Even though Microsoft is planning to kill off OneCare next year, it's still
touting
the product as a success. A couple of you happen to agree:
I've been very happy with OneCare, mainly for two reasons relating to
my 84-year-old dad's PC. First of all, OneCare wakes the PC in the middle
of the night to do an automated backup to an external hard drive. Dad isn't
aware of this and can't accidentally disable it, so it provides some protection
against his other often careless actions.
And, as part of my OneCare "circle," his system status gets
reported in the OneCare console on my home PC, alerting me to potential issues
as they occur. I haven't had much in the way of problems with OneCare, but
I'd speculate that the cost of providing free support was a big factor in
Microsoft's decision to stop offering it.
-David
I do not know why Microsoft would want to eliminate a necessary product,
especially since it was one of the cheapest packages around. Honestly, in
my opinion, I believe that anti-virus software should be FREE. Protecting
computers from malware and viruses is a necessity and should be provided with
the OS, instead of from the greedy, pay-or-else companies like Symantec. This
is the very reason I use Grisoft AVG.
If companies want to charge for their firewall or parental control products,
fine, but basic protection from hackers should be at the forethought of everyone.
How can you prevent viruses and zombies if we cannot afford the product? Symantec,
McAfee and others are no better than the pirates in Somalia.
-Anonymous
Earlier this week, one
reader wrote that the latest IE 8 beta has been a welcome change to IE 7.
But Rick begs to differ:
You have had one good comment for IE 8. Here's one not-so-good comment:
It stinks, especially on a corporate (government) LAN. Of course, that could
be because the government hasn't caught up with anything in years except Al
Capone.
Anyway, I tried it at home on a Vista upgrade machine and it crashed
too many times. I will have to wait for the RTM version. Although it could
just be that once again, there are way too many features for the average Web
surfer and MS has dumbed it down to where the geek (like me) tries to "fix
it." C'est la vie.
-Rick
Opinions? Criticisms? Let us have 'em! Leave a comment below or send an e-mail
to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 12/03/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Vista is still one of the great mysteries of software. Many like it and can't
for the life of them understand why it gets such a bad rap. Others hate it and
can't for the life of them understand why Microsoft built it in the first place.
For most Microsoft products, the first service pack stamps out the bugs and
makes it usable. The first Vista SP helped, but wasn't enough to change Vista's
bad reputation. Fortunately, SP2
is getting closer, as it's now in wide-scale beta.
Have any of you tried Vista SP2? If so, wadda ya think? Answers welcome at
[email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 12/03/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
How serious is Microsoft about the cloud? Besides building new cloud infrastructure
software and retooling all its apps for remote computing, Microsoft is
pouring
huge bucks into its datacenters, to the tune of 10,000 new servers every
month.
Microsoft has an interesting new approach to building datacenters with efficiencies
that remind me of state-of-the-art supplies like Wal-Mart has. Microsoft's approach
is all modular and snap-in, and the center is architected to deliver Just in
Time capacity (the same way a good supply chain delivers products Just in Time).
Are you starting to think more about clouds? If so, why? Send your thoughts
to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 12/03/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
We've covered (and lamented) OneCare quite a bit. For one, we were concerned
that
OneCare
competed directly with McAfee, Symantec, Sophos and Sunbelt. These companies
all built anti-virus/anti-malware software that saved Windows from a viral meltdown.
Their reward? Having Microsoft compete with them directly, and even denigrate
partners that chose to work with non-Redmond-sourced security software.
We also said that OneCare didn't seem to work very well. It wasn't my opinion
-- it was yours! You told me of all its problems. I never used the thing.
Now Microsoft doesn't care one lick about OneCare and is killing it off next
June. One Microsoft exec explains that putting OneCare on death row doesn't
mean it's guilty of failure. The problem is that poor people need protection
too and can't afford the $50 yearly price tag. (Hmm...I've argued many times
that anti-malware should be built right into the OS, just like brakes and turn
signals and seat belts are built right into the car.)
Microsoft may be turning in this direction with Morro, a free tool that will
replace OneCare. If Morro can stand up to other top-end anti-malware tools,
I'll be a happy computing camper and take back all the bad things I ever said
about OneCare.
Posted by Doug Barney on 12/02/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
A leader of the open source movement recently penned a
piece
for
BusinessWeek arguing that the "open source business model is
broken."
