why do people buy computers, with possible trojans pre-installed?

[myrkul]

I'm more concerned with all the pirated copies that can't get updates, and thus, are literally dangling in the wind for hackers to come along and take over. Allowing security updates on 'non-genuine' copies of windows would kill probably half the world's spam, and 3/4 of the DDoS attacks.

[1715183838]

1715183838

[1715183838]

1715183838

[1715183838]

1715183838

[1715183838]

1715183838

[1715183838]

1715183838

[kokjo]

This strikes me as a little FUDdy.

Windows has huge security holes. Being closed source, only MS can vet it. So yes, It's not as safe as Linux.

But a pre-installed trojan? Might be a bit much, don't you think?

a little bit, maybe. but microsoft can control any windows computer.
im not saying they do it, but they can.

It seems to me that once Microsoft activates their hidden trojans and starts to spy on ordinary users, the financial loss from future windows sales would be a lot more then what they can get out of people.

and your point is?

they haves no motive. BUT THEY CAN.

[david4dev]

People buy PCs and laptops with Windows preinstalled because almost all PCs and laptops come with Windows preinstalled. It's as simple as that. Most people don't have the technical knowledge to attempt to install a different operating system than what came by default.

[LokeRundt]

People buy PCs and laptops with Windows preinstalled because almost all PCs and laptops come with Windows preinstalled. It's as simple as that. Most people don't have the technical knowledge to attempt to install a different operating system than what came by default.

seriously, installing ubuntu from a cd is free and is all point and click

[joepie91]

People buy PCs and laptops with Windows preinstalled because almost all PCs and laptops come with Windows preinstalled. It's as simple as that. Most people don't have the technical knowledge to attempt to install a different operating system than what came by default.

I disagree.

The problem is not that people don't have the technical knowledge required, but that they THINK they don't have the technical knowledge required.

Honestly, installing something like OpenSuSE is just as point-and-click as installing any emoticons-and-cursors malware-ridden toolbar (yes, I'm looking at you, SmileyCentral and CometCursor) you can find for Windows. The issue is that people never do it, and thus assume it must be something complicated, as none of their peers did it either, so it must be something out of their knowledge field. Which is just plain untrue.

Most users are simply afraid to do things with a computer, afraid to break it or otherwise mess it up.

[kokjo]

People buy PCs and laptops with Windows preinstalled because almost all PCs and laptops come with Windows preinstalled. It's as simple as that. Most people don't have the technical knowledge to attempt to install a different operating system than what came by default.

I disagree.

The problem is not that people don't have the technical knowledge required, but that they THINK they don't have the technical knowledge required.

Honestly, installing something like OpenSuSE is just as point-and-click as installing any emoticons-and-cursors malware-ridden toolbar (yes, I'm looking at you, SmileyCentral and CometCursor) you can find for Windows. The issue is that people never do it, and thus assume it must be something complicated, as none of their peers did it either, so it must be something out of their knowledge field. Which is just plain untrue.

Most users are simply afraid to do things with a computer, afraid to break it or otherwise mess it up.

+1

[joulesbeef]

this is one reason most corps use both.

and people do try to watch what is leaving their network, that is how the first "spyware" was found in realplayer.


but more than corps, you might have noticed countries are worried about the us government control over MS.

I guess it depends on how sensitive you think your data is.

for 99% of us, windows is the least of our worries.

People also get windows as that is what their friends have, they also get windows cause they know a kid down the street that can fix windows, not many are lucky enough to know a kid who knows linux. This is key. When windows goes bad, you have someone you can call. ANd it is hard enough to get people to update their browsers, and you want them to install ubuntu? lol

yeah I think that if computers, came with linux preinstalled(like some netbooks) a good bit of people wouldnt even notice but if you ask people what they want, they want windows and office, the dont want linux and libreoffice or open office, (farken drives me nuts, i can show them it works fine for every document on their system but they hear stories about it not working sometimes and nope they just want office.)

and in a corporate world trying to change anything is like pulling teeth, their are corps with win95 systems still running their custom apps.

[vforvendetta]

Unless you're saying that the operating systems themselves are infected (I think someone would have noticed by this point), I always ended up reinstalling the system on the machines I purchased anyway, due the amount of bloatware many have on them. As a result, even if I were to suspect that, it wouldn't be a factor in the end.

But if you do find some sort of malware on a pre-assembled machine - I'm sure you'll have quite a few lawyers willing to take up the case for nothing, as you'll have quite a check waiting for you by the end of the proceedings!

[kokjo]

Unless you're saying that the operating systems themselves are infected (I think someone would have noticed by this point), I always ended up reinstalling the system on the machines I purchased anyway, due the amount of bloatware many have on them. As a result, even if I were to suspect that, it wouldn't be a factor in the end.

But if you do find some sort of malware on a pre-assembled machine - I'm sure you'll have quite a few lawyers willing to take up the case for nothing, as you'll have quite a check waiting for you by the end of the proceedings!

windows is not infected, it is the possible malware!
microsoft can gain access to any networked windows system, via the preinstalled trojan downloading system called windows update.
and you would have no knowledge of it.

let my simplify the question, why are people using closed source?

[Gabi]

Is it the thread where ppl insult windows cause they think it's still windows 3.1?

First you call windows a trojan and now you say that you just want to know why ppl use closed source.

In page 3 you will again change the point of the thread?

[kokjo]

Is it the thread where ppl insult windows cause they think it's still windows 3.1?

