Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on Today at 05:16:25 PM

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 04:50:52 PM

All of the flaws you see in Microsoft today are as a result of their own intrusions into user privacy. If they never intruded privacy, and instead focused on providing a secure operating system for their consumers, Windows would not be near as vulnerable as it is today.

Look at the cause. Microsoft is a company, and a company always tries to maximize profit. There is no doubt that privacy intrusion, as long as it's not against the law, is profitable. And not just profitable, but the single most important asset of current Internet companies. If consumers don't care about that, don't expect Microsoft to blame their ethics. They're going to take advantage of it.

Now as for security, it doesn't have to do much with focus, but with another fundamental problem that is inherited in closed-source software, which is smaller group of code auditors.

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 04:50:52 PM

Because most normal consumers have no choice, lack of knowledge, awareness, etc.

I can acknowledge an abuse, but there are alternatives, such as Linux. If security and privacy was the top priority of these consumers, they'd have already switched years now.

If people were given a choice to have security and privacy over not, then the vast majority would surely choose it. People don't care about it because the reality is that it's too difficult to care about it or there is not enough easy to follow information that allows them to attain it (until the Cybersecurity and Privacy subforum here on bitcointalk, am I right folks?). As for Microsoft being a company, that's why I said that unfortunately we aren't in a world where companies care about the security of their consumers. In an ideal world, this would be a priority of a company offering proprietary software. In fact, I think it would be a responsibility in an ideal world. Again, we aren't in that world. In that respect I am talking (and have been since my original post) from a world that we don't live in.

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on Today at 05:16:25 PM

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 04:50:52 PM

Because most normal consumers have no choice, lack of knowledge, awareness, etc.

I can acknowledge an abuse, but there are alternatives, such as Linux. If security and privacy was the top priority of these consumers, they'd have already switched years now.

Most average-knowledge users would believe that they are secure using these systems and wouldn't understand the pitfalls of using proprietary operating systems in comparison to operating systems like Linux until it's too late. Then only after being a victim will they look for alternatives and make the switch. It is not inherently their fault either as they are marketed into believing that using proprietary operating system is "secure enough".

Quote from: NotATether on Today at 05:25:12 PM

^--- this guy knows what he's talking about.

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 04:50:52 PM

Because most normal consumers have no choice, lack of knowledge, awareness, etc. If potential vulnerabilities or what happened to the normal consumers' information were clearly stated before you booted up the OS in a picture presentation and they were made aware that this could just as easily happen to them than anyone else, do you really think everyone would still be using Windows with no precaution, as so many do? Even julerz did, and he got hacked, but my reasoning is exactly why I think he IS NOT an idiot. The reason this information is not clear unless you look for it, is because Windows want you to THINK you are safe with their "windows defender" and other garbage painted with marketing to make the end user think that they are secure, when in reality their system is as vulnerable as swiss cheese.

Not to mention that they had *many* different security products, and rebranded each of them with the "Windows Defender" moniker as they were throwing out old products, eg. The original Windows defender (which was just an anti-spyware FTW), then MS Security Essentials, and now whatever is being branded as "Microsoft Defender" is some completely different codebase, as MSE never had any of this stuff. And of course, "Azure Defender" which is just for cloud but who knows if they will port that to PCs as well.

3rd party AVs are not much better though; Norton(LifeLock) getting their password vault hacked again, and previously there was Kaspersky and others also hacked, ... these things are only good for protecting someone who is an actual idiot who clicks on "You Won" pages.

+2