Microsoft To Demo 'Palladium' At WinHEC 364
1010011010 writes "According to Microsoft Watch, Microsoft will be demonstrating Palladium (also known as 'Next-Generation Secure Computing Base') at WinHEC in May in New Orleans. The 'trusted root' is now called the 'Nexus' by Microsoft. Developers wishing to write 'Nexus-aware' applications will apparently have to pay a licensing fee to do so. The product manager for Palladium, Mario Juarez, says, 'It's important to note that nexus-aware applications will not hinder any apps or anything else running in the regular Windows environment.' I'm sure you can all hear the word 'yet' at the end of that sentence. There's talk of phasing in Palladium, starting with Longhorn Server in 2005. I wonder how Microsoft will convince consumers that loss of control is a good thing, and how long the convincing will take. I, for one, am already planning to transition my company away from Microsoft software. Hopefully that won't get messed up by and dumb mandatory-palladium legislation from the Fritz types."
Did somebody say warez? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Did somebody say warez? (Score:2)
Speaking of mispronounciations... (Score:3, Funny)
'Cause I really did. I was all "What? Microsoft is embracing Wine? No wh-hay!"
Re:Did somebody say warez? (Score:2, Funny)
No one can tell you what the Nexus is (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, and it does the opposite of setting you free.
Re:No one can tell you what the Nexus is (Score:2)
Here come the squiddies
That's what jumped to my mind, anyway
-- james
Re:No one can tell you what the Nexus is (Score:2)
Re:No one can tell you what the Nexus is (Score:3, Funny)
A very thick, very wet blanket... And uncle Bill will tuck you in with plenty of cozy cinderblocks to hold it down...
Re:No one can tell you what the Nexus is (Score:5, Funny)
Morpheus: I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you're here. You're here because you know something. What you know you can't explain. But you feel it. You've felt it your entire life. That there's something wrong with the world. You don't know what it is, but it's there, like a splinter in your mind driving you mad. It is this feeling that has brought you to me. Do you know what I'm talking about?
Neo: The Nexus?
Morpheus: Do you want to know what IT is? The Nexus is everywhere. It is all around us, even now in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
Neo: What truth?
Morpheus: That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else you were born into bondage, born into a prison that you cannot smell or taste or touch. A prison for your mind. Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Nexus. is. You have to see it for yourself. This is your last chance.
Sad Fact.... (Score:2)
Re:No one can tell you what the Nexus is (Score:2)
Well, I know Malcolm McDowell can [trekkiesworld.de].
How to convince people loss of control is good (Score:5, Funny)
Tell them if they don't they'll be supporting terrorism.
Re:How to convince people loss of control is good (Score:2)
Here's how - (Score:4, Insightful)
There are several other places to find it; I just googled it again. And get a dead-tree version for your Dad, too (that's where mine went).
Re:How to convince people loss of control is good (Score:5, Funny)
Customer: Ooooh, that's bad.
Shopkeeper: But it comes with a free Media Player!
Customer: That's good!
Shopkeeper: The Media Player is also cursed.
Customer: That's bad.
Shopkeeper: But you get your choice of a free downloadable movie!
Customer: That's good!
Shopkeeper: The movies contain Digital Rights Management technology.
Customer: [stares]
Shopkeeper: That's bad.
Customer: Can I go now?
Re:How to convince people loss of control is good (Score:2)
Re:How to convince people loss of control is good (Score:3, Insightful)
Since when does Microsoft have to convince anyone of anything?
Joe Fourpack will just buy his Dell with Palladium preinstalled. No convincing required.
The price is right. It's secure, right? It's from Microsoft, so it must be high quality? It's got shiny graphics, so it must be high quality?
Another Microsoft Moment (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Another Microsoft Moment (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Another Microsoft Moment (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Another Microsoft Moment (Score:5, Informative)
Uh... No. VS.Net only ships with Microsoft data drivers, but there is nothing stopping you from installing mySql server [mysql.com] Oracle [oracle.com] and any other database that has an ODBC driver (and there's a lot of them so i'm not going to link them all in here!).
damn (Score:4, Funny)
Of course, being cool as I am I will realize that it's all fake and as harsh as real life^H^Hnux is, that's where we belong...
