Microsoft… Yes again…

Its been a while since I bashed Microsoft, mostly because I don’t pay attention anymore. However, every once in a while a statement comes from Microsoft that is so ridiculous in my opinion that I just can’t resist. Its almost like they write this stuff just to tempt me to mock them –

Here is a nice quote by Kevin Turner the COO at Microsoft –

“We’ve talked a lot about compatibility, we don’t need to talk as much about compatibility anymore, we need to talk about the fact that, look, what Vista is, its the most secure product in the history of operating systems on a desktop. It is more secure today than Apple Leopard, or XP, or Linux, or open source. We built this product to engineer in security on the front end, not as a service pack. As a result of that, we tightened down things like user account controls. Yes, it required a lot of compatibility upgrades and fixes, but you know what, it’s important that you understand the progress, and you’re able to articulate that, and fewer patching is what all customers want, and there’s a cost savings there. Windows Vista with Service Pack 1 delivers that.”

Now I put this out to you – Is there ANYONE on the planet that believes that Vista is MORE secure than OSX or various flavors of linux based operating systems? Anyone…. Anyone… In addition, last time I checked “linux” was a kernel not an operating system, and “open source” is a concept for software freedom and distribution not an operating system. I’ll just remember that Microsoft “told me” that Vista is more secure the next time I have to fix one of my kids computers that got turned into a zombie AGAIN just for visiting some website.

He also talks about compatibility as if they’ve solved the issue? Does he even use Vista? Vista should either break compatibility in the name of stability and security OR it should maintain compatibility at the expense of stability and security. Instead its backwards compatibility isn’t great and neither is its security, and ESPECIALLY not its stability.

This is Microsofts COO talking?! When you have have a tree this big and this rotten you don’t prune anymore, you simply chop it down and start over. Microsoft could simply admit where they have issues and work to fix them. Customers don’t like that, but at least they UNDERSTAND it. Instead Microsoft will scream at you over and over that the sky is green not blue. Spinning, PR alerts, and bald faced lies just don’t work anymore.

Ahh… I feel much better now.

Matt Heaton /

19 Responses to “Microsoft… Yes again…”

  1. Travis says:

    I also love how he says, “We built this product to engineer in security on the front end, not as a service pack.” and then finishes up the statement with, “Windows Vista with Service Pack 1 delivers that.”


  2. Philip says:

    In your post you suggest that Microsoft “chops down the tree and starts over.” It’s actually the case that Microsoft did start over with Vista. The thing is, they did such a great job working in backwards compatibility that no one realizes the changes that went on behind the scenes. (Paul Thurrott had an article about this a few weeks ago. Link:

    I’m a Mac user from way back, but I thrive on technology news, so I listen to everything I can. Vista is really getting hammered by the press, but from listening to reports from people in the know, Vista is quite a step up in terms of security. I think Microsoft has to work on their advertising because the only news about Vista these days is negative, if they want a chance they have to advertise the good side to Vista.

  3. Dave M. says:

    Matt are you saying that you can not configure a Windows machine so that it will not be taken over by a website?

    There are many ways to block malicious code and none of them even cost money. I am an end user IT guy. I fix Windows machines all the time. It is actually very easy to keep the bad stuff off.

    If you were a hacker would you bother with the computers that make up less than 10% of computers on the internet?

    I have said before that all Operating systems are equally bad.

    With that being said you have to wonder what is eventually to become of Microsoft with leadership like this?

  4. Oh, yeah, Vista is so compatible that no one has gotten it to work with my beloved perfect all-in-one (Lexmark P3150) and I also can’t use my beloved Webdisk with it to maintain my BlueHost site. I really need to find a cheap copy of XP on ebay so I can actually USE my new laptop that unfortunately came with Vista installed on it. (DH runs Linux but I’m too dependent on Windows Office2000, and Open Office does NOT have all its capabilities.)

  5. Ali says:

    I agree with Dave

  6. Nick says:

    Well, no matter how much *more* secure Vista is than Windows’ previous incarnations it is still pathetically laughable to suggest it is more secure than Linux/OSX, let alone “open source”?!?!

    Vista is more secure than “open source”??? Would anyone care to explain this one because I just can’t work it out…

  7. XTZGZoReX says:

    Firefox + Adblock Plus & NoScript = Done, security all over the place.

