Microsoft: We Make Hackers Obsolete 626
bahamat writes "This article explains how Microsoft was forced to yank a magazine ad by the Advertising Standards Authority. In the ad MS claims that they'll make the hacker extinct. The tagline reads "Microsoft software is carefully designed to keep your company's valuable information in, and unauthorised people and viruses out. Which means that your data couldn't really be safer, even if you kept it in a safe. Which is great news for the survival of your company. But tragic news for hackers." Does MS really think that people are too stupid to remember what happened less than 2 months ago? My favorite quote from the article is "Clarke described Microsoft's claim as "laughable". "
It's just like the "switch" ads all over again. (Score:5, Funny)
linux switch ads are better (Score:5, Funny)
much more creative.
Re:linux switch ads are better (Score:5, Funny)
http://uploads.newgrounds.com/68000/68643_sw_swit
Re:It's just like the "switch" ads all over again. (Score:5, Funny)
What they didn't say was..... (Score:5, Funny)
They never said anything about locking the safe.
Always read the fine print... even if it isn't there.
I cant wait! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I cant wait! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I cant wait! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I cant wait! (Score:5, Funny)
Have you modded up a troll today?
Re:I cant wait! (Score:5, Funny)
Don't think so... [bbspot.com]
Re:I cant wait! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I cant wait! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I cant wait! (Score:5, Interesting)
"AAAAGGGGHHHHH! I want to throttle those ad people! What the **** are they thinking. What the **** are we paying them for? We know that our security *SUCKS*. We are working *hard* to improve it. We're the most hacked system and we are trying. AAAAARGH."
My comment:
If only more technically trained people were put in a tight-loop with marketing and advertising..... grrr.
But this gets back to a greater problem... many product advertisements are from outer space when we look at them with a rational mind and, when appropriate, proper scientific background. But truth doesn't necessarily sell products.
Re:I cant wait! (Score:5, Informative)
You mean like Cisco [cisco.com] does? They require the Sales experts to be certified as well, with some requirements: Networking 101, minimum pass score: 80%
Re:I cant wait! (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft needs to watch their advertising people more carefully, as they're excellent at making the 'folks in the know' hate MS even more than they did already.
However, the majority of humankind remains clueless. "Whaddayatalkin'about? Microsoft is THE ONLY OS!, it's secure as Fort Knox, and the only enterprise-ready solution!" Gah. They'll just look at an advertisement that says Microsoft is gonna make Hackers obsolete, and read it as though hackers *are* obsolete, spread the word, and keep on not bothering to patch their un-patched first-release of Win2k Server that comes complete with Nimda, Code Red, and other buggy little 'features'.
-Sara
Re:I cant wait! (Score:5, Insightful)
I was wrong--it is blatant fraud. Its caption states: 'Microsoft software is carefully designed to keep your company's valuable information in, and unauthorised people and viruses out. Which means that your data couldn't really be safer, even if you kept it in a safe. Which is great news for the survival of your company. But tragic news for hackers.
Nothing future-tense, or even realistic about that!
Unless by "tragic" they mean a "tragic comedy of errors, which causes the hacker to double over laughing and results in severe stomach cramps."
The MS marketing people are their own worst enemies.
-Sara
Greasy hacker? Nah.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Greasy hacker? Nah.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Greasy hacker? Nah.. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Greasy hacker? Nah.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Greasy hacker? Nah.. (Score:5, Funny)
- Release insecure software for over a generation.
- Watch 'real' hacker skills atrophy with time.
- Implement all the code fixes they have been secretly stockpiling in Bill's underground lair.
- MS systems become inpenetrable.
Maybe this is the real reason MS wants Linux eliminated, because it keeps hackers sharp.
Re:Greasy hacker? Nah.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Laubscher says despite the decision, Microsoft fully maintains that its software is able to fulfil the task of keeping hackers and viruses out, making the customers' data safer than if kept in a safe.
I try to be open minded, but when you walk around with your foot hovering in front of your mouth, eventually, someone is going to push it in. This is worse that walking around with a "kick me" sign on your back, because they did it on purpose.
The claims they made are so over the top, its obvious their marketing dept. has lost all contact with the real world. No one with a pulse is stupid enough to believe it just because they said its true. This is insulting to their existing customers, who know better.