And I will bring back William Shatner; possibly saving (enter)price(line)?
*ducks*
Unsure (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Unsure (Score:3, Funny)
1.) Attach scanner
2.) Wait for BSOD
3.) Convince everyone that's what its suppose to do now because Windows was able to detect it was an evil scanner sent to cause you enormous grief by not being WHQL certified.
The fees! (Score:5, Insightful)
So won't this hurt Linux and Open Source software in general? High fees would keep Microsoft's good competitors (Apache, for instance) away from Palladium, and then we'd have all the unbearable boasting about how IIS is more secure.
That would be a cheap trick... but one to expect.
Re:The fees! (Score:5, Interesting)
If you sell a hardware platform with your application, then the cost of the operating system is in your cost of goods and services for producing your app. I think this is one of the major arguments of Linux + Java. Though my disclaimer is that I'm not a product manager
Re:The fees! (Score:4, Insightful)
If anything, I think the fees would drive more people to develop their software on free platforms.
Damn straight. The only reason I haven't dropped Win2k on my main desktop in favor of Linux is that I still develop some software that only runs on Win32 (and I don't feel like being hassled with WINE). It looks to me like Microsoft is going to try and latch onto my wallet just for developing software for their platform, so the incentive to drop all my Windows-specific work is getting pretty significant.
Re:The fees! (Score:3, Insightful)
Bussineses unfortunately like the idea of drm and anti-piracy.
I can see it now.
If they only write their programs for Windows they can lay off the mac version team and get rid of piracy all together! They can kill 2 birds with 1 stone. Adobe is even looking [slashdot.org] at canceling their mac versionsn to cut costs. Lets join palladium! The fee will pay for itself.
Sigh.
Palladium was designed for Microsoft and software publishers. Not consumers and the core market will
Re:The fees! (Score:3, Interesting)
Isn't this exactly what Apple is doing?
MacOS only runs on Apple hardware (yes yes, I know you can fake it), which can kept it pretty low compared to Windows which works on any x86 platform.
Now Windows will be locked to hardware as well...
Is MS pulling another Apple out their sleeves?
-- Tino Didriksen / ProjectJJ.dk
Re:The fees! (Score:2)
Phasing in... (Score:2)
Didn't they bring out the 2003 server because of the longhorn delay?
Nexus?! (Score:5, Funny)
Nexus v.6: I want more life, fucker.
Bill Gates: Sorry. Planned obsolescence is a bitch.
Re:Nexus?! (Score:2)
At least that's what Soren wanted in Generations. Or *cough* at least that's what I've heard from people who've watched the movie. *tip toe*..
Security (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Security (Score:3, Insightful)
Couldn't the decision be based on a non-biased group or even a public voting system? What is stopping the OSS community from writing their own version of paladium? I guess there might be some hardware issues to iron out, but I'm no expe
Re:Security (Score:5, Funny)
Freedom is slavery.
people love "security"... a bit too much... (Score:4, Insightful)
The government's already convinced people that loss of control in the name of "fighting evil" is wonderful, and that it should be accepted openly.
Hopefully people don't follow suit with Palladium, or pretty soon, the government will see that regulation of a person's own computer can be done easily and effectively.
solution: we all start using Linux (or in some cases, use Linux more) and move to Canada (or in some cases, stay there)
note: entire solution does not apply outside of US or Canada, your mileage may vary, see dealer for details, sweepstakes ends 11/05/72. Linux portion of solution applies to all humans, again, see dealer for details.
2005 (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:2005 (Score:2)
for desktops, we should try to get this [openbeos.org] ready by 2005.
Re:2005 (Score:2)
Disagree. Tying into Malarkium(tm) is EXACTLY what will be required to, for once and for all, get people to drop MS like the bad habit it is. Once they feel the tendrils entwining every last fiber of their computers, it won't be long at all before the hatchets come out and the serious hewing begins.
MS is fixing to just HAND IT OVER to Linux on a Silver Platter, and they have no idea what they're doing. Serves 'em right, too.
Re:2005 (Score:2)
If by take over, you mean the corporate desktop, then probably. If you mean all computers everywhere, then probably not.
