Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> __/ [ Mark Kent ] on Friday 19 May 2006 08:16 \__
>
>> begin oe_protect.scr
>> Au79 <au79@xxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> CNET News.com - San Francisco,CA,USA
>>>
>>> ... Microsoft should do more to protect Windows ... can and should
>>> protect the kernel of Windows, make it less vulnerable, and respond more
>>> quickly to vulnerabilities. ...
>>>
>>><http://news.com.com/Beware+the+Microsoft+monoculture/2008-1009_3-6073640.html>
>>
>> MS presumably need to find any possibility of additional revenue - this
>> will involve destroying its remaining partners, I'm sure.
>
> One used to be able to say that Symantec were Microsoft partners,
> virtually. Symantec protected that troubled platform and inhibited some
> users, which could otherwise run elsewhere.
>
> Now, look where the loveaffair stands.
>
>
http://news.com.com/2100-7355_3-6072540.html?part=rss&tag=6072540&subj=news
>
> Symantec CEO advocates Macs
>
> http://news.com.com/1606-2_3-6073553.html?part=rss&tag=6073553&subj=news
>
> Symantec CEO: "Diversity is key to secure infrastructure"
>
>
http://news.com.com/2100-1014_3-6074055.html?part=rss&tag=6074055&subj=news
>
> Symantec sued Microsoft last night
>
> That's the thank-you for all these years of protecting Windows. Netscaping
> them...
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Roy
>
It is clear that partnering with Microsoft is like partnering with a Black
Widow. "Once we've had your services, you are the main course."
Ian
|
|
