Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft

IE Holes Not Microsoft's Fault, Says Bill 1035

Posted by timothy
from the born-into-a-state-of-sin dept.
thparker writes "As part of the Media Center release discussed previously, Bill Gates had an interview with USA Today. Best quote: 'Q: Speaking of security, Internet Explorer has had well-publicized holes... Gates: Understand those are cases where you are downloading third-party software.' Well now we know -- these problems have all been our own fault." Any counterexamples?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IE Holes Not Microsoft's Fault, Says Bill

Comments Filter:
  • No thanks (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BWJones (18351) * on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:10AM (#10532626) Homepage Journal
    Gates: Understand those are cases where you are downloading third-party software.'

    Hrmmmm. Downloading third party software on my Macintosh does not seem to get me into trouble in the same manner as it does on Windows........Why is that Mr. Gates? Furthermore, I have performed the experiment: Install Windows on a computer and hook it up to the Internet. Leave it hooked up without downloading one bit of software from anywhere! and the machine will be compromised. Why is that Mr. Gates?

    Moving along: Q: Might you add anti-virus/spyware protection in Windows? Gates: It's not a thing you build in. You have to offer a service......Why is that Mr. Gates? I would have thought that you would offer a secure environment as part of your product out of the box? What does that tell us about the quality of your products? After all, does not my automobile come with airbags and antilock brakes and skid control and all wheel drive? Under your logic, those features would only work if I paid a monthly premium.

    You know, I kept waiting for something better to happen with Windows, but I have work to do and things to create, so I'll stick with OS X and my Macintosh. Thanks anyway.

    • by notthe9 (800486) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:41AM (#10532810)
      I have performed the experiment: Install Windows on a computer and hook it up to the Internet. Leave it hooked up without downloading one bit of software from anywhere! and the machine will be compromised. Why is that Mr. Gates?

      Impossible! You must be lying!

      (Sorry, I realize this mihgt not be defensible, but I accidently checked the "Always Trust Microsoft" box during an install a few years ago. If only I could turn back time.)
    • Re:No thanks (Score:5, Insightful)

      by asadsalm (647013) on Friday October 15, 2004 @03:12AM (#10532956)
      Q: Might you add anti-virus/spyware protection in Windows?

      Gates: It's not a thing you build in.

      Us: But a browser is a thing you can build in ... Right?
    • by SmallFurryCreature (593017) on Friday October 15, 2004 @03:53AM (#10533095) Journal
      The car industry, well mostly the american car industry, was extremely reluctant to do anything about safety in cars. Safety studies might give the audience the idea that driving wasn't safe.

      They tried everything to stop people from doing safety studies and stopping laws making safety devices mandatory. It did not fit their marketing image to have to put safety features in.

      Sounds very similar eh? Gates blames insecurity on bad users. The car industry blamed it on bad drivers (this fits marketing as noone thinks of themselves as a bad driver).

      Until enough studies came out showing how dangerous cars were (things like the steering column being a spear aimed at your chest) and the public started to get aware and goverment was starting to take action ONLY then and very slowly did the car industry do something. That still won't do anything until laws enforce the use of seatbelts and even then you will have idiots claiming using seatbelts is unsafe. Same as I have met person (not heard about, actually talked to myself) who didn't use anti-virus software because it was reading their files.

      So don't hold your breath waiting for MS to move on its own. SP2 was already a huge achievement. Anything more will only come after a long long struggle.

      Or a very short one if you install the flippered OS. Or the horned one if your into necrophilia. Then again, that is like driving a volvo. Not cool. Sure your kids might survive an accident but who cares about that eh?

      • by Sentry21 (8183) on Friday October 15, 2004 @07:12AM (#10533730) Journal
        The car industry blamed it on bad drivers (this fits marketing as noone thinks of themselves as a bad driver).

        That's kind of funny when you consider that most XP crashes are because of bad drivers too (or misbehaving malware).

        --Dan
    • Re:No thanks (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ajd1474 (558490) on Friday October 15, 2004 @03:58AM (#10533107)
      If MS included Anti-virus, serious Firewall software and whatever else you feel they should include to make it "secure", you'd be the first person up in arms claiming it to be another example of MS using their monopoly to push out competitors.

      Everyone wants MS to remove things like CD-burning, Media Player, IE etc because it is anti-competitive and now you WANT THEM to build MORE APPS IN??

      Also, motor companies do NOT make Airbags, ABS and skid control... they are usually made by third party companies (Bosch for example). So are you suggesting that Windows comes bundled with Norton Antivirus/Firewall, that you shouldnt get a choice, and that we should add another $50 to the cost? Sounds anti-competitive to me. Sounds like you're another /. er who trips over their own arguments in an effort to be the first to bash MS.
  • by cloudkj (685320) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:10AM (#10532630)
    Microsoft is taking Amazon's customer-centric approach. Except in this case, the customer is always at fault ;)
  • Uhhhh... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Capt'n Hector (650760) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:11AM (#10532638)
    Yes, viri, trojans and spyware tend to be third party. The problem is, IE lets you download these and execute, sometimes by just viewing a page.
  • by onyxruby (118189) <onyxrubyNO@SPAMcomcast.net> on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:12AM (#10532640)
    If I did something, than it's my fault. If I didn't do something, and didn't apply a patch that was available, than it's my fault. If I didn't do something and it happens automatically with default settings, it's Microsoft's fault.

    Sick and tired of fixing spyware infested machines.

  • Rubbish! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Any Web Loco (555458) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:12AM (#10532645) Homepage
    Those holes are what LETS third-party software install its freaking self.
  • by Machitis (597087) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:14AM (#10532653)
    I wasn't aware Windows Update was third-party software...?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:15AM (#10532661)
    is like Tony Soprano lecturing about law and order..
  • software, eh? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by crackshoe (751995) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:17AM (#10532669)
    Q: Yes, but will people continue to do that with Media Center? Gates: You might well do it. We need to use approaches that block people from ever getting software onto the machine they don't want. Me: Great. Now let me get a PC from a major OEM without windows - oh, not that software?
  • by John Hansen (652843) <.crayz9001. .at. .foobar.homelinux.net.> on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:18AM (#10532676) Homepage

    So, pray tell, how is making a horribly insecure third-party application model (DirectX) and then complaining about how people are exploiting it supposed to hold water? YOU ARE THE API DEVELOPER. IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO ANTICIPATE POTENTIAL ABUSES.

    Because if I'm reading this right, then that's exactly what Gates is doing. No wonder Microsoft's products are so shitty; they think that security is something that happens to other people.

  • by MoralHazard (447833) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:18AM (#10532681)
    Sounds like Microsoft's Trusted Computing Initiative isn't getting as much executive support as it might've.

    Remember that, Bill? When you said you were going to make all the Windows computers secure by focusing all your energies on securing your code?

    Now, it's not your fault, and you won't do anything to fix it? Then why on earth did you tell everyone that you would?
  • by ATAMAH (578546) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:20AM (#10532689)
    The more he reminds me of my ex girlfriend. As in - he is just as greedy and his side is never at fault.
    Although he is much uglier and....male.
  • by gad_zuki! (70830) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:20AM (#10532691)
    I hear them from the Bush administration almost daily and corporate america is getting a lot more brazen. No one fact checks, dissenting opinions are marginalized, and the corrections page doesn't have nearly the eyeballs the front page does. And that's assuming a correction is ever given.

    This is the same mentality of shipping a crappy product and having tech support take care of the issues. Okay, fine, at least I have someone to complain to and I can return products, but with information you don't have that option. You complain to your peers, who are just an echo chamber. The fact that lying usually goes unchallenged in media makes for bigger more destructive lies.

    The browser has holes, its a piece of software. This is way over the line. How did the information age become the disinformation age? Perhaps we officially entered the post-postman world [amazon.com] where everything is a soundbite that flies through the subconscious and sticks there. Long corrections don't have the same stickiness, so lying is now smart business.

    Keep it up Bill, you're making my next Apple purchase all the sweeter.

    Disclaimer for the mods: Yes, many politicians lie. Apple isnt perfect, etc. But there is a difference between small and big lies. Lies which are harmless and those which cause destruction.
    • by killjoe (766577) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:56AM (#10532886)
      The problem lies directly with the American people.

      First of all they are utterly clueless and can't even discern between the truth and a lie. They are pretty much programmed to accept whatever somebody on the tee vee tells them.

      Look at this (or any other election) for example. Is Kerry a flip flopper? Is he a coward? Did he get his metals from self inflicted wounds? Ask your typical american and they will say yes. Press them for details and you'll realiize they don't know shit, they are simply repeating what they saw on television commercials.

      Same with Gates and Company. Ask yourself. Have you ever heard or read an interview with Ballmer or Gates in which they didn't tell at least one lie? Not a minor one either but a blatant out and out lie. They people are habitual and pathalogical liars. They will continue to tell lies until the press calls them on it. Since they buy lots of advertising don't hold your breath though.
    • by _xeno_ (155264) on Friday October 15, 2004 @03:29AM (#10533018) Homepage Journal
      The annoying thing with the media today is that they just report on what someone tells them to. What I mean is that they'll just rehash the talking points or press releases that are sent to them.

      So you see things like "Bush said this, and Kerry said that." Which is 100% true. But there's no investigation into whether the quotes are actually, like, true.

      So Microsoft will release a press release saying "We're improving security!" and then various media reports will say "Microsoft says it's improving security." But the media won't actually investigate whether or not Microsoft actually is improving security, they'll just report that Microsoft has said that they are.

      About the only time you'll hear any discussions about the truth of any position anyone has is on various talk shows, where to "show both sides" you'll get two people who are representing "opposite sides" of a given debate. Directly opposite sides.

      Since these people are soley debating for their side, we're ultimately left with no middle ground. Only two extreme views on a topic.

      So while the two "sides" of the debate are represented, the media generally "let's the reader decide" which side they believe in. But since the veracity of the two sides has never been called into question (other than each side calling the other wrong), the average reader/listener/viewer has no way of judging complicated scenarios they don't really understand.

      (For example, I don't really know what Kerry's position is on Iraq. I have no idea whether or not it's a good position, because I only hear polarized viewpoints on it. About all I know is that he intends to "do it differently" and "get international support." I have no idea about the details and don't know enough about international politics and warfare to judge it even if I did know.)

      This is one of the main reasons I get all my news from the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. At least then I know it's all fake. :)

      I'm currently up due to insomnia, so if any of that makes no sense, I'll try and post a correction tomorrow. It'll be in fine print and on the fifth page. :)

    • by njdj (458173) on Friday October 15, 2004 @04:48AM (#10533296)
      I hear them from the Bush administration almost daily and corporate america is getting a lot more brazen.

      Politicians (especially the ones in power, regardless of party) always tend to lie. And salespeople have never been noted for truthfulness.

      What has changed, gradually, over a couple of decades, is that the media no longer provide a check on politicians and corporate liars.

      The purpose of the media used to be to provide information and critical comment. That's changed. A newspaper or a TV network makes more money if it's operated primarily as an entertainment. That means: nothing that requires the consumer to think, because a lot of people don't like to think. Not too many boring facts, either (unless they're sensational).

      Don't be too hard on Gates. There will always be people whose goal in life is to make more money, by any means that works. The problem is that our society has lost the checks and balances that used to constrain people like him.

  • From TFA.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mstefanus (705346) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:22AM (#10532707)
    Q: What's your take on making Windows Media compatible with Apple?
    Gates: We're big believers in interoperability.

    BWWAAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAAAHHAAAA!!!!!!

    Yes yes... ofcourse, interoperability within Microsoft products
  • Article is a troll (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ic3p1ck (597610) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:25AM (#10532721)
    Mod article +5 Troll...

    Wish there was a rating system for articles.
  • by roman_mir (125474) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:30AM (#10532751) Homepage Journal
    What Gates is saying is that Windows does not come with native viruses installed, you have to download them from other places. Well, I sure hope they see that they are missing a market opportunity here. Longhorn better come with its own, native viruses.

  • Gibberish (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gruntled (107194) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:35AM (#10532784)
    The purpose of Internet Explorer is to download third party files (by viewing Web pages). Mr Gates's claim that vulnerabilites exist because of such downloads is therefore nonsensical; it's like saying we could end deaths due to automobile accidents by banning automobiles. Yeah, there's a certain logic to that, but it sort of misses the point. To take a recent, ongoing example: A malevolent Web page can use an image file to compromise a Windows system. This vulnerability is not created by users who have somehow previously contaiminated the local environment; it's a part of the system's design. The OS was originally built to offer features over security, and maintaining backward compatability rather than fixing those issues would make it more difficult to coax existing users into upgrading (and would also make it easier for existing users to consider alternatives rather than upgrading). I lost two years of my life covering the antitrust trial, listening to this guy and his minions cheerfully perjure themselves, and he just can't seem to stop making it up.
    • Re:Gibberish (Score:4, Insightful)

      by KamuSan (680564) on Friday October 15, 2004 @03:01AM (#10532916) Journal
      It's more like banning traffic accidents by forbidding driving.

      It just means that Bill Gates still doesn't get network connected computers. I remember he once thought that 'the Internet' would never be important. And now I think that, IE monopoly and all, Microsoft still, inherently, deeply, doesn't get network connected computers. Yes, they forced Netscape out of the market with IE, but for them IE is just another piece of software.
      • Re:Gibberish (Score:4, Informative)

        by gruntled (107194) on Friday October 15, 2004 @03:19AM (#10532987)
        Your analogy is more precise than mine; nicely done. But I think MS does "get" networking these days; they're just in this huge bind because they can't repair all the problems without breaking nearly every existing application out there. Most people won't throw away their entire investment in software for an OS upgrade -- even a a more secure OS upgrade -- so Microsoft winds up muddling along with things like XP Service Pack 2 (the 2 stands for "too little, too late"). Must stop typing these at 3 AM....
  • by ImTwoSlick (723185) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:36AM (#10532789)
    Han: "It's not my fault!"
    Lando: "It's not my fault!"
    Bill: "It's not my fault!"
  • Bill (Score:4, Insightful)

    by cbdavis (114685) on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:42AM (#10532818)
    You need to see a shrink. You are SO in denial mode. Take it from your users, not your PR cronies, IE is broke, always has been broke, always will be broke. Firefox is great ( but there are still some problems with it) and it will get better. But I doubt if it will ever get a big following. Bill has us by the cojones. We know it, He knows it. Thats why he can lie, lie, and lie some more. Thats it, Bill, blame your users. Just once, I would like for M$ to admit fault. I can dream, right?
  • Nuts! (Score:4, Funny)

    by abacsalmasi (643483) <adam@stableresea[ ].com ['rch' in gap]> on Friday October 15, 2004 @02:53AM (#10532869) Homepage
    I hope my mom doesn't read this, I told her that all the porn on my machine was downloaded by Windows.
  • Catch 22! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Advocadus Diaboli (323784) on Friday October 15, 2004 @03:01AM (#10532908)
    Q: Speaking of security, Internet Explorer has had well-publicized holes ...
    Gates: Understand those are cases where you are downloading third-party software.
    ...
    Q: Might you add anti-virus/spyware protection in Windows?
    Gates: It's not a thing you build in. You have to offer a service. There are third parties who are doing a good job. We're always taking a hard look, but we don't have any concrete plans.

    So if I get this right the problem with security is that I download third party software and Mr. Gates thinks that it can be solved by third party service (which means probably downloading third party anti-virus software). Now I clearly understand why the problem is never solved...

  • by outanowhere (686527) on Friday October 15, 2004 @03:05AM (#10532927) Journal
    Blame it on the user.

    Again.

    As usual.

    As always.

    Microsoft and especially Mr. Gates have both blamed the user for DOS and windows bugs, et cetera, ad nauseum, since the beginning.

    It's one of the things that really encouraged me to dump windows. Being told personally, to one's face, by Microsoft and Mr. Gates that the problems with DOS and windows is my fault made it very easy to walk away from the huge investment in microsoft stuff.

    Since the user is at fault, the user can fix it--like I did: dump microsoft.

  • +1 FUNNY (Score:4, Funny)

    by scum-e-bag (211846) on Friday October 15, 2004 @03:16AM (#10532971) Homepage Journal
    Gates: We're big believers in interoperability.


    Come on, mod me +1 FUNNY for all those who haven't RTA...

    I pissed myself when I read this one.
  • by Klowner (145731) on Friday October 15, 2004 @03:25AM (#10533008) Homepage
    I mean, spyware and viruses weren't made by microsoft, IE just helps you download and install them more easily, and even sometimes automatically!

    I think we should all thank Bill for coming clean about this ever increasing problem.
  • by DeepHurtn! (773713) on Friday October 15, 2004 @03:37AM (#10533040)
    I haven't seen anybody mention my favourite line from the interview:

    Gates: "We're big believers in interoperability."

    • by TiggsPanther (611974) <tiggs@m-void.c o . uk> on Friday October 15, 2004 @04:46AM (#10533287) Journal
      Gates: "We're big believers in interoperability."

      I was amused by that, too. I was tempted to call bull, but technically they are interested in interoperability.

      It's just that they seem to believe that everyone else should have to pay them for the privilege of being interoperable.
      It's great from a business point of view, but not much use from a F/OSS point of view, unless projects manage to pick up a sponsor who would be willing to shell out to license the technology and manage to do it in such a way as is compatible with whatever license they're using.

  • Catch 22 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by The Real Nem (793299) on Friday October 15, 2004 @03:38AM (#10533049) Homepage

    It is kind of a catch 22. If Windows had built in anti-virus software no one would buy 3rd party anti-virus software and Microsoft would gain a monopoly in the market. They would get their asses sued and everyone would complain that they have a monopoly or they have created an unfair environment. We've seen it before. If Windows doesn't have built in anti-virus software everyone complains they don't.

    And even if Windows did have built in anti-virus software, can you honestly tell me, given their track record, that you would feel secure with it? If everyone used Windows built in anti-virus software wouldn't it be just that much easier to exploit and cause even more damage.

  • by infonick (679715) * on Friday October 15, 2004 @04:19AM (#10533183) Homepage
    I will never understand. If a grocery store so as much hires someone *unlikeable* to work the cash registers, they lose customers. likewise with vehicle manufacturers. If a bad car is designed, it is branded a lemon, and is treated as such by all consumer reporting websites/newsletters.

    So why Bill Gates is still in buisness after making such a comment: "Understand those are cases where you are downloading third-party software" it makes my eys roll. Why is the customer always right? because only the customer knows what he or she wants. If the customer wants a good solid car, they are going to buy a good solid car from *insert favorite car manufacturer here*. So why people put up with this slander from the biggest man in Microsoft is beyond me.

    Personally, i think i run a very tight ship. I dont need antivirus, and a nice firewall is all that stands between me and the next script-kiddie on the block. Problems i've ever had are related to IE and poor OS performance.

    Because i will shortly be entering my era of University in 2005, my thoughs turn to my financial future. I will not be able to afford a new computer, much less new games/new MS OS. When the time comes when i can no longer play games on my current setup, windows will have no further place on my computer.

    *Deep Breath* - Thank you for your time.
  • 3rd party (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tom (822) on Friday October 15, 2004 @04:24AM (#10533210) Homepage Journal
    Understand those are cases where you are downloading third-party software.

    True, that. Now the point is that you're downloading this "third-party software", aka virus, trojan horse or spyware, even though you never wanted to.
  • I'm sorry, what!? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rincebrain (776480) on Friday October 15, 2004 @04:36AM (#10533258) Homepage
    Last Q/A in the article:
    Q: There is talk of a Google browser. Internet Explorer has had its security woes. How do you keep users?

    Gates: More has been invested in making IE secure than any browser on the planet by a long shot. Nothing is going to change. That's the one over 90% of people are going to keep using.
    [Italics and bolded sentence my own markup]

    So let me get this straight, Mr. Gates. You have thousands of people working just on Internet Explorer, and yet...a thousand or two thousand people working on Mozilla have bested you?

    Nothing is going to change, indeed, Mr. Gates. You're going to keep spewing the same old story, ignoring obvious holes in your own logic (third-party software is to blame for all security problems, true...but that doesn't mean your software should allow third-party software to install itself without the user doing a thing), denying any obvious falsehoods in your own statements (" We feel like we are pioneering an experience that to us is a clear thing most households will want." - Gates, regarding Windows Media Center PCs...I'm sorry, I didn't know you pioneered multicasting from a set-top box...I presume Linksys is paying you licensing fees for their video broadcast device, to name one alternative?), and hoping people will be stupid enough to follow it.