My first reaction is that open source wasn't founded on a business model, but
on a software development model. This software model was then adapted by companies
such as Red Hat to underpin efforts to make money.
But before I get distracted by too much philosophy, let's look at the argument
made by Stuart Cohen, CEO of Collaborative Software Initiative. Cohen wrote
that selling support for open source tools isn't the moneymaker many thought.
The thing is, open source doesn't need all that much support, Cohen argued.
Open source companies need to find news ways, whether it's adding new layers
of software or building communities, to keep the whole business moving.
Making money off something that's intrinsically free is difficult? Who would've
thought? How would you make a buck from open source? Moneymaking ideas welcome
at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 12/02/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
While less conservative than it was two decades ago, IBM isn't exactly a wild
and crazy company. So when IBM told me that electronic holiday toys
could
include malware, I had to trust the information.
The idea is that toys, especially those that connect via USB, could be loaded
with software to give hackers a backdoor entry to your machine and maybe your
network.
Posted by Doug Barney on 12/02/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
There's just no shortage of opinions when it comes to the "Vista Capable"
sticker lawsuit. Today, it's the Microsoft defenders' turn:
OK...just a sanity check here. All of you whining about this, please
look carefully at the your computer and see if you can figure out who manufactured
it. Those whose computers were manufactured by Microsoft, keep complaining
about MS. The rest of you, aim your complaints at the computer manufacturer!
So much whine, bring on the cheese!
-Terry
I think MS should win the case. It's fun to knock the "Big Dawg"
which is why people tend to root for underdogs. I believe Microsoft didn't
even have to put that label on the hardware. Let's not blame it for the ignorance
of others.
-Michael
In my opinion, Vista is not just Vista Ultimate. I believe (correct me
if I am wrong) there are other editions including Home Basic, Home Premium,
Business, etc. If a machine can run Vista Basic (without the razzmatazz of
Vista Ultimate), then the machine is "Vista Capable." If the sticker
said "Aero Capable," then we have a different game entirely. I use
an HP dv2910us with 3GB RAM, and it's very capable of running Aero, but I
use the Windows Classic theme. Just because Aero is turned off, doesn't mean
I am not running Vista.
Microsoft should pay, but not through its nose.
-Anonymous
I think everyone is missing the point about the "Vista Capable"
stickers. Yes, Microsoft goofed when it allowed manufacturers to use them.
However, Microsoft did not manufacture any of those low-end computers or place
the stickers on the computers. Most of the blame should go to the manufacturers
who wanted to mislead consumers about low-end computers.
Another important question is: Why does Vista have so many flavors? Could
Microsoft be making these stripped-down products in response to manufacturers'
needs? Could it be making them to make more affordable products? After all,
it doesn't cost Microsoft any more money to ship Ultimate than it does to
ship Home Basic. Unlike Apple, Microsoft does not control the entire manufacturing
practice for its computers. If it did and forced manufacturers to make high-end
computers, it would deny access to a large segment of the populace.
-Earl
As they try to hang MS, how many of those same folks are trying to fry
the auto companies for the mileage ratings posted on the windows of new cars?
I know the auto companies all say, "Well, those are the numbers from
the government testing," but I don't hear any of them saying, "Here's
what you should really expect to get."
-Anonymous
After news broke that Jerry
Yang was leaving Yahoo, Doug wrote that he'd be happy with just 1 percent
of Yang's success. He's not alone:
I totally agree with you on your statement. Look at the high-tech industry
as a whole and the persons who started to develop companies. How many have
created something major and then let go from the company? If I am not mistaken,
this happened recently at VMware.
-Lee
Bill doesn't think OneCare deserves the bad rap it's been getting:
One of my pet peeves with the nightly "news" programs has been
the way they casually plant uncorroborated, inaccurate statements in the programs
and repeat them frequently. One of your recent Redmond Reports contains such
a statement: "problem-plagued
Live OneCare." I have this product installed on many systems with
many happy VSB users. Version 2, the current one, has worked well. It's easy
to administer and has been successful in protecting the computers. I have
not had to repair or clean viruses from any of these systems. It is less intrusive
than any of the other anti-virus programs that are on other computers I administer.
I am happy with OneCare and hate to see it go. But then I am a user,
not a journalist.
-Bill
And finally, Fred needs some Wi-Fi security answers. Can
some knowledgeable reader help him out?