But that's OK, because I don't understand how people get "tied" into Palladium. It provides hardware-backed authentication and code signing, I thought. I haven't seen any hard theories as to why this would be a b
Surreal (Score:5, Interesting)
Now MS can candidly tell consumers how they intend on outright controlling all of your data and even charge developers for the "privilage" of being able to conform.
I just can't see how so many pointy-hairs can examine Microsoft and it's products and decide that it would a good idea to spend so much money on it. Microsoft sales people are truly adept at their trade.
Re:Surreal (Score:3, Insightful)
That's exactly the point. Microsoft is a company based on marketing, not engineering. That's why they almost always hire new college grads as programmers...anyone with any actual development experience would see right through all the marketing hype and realize how much thier products suck.
Actually, I would argue that Sun has the exact opposite problem. Love it or hate it, Java has made a huge impact on the software industry, but Sun has been thus f
why doesn't everyone.... (Score:4, Insightful)
If your afraid of how it works or don't like it don't use it, don't use windows. With just what MS has said most all of what people go on about has no bases and is just stuff from tin foil hat people. Yes MS has done bad things. Maybe they will with this. But give them a chance with it, let them screw up before you chastise them.
Re:why doesn't everyone.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Because we already know what Microsoft will do: employ whatever tactics neccassary to insure their continued monopoly status and success - even if it means eliminating the private ownership of data as we know it. The rabid MS bashing going on isn't a sign of premature paranoia, rather, it is the natural reaction of those that have studied the company's history.
Re:why doesn't everyone.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Given one of the features in Palladium is supposed to allow for remote deletion of files by Microsoft, I'll have to decline giving them the chance to screw up. I see 2 major problems with this:
1. I don't trust Microsoft with this power. Should I run software Microsoft doesn't like, what's to stop it from deleting the software?
2. With Microsoft's famous security in software, coupled with this new feature, how long do you think it will take for a person to crack into a Microsoft server and issue commands to thousands of computers to delete files? Palladium may be designed to only run trusted programs to issue these commands, but I can't imagine gaining trusted access being much more difficult than grabbing administrater or root privledges on a machine.
Sure, you could set up your firewall to block the remote deletion commands, if you know what port it's using. I have philosophical issues with using firewalls to protect myself from the programs running on my computer, as opposed to protecting myself from outside threats, though. I'd much prefer not putting Palladium on my system. The risk is much too great, especially if I were to screw up configuring things to block this "feature"(and I'm hardly a good sysadmin).
Re:why doesn't everyone.... (Score:2)
I really have to laugh out of sheer pity when I read stuff like this. What on Earth makes you think Microsoft would care enough about you to delete things of your machine ? More importantly, what makes you think they'd take the risk of being sued for deleting the wrong thing ? It really is the epitomy of paranoid ramblings.
Your second point, OTOH, is quite valid and reaso
Re:why doesn't everyone.... (Score:2)
My first point was actually much less of a concern to me. I probably should have noted its minor consideration. However, it's worth discussing anyways.
Depending on how the system is set up, it could be a relatively simple task to enter a particular file into a database and send mass-messages to
Hmm (Score:3, Interesting)
And, I suppose it will only be a matter of time before Palladium dictates that only Nexus-aware programs will run. Nice business model.
Windows XB (Score:2)
And, I suppose it will only be a matter of time before Palladium dictates that only Nexus-aware programs will run.
If Microsoft is going to make the business model of the Nexus environment like that of the Xbox console, then why not just call it "Windows XB"?
Mandatory access control for all! (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Mandatory access control for all! (Score:5, Insightful)
They are wrong.
My home is "shared" with a Nerf arrow launcher, a Sonicare toothbrush, a Panasonic TV set, and a Revere tea kettle (among other things). Neither Nerf, Sonicare, Panasonic, or Revere have the right to enter my home and tell me how I can or can't use these articles. Why? Because they gave up all rights and claims to those articles when they sold them to me.
Yet, somehow, software vendors have gotten it into their minds that they not only have the right to impose constraints and restrictions on their customers post-sale, they think this is normal, even a positive thing. They are utterly incapable of seeing the yawning inconsistency between what they claim is happening (a "license" to use the software) and what is actually happening (a cash-for-goods sale).