Yeah! (Score:5, Funny)
The MS product is... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The MS product is... (Score:5, Funny)
By installing this Product, you agree to allow Microsoft to execute this program or install updates without notice.
The Product may transmit usage information to Microsoft. Such information is governed by our Privacy Policy (summarized: we don't intentionally distribute this information to non-paying groups).
Re:The MS product is... (Score:5, Funny)
. . .which is activated, oddly enough, by flipping the switch to the "on" position. MS execs explained this was perfectly logical, given the necessity of hitting "Start" to shutdown and CTRL-ALT-DELETE to start-up in previous versions of their software.
Re:The MS product is... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The MS product is... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Yeah! (Score:5, Funny)
It's either that or a WOFS. (Write Only File System)
Linux: we make manuals obsolete (Score:5, Funny)
The security of Windows, the ease of use of Linux, and a Macintosh mouse!
Re:Linux: we make manuals obsolete (Score:5, Interesting)
the original mac mouse had one button because it was decided that two would be confusing for users accustomed to keyboards - a mouse being such an innovation at that time.
sticking with it since then has just been sheer cussedness.
Re:Linux: we make manuals obsolete (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Linux: we make manuals obsolete (Score:5, Insightful)
What's worse is their laptops... If you want a multi-button pointing device, you've got to connect it externally. Yuck. It's a shame too cause I would really consider getting an iBook if it had an intergrated trackball or an eraser head mouse with at least 2 buttons. As it stands, a single button touchpad is a dealbreaker.
I guess we're getting kinda OT here, but as far as deceptive advertising goes, aren't Apple's switch ads just as bad? What if you're more productive with a 3-button scroll trackball? Is Apple's "different" way really better? Do they have statistics proving applications on OS X are really more stable than those on Windows XP? Let's face it, advertising is subjective - that's why it's advertising.
If the Mac switchers have reached personal computing nirvana, the beer drinkers are all buff and having a great day with attractive females at the beach, the car is doing things that you can't legally do on public roads or Microsoft software is depicted as secure, guess what - it's an advertisment. Could you imagine what ads would be like if they depicted reality?
Scene: Int. my house, night.
Me: "I'm thirsty."
Cut-to wide shot of me walking out of the computer room and follow me walking to the fridge.
Close up of me opening a can of Sprite(tm).
Me: "Ahh... Can of fizzy liquid goodness."
Cut back to wide shot of me walking back into the computer room. Fade out and show a graphic:
"Sprite. Because you're too lazy to restock on something with caffine."
Well, yeah (Score:5, Interesting)
On a single button mouse, a single click is unique, and a double click is unique, as is a click and drag or a click and hold.
With two buttons, then there's a question: Which button to use in any situation? With three buttons, you've also got to worry about two button combos (keyboards have combos!)
So in a sense, it's just less training. The Mac OS is designed to be sufficient with a single mouse button, and every additional button and scrollwheel is acceleration.
The Windows OS is *not* designed to be sufficient with a single mouse button. Rather, it's extremely inconvenient to use only a single mouse button.
On the *flip* side, the Mac has not traditionally been designed to be run mouseless (OS X may be more so, but I haven't tested that capability), while Windows has been designed from the ground up to be navigable without a mouse. Not terribly pretty, but it works.
So the bitching about a single mouse button is wasted energy; if you're using a Mac, you don't need more, though you are certainly welcome to use more if you want it, while on Windows (and Linux) it's just different, not worse, not better.
Re:Linux: we make manuals obsolete (Score:5, Funny)
why do PC's have 2 buttons?
So you've always got one hand free...
Well, technically (Score:5, Funny)
*rim shot*
Re:Well, technically (Score:5, Insightful)
That's actually a fairly profound insight.
Despite what the popular media will try to tell you, REAL hackers are the whitehats, people like Linus Torvalds or Richard Stallman. In that case, windows quite literally IS hacker proof... only MS's internal team has access to the source code, so only they can hack on it.
What they probably were trying to say is that it's cracker proof, and that would have been the painfully obvious and blatant lie that everybody here is making it out to be.
