For those who don't want to follow the link, here is the article (followed by my quick counterpoint):
Les Hatton
A shattering experience with Windows
Those who opt for Windows over Linux or Mac OS X should be prepared for trouble
As you may know, I am a staunch supporter of open source alternatives to Microsoft. My enthusiasm for all things non-Microsoft was reinforced the other week, after I agreed to "sort out" our builder's new Windows XP PC, which would crash every time it got past the log-on phase. I still can't believe what followed and wonder if Microsoft ever factors the kind of appalling waste of time I had to endure into its fantastical computations of return on investment. I presume not.
First, the machine warned me quite correctly that it had not been shut down properly and recommended a scan, so I let it scan. Half way through, the scan hung. I tried again, this time it hung in a different place. Subsequently it always hung at the same place. Only a really incompetent system can't even scan its own disks, let alone repair them.
You might like the next bit.
At the suggestion of my son, I removed the disk, put it in a FireWire caddy and connected it to his Macintosh. The Mac had no trouble reading it, so at least we were able to back up important files onto one of the Mac disks.
Things went downhill from there. It was obvious that the XP hard disk would have to be reformatted, but, as there was no Windows disk, just a barcode with the XP Home reference number, I had to make a phone call to Time. The company said it would send a disk for "a small additional fee". This turns out to be 70 quid, which is hardly what I would call small. Time helpfully pointed out that I could get it for free if our builder took out the five-year extended warranty. It was at this point that I decided to hang up.
Anyway, given that our builder has paid for a licence and so have I, I used my disk and his number and managed at last to reformat the drive.
Next I started on the upgrades, service packs, security add-ons and so on to make this definitively underwhelming operating system modestly secure. This took just about all of my Saturday afternoon. Then it was time for Norton Antivirus, which, after being installed, told us that it was taking over the security and would therefore disable the Windows warnings so we wouldn't get them twice. (How do I know if Norton disables Windows from doing something that Norton cannot do? Answer: I don't).
At this point, ZoneAlarm - which my son prudently loaded off-line before all these shenanigans started - informed us that it had blocked 54 intrusion attempts, one of which was considered severe. These occurred while we were trying to update Windows.
So finally, we reinstalled 7GB of backed up files knowing full well the machine will probably succumb again within weeks. Norton then had to scan everything, which took ages.
I have never had to go through anything like this with Linux. My son has never had to do this with OS X. Why do we still have to endure this kind of hassle with Windows? Will it ever get better? Of course it will. Do you know there are fairies in our garden? No, really.
Now, for those of you who know me, you know that I rarely step in to defend Microsoft or any of the products and practices thereof. However, in this case, I feel the article portrays such a thorough ignorance of the workings of Windows that it begs an answer.
I well understand that Windows is frustrating at times, but expecting others to see your ability to operate FOSS as any kind of credibility with Windows operation is a little like working with Pintos and expecting people to accept your credibility as a television repairman. Additionally, that the builder failed to provide the author with the serial number for the install (however ridiculous a notion product activation may be) is not Microsoft's fault, but finds blame closer to home: the builder. You can lambaste Microsoft all you want for their shortcomings as a corporation, but DON'T blame them for the builder's incompetence. Let's continue.
First, the machine warned me quite correctly that it had not been shut down properly and recommended a scan, so I let it scan. Half way through, the scan hung. I tried again, this time it hung in a different place. Subsequently it always hung at the same place. Only a really incompetent system can't even scan its own disks, let alone repair them.
This is not unusual behaviour; in fact, Windows is
designed to ask for a scan if it detects that you hard-shutdown the system. This is not a requisite, though the author certainly makes it sound the part. That's a flaw in Windows design:
media checks are OPTIONAL. Then again, I find it difficult to believe that somebody with so much experience in FOSS would
continue to allow scans when they're found to be a sticking point for the OS. Additionally, it should be noted that Windows has the fairly incompetent ability to scan malfunctioning volumes
from the malfunctioning volumes. This is a breach in both stability and security. However, it should be expected - when repairing a DOS volume - that you'll
have to use a SEPARATE VOLUME for critical problems, and this hardly applies to just Windows.
At the suggestion of my son, I removed the disk, put it in a FireWire caddy and connected it to his Macintosh. The Mac had no trouble reading it, so at least we were able to back up important files onto one of the Mac disks.
This is - perhaps - the first part that the author got technically correct. Too bad it took somebody else to
tell him to do it. The Mac had no trouble reading the drive
because its system didn't have to rely on it. Believe me, I've had trouble running Disk First Aid against the master drive
from the master drive in the past; that's why I
started using the system CD.
