship it is going to see wide adoption. Consumer OEM installs will come first and with SP1 corporate America will follow. Microsoft and Windows aren't irrelevant, despite what you might read or want to believe. The marketshare is just too big. But, how many more delays and under delivered releases can they stand before the current status quo changes? It's a very tenuous time for Microsoft on both the Windows and Office fronts. The day when you can walk into a CIO's office and ask “what would it take to replace Windows on the desktop” without getting a blank stare are on the horizon…and I'd guess it's going to come faster than Microsoft had anticipated. Luckily for them, they're diversifying like crazy these days. Let's start a pool for what year neither Windows or Office will be the biggest revenue generators for them company will be :) On a somewhat related note, Scoble points out another case of journalistic stupidity, which is something I've covered here time and time again. If Microsoft could rewrite 60% of the entire codebase in that time frame do you think they'd have delayed the product this many times? That's just nonsensical, but it sure did make headlines.
–jeremy
, , , ,

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Microsoft Updates Windows Vista Road Map

March 21, 2006 Leave a comment

It looks like Microsoft has once again delayed the general release of Windows Vista. The bad news for them on this one? They are going to now miss another Christmas season, where it's reported that up to 30% of all PC's for the year are sold. This gives Linux (and Apple with OS X) more time to improve their product and gain some more footing before the marking blitz swings into full gear. This had to be a really painful decision and leads be to presume that something was seriously wrong with the product. OR, maybe Microsoft has learned from past mistakes – anything is possible I guess. Either way, this really is a critical release for them. After working really hard to convince both companies and consumers that XP was the way to go, they now have to convince them that Vista is a compelling upgrade. The easy part for them though, is that a short time after Vista is released it will be the default preinstall option for almost any PC you see in any store. It's almost hard to fail with that setup, isn't it. If the preinstall situation wasn't like it was (and that's a big if…I know), the computer market really would be such a different animal. How much longer can they keep the kung-fu death grip on the OEM market is the question that Microsoft has to be asking themselves. Once they aren't the default no choice option, they're going to be in a world that looks so much different…a world where there is competition that's based on features, security and stability. At least they'll have their marketing budget to fall back on.
–jeremy
, , ,

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Microsoft

← Older posts

Newer posts →