No, they're right (Score:5, Funny)
Re:No, they're right (Score:5, Funny)
uhhhh (Score:5, Funny)
the sound of bursting bulkheads. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, not really. Most firms are honest. Some firms exadurate, like Apple's famous "bicycle for your brain" hyperbole describing the Apple II or Oracle's "Unbreakable" advert. Microsoft, however is so dishonest that really large, generally clueless organizations notice:
When you get to the point where the postman. bankers and marketing droids notice you suck and lie about it, man, it's over.
Re:the sound of bursting bulkheads. (Score:5, Funny)
It's worse than that. My 70 year old *mom* has noticed it, and she's willing to believe we were put here by a confederation of space aliens and fairies.
KFG
To Paraphrase the OpenBSD guys... (Score:5, Funny)
3 vulnerabilities in 7 yea--- days!
Just like Oracle's "Unbreakable" ads (Score:5, Insightful)
Precendent's been set. But the correct response from the geek public has been to attempt to poke holes in an(y) absolutist claim, as is its obligation.
Re:Just like Oracle's "Unbreakable" ads (Score:4, Interesting)
After all, it's [cert.org] not exactly [cert.org] an infrequent [cert.org] problem.
Re:Just like Oracle's "Unbreakable" ads (Score:5, Funny)
One of the most commonly seen ads on this electronic billboard is Oracle's "Unbreakable" farce.
Last week a fellow cohort of mine was driving in at 6:30am and happened to glance at the billboard. It was showing the Blue Screen of Death.
No, no, you don't understand (Score:5, Funny)
That's how microsoft make hackers obsolete.
Ha (Score:4, Funny)
Why is it wrong to lie? (Score:5, Interesting)
Moral of the story? Don't trust ads, try before you buy and read some consumer reports. I guess they don't have good reports for computers yet really. We don't have such a large choice like we do with automobiles.
In further news... (Score:5, Funny)
I wonder what Tariq Aziz is doing after the war.
Re:In further news... (Score:4, Funny)
MS will never make the courtroom obsolete. (Score:5, Funny)
Jason
ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]
Standards (Score:5, Interesting)
It might be the end of advertising as we know it.
OT: mutual fund advertising (Score:5, Insightful)
also- the NASD regulates its member's advertising as well.
DISCLAIMER: I am not a securities lawyer, I'm married to a soon-to-be securities lawyer. All my knowledge comes from a paper she wrote for her Market Regulations class. If its any consolation, she got an "A".
Well it is true.. (Score:5, Funny)
I don't see what the problem is. It's true! Why be a hacker when you can do it all as a script kiddie?
What a crazy company.. (Score:5, Funny)
hacker n. [originally, someone who makes furniture with an axe]
Why would Microsoft even care about some crude pre-modern furniture makers? I am beginning to think there was more than one reason the advertisement got yanked.
Reminds of the NT4 hype 7 years ago (Score:5, Insightful)
I remember how NT4 was supposed to be the unix killer. Anyone remember the microsoft ad on the internet which went something like this
At the same time Bill Gates did a show called scalability day. In the demonstration with Microsoft Transaction server they showed NT doing million of simulated hits for banking apps. Bill said if NT can do this with only pc hardware just imagine what it can do with 32 processor systems.
What a joke. We all know that NT4 sucked bigtime and it was no solaris as Microsoft claimed.
Same is true with this. Many companies like Motorolla and TI believed the lie and replaced all there unix systems with NT ones only to downgrade back to unix. NT just could not handle it and Microsoft transaction server was not the magical bullet Microsoft made it out to be.
Its like the story of the boy who called wolf.
Re:Reminds of the NT4 hype 7 years ago (Score:5, Interesting)
Plus, it's also worth considering that eventually, the new PC user market will dry up. Within the next few generations, there won't be a large market of first time PC users to fool with flashy graphics and a fat guy dressed up like a butterfly. Kids are learning computers, and that's bad for Microsoft. Now's the time to sell your Microsoft stock, because as a company, they're doomed on _every_ front.
Re:Reminds of the NT4 hype 7 years ago (Score:5, Insightful)
Sigh... strike two.
It wasn't Stalin nor was it Hitler (though if this were horseshoes, you'd get points for being in the ballpark, technos)... Joseph Goebbels, of Nazi Minister of Propaganda fame, was gracious enough to leave the world the depressing insight: if a lie is repeated often enough and long enough, it will come to be perceived as truth.