Things went downhill from there. It was obvious that the XP hard disk would have to be reformatted, but, as there was no Windows disk, just a barcode with the XP Home reference number, I had to make a phone call to Time. The company said it would send a disk for "a small additional fee". This turns out to be 70 quid, which is hardly what I would call small. Time helpfully pointed out that I could get it for free if our builder took out the five-year extended warranty. It was at this point that I decided to hang up.
It's understandable - given the notorious instability of kernel32 - that the drive would need to be reformatted. What's NOT understandable is why the author called a third-party distributor, then attempted to get THEM to send him a "replacement disc" free of charge. They have OEM fees they have to charge too ya know, otherwise they risk losing their licensed status. Again, this is the problem belongs to the builder, not the author or the distributor. If the builder wants to maintain corporate licence status doing crap like this, he should just make a copy and call the end-user an "off-site technician." I'm surprised that he didn't just include an OEM copy with the system and give THE AUTHOR the documentation and registration/activation numbers.
Anyway, given that our builder has paid for a licence and so have I, I used my disk and his number and managed at last to reformat the drive.
I certainly hope he's not confusing
paying for the system with
owning the OS. Prior to Microsoft, this distinction would not exist, but their licensing model brings illicit redistributions into the picture. It certainly sounds like a second-party usage of the same serial number; at the very least - from a purely legal standpoint - it should be the opposite (the builder's disc and THE AUTHOR'S number).
Next I started on the upgrades, service packs, security add-ons and so on to make this definitively underwhelming operating system modestly secure. This took just about all of my Saturday afternoon. Then it was time for Norton Antivirus, which, after being installed, told us that it was taking over the security and would therefore disable the Windows warnings so we wouldn't get them twice. (How do I know if Norton disables Windows from doing something that Norton cannot do? Answer: I don't).
Looks like someone doesn't remember the fun, fun, FUN of apt-get'ing an ENTIRE UPDATE. Really, transferring THAT MUCH DATA over anything less than an OC-48 is going to take some time. Additionally, it should be noted that questions about Symantec/Norton software are an entirely separate kettle of fish and have shit-all to do with Microsoft as a corporate entity. I don't really like either corporation, but I DON'T go confusing Symantec issues with Microsoft issues.
At this point, ZoneAlarm - which my son prudently loaded off-line before all these shenanigans started - informed us that it had blocked 54 intrusion attempts, one of which was considered severe. These occurred while we were trying to update Windows.
I suggest that if the author is going to use a SERIOUS software firewall, he should use BlackIce. I've had ZoneAlarm flag connection attempts from Gaim, various updaters, and WEB BROWSERS as breach attempts. As a matter of fact, I read an article a while back about somebody who disassembled ZoneAlarm (in blatent violation of the EULA, of course), who found that the code flags EVERYTHING GOING THROUGH PORTS, BOTH INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND AS AN INTRUSION ATTEMPT. God forbid I should see Google in Firefox, RIGHT? I'm willing to bet that the one "severe attempt" was an attempted download of SP2 (okay, so it's not
that far off, considering the number of people who DON'T want it).
Even better yet, enable the built-in firewall, run BlackIce, start running SpywareBlaster, SpywareGuard, AdAware, BitDefender Free edition, and stick the whole thing behind a home router (like a D-Link or LinkSys). I did this, and my shared Windows box has seen ZERO intrusion attempts since then (that's right, because I block EVERYTHING but ports 21 and 80, and 21 routes to an FTP server that's a port of UNIX ftpd). Consequently, my Linux boxes have zero instrusion attempts, as well. However, as I've mentioned before, I can NEVER verify that nobody's messed with my system files on the Windows box - a severe security breach, in my eyes. A debugger does not a decompiler make.
So finally, we reinstalled 7GB of backed up files knowing full well the machine will probably succumb again within weeks. Norton then had to scan everything, which took ages.
The author seems to think that an unsecured Windows box WON'T be breached within MINUTES of connection. It is to laugh. Again, Norton is another issue, one might get better results from BitDefender.
I have never had to go through anything like this with Linux. My son has never had to do this with OS X. Why do we still have to endure this kind of hassle with Windows? Will it ever get better? Of course it will. Do you know there are fairies in our garden? No, really.
Now the author finds it prudent to compare Win32 security to BSD security. No offense, but WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING? BSD kicks Win32's ass many times over. The whole reason you don't have to do this with Linux or OS X is not obscurity, but security. That's something they can claim that Windows cannot; in fact, one CANNOT DEFINITEVLY VERIFY the veracity of Windows security claims. Additionally, things WILL get better. However, things will get much, MUCH worse before they do, and that will be the cannonball that ultimately sinks the Windows ship.
In conclusion, I find the author's viewpoint to make for decent rant materielle, but anybody coming at it from a moderate standpoint would have no problem tearing it apart. I've done so, and we all
know my problem with Windows: the lack of
decent command-line facilities, decent security, and decent stability.