If we were to presume the software vendors are correct in their beliefs -- if we were to accept that a retail marketplace seller can impose restrictions on a buyer with little more than a shrinkwrap "agreement" -- then lawful innovation becomes impossible. The TV show Junkyard Wars would be illegal, as all the articles in that junkyard would have been obtained under contractual restrictions forbidding their use for anything other than what the vendor deemed proper. Using an old camping tent as a parachute for your rocket would land you in prison, because the vendor only granted permission for it to be used for outdoor camping activities. Likewise, using the Unreal engine as a basis for architectural walk-through simulations would get you carted away.
Thus, the analogy must be deemed to fail. There is no "sharing" going on here, because the software was sold to end users. Once sold, the end user gets final say over how it's used. Any other interpretation raises caveat emptor to unreasonable levels. I should not have to take Lawrence Lessig with me every time I go shopping at Fry's.
Besides, the computer industry got plenty vigorous and prosperous without these restrictions. No one has yet presented a convincing argument why that should change.
Schwab
Re:Mandatory access control for all! (Score:2)
Nice try.
There's a difference between restrictions imposed by a vendor and restrictions imposed by the government. Right now, the government, in the form of copyright law, says you can't do that.
As it happens, because computers make it so easy to copy things, and because I see this form of infinite abundance as an overall Good Thing, I believe copyright needs to be fundamentally re-examined
Re:Mandatory access control for all! (Score:2)
My computer is mine and is shared with whoever I wish to share it with, my girlfriend, my cat, even some people on the internet.
It certainly is not shared with people who wrote the software for it any more than your computer is shared with me because you read my comment on slashdot.
What is in dispute is the right to own and use the stuff I purchased in a way that I want. And one of the restrictions of sale is that the former owner transfers me all those rights.
Re:Mandatory access control for all! (Score:2)
I did so immediately after reading your comment. I'm somewhat confused - I was able to log in as "administrator" with no warnings, no fuss, and no loss of functionality. My normal user account, in fact, is a member of the administrators group (it's just easier that way).
Are you referring to the lack of an "administrator" icon on the welcome screen? If so, then you need to know 3 things:
1) the welcome screen can be switched off, lea
What i want to know (Score:2, Funny)
Anyone agree or disagree on that?
In the tradition offollowing with the "leader".... (Score:5, Funny)
One of our developers has already approached RMS but apparently he mumbled something about "GNU/trusted computing" before the developer hung up the phone.
________
Open source hosting @ $3 / Month - Cheap Web Site Hosting [cheap-web-...ing.com.au]
Wait a sec.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Missed the Point. (Score:5, Insightful)
" "Palladium" will not require digital rights management technology, and DRM will not require "Palladium." "
DMR is not the focus of Palladium (at least intially.... I say this with a grain of salt as you never know what they future will hold), but rather a seperate microsoft initiative spearheaded by the windowsmedia group and the Office group. I would be far more concerned about what these groups do than what Microsoft has outlined for Palladium.
Palladium is (or at least what is hoped, again i say this with a grain of salt, we'll only really know once the deliverables are shown) a combination of two big ideas. The first is to provide a system in which a user can trust stuff and allow it to run with sensitive information (eg, user data) and provide a sandbox where they can run stuff that they don't trust and know it won't do anything of consequence.
The second is to bring the PC hardware/Software to a more sofistated level, bringing up the bar as it would to what is now held by some of the mainframes. This serves two fold a purpose, one to weed out old hardware and hardware manufacturers that people keep using over and over that perhaps just don't have proper drivers which haul down the machine. Secondly, give greater credibility to the Wintel platform in all they're little political/business/OSS/User heart battles. At the end of the day, any time a user/admin/whomever sees something not function correctly (eg, system crash, failed performance of hardware eg... scanner won't scan) the first impulse is to blame Windows reguardless what caused the problem. I'm all for the improvement of the overall improvement of windows as any system that is improved makes a cost saving in both time and money at the end of the day.
There has been much speculation as to what Pallium will actually be. Most of it has been nonsense runned off by people with FUD as they're agenda. Little is known about what exactly will Pallium eventually encompase.... But what I do know is this. If it turns out that user restrictions are placed and people suddenly stop beind able to do certain things... then Microsoft will get a hit to they're bottom line and OS's like Linux and Mac OSX will suddenly have a massive inflow.