Sidenote: A simple search into Google before posting can clear up so many offtopic threads.
Sidenote Two: You might consider choosing less genocidal sources when selecting a quotation to bolster your point...
Why is everyone railing on this.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Now what they did not say is 'we make Crackers obsolete'. Their marketing department gets one right and everyone gripes...
Re:Why is everyone railing on this.... (Score:5, Funny)
That's because Microsoft has nothing to do with crackers. It's Frito-Lay that has made crackers obsolete. Tortilla chips have gained so much market share in recent years that crackers just don't have a chance.
Advertising Standards Authority (Score:5, Informative)
America, naturally, would never CONSIDER such an insightful group.
Re:Advertising Standards Authority (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course they wouldn't. Such a group would not be insightful in the US. It wouldn't even be appropriate. Wouldn't make sense.
In the United States, corporations have the right to lie to you [commondreams.org]. God bless 'em! Yee ha!
The fool who ruled that corporations are the same thing as persons should be dug up and shot a few times. Someone please explain to me how this is supposed to benefit individuals?
Definitions (Score:5, Informative)
Directly from the jargon file, a list of common definitions of hacker. Notice the 'malicious meddler' one...
(Originally, someone who makes furniture with an axe) 1. A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and how to stretch their capabilities, as opposed to most users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary. 2. One who programs enthusiastically (even obsessively) or who enjoys programming rather than just theorizing about programming. 3. A person capable of appreciating hack value. 4. A person who is good at programming quickly. 5. An expert at a particular program, or one who frequently does work using it or on it; as in "a Unix hacker". (Definitions 1 through 5 are correlated, and people who fit them congregate.) 6. An expert or enthusiast of any kind. One might be an astronomy hacker, for example. 7. One who enjoys the intellectual challenge of creatively overcoming or circumventing limitations. 8. (Deprecated) A malicious meddler who tries to discover sensitive information by poking around. Hence "password hacker", "network hacker". The correct term is cracker. The term "hacker" also tends to connote membership in the global community defined by the net (see The Network and Internet address). It also implies that the person described is seen to subscribe to some version of the hacker ethic. It is better to be described as a hacker by others than to describe oneself that way. Hackers consider themselves something of an elite (a meritocracy based on ability), though one to which new members are gladly welcome. Thus while it is gratifying to be called a hacker, false claimants to the title are quickly labelled as "bogus" or a "wannabee". 9. (University of Maryland, rare) A programmer who does not understand proper programming techniques and principles and doesn't have a Computer Science degree. Someone who just bangs on the keyboard until something happens. For example, "This program is nothing but spaghetti code. It must have been written by a hacker".
Pretty amusing coming from Microsoft.. (Score:5, Insightful)
A Linux box, by default, is hardly more secure. Within a couple of weeks of building an Apache Server with the latest Redhat, it got rooted. Yay. You still have to patch it up, lock it down, and monitor it. I know the tools are there to make it more secure, but the problem is that you have to get to know it. I'm new to the Linux world, and as such I was more vulnerable to malicious attack than I was with IIS because I was unfamiliar with it.
So I'm curious, who actually can make that claim? Nobody immediately springs to mind.
Re:Pretty amusing coming from Microsoft.. (Score:5, Funny)
I think you meant shut it down.
A really poor track record - to nobody's surprise (Score:5, Interesting)
SQL Slammer - affected users had better be thankful the packets only caused congestion - a packet 5 times the size but had a damaging (as opposed to disruptive) payload would hurt a lot more.
The WebDAV hole - a hell of a good job keeping hackers out of the US Army website.
The JScript hole - so just by reading my (HTML and JScript enabled) mail, an attacker could potentially run arbitrary code on my computer?
SirCam and Klez - information really does want to be free, it keeps escaping from Microsoft products!
In Soviet Russia, Microsoft owns Hackers!
Re:A really poor track record - to nobody's surpri (Score:5, Insightful)
Unix is a complete joke as far as security.
I don't know what you mean by "Unix", but I'm assuming it includes all POSIX-compatable operating systems (including GNU/Linux, *BSD, etc). In that case, maybe you should look at OpenBSD [openbsd.org]. It's about as Unix as they come, being BSD-derived and all. Yet it is also one of the most secure general-purpose operating systems out there. In the past 7+ years, OpenBSD has had one remote root hole in the default install (the OpenSSH off-by-one hole, I believe) and a handfull of priviledge escalation holes and the like. Compare this to Solaris or Red Hat Linux, and you'll see that not all Unixes are the same.
a.) It's ancient so most of the flaws are finally worked out.
I agree here, but I think that the point deserves more elaboration. Many of the flaws in Windows and Windows-related products like IIS stem from fundamental design problems, the kind that only massive time and energy spent reworking can fix. For example, the fact that any NetBIOS-enabled Windows machine will send you its password hashes upon request (by getting the machine to retrieve a remote file:// url) has been acknowledged by Microsoft as a pretty much unfixable design flaw. Similarly, the IIS URL parsing mechanism is overly complex, leading to holes like the Unicode ../../ problems. With Unix, most of the fundamental design issues have been worked out or worked around. True, there are still a few fundamental problems; the inflexible permissions system and the fact that many things run as root just to get one specific priviledge (ping, daemons, etc) come to mind. But most of the flaws in Unix programs come from buffer overflows, format string vulnerabilities, unchecked perl open() calls, and the like: little, isolated errors that are easy to make and almost as easy to fix.
b.) Nobody _gives a shit_ about Unix so there aren't a lot of hackers out there targetting it.
This point blatantly contradicts the others. If Unix is so unimportant, why (according to point a) have there been so many flaws found and fixed? Besides that, have you looked at how many companies are into Linux [slashdot.org] these days? I think that Red Hat, IBM, and HP (just to name a few) would disagree with your statement that "Nobody _gives a shit_ about Unix". With the release of Mac OS X, Unix is now also a popular desktop OS with a significant market share. As for "hackers" (I'll assume you meant crackers) targeting Unix, take a look at any security-related mailing list [neohapsis.com] and you'll see that many Unix-related flaws are researched and found, and often exploited. Crackers and script kiddies do care about Unix (it accounts for over half of all webservers [netcraft.net]*, for example), and this is why so much effort has gone into and will continue to go into securing Unix.
*Netcraft says that 64.19% of sites run Apache, but does not mention the OS distribution. Since most Apache installs are on Unix systems, and since there are also some non-Apache Unix webservers, I figured that saying 50% was more than reasonable.
Microsoft advertising a move to Linux? (Score:4, Funny)
Even if it were true that Microsoft platforms were secure and immune to outside vulnerbilities, their advertisement implies that hackers would become extinct using their platforms.
This should lead us to believe that anyone who cares to code or develop applications on a computer, or any company that wants to have or just use any applications post-Microsoft platform era, should no longer use their platforms as they make hackers extinct? It is rather a catch-22 situation for Microsoft is it not, that their platform will prevent anyone from developing it further once hackers are obsolete (although with a perfectly performing system why would they need to develop it further?)
But thanks for the warning Microsoft, we should not develop for their platforms and must move to other platforms if we want to hack away at the system to create applications. How nice of them to advertise this fact.
The Best MS Headline EVER (Score:5, Funny)
I believe it's called self-abuse... for the more techie, it's known as digital-masturbation.
Kevin Smith said it best.... (Score:5, Funny)
Holden: Yeah.
Banky: Good. Over here, we have a publicly accessible, secure, and intelligently maintained Windows server. Down here, we have a self-hating, angry as fuck, agenda of rage, bitter Solaris admin. Over here, we got Santa Claus, and up here the Easter Bunny. Which one is going to get to the hundred dollar bill first?
Holden: What is this supposed to prove?
Banky: No, I'm serious. This is a serious exercise. It's like an SAT question. Which one is going to get to the hundred dollar bill first? The male-friendly lesbian, the man-hating dyke, Santa Claus, or the Easter bunny?
Holden: The self-hating admin.
Banky: Good. Why?
Holden: I don't know.
Banky: Because the other three are figments of your fucking imagination!
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0118842 [imdb.com]
To Which My Computer Says.... (Score:4, Informative)
A security issue has been identified that could allow an attacker to run programs on a computer running Microsoft® Windows®. The attacker would first have to send you an e-mail message or entice you into visiting a malicious Web site. You can help protect your computer by installing this update from Microsoft. After you install this item, you may have to restart your computer. Once you have installed this item, it cannot be removed."
The claim is not misleading - it's artful (Score:5, Interesting)
Any logical person would conclude that what follows will be a conclusion presented by the advertiser, based on the afore-mentioned fact.
I have no doubt that some will argue that Microsoft software designers do not take security into consideration when designing software, or that Microsoft intentionally introduces security holes, so as to promote the purchase of upgrades to it's products (although msot security patches are distributed freely, think SUN and their policy of many years ago, requiring that companies wanting a bug fixes in Solaris were required to pay for the patch to be created).
The other issue is code change. The products to which the advertisement refers MUST be based on new code, because we know that in the past Microsoft did not design software with security in mind, because Craig Mindie said so [pcw.co.uk]:For this reason, IF the products are all based on new code, and IF you think that Microsoft would act in it's own best interest to sell more software and IF you believe that designing security in mind is likely to sell more product, then the ad is not misleading at all.
The key here is to see that Microsoft is NOT CLAIMING that their software IS SECURE they are claiming that they try to design it so that it is secure, and then draw the conclusion (however ridiculous it may be) that it is in fact more secure than a vault, but this is a conclusion, not a statement of fact.
--CTH
Re:The claim is not misleading - it's artful (Score:4, Insightful)
No, the ad is misleading. It may be technically true, but it is still misleading in that it heavily implies something which is not true. Under ASA standards it only needs to be deliberately misleading to be chucked out, it doesn't have to be an outright lie. This is a good thing.
It is quite obviously possible to mislead people without needing to specifically tell an actual lie, but in the ASA's view, it is not about whether or not a company is technically lying, but about whether or not they are deceiving people. This makes perfect sense to me; deception is wrong regardless of whether or not a lie was required to do it.
two months?!?!? (Score:5, Interesting)
You don't need to look that far back. Try this week [slashdot.org]. It seems as though Microsoft has an ongoing program to nurture and feed the *acker types of the world.
I guess the new quote is (Score:4, Funny)
Bwahahahahaha! (Score:5, Interesting)
Their substantiation is pretty fucking worthless IMHO, as long as the software includes a EULA that absolves Microsoft of any responsiblity should the software NOT be as secure as they claim.
~Philly
Hackers Obsolete (Score:5, Funny)
You know, they could be right... (Score:5, Funny)
(Typing...)
Elh: Ah, crap, it's already running Windows.
Actually it is true. (Score:5, Funny)
Ho, ho, ho... (Score:4, Funny)
-- I believe this ad is true?
-- Huh?
-- They'll be secure in a billion years and we'll be all extinct!
Ironic (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyone know where I can get a bigger copy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Hi! Maybe I didn't read the article carefully enough, but I was wondering anyone had a higher-dpi image of the ad! I want to put it up in our office next to my Slackware box - I love the image of the Hacker! It's hilarious!
Disappointing (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe they just revised the EULA? (Score:5, Funny)
Actually, to make this true you would really just need to revise the End User Licensing Agreement:
By clicking "I agree" below, the user warrants that:
1. 'carefully designed' means 'cobbled together from papers we found in a dumpster at Xerox Parc in 1981 and have been trying to figure out ever since.'
----
2. 'Your company's valuable information' excludes any material represented on fixed or removable storage media, in any volatile or non-volatile memory, or intercepted network communications.
----
3. Microsoft warrants that the operating system will keep viruses from damaging the system. For the purposes of this agreement, 'virus' shall be defined as any file ending in '.txt' or '.jpg'
----
3. Microsoft warrants that the operating system will keep 'unauthorized people out.' For a person to be recognized as 'unauthorized' for the purposes of this agreement, they must be registered in a handwritten book at the corporate headquarters of Microsoft's Solomon Islands subsidiary. Names may be added to this book in person, between the hours of 8:00am and 8:10am on the eleventh of every month beginning with "F." By appointment only.
-------
Other ads from the same ad agency (Score:5, Funny)
"The 1974 Ford Pinto: Featuring a non-exploding gas tank!"
"Amtrak: No more deadly derailments, we promise!"
"Slashdot: Never a duplicate story!"
We make hackers obsolete... (Score:4, Funny)
Too stupid? (Score:5, Funny)
They don't just think it... They count on it.
