Skip to comments.
Microsoft Gives Details on Windows Release (featuring new "security" chip)
Associated Press
| Elizabeth M. Gillespie
Posted on 04/25/2005 2:37:40 PM PDT by HAL9000
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-29 last
To: wvobiwan
If Microsoft develops it, the security chip will be MUCH EASIER to break into than a hard drive. MS couldn't make a secure system to save their lives. If virus writers can get their hands on the 'master keys', it would become possible for them to write viruses and other malware which would be cryptographically undetectable. Double-plus ungood.
21
posted on
04/25/2005 3:19:43 PM PDT
by
supercat
("Though her life has been sold for corrupt men's gold, she refuses to give up the ghost.")
To: Cicero
You're right... this is not the "Longhorn" operating system they're touting, it's hardware, and the new OS is dependent upon that hardware for security. Hardware that is not present in current generation and older pee-sees. Guess it's time for all you Windoze bots to jump on the upgrade treadmill, again. Oh, wait. 2006 "release?" That mean's you've got a couple more years to go yet, LOL. Bet the legacy apps will be "broken" too. More forced upgrades.
To: HAL9000
Under the FWIW column, the Apple booth at last week's National Association of Broadcasters Convention was huge, jammed full of attendees, and buzzing hard all three show days I was there. The Microsoft booth was quiet for the most part.
Apple is looking good, even with its 5% market share. Longhorn could deliver another 5% market share to Apple, if not more.
23
posted on
04/25/2005 3:30:32 PM PDT
by
savedbygrace
("No Monday morning quarterback has ever led a team to victory" GW Bush)
To: landorepub
I'm with you. My next computer will be a Mac. Learning to use Windows has been worse than learning to fly. I want a computer that does not cause me drama when I turn it on. I never know until it has finished booting whether or not it is really going to work.
24
posted on
04/25/2005 3:41:56 PM PDT
by
Pukin Dog
(Sans Reproache)
To: supercat
Microsoft's "security chip" reminds me of the Clinton administration's CLIPPER chip.
25
posted on
04/25/2005 3:46:16 PM PDT
by
HAL9000
(Get a Mac - The Ultimate FReeping Machine)
To: Windcatcher
nothing short of an Act of Congress can get me to upgrade if I really don't want to.what if an app, game, or content won't work unless you do?
26
posted on
04/25/2005 4:29:32 PM PDT
by
D-fendr
To: D-fendr
Don't underestimate my ability to live without :P
To: Windcatcher
I'm running XP on three computers, 2000 on another, Win98SE on another, and Win3.11 on an old computer up in the attic. The latter still has a lot of old games on it, but I must admit it's about time to throw it out.
28
posted on
04/25/2005 4:57:25 PM PDT
by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: HAL9000
Currently, such encryption locks are stored as data on a hard drive. It is, however, much more difficult to crack a chip. Who writes this stuff? The difference between hardware and software implementation is purely one of performance (a dedicated chip can generally encrypt/decrypt faster). The security of the end result depends entirely on the soundness of the algorithm and the security of the key.
29
posted on
04/26/2005 8:51:57 AM PDT
by
steve-b
(A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-29 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson