I find that most people around where I work in a computer store that does repair, and some new pc sales is that even $38.95 for two years of anti virus is too much. To make matters worse, even a free tool is too much for some older computers, but it sure can send a ton of spam.

Then there’s the people who constantly click on every link they see, and even more curiously, wonder what ‘Run and Open’ mean.

But then again I’m an enjuneir…I don’t do things unless they add up!

Dead Bird | Dead Bird | Dead Bird | Jesus Christ Superstar!

Sure, if Apple OS 9/10 had been in Windows shoes, as far as you and I know, there’s a good chance we’d still be burdened with excessive spam, and the facts would be flipped, 80% of spam would originate from zombie OS X machines. Or perhaps not.

Back to the initial claim. If Windows runs on over 90% of the world’s computers, should 90% of spam –on average– come from windows machines?

Also, holding MS responsible is one thing. But in fact don’t they post security updates? And, they distribute “Windows Defender” (spy/male ware protection) for free (and installed in Vista).

If people have specific useful solutions, great. And it’s actually fine to blame MS all you want. (Really I don’t mean to defend them except when the claim is so odd.) Hey, I have a solution… make macs the predominent OS and I can assure you you’ll see more viruses and zombie emailers on Mac. Then, who’s fault it is? MS’s for losing market share, or Apple for doing so good? Don’t blame the OS, find a solution maybe if you have one.

Now, is this Microsoft’s fault? Or his fault for not having sufficient security?

Personally, I think that domestic PCs should be made simpler and safer for novice users. Straight out of the box, without the need for extensive configuration or purchasing subsequent applications. I’m sure that (to paraphrase one of Aral’s favorite quotes) 80% of domestic users utilise only 20% of a PC’s features.

But I wonder… not that I would advocate this, but would it be possible to fight fire with fire? Create a “Zombie Killer” virus that, upon infecting an unprotected machine, did nothing but block all network access. The user would then be compelled to visit their local PC store and purchase a decent security package. Just a thought….

The point is, spam is a big problem, and if Aral is correct that a wopping 80% of spam is trafficing through some horrific 28 Days infected zombie Windows machines, well then what can the makers of Windows machines do about it? Can they do anything? And if they’re not, SHOULD they do something?? Clearly Windows is too powerful a machine in the hands of spammers. Give a bastard a windows computer and he suddenly has the power to congest the world’s inbox with news about the latest animal sex gone wild, and where to get really great deals!

Anyways, point is you’re quite rude, Aral’s subject is a very logical inquiry. And if tommorrow you’re shocked to find yourself wacked in the face 100 times a day, with 80% of these wack-happy objects being Apple Mighty Mouse’s, you should begin an inquiry about what Apple can do to stop their Mighty Mouse’s from being used to whack you in the face.

cheers.

–

I don’t think Microsoft can be held responsible for all spam, but some of their prior choices have definitely led to its near-universal levels today.

(1) The original email protocols were “anyone can call anyone anytime”. We saw what happened with junkmail, telemarketers, and fax attacks, so the original architects of email should have had a clue what would eventually happen with email.

(2) In the mid-90s Microsoft was *one* of the companies pushing unsafe email technology, such as scripting from strangers, markup and web bugs, lack of verification of attachments. Microsoft Outlook also introduced the evil full-autoquote in reply, which eventually killed most mailing list digests. But other email vendors followed similar practices too.

(3) Microsoft’s security choices in the mid-90s led to Vista being late (the XP SP2 release chewed up their schedule), and most spam today definitely does come from compromised Windows machines.

Microsoft’s choices did lead to the degradation of email that we see today. They weren’t the only contributor, but I don’t see any other group whose choices have had so terrible an effect.

jd/adobe (speaking for myself, of course)

PS: Kris, you’re right, security is a very significant issue, and we have to be careful _in_advance_ of any actual exploits. If you bring up a security issue with Adobe software today, you will be heard, and your contributions appreciated. The lessons from the 1990s must not be repeated.

If a mac was used to print propaganda for something bad, would it be Apple’s fault? If a theif finds my car easy to hijack and then they go do some crimes should volkswagon be held accountable? I don’t recall American or United airlines paying for the World Trade Centers.

Your initial linear progression is so fallacious it’s funny.