For example, just pulled from the Microsoft outlook home page:
If you have Outlook version 2002, you already have industry-leading technologies helping to protect your data.
Evidently, Security Bulletin MS03-003 is some of that industry-leading technology.
"We Make Hackers Obsolete" (Score:5, Funny)
It says so in the license!
Microsoft must be really stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft must be really, really stupid to think that anybody is going to fall for that. The reliability of their software is a joke across the industry that EVERYBODY knows about.
Being an advocate of alternative software, I talk to a lot of people about Microsoft before I even mention that I advocate other stuff. I have never heard someone say that Microsoft's stuff is reliable. As a matter of fact, even the most naive computer users have stated plainly that Microsoft causes all kinds of trouble for them. It is a widely known fact.
So why would Microsoft make a stupid claim like this? My feeling is that they have a serious break in communication between their marketing department, which probably uses blueberry candy-apple Macs to make glossy, lickable presentations, and all other departments, which use UNIX for all of their operations because they know how much Windows sucks (because they made it) and refuse to use it.
2 Months ago? Bah, how about 2 days ago! (Score:5, Insightful)
Now if only they could stop some of the other ads (Score:5, Informative)
It's great that Microsoft's advertising claims were shot down in this case for being unjustifiable, but they've still got some other pretty nasty falsehoods floating around out there.
I don't know if this particular campaign is appearing at American schools, but certainly at Canadian universities, Microsoft has launched a fairly heavy ad campaign for academic-priced software (I've seen the ads at Waterloo and Simon Fraser.) The ads feature bold print saying "Getting software for any less would be illegal", and in smaller print, below: "90% off the estimated retail price!". (See a banner ad of it at the University of Waterloo computer store [uwaterloo.ca].)
Hmm... given that I've paid less than their listed prices for the software on my computer, I guess they're accusing me of breaking the law. It's too bad that a lot of their competition's software is still cheaper (e.g. I use OpenOffice, myself, but I'm pretty sure I could get a full-priced copy of StarOffice for less than the student-priced Office XP.)
I would love to see Sun start a competing campaign saying "Getting certain other software at these prices would be illegal. Save money and keep yourself out of jail: use StarOffice."
A Safe? (Score:5, Funny)
Incorrect threat model (Score:5, Insightful)
This message may appeal to naive purchasers, but does not address real-world threats. Most corporate fraud is committed by insiders. Microsoft is proposing an overly simplistic threat model: the villains are outside the wall. In reality, villains inside the wall account for greater damage.
The fine print (Score:5, Funny)
2. Use Mozilla instead of IE and Outlook Express.
3. Have two anti-virus programs that checks for updates every five minutes.
4. Sanitize all floppy disks with magnets before use.
5. Check for and download Windows updates daily, unless the updates undoes the previous fix (e.g. Slammer) or breaks the Windows. Consumers should buy a second system and a second copy of Windows.
6. Leave the system off. If you must use your computer, try your local library computer lab. If you must use your home computer, turn it on just long enough to do your business and turn it off when finished. Note that acorrding to EULA, by merely turning on the system, you are acting against the recommandation of MS and therefore, MS is not liable for any damages.
7. Upgrade to the new version of Windows as soon as it is released. Delete your old partition and do a clean install as the new and improved Windows magically wipes away your past problems.
8. If you get hacked with the latest version of Windows, that probably means that you are a pirate.
9. If you are not a pirate, that means that you must have violated one of the clauses above and MS shall not be held liable.
10. If you followed all the clauses above, by EULA, you must submit the problem to us, so that we can put a clause excluding your error in the future EULA (to be installed with the next patch) so that MS MS shall not be held liable. If you do not submit your error, you are in violation of EULA and MS shall not be held liable.
South Africa banned the Ads but NOT in the US (Score:5, Insightful)
Wasn't it Hitler who said... (Score:5, Insightful)
Common Criteria Certification (Score:5, Interesting)
The result of this evaluation is that both products are not safe to use on the Internet and as a public terminal:
(Read [microsoft.com] it yourself.)
So Windows is indeed certified to be hacker-proof, unless you connect it to the Internet, or the hacker is unwilling to cooperate.
Re:I missed a press release (Score:4, Funny)
Re:OMG (Score:5, Interesting)