Give the public a little credit... The market doesn't have an absolute hold on them and if windows doesn't suit they're needs they'll jump off as though the ship is on fire. It's not like there aren't other capable alternatives. If there wasn't windows would have been regulated long time ago just like the telcos. But do you really think microsoft would alient people that much (or abolish competition for that matter) to be able to hurt themselves? I think not.
Re:Missed the Point. (Score:3, Interesting)
And while you're right that Palladium is not the same as DRM, I've heard Manferdelli (the Microsoft manager) talk, and he very frankly admitted that the original motivation for the project was to support DRM. Then they realized they could generalize it and do a lot more with it.
I also disagree that Palladium provides a sandbox. Palladium applications can still be pretty dama
Re:Missed the Point. (Score:4, Interesting)
However, I think I need to clarify my points, as I was making broad claims and you've picked up at least one that needs clarification.
I also disagree that Palladium provides a sandbox. Palladium applications can still be pretty damaging. They can delete all your files, or whatever, just like apps today. What Palladium does allow is that an application can encrypt its data and be confident that no one else can decrypt it. So you do gain a certain amount of security in that way. Palladium-aware apps can protect themselves in ways that old-style programs cannot. But there's no sandbox per se.
By sandbox I mean that non trusted code work under regular windows with presumably tighter restrictions (providing the default sandbox) and trusted code run in a freer app space. I do realize that a trusted app would have full control over its space ultimately have potential to create damage This ultimately then begs the question can you really trust a trusted app? On its defence (slightly), anyone willing to pay a license fee to become certified *should be* more trustworthy than some virus writer as they've got to cough up some cash make themselves apear secure!
I admit my def is not a true sandbox and a poor term to describe what I meant. But if that's not what is delivered (or at least some other variant that has obvious measures of secure/insecure code execution then the end users just won't get it) then they're not going to be any major credibility in the short run as to the whole push.
And while you're right that Palladium is not the same as DRM, I've heard Manferdelli (the Microsoft manager) talk, and he very frankly admitted that the original motivation for the project was to support DRM. Then they realized they could generalize it and do a lot more with it.
Now, I totally agree with you.... Palladium is a totally different beast then what was initially announced. Goes to show that the consumer still has some power over big companies and not the other way around. However, I must point out that in the end it doesn't matter what was the original idea was, it's what delivered that counts. Simple example, Microsoft was going to release the next generation help system having spent over 1/2 billion into the project. It was going to revolutionize how help is provided. It got canned. Bits and pieces of it pop up in office in the form of SmartTags and other things.. Apple also had a similar thing going before that... OpenDoc if I'm not mistaken.... got canned. An on the subject on failures, remember Microsoft Bob? It was suppose to revolutionize computers to beginners... that got canned after lack of consumer interest.
My long winded point (and I apologise for that) is that Microsoft can say what they want when they want it about it, but the reality is they won't release something that's going to hurt them (well much). Case in point, windows media even with it's DRM is relatively popular (cough even though it has divx to help with some of those numbers). And God knows why they're IM is so popular but they've capitalized on it and are making a "hip" integrated add-on (3 degrees) for it.
Anyhow.... The best policy when speaking about Palladium is to wait and see.... We really don't know the particulars which only lead to more speculation. A charge that can be directly aimed at Microsoft for leaving it so vague at times leaving ramped speculation impossible to avoid.
Btw... I hope my response is a tad better.... I'm working late and such my writing skills are simply not there right now...
Re:Missed the Point. (Score:3, Interesting)
That doesn't require hardware support. You can already do this in multi-user systems (including WinNT/XP/2K) by creating a new unprivileged user and executing code as that user. If every user could create sub-users with limited privileges, the system would be prot
Re:Missed the Point. (Score:2)
The parent poster however has confused DMR [bell-labs.com] with DRM. I don't think DMR would be amused
Good Thing (Score:3, Interesting)
I must have forgotten when they convinced me that Clippy was a Good Thing before forcing^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hintroducing it.
Seriously, do you really think they're going to even try to convince us? What's the point of having a monopoly if you can't (ab)use it?