First you call windows a trojan and now you say that you just want to know why ppl use closed source.

In page 3 you will again change the point of the thread?

possible trojans, i did not say it was.
3.1? no 7
3.1 has in fact less trojan-like attitude, beacuse there was no auto update feature(trojan downloader feature).

you may say that most linux distros also have autoupdate features, but you can always read the source, and ensure there is no trojans.
you can't read the source of windows, becuase its closed source.

my points with the post was:
a) to make windows users aware of what they are using and how much control they have over their computers.
b) to learn how they justify being paranoid(many users here have 3 layered tinfoil hats) and use windows at the same time.

maybe calling windows a trojan was a overkill, yes true. but i did it to show the contrast. microsoft can actually install whatever they want on your computer, again im not saying they does it, only that they can.

[Sovereign]

Best place to DL?

[kokjo]

Best place to DL?

to DL what?

[Sovereign]

linux ultimate edition 2.8

[kokjo]

linux ultimate edition 2.8

http://ultimateedition.info/ultimate-edition/ultimate-edition-2-6/#download

by torrent i think.

[vforvendetta]

Unless you're saying that the operating systems themselves are infected (I think someone would have noticed by this point), I always ended up reinstalling the system on the machines I purchased anyway, due the amount of bloatware many have on them. As a result, even if I were to suspect that, it wouldn't be a factor in the end.

But if you do find some sort of malware on a pre-assembled machine - I'm sure you'll have quite a few lawyers willing to take up the case for nothing, as you'll have quite a check waiting for you by the end of the proceedings!

windows is not infected, it is the possible malware!
microsoft can gain access to any networked windows system, via the preinstalled trojan downloading system called windows update.
and you would have no knowledge of it.

let my simplify the question, why are people using closed source?

So anything that has an autoupdater is by default malicious? What evidence do you have that Microsoft is installing spyware, viruses, or other forms of malware on customer operating systems that you so strongly insinuate?

I use closed source operating systems because it's hardly any different from using other closed source software - or do you not use any of that either? Open source is nice, but I'm not going to expect everybody to follow through with that standard (I have published my own open source software on sourceforge, if that helps to back up my own credentials on discussing this topic). You certainly have the right to despise any operating system you choose - but that isn't a justification for spreading hearsay or other false information.

[kokjo]

So anything that has an autoupdater is by default malicious?

any closed source autoupdater can by default be malicious. do you disagree?

What evidence do you have that Microsoft is installing spyware, viruses, or other forms of malware on customer operating systems that you so strongly insinuate?

none! but they can do it. please see what words i use. i do not say that they do, only that they can.

You certainly have the right to despise any operating system you choose - but that isn't a justification for spreading hearsay or other false information.

i did not write any false information, please read my posts again.

[vforvendetta]

any closed source autoupdater can by default be malicious. do you disagree?

Any software in general can be malicious - but the fact that something includes an updater does not make it any more malware than it makes me a criminal for running tor. It can be used for good or bad purposes - I have yet to see any evidence from your camp that would even remotely persuade me that Microsoft intends to use this tool for illegal or malicious purposes.

none! but they can do it. please see what words i use. i do not say that they do, only that they can.

Lots of things can happen through all kinds of mediums - Apple could decide to collect and redistribute personal information on iPhone users through an implicit agreement, Sun could, effective immediately, charge royalty for all Java programs produced henceforth, and the operators of Deepbit could decide to capitalize on their pool monopoly by doubling their use fee. Furthermore, the world could end tomorrow.

However...there is no evidence to suggest any of these hypothetical situations will actually occur. To insinuate that they will with no evidence for my stance would be alarmist and irrational.

i did not write any false information, please read my posts again.

You can hide behind the banner of "that's not what I said" all you like - but anybody reading your posts knows you are trying to persuade people through fear to switch systems, based on an unfounded and implicit claim that Microsoft would have some strange reason to completely destroy their own business. You are a propagandist - and a very poor representation of the linux community.

[myrkul]

any closed source autoupdater can by default be malicious. do you disagree?

Any software in general can be malicious - but the fact that something includes an updater does not make it any more malware than it makes me a criminal for running tor. It can be used for good or bad purposes - I have yet to see any evidence from your camp that would even remotely persuade me that Microsoft intends to use this tool for illegal or malicious purposes.

His issue is not with the autoupdate, but with the closed source nature of everything it downloads. Antivirus programs have numerous times caught and considered actual system files as virii. With no way of looking into the source for those binaries, there's no way to be sure that the program wasn't right. (note, this is just my tin hat speaking, I hate windows for completely different reasons)

Open source is inherently safer, due to the fact that you can examine the source, and see what it's actually doing.

[kokjo]

none! but they can do it. please see what words i use. i do not say that they do, only that they can.

Lots of things can happen through all kinds of mediums - Apple could decide to collect and redistribute personal information on iPhone users through an implicit agreement, Sun could, effective immediately, charge royalty for all Java programs produced henceforth, and the operators of Deepbit could decide to capitalize on their pool monopoly by doubling their use fee. Furthermore, the world could end tomorrow.

and people know this, and are scared of it. look at facebook, people are crying and screaming about privacy issues.
but they don't know what microsoft or apple can do with their computers. people are just ignoring/unknowing the fact that they can have access to their computers.

on this forum some people are paranoid that the governements or corporations are gonna rape them in the ass, but they still use windows or mac, not knowing what they can do if they like.

open source are not suspicious, you can read the source, and verify that it is not malicious. you can't do that with closed source.