On Wednesday 07 June 2006 10:13 pm, Roy Schestowitz had this to say in
comp.os.linux.advocacy:
> Can the malware industry be trusted?
>
> ,----[ Conclusion ]
> | Today, players like McAfee, Symantec, Norton, and dozens of other firms
> | fight for a share of a market worth tens-of-billions of dollars a year.
> |
> | [...]
> |
> | The Windows economy is a tough arena to play in. You have to keep
> | Mister Gates happy to survive, and even then, there isn't any guarantee
> | that your niche in the market won't be gobbled up by the next release
> | of Windows. Of course, sometimes the little fish try to bite back. That
> | is what Symantec is trying to do now to prevent Vista swallowing them
> | whole.
> |
> | It may be that if you do business with Microsoft on a regular basis, you
> | get used to working in an ethics-free environment, and you begin to
> | practice the same black business arts as the master. Whatever the cause,
> | hat I see happening in the malware business today reflects Microsoft's
> | own ethics-free practices. I'm not convinced there is an honest firm
> | in the whole mess. So in my humble opinion, the answer to the question,
> | "can the malware industry be trusted?" is a resounding "No!" What do
> | you think?
> `----
>
> http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/06/1832223&from=rss
>
> BTW: Microsoft OneCare is now sold for a discount price and AOL started
> their own anti-malware product. It's like financial party over the lack of
> security in Windows.
MickeyMouse leads the way in being unethical on this whole subject. Imagine
providing an insecure toy operating system and then charging people to try
and secure it. Incredible!
--
The ULTIMATE Windoze Fanboy:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2370205018226686613
View Some Common Linux Desktops ...
http://linclips.crocusplains.com/index.php
|
|