Re:Good Thing (Score:2)
You notice they had to get rid of Clippy. People hated him. And let's not forget poor old Bob.
Microsoft is subject to market discipline just like every other company. The only reason they have a monopoly is that they've kept everyone happy enough. If they start doing things to make people unhappy, their monopoly will disappear faster than IBM's did.
how will this protect from viruses ? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's worth nothing that the behemoth apps (Outlook, Word, Excel etc) are signed, they will probably keep their embedded superscripting features, so viruses will still happily run on them.
I am curious about buffer overflows. Stack checks are not infallible, code is not read-only and and I can't imagine the palladium system checking the signature for each 4k block as it runs (since if decent encryption is used it will be quite expensive in CPU time). So, will we have signed apps that might still have such bugs ?
Re:how will this protect from viruses ? (Score:5, Informative)
Simple... suddenly secure Office apps will use .Net which runs the macros in a sandbox outside the secure zone. It has been on the drawing box for quite some time. Office 2003 will offer the first steps to .Net integration wich will ultimately add more security and control over these dumb macro exploits.
But the more obvious step would be to prohit you from manually launching such a script in the first place. Which is a step up. I've personally witnessed Computer Science Master and PHD students who should know better open up arbitrary code sent to them via email. Goes to show that sometimes even the knowledgeful are just as dumb as the users they often mock.
Re:how will this protect from viruses ? (Score:2)
A sandbox for MS Office macros would be an excellent idea, but you don't need Palladium for that. You don't need .NET either.
Re:how will this protect from viruses ? (Score:2)
Obviously not. But such integration insures two things: Consistency and standardization. .Net already has its own sandbox machanisms and is being integrated into office 2003. Pallium, well, you got to give a reason to hunk over cash to the predicesor of Offic 2k3 ;)
Re:how will this protect from viruses ? (Score:4, Informative)
First, Palladium doesn't sign all the executables. As the article takes pains to mention, all the old Windows programs will still run. What Palladium does provide is "attestation", meaning that the secure hardware can report a hash of the secure part of the application to a remote server. That server can then decide based on the hash whether to trust the app.
As far as viruses, I think you're right that macro viruses wouldn't be stopped. The one advantage is that the scope of the damage might be limited, as any "sensitive" data on your computer could be encrypted using the Palladium hardware. So you could still get an email virus, but it couldn't access your bank account data.
thoughts.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Then I read some comments. You gotta pay to write software for windows. What crap! They have the desktop computer section by the balls, and they keep squeezing for more money.
But the more they squeeze, the more people get sick and leave. So in part, I welcome this. Maybe a few more people will get the idea and switch to something freer....something that ends with "ix"
Re:thoughts.. (Score:2)
I guess all the Linux users out there will have to sync their cvs clients back to Minix.
Wish this was a joke... (Score:4, Funny)
Oh that's easy! All you have to do is convince everyone that having control over your computer just helps terrorists.
Sigh. Now if only I were kidding.
Palladium... (Score:2, Funny)
I can see both sides of the DRM war (Score:3, Interesting)
I was always one of the people saying the Internet would revolutionize the world... that Information should be free, etc etc. And that's what it comes down to... the real world is based on selling goods, trading services, etc. These goods and services are of limited quantity, so they have value. Media on the Internet can be copied infinitelly, and thus has no value.
I am stepping out on a limb here, but is it possible the dot.com boom of the late 90's failed because of people trying to charge for things that were inherently worthless? What if your wallpapers.com website sold quality wallpaper images, but that were signed and could only be used by the person who bought it. (think: When I buy a painting to put on my wall, I can't send a copy to all my friends for free, can I? Isn't it the _same thing_??)
So there's the problem. Do you want the benefits of a media-rich world, where people can actually make MONEY, and succeed, and continue? How many GOOD sites have shut down because of lack of revenue?
Would it be worth it, if it were properly implemented and restricted, to put such a system in place to give the internet an actual economy?
Those where the days... (Score:2, Funny)
Longhorn Server?? (Score:2)
There is no planned server edition for Longhorn, much less with a fixed release date of 2005.
I was thinking (Score:2, Interesting)
Submitters name (Score:2)
"Yeah, microsoft is bad! Gimme back my market share on evil!"
hm why? (Score:3, Insightful)
, for one, am already planning to transition my company away from Microsoft software
But this sort of thing is brilliant for companies, as it cuts down on the damage a employee can do on their PC. It also restricts what data a sour employee can walk out of your company with.
I for one would like to be able to see a OpenSource application that works like a central repository and customises documents via steganograpghy whenever an employee checks out a sensative document. Then leaks can be tracked down to who checked the document out, and investigations proceed from there.
Yoink (Score:3, Funny)
A prophecy (Score:2)
Their blood shall be upon their own hands.
Technology isolation (Score:2)
Just be sure that your goal here is in line with that of your employer. Or, if you are the boss, that you've thought about the implications for your customers and, therefore, you. Playing favorites with ones means is a risk few will take, so don't expect a lot of help.
Momopoly (Score:2)
How'bout them Apples? (Score:2, Insightful)
Apple did it and it has only 5% of the market. Let that be a lesson.
(Disclaimer: Well, not really considering I have swtiched may laptop to an iBook and am loving the BSD-based little thing.)
Can you say "Naïve"? (Score:3, Insightful)
Nick...
Palladium and anti-virus (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.virusbtn.com/magazine/archives/200209/
Summary:
- It's foolish to expect it'll stop viruses
- Microsoft will have the anti-virus industry by the short and curlies
- Microsoft PR is impressively
"I wonder how Microsoft will convince..." (Score:3, Funny)
Not long. A glimpse from the future...
Microsoft Windows XP2 makes your favorite operating system even more user friendly.
Tired of viruses, spyware, and popup ads that aren't from Microsoft? So are we, so XP2 utilizes a brand new technology called Palladium. You can now be confident that only Microsoft tested, and approved programs can run on your computer.
Security is a good thing (TM)
Back to the present...
--Joey
MS will ace this demo. (Score:3, Funny)
Is Palladium suppose to carry over to things off the computer? Because I know many businesses that wouldn't run if they used Windows.
In Microsoft Russia (Score:2)
There has to be major anti-trust entanglements with Palladium. How the HELL did they trick the DoJ into believing Palladium is anything but a megalomaniacle attempt to control the software industry. Does the DoJ have to wait until after M$ seizes control before intervening?
Re:In Microsoft Russia (Score:2)
Oh - and that government is typically proactive instead of reactive...
Re:Big Brother is Watching..... (Score:4, Funny)
I dont have anything to hide....
except probably your username?:)
Re:Microsoft To Demo 'Palladium' At WinHEC?? (Score:5, Funny)
demo guy: Well, Bill. You just hook up the scanner and Windows will automatically find and install the drivers for it.
Bill: That's great!
demo guy: Yes. It is one of the great features of Windo- Oh, boy. That's not supposed to happen.
*BSOD appears on a 3 story screen*
*audience laughs*
*/me shudders after thoughts of the future run through my head*
I can see it now...
demo guy: You plug in your printer and WindowsPA automagically detects it and installs the printer drivers.
Bill: That's great!
demo guy: Yes. It is one of the great features of Win- Oh, boy. That's not supposed to happen...
*BSOD fills 3 story screen*
BSOD: All you data are belong to Microsoft.
*Audience laughs*
*/me laughs becasue
Re:Microsoft To Demo 'Palladium' At WinHEC?? (Score:3, Interesting)
BSOD Frequency (Score:3, Interesting)
I run Windows 98 f
Re:BSOD Frequency (Score:3, Funny)
That's the problem right there, running an application, even a small one. I have found Windows to be extremely stable if you simply don't mess with it by running applications. But users insist on doing just that, poking and prodding, clicking and dragging, making demands on the OS, and then they're surprised when the thing crashes and blame Microsoft. Same thing with viruses, users running things, and clicking on things,
Re:About now... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:About now... (Score:3, Interesting)
The risks far outweigh the benefits from a company that has shown itself repeatedly to be untrustworthy.
The comment about preventing employees installing software is misleading. NTFS and Unix permissions can prevent this (though it's tricky to get the balance on NTFS if people actually have to use the computer for more than a few specific tasks. I have been called out several times to fix people'
Re:About now... (Score:2)
Re:Brass Lining (Score:2)