You must have heard how Google is moving from Windows PCs to Macs or Linux due to ‘security issues’ that Windows has. Honestly, using a 9-year-old OS such as Windows XP, with Internet Explorer 6, is just an invite to hackers to steal your data. Using this as an excuse to dump Windows, instead of moving to Windows 7 is just negative propaganda against Microsoft.
While Google seems to be doing this, Mac fanboys are jumping up and down around the globe out of sheer excitement that Google employees would be using more Macs. One of them, over at Cultofmac, has gone so far to label ‘Windows 7’s woeful security issues’ as the main problem. This is an example of how dumb Mac fanboys blog.
According to a report in the Financial Times, Google is so fed up with Windows 7’s woeful security issues that they are now taking Redmond’s operating system by the pants seat and unceremoniously hurtling it from the building.
Interestingly, the post is also titled “Google Replacing Windows 7 Campus Computers With Macs”, which is again very misleading. Windows 7 has had a very clean security record, so after reading the above statement, it’s very obvious that John, the author of the article at CultofMac, is trying to spread FUD about it. If you go over to the Financial Times, you’ll find no mention of ‘Windows 7’. Even Financial Times have been stupid to not write Windows XP, but instead mentioned Windows, where ever needed, in the article.
I use Windows 7 and OS X daily on my iMac and I’ve been happy with both. But I can’t stand this bullshit attitude of Apple fanboys who think they can just push junk against Microsoft in their articles and get away with it.
You mean like checking out the actual NVD that the CVE Microsoft refers to that lists IE6, 6:SP1, 7 and 8 on systems from XP to 7?
As I said, I support that POS software for a living. First thing we did when we heard about it and researched it was to install Google Chrome and require that employees only use IE where absolutely necessary. IE 6 wasn't the only browser affected by that code (regardless of what the Microsoft's Marketing department says). What Microsoft posted is the typical spin they are known for. It was finger-pointing damage control and nothing else. Unless the security professionals that update the NVD and the CVE are just liars.
100% agree with you.
As a Microsoft fan boy my self, I get sick of hearing all these wild claims against Microsoft. Not only bloggers make these claims but I also find many well respected journalists do the same thing. It always seems to be hate on MS day.
99% of them are completely false. Windows 7 has an extremely clean record in not only regards to security, but almost everything.
And if it is not Windows 7 it is Zune or Windows Phone or Internet Explorer.
I think it's a great move on Google's part.
Good for you that YOU use Windows 7 and have been happy with it. That doesn't mean that the overall product itself has worked happily for everyone especially in high-seat corporate computing environments. Is it better than Vista? Yes. But, it's still no walk in the park. The fact is that even corporations have become so sick of Microsoft's broken track record and high overhead that the top brass are getting to the point that they are willing to rip and replace. Apple, Google and the *nix community have shown that Microsoft is now an option, not a requirement to do business much less general and home computing.
How is using the general term “Windows” (see your Financial Times line) stupid? XP, Vista, 7, 2003, 2008; it's all Windows. I actually find it arrogant that you would assume a multi-billion dollar company is running their systems on XP with, of all the stupidest comments I've read, IE6. IE6, really? Even Microsoft put that one to bed. Maybe you'd like to posit that Google is even running XP pre-SP1 as well? The only people using that POS are mom and pops that don't even know there's an update feature built into Windows.
I'm not a blogger or a journalist, I'm an IT manager. And guess what… I am one of those pushing to get Windows off my network. The expense not only in procurement but in ongoing maintenance and support as well as upgrades is beyond reasonable. My people spend too much time fixing crap because Micro$oft leaves security to the “other vendors” than is reasonable. I've supported OS X as well and the difference in support and ongoing expenses is like night and day. Lower costs, less critical security advisories, shorter fixes for CVE advisories. Best of all, to date, not one “in the wild” virus. Market share may account for the quantity, but it certainly doesn't account for there not being a single virus in the wild.
You have anger issues. You have made as many or more assumptions as the “fanboys”. I can tell you from personal experiencer that Windows 7 is used at Google, you are assuming XP, and you are wrong. Configuration and support of any version of Windows is complicated and costly and Windows 7 is a security nightmare. Not as much as previous version but still a leaky sieve. Try supporting thousands of copies. It's a little different from your iMac. Duh.
Google said the security issues were in Internet Explorer 6 due to which the it got hacked. That doesn't run on Windows 7 does it?
Way to twist a story and wrap it around Windows 7.
The issues were with Windows XP and Internet Explorer 6 due to which Google got hacked. Try doing a little research before putting such a lengthy comment.
Mac fanboy-ism is the number 1 reason for never, ever be a part of this cult/sect ….
I mean like the security measures in Windows 7 that doesn't let attacks like these be successful. I'd trust Microsoft's 'Marketing Department' (or Apple's) more than you or any Mac fanboy.
You don't really sound like an IT manager if you don't know these things.
Google said the security issues were in Internet Explorer 6 due to which the
it got hacked. That doesn't run on Windows 7 does it?
Way to twist a story and wrap it around Windows 7.
The issues were with Windows XP and Internet Explorer 6 due to which Google
got hacked. Try doing a little research before putting such a lengthy
There are definitely two camps here: those who know Macs are better, and those who deny that Macs are better. How many times will people see Microsoft come out with a “new and improved Windows” and yet it still doesn't seem to measure up? Or in the case of Windows 7, it's simply trying to be Mac OS X without having “OS X” on the box. I'm not going to try to dis Windows 7 too much, because I honestly haven't used it yet. But I've looked at it, and waved the cursor around a bit in passing, and it's appalling how uncreative the Microsoft camp is. And I have used Vista, which, on a new-out-of-the-box top-of-the-line laptop, ran like a pile of garbage. I have to agree that Google is probably making a smart move (and of course a very political move) in leaving Microsoft for greener pastures.