MS Nightmare: Windows 7 deemed LESS secure than Vista

[RealBlackStuff]

http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1898&tag=nl.e539

[Marin85]

Win 7 is still in beta. I hope they will take their time to fix this one and the many more that will probably appear on the surface in the mean time (I guess most of them are just waiting to be discovered). Yet, I don´t really like much such articles: Win 7 is still in beta, yet it gets labeled to be less secure than the previous M$ OS...

(Nobody likes Microsoft, everybody buys their software, there is always somebody who will claim that their upcoming OS is the worst/less secure of all by now and that this OS is doomed to fail... I just fail to understand the reasoning behind this cycle For that matter I´m just awaiting the article that will state what a failure Win 7 is going to be...)

Just my 2 cents

Marin

[bill bolton]

Yet, I don´t really like much such articles: Win 7 is still in beta, yet it gets labeled to be less secure than the previous M$ OS...

The uncontrolled path that Microsoft has choosen for the wide beta test of Windows 7 inevitably means that there will (and should) be a lot more scrutiny of the behaviour of the beta product, simply because it has a very significant platform population in common use.

Cheers,

Bil B.

[Marin85]

The uncontrolled path that Microsoft has choosen for the wide beta test of Windows 7 inevitably means that there will (and should) be a lot more scrutiny of the behaviour of the beta product, simply because it has a very significant platform population in common use.

I couldn´t agree more!

Isn´t the end purpose of this wild beta testing campaign to achieve - among other things - better security in the final version? I only mean how could they state things like " Windows 7 deemed LESS secure than Vista" ?... (that´s referring to the final product Win 7)


Marin

[foehammer]

This "uncontrolled beta" is an incredibly smart move. They get feedback from the users, (probably surreptitiously as well as with their knowledge). Look at the technet forums and you'll see tons of posts that the MS staff can troll for data. There's always gonna be folks who decry every version of windows,but the fact that they have an open beta in addition to their regular testing is a very positive move for a company thats been known for violating antitrust laws.

[K0LO]

Update on UAC - Microsoft's defense of their design decision.

[bill bolton]

Look at the technet forums and you'll see tons of posts that the MS staff can troll for data.

The point of a controlled beta test in a product lifecycle is to get enough user data to inform the final tuning of the product design. An uncontrolled beta test just results in an overloaded of so much data that it can't sensibly be processed.

The wide beta approach is just plain dumb from a product engineering point of view, but the Microsoft marketing people probably love it in terms of creating market "buzz".... however its, pragamatically, just another case of marketing style triumphing over product substance!

Cheers,

Bill B.

[jdhurst]

At the core of this article is User Access Control. Microsoft built it to be in peoples' way (their words, not mine) and many people disabled it (including me). However, there are bound to be people who will use, and accordingly, trust UAC. So the worst news here is that malware can disable UAC. What were they thinking? At whatever level the user sets, malware should not be able to defeat it. .... JDH

[jdhurst]

And in ZD-Net today is a mea culpa by Microsoft that they messed up. Active X is useful but is a security nightmare, and Microsoft has simply never bothered to secure it, making everything they write insecure. So those of us who like Windows from a stability and application support standpoint have to be always re-securing our systems. .... JDH

[K0LO]

Remember that the development team for Windows 7 is still making design decisions. In the blog Engineering Windows 7 they describe why they changed their mind on UAC. It's actually a good thing that they are listening to feedback...

[jdhurst]

Off topic, but so be it: If Microsoft had listened to feedback, Vista would not have failed in the marketplace. They don't actually listen - they just loudly protest that they do. BTW - I use Vista, so I feel amply justified in pointing out its many failures. I have yet to sell it to a single client (albeit I am getting close). .... JDH

[mattbiernat]

maybe the Vista failure is making them wake up and actual listen

[bigwormie]

The wide beta approach is just plain dumb from a product engineering point of view, but the Microsoft marketing people probably love it in terms of creating market "buzz".... however its, pragamatically, just another case of marketing style triumphing over product substance!

Cheers,

Bill B.[/quote]

I would like to think that a company such as Microsoft has the man-power and computer resources to be able to collect and process the available data from this beta, in an efficient and effective manner, to be able to improve the product enough for it's official launch.

The problem with only making the beta available to egg heads is that you do not get an accurate representation of the population. You want people mixed in who are merely "enthusiasts" who may not know how to clean up a registry or fix a network issue. Making it available to everyone gives you a better picture of what issues the average joe will experience.

It isn't that difficult to build a program that chategorizes the feedback into subgroups such as software or driver compatibility and then further into specific driver compatibility such as the video driver for the 965e chipset not working well. They then simply forward that data to their strategic partners (like intel) and ask them to fix it. Windows 7 is a great product and will be hugely successful as long as the world doesn't sink into an economic depression.

Sorry if I am misunderstood your point.

[ssd_thinkpad]

Why would Microsoft have Windows 7 (free Beta product) as secure as Vista (paid Commercial product)? It should also only be used on non-productive systems! Therefore security is a not that a major problem for "beta tester". I am using Vista without Aero today and it is very secure as much as I think. I am not sure why everyone bashes Vista. If Windows 7 would be as good as Vista, I'd sell Vista immediately, install the secure Windows 7 Beta and buy it when it comes available. But this is obviously not what Microsoft wants

[Temetka]

Please tell me that you aren't serious with that last comment, ssd.

Wow.

As a security 'guy' myself, I can't help but shake my head and sigh sadly when I read your words.

[ssd_thinkpad]

Please tell me that you aren't serious with that last comment, ssd.

Microsoft does not want to have evil robot networks consisting of millions of windows 7 computers, of course. But a product manager also needs to have diversificate his products. I think the decision to not respond to some security issues is evil, yes. And as a customer I'd prefer that Microsoft would address these security issues. But I do understand their point from a business perspective - they need to sell vista