    The saddest part of the above discourse is, Gates is probably right. People are, until told otherwise, going to keep using bug-ridden products, until they are shown that there are alternatives...I know many users who have never clicked Windows Update in their lives, and not because they've never used Windows.

    I could be wrong, but I'm sensing a downward spiral, when M$ can announce things such as they did in their article, and not get negative feedback from the interviewer. Just my $0.05.
  • by Max Threshold (540114) on Friday October 15, 2004 @04:52AM (#10533304)
    Downloading third-party software is exactly what gets people into trouble with Windows... especially when IE holes cause them to do so unknowingly!
  • by randalx (659791) on Friday October 15, 2004 @05:08AM (#10533358)
    Gates: What the consumer wants is pretty clear: a single remote control that lets them navigate photos, music, videos, TV in a very rich way. They want to see that on any screen in the house and then have a great portable device where they can take that stuff wherever they want anytime. The full realization of that dream is still years away, but we've taken a dramatic step in delivering that with Media Center.

    I think it'd be great if we could beat Microsoft to the punch by offering all of this and more using Linux and open formats (not WMA Bill!). It seems like there is already a lot of work in the area going on (MythTV [mythtv.org], Freevo [sourceforge.net], Mister House [misterhouse.net], VLC [videolan.org]) but is any of this ready to be easily set up by the average Joe? Is there any work being done to put all the pieces together. Perhaps a modded distribution geared specifically to creating and setting up a Media Center type environment. Not only could a Linux based solution put anything from MS to shame it could also force Movies/TV/Music industries to support open formats if the Linux Media Center becomes the dominant player.

    Am I dreaming or can the open source community take the lead here?

  • by emtboy9 (99534) <jeffNO@SPAMjefflane.org> on Friday October 15, 2004 @07:47AM (#10533843) Homepage
    I just love this kind of stuff... I mean, these interviews are the things that comedy routines are made of...
    Q: What's your take on making Windows Media compatible with Apple?
    Gates: We're big believers in interoperability. We've stated very clearly that if Apple wanted to support interoperability, we'd make that super easy for them. The notion that a single device is all anybody is going to want is sort of like saying the Model T is the end of everything.

    That just rules! We believe in interoperability, as long as you bow befor us! Kneel before Zod, errr... Bill! It is almost laughable, if it weren't so sad, to hear Bill Gates saying bad things like the above quote. Isnt what he accuses Apple of EXACTLY what Microsoft has been pusing the world to for years? What is the difference between being the sole supplier of iPods and iTunes (which Apple is) and being virtually the sole provider for desktop OSs, and using such position to force the adoption of "standards" that favor MS products.

    Q: Might you add anti-virus/spyware protection in Windows?
    Gates: It's not a thing you build in. You have to offer a service. There are third parties who are doing a good job. We're always taking a hard look, but we don't have any concrete plans.
    Funny, thats the exact thing that was said about web browsers before IE became so ingrained into the Windows code base that its pretty much inseperable... Its amazing... it really is. Its like, his lips are moving, but the words coming out dont match the movements. Just like a poorly dubbed kung-fu movie.
    Q: There is talk of a Google browser. Internet Explorer has had its security woes. How do you keep users?
    Gates: More has been invested in making IE secure than any browser on the planet by a long shot. Nothing is going to change. That's the one over 90% of people are going to keep using.
    Ummm... if that is the case, if I were Bill, et al, I would be demanding a refund on the IE "security" expenses...
  • Could he explain (Score:5, Informative)

    by BCW2 (168187) on Friday October 15, 2004 @08:13AM (#10533949) Journal
    Why a fresh install of XP puts at least 11 instances of Alexa (known spyware) and 5 DSO exploits on a box? Try it, install XP and then Ad-Aware and Spybot. Run them both and see the results. No computer that comes into or is built at the white box store I work at, leaves without those two programs installed. Yesterdays updates put 3 instances of Alexa back in.

My idea of roughing it turning the air conditioner too low.

Working...