After my initial consternation upon reading your report
on the latest Wi-Fi hack, I began to wonder. As a Wi-Fi user in my home,
a single-family house in a neighborhood of single-family houses, on a short
street that dead-ends between two minor cross streets, how concerned should
I be about the insecurity of my simple WEP Wi-Fi connection at home?
Agreed: In a hotel or at a public hot spot, I'm at serious risk. But
how about at home, under the circumstances described above?
-Fred
Got an answer for Fred? Want to comment on anything else we've covered today?
Fill out the form below or send an e-mail [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 12/02/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Black Friday is a nasty name for a good thing: It's the day after Thanksgiving
when millions of American shoppers hit the malls in search of smokin' bargains.
Apple had been making noises about some sweet Black Friday dealios, so I checked
it out. The best bargain I found was $100 off its lowest-end laptop -- making
it still a hair under a grand.
As this bad economy continues, I believe Apple will have to lower its premium
prices. Kinda tough to shell out all that money for a Mac when you can't fill
your fridge with groceries.
Meanwhile, "The Simpsons" has soured on Apple, and in the last episode
spent six full minutes making
fun of the company. Since I gave up watching "The Simpsons" 10
years ago, I unfortunately missed this episode.
Posted by Doug Barney on 12/01/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Fred thinks the whole "Vista Capable" sticker debacle is a matter
of deception by omission:
So the sticker on the machine reads "Vista Capable." That tells
me the machine can run Vista. Doesn't say how well, though. And it doesn't
tell me Vista can run on the machine, either, without perhaps limping badly.
This is no different from the prior "Designed for Microsoft Windows XP"
stickers, such as the one HP affixed to my 256MB RAM Pavilion that really
needed a RAM upgrade to 1GB to run XP without constant HD swapping.
Typical modern-day, misleading advertising. It's the truth, yes, but
not the WHOLE truth. But I'd put the lion's share of the blame on the OEM,
not on MS. After all, MS didn't FORCE the OEM to affix that sticker.
-Fred
And Paul responds to Floyd's
letter last week, which suggested that it wasn't "average" users
who were confused by the stickers, but users that should've known better:
Floyd makes good points but forgets that these were computers bought
before Vista had been released. So the moms and pops that bought these had
not been told by the seller or the sticker that there would be different versions.
In hindsight, it is easy to see but remember this was before Vista's release.
-Paul
IE 8's release candidate is scheduled
for early 2009, but Liza's been testing out the beta for a while now. So
far, so good:
I've been running the IE 8 beta 2 for a month or two now, and I like
it a lot better than IE 7. Microsoft finally added my favorite Firefox feature:
the ability to reopen an accidentally closed tab. Firefox still does it better,
IMHO (that and many other things -- NoScript add-on, anyone?), but IE 8 is
a step in the right direction.
-Liza
Share your thoughts with us! Leave a comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 12/01/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Will the soap opera that is Yahoo-Microsoft never end? The hostile takeover
attempt by Microsoft went on for months. Then, as Yahoo expressed interest,
Microsoft summarily called off the hunt and has repeatedly said
it
has no interest in the search company.
A report emerged over the holiday break that Microsoft was offering
$20 billion for the search business. A day later, a "source" claimed
it was all poppycock.
Twenty billion dollars is far less than the $45 billion Microsoft offered for
all of Yahoo, but I still think the money is better spent inventing the future
instead of just buying market share.
Posted by Doug Barney on 12/01/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Years ago, it was pretty easy to keep track of ScriptLogic; the company had
a handful of programs aimed directly at Windows admins. But after an acquisition
or two, and lots of internal development, the company now has some 21 products
-- and that's not counting the half-dozen or so Quest products ScriptLogic now
offers (Quest bought ScriptLogic last year, but wisely kept it as an independent
brand and company).
Recently, the company enhanced Security
Explorer, a tool to manage access to Windows networks and applications,
which is now up to version 7.0. ScriptLogic also made a new push into Exchange
management with Security
Explorer for Exchange, a tool that helps admins handle Exchange permissions.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/24/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Last week, Doug wrote about a list of the
"coolest"
IT jobs, as determined by IT pros. Here's one reader's idea of a dream IT
job:
Being the 'Net admin for a giant adult entertainment dot-com.