    @Travis: I was just about to post the same thing when I saw your comment. :)

    @Philip: If Vista is so “compatible” then I don’t understand why half of my games and applications are failing on it. Take Hellgate: London as an example for a game; Vista leaves you at the loading screen of each level for 5 minutes before you can play on.

    I do admit that Vista has come VERY far when it comes to security (compared to XP and older Windows versions), but honestly, Vista > GNU/Linux operating systems when it comes to security? No, no way. Simple as that.

    As for the open source part, I find that directly stupid. Seriously, ANY idiot can figure than having an open source where you can check through every single function, constant, variable, and array is more secure than a 100% closed source operating system where you have no idea what’s going on behind the scenes.

    There goes my input…

  8. Dear Matt,

    I am concerned about recent trends in the UK where ISPs are selling statistics to advertising companies. I think this is a bigger threat to privacy than anything else right now. It is tempting to obtain revenue from allowing marketing companies to set up a black box on your traffic. I hope you are not considering this. I am trusting you.

  9. Ty says:

    I was just watching some snippets of Monty Python before I read the Microsoft quote of being more secure than OSX, etc… I needed that laugh! What are they smoking?

  10. Brandon says:

    Hi All,

    So if Vista is more secure than Leopard, Linux and Open Source then I wish Kevin Turner could explain this. I had so many viruses on my windows laptop that I couldn’t run windows on it any more, it just kept being bogged down by the amount of re-formats I did and the viruses going on it. But since then I have used Linux on that Laptop and what do you know it runs like its brand new and I’ve never gotten a virus on it.

    Now I am a software reviewer so its understandable that i get more viruses than the common person but I thought Kevin said Vista is more secure that Leopard, Linux and Open Source.

    Why cant microsoft just admit Vista was a disaster and move on?

  11. Jake says:

    AMEN brotha! My goodness. Do they think any of us really believe any of that PAP!?

  12. David Bach says:

    Well Dave M., etc.. Matt is right about visiting websites with Vista.

    I have to fix Windows computers all the time. (Just reload everything then patch.. patch… patch.. load virus protection.. Wow where did all the speed come from.)

    I will stick with OS X and Ubuntu for all my work.


  13. B. Smith says:


    The security conference held here in Vancouver in March showed a continuation of a trend from previous such hacking contests: MacOS is usually the first to be hacked.

    As far as the remaining two (Vista and Linux), it was an Adobe Flash vulnerability that got Vista. The same Flash vulnerability would have compromised Linux as well but the rules of the contest removes a cross platform attack once it has been successfully used. In the CanSecWest hacking contest, neither Vista or Linux showed any inherent superiority.


  14. Barry says:

    The worst part of it is their arrogance at shoving Vista down our throats. I’d love to buy one of the cheap new laptops out there but you can’t get a new laptop with XP. If linux could get the hardware support issues fixed it would be so easy to FU Micro$loth!

  15. nahtass says:

    Bug fat LOL. I have $4k in audio gear dead because no one will write 64bit drivers for Vista. I also have a few thousand ready to spend on new gear but they are behind in development (don’t want to do it).

    And for the (un)official record. I heard Vista was a product of corporate contracts requiring MSoft to release a new product for purchase. So vista got thrown out fast to be able to collect on the large corporate contracts. So, in other words, another ME.

    And as the rumor goes in the programming world, all of the Windows ME developers were drunk.


  16. Mark says:

    Matt, I like your spunk, and I love your company, but your Windows bashing is starting to look sad.

    Look, MS spokespeople are going to say positive things about Vista, what do you expect? But the fact is that Vista is built like a tank, and OSX has in fact very weak security. Then how do you explain all those people, like your kids, with infected Windows machines? I know it’s been argued before to the point of exhaustion, but it’s true: OSX has a smaller userbase, and thus, less risk from attackers.

    Now, I’d rather be in a Go-Cart in Connecticut than an Armored Tank in Baghdad, but the point still stands.

  17. july says:

    There’s the Microsoft Windows 7 now. And I think it will be much better than Vista :)

  18. Did you see now the “discrepancy” of opinions between Steve Jobs and MS CEO about the future of PC’s as we know them. After reading what both of them said, I definitely believe Steve Jobs more

Leave a Reply