Advanced

InformationWeek Lets Microsoft’s Bill Hilf Try To Scare You.. Yeah. Right.

Posted by itron on · 2 comments
HackFUD; By KC 		Mail this story
Print this story

What he seems to be implying here is that if you use FOSS products, there’s no one to phone up and complain to if something with that product goes wrong. There’s no accountability. You can’t hold someone liable for something going wrong. What he’s also saying is that buying commercial (read : proprietary) software, then all these negatives Go Away. Not only that, but with the purchase of the commercial software, you’re getting a “guarantee that what you have will perform, and has been tested”, that you can hold the publishers of that software liable if something doesn’t work. Oh, really? Yeah. Right.

Full Story

  Nav
» Read more about: Story Type: Editorial; Groups: Community, GNU, Linux, Microsoft

» Get new stories by e-mail: nightly or as they are published

« Return to the newswire homepage

  Related stories
» More like this

Comments (2)

No worse than Windows

jhansonxi ·
A lot of companies (including several I have worked for) use pirated proprietary software and have the same support issues. Even the ones that buy legitimate proprietary software encounter the same problem because the market is flooded with counterfeit products. Avoiding those problems still doesn't mean they adequate support. Many tech support staff (especially overseas) are just about useless. They are low-paid and poorly trained and provide very little information that can't be obtained from the web. Most could be replaced with an interactive voice response system using Festival.

all the credit, none of the blame

gus3 ·
I wrote the following in Oct. 2002: -------------------------------------- Legally, the very products that Mr. Allchin oversees are extremely risky for a customer to use. The operating system manages everything on the computer, and hence the danger of damage caused by any bug increases by several orders of magnitude. If someone wants to audit the OS source code, rather than trusting someone who says "it's stable," they can choose Linux, the *BSD flavors, and the Debian GNU/Hurd, plus some of the commercial Unix brands. Not only that, the patches and bug fixes are also available for scrutiny before installation. Given the track record for bug fixes out of Redmond (NT4 Service Packs, anyone?), I dare Mr. Allchin to admit that his product is in severe need of public scrutiny. I know, it's unlikely to happen.

The sad reality is this: When you buy Windows, you are giving Microsoft all the credit for your system's good performance. However, if an upgrade wipes the screenplay you spent three years on, and the backup as well when you try to recover your files, the blame you can place on Microsoft is limited to the purchase price. If you attempt to hold them accountable beyond that, you will be told that "you must have done something wrong." For any legal action, the burden of proof (at least in the USA) is on you, as the plaintiff, to prove that their product was defective. Without the source code, how can you do that? They've taken steps to make sure you can give them all the credit, but very little of the blame.

http://gus3.typepad.com/i_am_therefore_i_think/2002/10/manda...
Read the whole comment

Post a comment

A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.

Your message:
|||||
10
Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help

Sign up and post (it is free)  or  Log in and post