Since rolling out their "Trustworthy Computing" initiative with much fanfare and some very bold claims, a virtual tsunami of holes and vulnerabilities have been reported.

The latest, and perhaps most embarrassing example is a new hole that has turned up in the company's C++ compiler, an integral part of the .NET toolkit which was officially released just this week. (see the news links below)

The most worrying thing about this latest hole is that if it hadn't been discovered and reported by an independent security expert, it could have resulted in many "insecure" applications being unknowingly launched by other developers.

Now one must assume that this new compiler must have passed the stringent new security auditing that Microsoft has made so much noise about -- uh-oh!

It would appear the assertion I made recently, suggesting that Microsoft was simply out of its depth here and that no amount of goodwill could compensate for a lack of understanding or raw ability in the area of security, is already looking pretty damned accurate.

Readers Say (updated hourly) From Yesterday... Tipoff... - Anon Microsoft Monopoly... - Peter Sky Digital... - James Alternate Desk Top??... - Paul MS monopoly breaking... - Allister Sky Digital... - Robert Micropoly?... - Martnz Have Your Say

Then there's the way that a security update for IE6 was posted to the company's website -- and pulled down again within 24 hours due to "problems."

I wonder who audited that one?

Now surely Microsoft's clear inability to back up its promises over security with some real results must spell the death of its long-planned intention to become a universal authenticator and repository of people's data on the Net?

Don't bank on it -- my money is still on the average punter being so dull and stupid as to ignore the obvious and rely on the company's inevitable claims that "we are now secure."

An Aardvark reader asked an interesting question: why do people keep buying Microsoft's bloated, expensive, insecure software when there are equivalent open-source alternatives available absolutely free of charge?

Well the answer is simple...

Microsoft, like most big companies, spends a shirtload of money on very clever marketing -- downplaying bugs and problems while simultaneously hyping up the newest features on offer.

Take the release of Windows XP for example. The incredibly expensive and thorough advertising campaign that accompanied the product's launch created a massive level of awareness amongst your "average" computer user. There probably isn't a single person between the ages of 10 and 60 who doesn't know that XP is a Microsoft product which is [allegedly] better, faster and more fun to use than anything else.

Ask those same people "what is Linux?" or "what is Star Office?" and 90 percent of them will stare blankly at you and say "I dunno."

Unfortunately, open-source software's biggest strength is also its biggest weakness. When you're giving a product away, nobody can afford to spend a similar shirtload of money to that which Microsoft allocates to marketing.

That so many users of open-source software are very satisfied with the products is a clear indication that the reason most people are using MS Windows/Office is simply a lack of awareness and understanding. Sadly, there is no simple (aka "cheap") way to address this problem.

PC World, Netguide and other computer/Net magazines can publish pro-open-source software articles until they're blue in the face -- but the vast majority of computer users, the masses which give Microsoft its control of the desktop, prefer to read the Woman's Weekly, the Listener or NZ Fishing magazine. To them, computers are just a tool -- like their cellphone or toaster.

People prefer to buy brands they've heard of and know something about -- this is why some products command an unreasonable premium -- simply because the manufacturer has spent their own shirtload of money promoting their name in the marketplace.

Example: Why on earth to people continue to spend huge amounts of money buying Coca Cola when it's really just a bottle of sugared water with some flavouring?

Why do people pay huge amounts of money for Nike or other "brand name" sports shoes when we know that other, equally good "no-name" products can be had for half the price?

The answer: Both Coca Cola and Nike spend incredibly large amounts of money marketing their products and brands as being somehow "better" than the cheaper alternatives -- and people are stupid enough to believe them!

Now, do you really think that the "average" computer user is going to believe that any "free" software can be as good as the expensive Microsoft product they've just paid hundreds of dollars for?

And, after all, Microsoft must know all about security because they are the world's most successful software company aren't they?

It's Still Free -- So Pay Up!
Note: If you can't afford a donation, please check out The Aardvark Marketplace and visit the advertisers instead.

Every month, Aardvark scores over half a million hits, at least 150K page views and delivers more than 6GB of data to visitors.

All this traffic has meant that I've had to shift the site to a new server to ensure that your daily dose is always fresh and delivered to your browser with minimal delays.

I also invest over 300 hours per year writing the daily column and compiling the day's news index -- all for your illumination and entertainment.

If you haven't sent any money to help offset the costs of running this ad-free, 100% Kiwi, always fresh, often controversial site then you can give yourself the warm-fuzzies this Christmas by doing so now.

Just drop by, click on the Aardvark, and hand over your loot.

Add Aardvark To Your Own Website!
Got a moment? Want a little extra fresh content for your own website or page?

Just add a couple of lines of JavaScript to your pages and you can get a free summary of Aardvark's daily commentary -- automatically updated each and every week-day.

Aardvark also makes a summary of this daily column available via XML using the RSS format. More details can be found here.

Contact me if you decide to use either of these feeds and have any problems.

Did you tell someone else about Aardvark today? If not then do it now!