"Apparently Bill Gates thinks you are stupid."

There is some evidence to that effect: we keep on buying his crap, and he keeps on destroying any possible competition. In order to defend myself from the shockingly shoddy IE security, and to trike a small blow at the predatory monopolisitc practices at MS, I long ago shifted to Mozilla Firefox as a browser. I'm trying to gather the strength to go in full defiance mode and shift to open-source Linux as an os. And then I think I'll paste pictures of Bill inside my toilet...

Steve Jobs announced last week that 3 PC makers had asked to license OS X because of MS' continued lack of security, spyware, etc.

The timing is awfully interesting, don't you think?

By trustworthy, he means trustworthy for groups like the R.I.A.A. It will still be full of flaws to the end user. You won't, however, be able to play stuff that is "unauthorized".

Within five minutes of the time "something else" gains any significant market share, that "something else" will also become a target. Windows and IE are targeted because they are so widespread. Once the hackers and scammers start targeting ANY system, it too will suddenly be seen to have HUGE security issues.

Macintosh.

(I know you knew that already, but somebody had to say it, so it might as well be me.)

A computer that won't let me run apps on it without buying a "developer permit"? An internet that only allows "approved" content? Scary stuff. But not as scary as this.

I'm not calling it *likely*, but I mean, Jesus. Legislative control of technology is out of freakin' control. Few things have ever made me more ready to cut the EFF a big fat cheque.

Microsoft software is perfectly trustworthy.

You can trust it to defy your wishes, occupy excess space on your drive and in memory, allow outsiders access when you cannot have it, and require you to send money to Redmond. Oh, and to attempt to destroy any non-Microsoft software it may encounter.

Absolutely consistent and reliable.

Regards,
Ric

To be honest, the only funny bit about the first article is the headline. The very first sentence of the article conflicts with it by providing an update on the progress, not that they are switching their focus.

The third paragraph continues:

"In the three years since Microsoft launched its initiative to improve the security of its products, the company has changed how its software is written, improved the mechanism for fixing bugs and released some tools for removing virtual pests."

Of course, that is what you were pointing out...right?