Comments on: OneCare upgrade brings headaches
Recent changes to the security software for Windows Live has online forums buzzing with complaints from users--including onetime fans.
Recent changes to the security software for Windows Live has online forums buzzing with complaints from users--including onetime fans.
Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.
Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft.
Beyond Binary is a look at how technology is changing our lives and the people behind all that life-changing stuff, with an extra emphasis on that which emanates from Redmond, Wash.
Add this feed to your online news reader
The recent OneCare update occured without a hitch.
The claim that "one percent of the install base" are having problems needs clarifying. The update was halted for quite a while until a few days ago. Is this one percent of people that have received the update or one percent of the total OneCare customer base including those that are still running the old version? What percentage have been updated to 2.0?
I was going to somewhat flack you and say that OneCare had a large testing base (I do know people on forums who tested it extensivly, since before 1.5 was released, 2.0 was worked on) but Onecare BETA, the testing was massive. Something like 1.5 million copies being tested.
I was wondering why my church system wasn't allowing the 2.0 update. I didn't realize they stopped. I got the 2.0 update automatically at home. One of my systems lags its onecare startup (my computer, the main of the hub informs me its off) but it starts itself after about 4 minutes or so. But the system is not often restarted either.
The are missing the boat on this one....bigger problems than we can all imagine
Shouldn't the OS provide a safe environment by itself?
I am the Technical Support Division Manager for an ISP in NW Iowa and if I have had these problems, I really feel sorry for the folks who are not computer literate and have to deal with these issues.
I tested Microsoft One Care and it didn't work for me. I went back to my old trusted anti-virus AVG by Grisoft. I now use Genie-soft to back up my files and I use the firewall that came with Windows XP. No issues. No system hogging. Come on, Microsoft! You basically invented the PC...can't you make software that will work with it?
I have friends using Symantec/Norton and open source tools and do nothing but complain about them. Majority of the time when they ask me for help, it is the virus scanner or adhoc firewall that is the problem.
Microsoft is just like EVERY OTHER COMPANY out there trying to make a buck and hitting software delivery schedules. I love the MAC people, Apple's bug reports have tripled in the last year, wow they must be getting better...:)
I feel badly for the people where the installation was less than perfect.
Here are the things that do bug me.
1) The system tray icon often claims a problem with security and to open OneCare only to find once opened that everything is fine.
2) At one time I was unable to switch between user profiles on Vista unless the user had Administrator rights. Research into the problem, which has since fixed itself, indicated a problem with OneCare.
Here are a couple of things I really like:
1) Price is great and covers 3 machines.
2) Automated backups that have already saved my from a fried laptop hard drive crash.
3) Easy setup for ActiveSync devices. (A nightmare with other products)
4) Easy and generally automated port openings on the firewall.
All said, however, this does not excuse a poorly tested upgrade that has cause a lot of problems for others.
Russ
I am not a big MS fan, but if my option is to greatly reduce options, and pay more for the priviledge, thanks... but I'll pass.
Mini - Optical Drive
Macbook 1 - keyboard, display, motherboard
Macbook 2 - chipped topcase, mouse button, optical drive, and hard drive.
As you can see, Macs do clearly suck. I bought an Apple Care on all but the Macbook (still under warranty).
My wife's Vaio is 3yrs old and never had a problem, so she's gone back to using that and the Macbook just sits in its case. We'll probably either sell it or donate it...it's a piece of garbage. Not to mention, the snooty so-called Genius' who treats us like we're stupid (I'm ACDT and A+ Certified) and says they'll fix the topcase "one time only" yet it's a known-issue? I hate people.
Anyway, there's "our" Mac situation...three strikes for Apple.
1. Most home users need automation. They will not schedule or remember to implement security tasks. Kids get on to chat, Dad logs onto the bank, Mom checks movie times. Security is no one's job, and will not get done.
2. Automation assumes some specific parameters... networking, OS settings, BIOS settings, Software Versions - All which get more complex every day.
3. Security software has the worst of all worlds - selectively recognizing and halting harmful operations that mimic SAFE operations.
Here is where Microsoft blew it.... They implemented automation that few people ever use. By example, smart tags and community editing of Office documents created its share of security holes. When is the last time YOUR team gang edited a document using the latest Office automation? Yet the services, ports and Office tools that make this all possible are routinely hi-jacked by illicit scripts.
Secondly, MS blew it big time with Vista. Aero is a waste of resources (Like I need my OS to look and run like a video game. What 24 year old made that decision!) Each feature that was added to this "new" OS, is a potential a tool for hackers. This more secure OS is no more secure than a properly protected computer running XP. (AND IT RUNS SLOWER!)
Solution?
MS should focus on making Windows robust. WinFS, a good tool for registering services, and limiting features to "request only".
Example: The only way a service can be started is when the user requests the tool the first time. They only way the service can be requested is through a GUI (which will take some work because most Gui's are scriptable). That alone will greatly limit the types of attacks to which the average home user can fall victim.
Example: Instead of having to turn user info in Document files OFF - the user should have to turn it ON. - AND - this feature should not be scriptable.
I believe that Live One Care has fallen victim to the complexity of security management, but I would rather have MS solve the root cause of the problem - vulnerability from poorly controlled features, poor memory management (oops... another buffer overflow?), than more attempts at containing the problem through more complex software traps.
I can dream, can't I?
MS caused the problem. Relying on them for the answer is the height is ignorance.
- Use Open Source Software Solutions
- by taggartromkey January 14, 2008 10:03 AM PST
- I hate to sound like a MS hater but all of their new products like Vista and OneCare are down right shoddy. I'm glad i ditched OneCare for Clamwin on my XP desktop box i use for web design work. Clamwin found 6 viruses that OneCare couldn't see. However Clamwin isn't perfect. You have to scan your machine manually but trust me it's worth it.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- impervious OS?
- by rkinne01 January 15, 2008 11:29 AM PST
- There is no such thing my friend. Macs and Linux machines are vulnerable as well to viruses and attacks! Do some digging here on PcWorld.com to see what I mean.
- Like this
-
(30 Comments)There are Operating Systems like Linux and Mac OS X out there that are impervious to viruses. I use PCLinuxOS on my laptop which take to school and so far no problems.