-Scott
And here are more of your thoughts on whether Microsoft should win or lose
the "Vista Capable" label lawsuit:
According to Merriam-Webster's magic book: "Capable: Having attributes
(as physical or mental power) required for performance or accomplishment."
System requirements meet the basic needs to perform or accomplish the
features included to perform all functions within Vista Basic, in my opinion.
I don't think the Vista Capable labels are misleading.
-Rob
This is the worst sort of "gotcha." Microsoft should lose this
one. Has it completely lost sight of taking care of its customers? Regardless
of the verdict, it needs to re-examine how it is treating customers if this
is how it intends to operate.
-Mike
Frankly, I find this argument laughable. I've been around since the days
of PC-DOS 2.0 and whatever Microsoft claimed to be a minimum configuration
was always off by a factor of two! (If you wanted acceptable performance.)
So why are people just now complaining about this? "Vista Capable"
means an 800MHz Pentium-class processor, 512MB of RAM and a 20GB HDD. Microsoft
has always been upfront about this.
Well, guess what? In June 2006, I was able to get my circa-2000 Dell
Dimension 4100 (866MHz, 512MB RAM, 100GB HDD) to run Vista. Granted it was
UGLY and dog-slow to boot, but once booted, it was stable on this six-year-old
machine. I could even use it to run Outlook against my employer's Exchange
server using 802.11b and VPN, and still browse the Internet! In the spring
of 2007, I bought a low-end Celeron with 512MB RAM with Vista Basic from Compaq
and it ran reasonably well without Aero. I upgraded it to Vista Ultimate and
it even ran Aero with only 512MB of RAM, but it really needed 1GB to run satisfactorily.
As RAM prices dropped, I upgraded it to 2GB and it has had absolutely no problems.
Even this lame, entry-level PC sold in 2007 went from being "Vista Capable"
to being "Vista Premium Ready" by doing nothing more than adding
a $10, 512MB DIMM. What made it even better was spending $32 on it to put
in 2GB of RAM. Over all, not a bad investment.
In the end, if you expected "Vista Capable" to mean that any
six-year-old computer would run Vista well, you were just plain naive. If
you bought a new computer since January 2007, you got what you were promised.
-Marc
Microsoft should lose. But if it admits this, and it begins to inform
potential Vista users openly about what is REALLY needed to run Vista in all
its incarnations, it will win big-time -- in terms of its reputation for honesty.
It's a new OS. What is wrong with telling people that some machines may not
run it? Or run it well?
-T.
It is my opinion that based on following Microsoft's products and philosophy
from the early '80s to today that labeling PCs "Vista Capable" when
they can only support Vista Basic with their current configuration is not
only deceiving, but also contrary to the company's philosophy.
I agree with your comment regarding the average person not understanding
the difference between the PC hardware requirements for running Vista Basic
verses running the Vista Home Premium, Vista Business or Vista Ultimate. It
is a shame that the current "I'm a PC" marketing campaign strongly
voices that there are no problems with Vista when consumers are bullied into
believing this hype and then perhaps buying a low-end PC marked "Vista
Capable" and a Vista Ultimate Upgrade -- only to discover that the darn
thing won't install.
Granted, one cannot blame the Vista product in and of itself for this
mishap, but one can certainly say that the purchased PC should not have said
it was "Vista Capable" when it can only support Vista Basic. It
should state so on the label and Microsoft should resolve this issue with
its partners instead of trying to sweep another important issue under the
rug.
-Vernon
I think the argument between Microsoft and the hardware manufacturers
was probably like junior high:
HP/Dell/IBM: Can we say our two-year-old hardware will run Vista?
MS: Well, it won't run the most likely Home version, Vista Home
Premium, so you probably shouldn't say it can.
HP/Dell/IBM: But come on, it will run ONE version of Vista.
And we already have so many of them built. If you don't let us sell them
as capable, we'll have to NOT sell them and eat the cost. And that's not
our fault that we built too many that wouldn't be compatible. It's not like
WE control what WE build.
MS: ???
HP/Dell/IBM: OK, maybe we do. But can we, can we please?
Make up some fancy sticker that doesn't say *which* version of Vista, just
*a* version.
MS: Fine, whatever. But you better not later offer to roll
back those computers and offer XP.
HP/Dell/IBM: We've learned our lesson. We would never do
that!
-George
Tell us what you think! Leave a comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/24/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments