That's not a fix, that's workaround. Doesn't work. Re: Score: 2 , Informative. Although Vista is doing comparatively worse than XP due to the fivefold increase in PC sales between their respective first years, the total Vista sales are higher, so there should be more people finding flaws. Two points here: 1. Slashdotters have maintained for years Congratulations on not being a bigot and actually thinking about what you write.
Let's look at linux, OSX and a few of the other open source based operating systems. Re:bullshit Score: 4 , Interesting. Yes, you are right. Let's all use your recommended method for inferring user base. Oh wait My recommended method is no method at all: there is no simple, reliable way of determining user base for operating systems. Even the concept is meaningless. For example, there probably have been more Linux-based routers like the WRT54G sold than Mac desktops and laptops; does that mean Linux has a bigger user base?
Yeah, cause nobody uses it! Score: 2 , Funny. Re:Yeah, cause nobody uses OS X! Score: 3 , Insightful. Us Mac users never believed in this line of logic.
How are they logged? Score: 5 , Insightful. Is this via support calls or just little modal dialog boxes that people are tired of clicking "send" on? Or are they filtering out things they've already encountered in XP? Statistics are a great aid to the common lie. Methodology has issues Score: 4 , Interesting.
I learned something. Re:Methodology has issues Score: 5 , Insightful. I think the GP wasn't talking about the kernels. Linux distros simply distribute much much more software than comes with your average proprietary OS. Most will issue a security advisory when there's a bug in apache, mysql, postgres, sqlite or all of these types of things.
Microsoft doesn't issue an advisory about a bug in Oracle. On Linux, the distros take responsibility for a much much wider range of software than Microsoft does on their platforms.
So what are you comparing? That's true, but it's hardly a defense of Linux distros. More lines of code doesn't imply better by any means. Re:Methodology has issues Score: 4 , Funny. Re:Methodology has issues Score: 4 , Insightful. Don't change the subject, he didn't say better.
And as far as a defense, it's not, it's an explanation. When microsoft ships with several different database packages, several different browsers, several different desktop environments, several different office suites, a crapload of various network tools, applications, etc Until then, it's like comparing the number of problems found in a storage shed to a skyscraper, and using that comparison to try to argue that the shed is better since it had less reported problems.
The author of the article was making a kernel-to-kernel comparison. If the Linux kernel contains more lines of code, it probably contains more bugs. But that doesn't mean it should contain more lines of code. The kernel itself is simpler, the difference is drivers Windows doesnt include many drivers, most are sourced from third parties. It also doesn't include many optional components, anything optional tends to come from third parties too.
Linux ships with a large set of hardware drivers in the kernel, although they can be turned off.. Windows comes with things like video support that can't be removed, and which needs third party drivers to work properly. Re:Methodology has issues Score: 5 , Informative. Employee rejoices Score: 3 , Funny. Number of vulnerabilities -- who cares? For the last time, you just can't add up the number of vulnerabilities in separate products from different authors and expect to glean any meaningful information from numerology thereon.
Re:Number of vulnerabilities -- who cares? Score: 5 , Funny. For the last time , you just can't [ Well, sure there're few flaws seen - Score: 5 , Funny. In related news, BeOS showed few vulnerabilities this year Re:Well, sure there're few flaws seen - Score: 5 , Funny.
Re: Score: 3 , Funny. Could the reason there are fewer exploits in the first year of Vista Verses XP be due to the fact that it has a reluctant adoption rate bu users and the OS exploiters are likely focusing their efforts on current Operating Systems that are more stable, known, and in higher use. Give it time Besides, now that Microsoft has set for the new "Windows 7" release target date, it seems that Vista may be the new short-lived 'Windows Me'.
Your argument fails. The number of exploits does not depend on the number of computers running it. It depends on the number of flaws that can be exploited. Passed every test Score: 5 , Funny. Click to launch Word. Sounds plausible Score: 4 , Funny. In other news Score: 2 , Funny. Boeing has said it's latest jet liner crashes less and Ford has made a car that kills fewer drivers. Straight from Churchill Score: 2 , Funny. How does that old quote go?
You spin me right round baby right round. Score: 2. I was convinced at the time rightly or wrongly that XP was complete crap proir to SP2 and was certainly not alone. I did quite a few win2k installs at that time and a few since on low memory machines. Server was impressive on the machine I ran it on as well - I'm not entirely sure why XP and vista comes across as the hobby systems you have to pay for.
Perspective Score: 2 , Flamebait. Absolute flaws reported doesn't work Score: 5 , Insightful. I think that is a silly measure of bugginess. Not only does the number of flaws reported being less reflect lower usage of Vista, it also likely says the the reporting system is difficult to work with. If anything, I think the fact that the non-Windows systems have a higher number of flaws reported indicates that they have easier-to-use bug reporting systems.
The correct way to measure statistics on things like this is either to have a third party subject them to a standardized battery of tests indicating actual security levels or to measure the ratio of bugs fixed to total bugs reported indicating the development team's ability to correct reported flaws quickly. Fewer flaws because Score: 3 , Interesting. Remember ladies, this is what George W. Bush's go-away speech is going to be like. Don't be too scathing. Let them have their moment.
Windows 7 announcement in Report says Ubuntu is better! From the PDF [technet. Look how many vista have left to find!! Re:Report says Ubuntu is better! Score: 4 , Interesting. Score: 4 , Insightful. And how many were patched silently without being publicly disclosed? Will microsoft be willing to disclose their internal changelogs if they even exist detailing exactly what changes were made to code and why?
Vista SP1 looks to be huge, how many vulnerabilities known only to microsoft are going to silently get fixed without ever being disclosed to the public? Statistics Score: 5 , Insightful. Reminds me of a quote - "Statistics are like humans. Torture them enough and you can make them admit anything you want".
You know it's bad when not even the script kiddies wanna get their paws on it. Personally Score: 2 , Funny. Nobody uses Vista? According to this link, if you took all the Linux and Apple users and put them into a single group, it STILL wouldn't be as many people who are using Vista by a good size chunk let alone XP , so let's not repeat that lie again. I don't mind people being critical of anything, but please be honest in your critique. And whatever you do don't use Apple as an example of "the way things should be".
I'm sure this will be tagged flamebait or troll. That's kind of ironic when I'm replying to all these guy's tagged 'informative' who say "Nobody uses Vista" when they are obviously providing false information.
If pointing out a blatant lie makes me a troll so be it. I guess they don't count design flaws Score: 2. I tend to file "design flaws" as bugs at work. I guess they aren't bugs here. At least they aren't a security threat, so that's something at least. Linux has the better bug-per-dollar ratio.
I agree! My copy of XP has been humming along nicely ever since Vista's release. Usual counting method Score: 2. This is why I why I resist the notion that there are too many smart people over at MS. They routinely use the idea that number of flaws in their OS being less than number flaws in an entire linux distribution is somehow a sensible metric.
How does someone even type that out? I mean Only 1 Flaw Score: 5 , Funny. And that 1 flaw was actually putting Vista on the market. Quick rebuttal to Appendix A Score: 5 , Interesting. From Jeff Jones' report: Q: Linux distros contain many more optional applications than Windows - that is Apples and Oranges - how can any comparison be valid? From a user perspective, I think it is Apples and Apples. Whichever OS is chosen, I believe most people will install the default set of components and use that.
If vulnerabilities are in those components, they will be exposed and need to take mitigating action. I did, however, try to even the playing field as much as possible by excluding optional Linux-distro components and excluding even some default components for which there is no obvious counterpart. In contrast, on the Windows analysis, I included any component that shipped with the product.
I think the comparison is valid and useful. You can't even compare against Jeff's Windows numbers because he looks into how critical each vulnerability is on Windows good but not on any Linux setup bad. If the real concern is user exposure, then vulnerabilities in all packages makes sense, but only if you count vulnerabilities in common Windows packages to, like Acrobat Reader, Photoshop, Office, and even games like WoW.
My biggest beef is that Jeff fails to include his compiled vulnerability database. Why are you people focusing on the tree and not the forest? No surprise there. No software for any NT-based operating system should assume that you have administrator privileges for everyday operation. I have trouble installing XP on my laptop. You made me vomit a little in my mouth. Power User is a cop out.
Nobody should ever be a Power User. Power User has been castrated, and rightfully so, in Vista and now has no more permission than a User. I really hope you have some good users because having everyone be a Power User would be a spyware hell. Supporting, troubleshooting, and maintaining Vista is magnitudes easier than XP could ever hope to be. Try looking at the event viewer for starters. I still have like MB ram free so why god damed does it do that?.
Vista will be a forced upgrade, no porting for DX10, some pretty obvious market manipulation in regards to games….. Halo 2 for pc being Vista only is a great example given it runs fine on XP once hacked to remove the restrictions. Agree, as the Problems where in my case only located do to incompatible Audio Drivers, who got mostly updated at 2ndQ My thoughts exactly. People forget so quickly how much everyone seemed to loathe XP.
I really had no problems with it and pretty much loved it instantly. Several critical line of business apps don't work period under vista without major workarounds, and we still can't get power management to work consistently for our laptop fleet. It's a no go for now. You can cook the numbers any way you like, so always make sure you know who the chef is. While providing support for businesses up to It can take that opportunity to try again with a better Vista, or just move on to the next version that maybe this time we'll all actually want.
Tried this? There is something wrong, improper graphics driver. The Graphics numbers are 1. Thats the way it is on my optiplex … the graphics scores are both 3. I put Vista on this system knowing full well that it was not going to run Aero. The two lowest scores in my Performance index are Graphics related 3. It may not play Crysis, but I never intended it to try. With 4 gigs, XP x64, and Audigy 2, I see a loss of all hardware accelerated features.
Load up Everest and look under DirectX Sound. Unfortunately its needless incompatibilities were formed by not Microsoft Windows ….
Otherwise, sleep and resume on vista is godly, and SP1 fixes copy file stuff which makes it pwn more …. Did you apply the hack, that may cause that problem. You may want to delete all of those files and then rerun the test. No Vista machine should score less than 3. Some games even have higher frame rates on Vista than I got on XP, go figure. You know, I had few problems with ME. It more or less worked alongside my 98SE machine just fine.
MS needed to make a quick money maker for the mainstream market. Guess what happen when XP finally came out? MS abandoned ME like a prom-night newborn. Oh yeah, forgot about the whole problem with certain applications refusing to work outside of administrative rights.
That is the result of bad software development practice that has been going on for years in the Windows arena. Vista exposes its ugly head by making the default account non-administrative. I do agree that UAC is a good idea, but execution is very ham-fisted. I strongly agree that Vista is from ready to be use in the IT world.
It is too immature with some compatibility problems. What a surprise… the release management director whose job depends on how successful his software development process proves to be in reducing the number and severity of bugs wants the QA team to artificially deflate the severity of bugs that occur in software developed with his procedure.
Anyone with experience at a large commercial software vendor is familiar with these tactics. Release management is the art of drafting well-meaning but often counter-productive procedures in the hopes that defect rates will go down, allowing the release management team to take credit for what was mostly the work of the development teams—and also the art of massaging the data to make even problematic development cycles look good.
Having a bunch of old bugs on the long-term wish list is a good idea for developers but looks bad for management. But despite the limitations, the OpenBSD folks decided that if the attack can come from any other computer, then it is indeed a remote hole.
A bug is a bug, and the only way to classify its severity is based on the probability that a customer would hit it and the potential impact that it would cause. As someone who does not have experience at a large commercial software vendor, I thank you for pointing this out. With that being said, most of WIndows problems squarely lay around just simply crappy code more than it being the result of end users making stupid decisions.
The problem with UAC is the typical Microsoft kissup is already recommending it be turned off. What a stupid comment! To call Unix a server OS is a bit silly. With Vista its so easy to turn off UAC and so irritating you want to turn it off.
0コメント