Android malware victims offered free WinPhones by MS Microsoft is offering free Windows phones to Android malware victims, providing they are prepared to tell world+dog about their problems. The marketing stunt - already given the hashtag #droidrage on Twitter - follows a run of publicity about android malware. Ben Rudolph (@BenthePCGuy), the Microsoft Windows Phone "evangelist …
Wow... just wow.
Can't believe how many are so anti MSm purely for the sake of it.
Without exception, every person I've shown WP7 to has liked it. Not all to the point of changing, but not one has said 'urghh'.
A couple have said they prefer the 'manageability' of android, a fair point. But NONE have said it's 'awful' or 'dreadful'.
The comments here merely expose the anti ms brigade for what they are. At least have the nerve to try a product before you slate it.
Yes, Barry, I'm looking at you.
"Can't believe how many are so anti MSm purely for the sake of it."
Simply not true, many of here will have very good reasons for their contempt of $MS
"The comments here merely expose the anti ms brigade for what they are. At least have the nerve to try a product before you slate it."
I personally had a go with the on-line windows phone 7 trial () and was suitably un-impressed. It was more the fact that I spent 5-10 minutes clearing up all the coffee on my screen, phone and desk after giving winphoney a whirl ;)
I do not thing that Microsoft is surprised at all. What opinion would you expect from the public about Chikatilo? A long history of he Redmond's behavior is the cause. Think about the recent episode when Microsoft racketeering Android device manufacturers. Did you see the actual patents? Those from the B&N case are merely ridiculous, MS (their chief lawyer) has the impudence to hypocritically talk about innovations.
Comparing the products, say Windows7, it might be good , it cannot compare to any free and open OS. It is much less secure, nobody (but MS) knows how it is built, architecture is not modular (Win8 promised to bring that after 25 years at last, everything is uncomfortably GUI, it is very inconvenient, lacks repos, central installer, updater like dpkg/pkg/rpm,aptitude/yum and many more.Contrary to the existence of the MS Tax one has to pay for many PCs, you cannot resell an OEM copy., so it is imposed by a monopolistic company.
It has nothing to do with how good WP7 is, or how easy to use, or how many features it has.
'Windows' is 'what my father did in the 90s', it is 'boring old businesses 10 years behind the times (still running XP)". The brand has expired.
Another problem is the "just you wait for" marketing. As soon as a product is released Microsoft starts talking about the next one. Nothing surer to kill sales than "The next one will be much better".
Whan WM6.5 was released it was just an interim before 7 was ready. WP7 killed compatibility with WM and yet did not have all its features. 'Just wait for 7.1' and 'Mango will fix all that'.
Nokia had the same problem (and still has). "Don't buy Sybian, we are dumping Meego". Don't buy anything until we get our WP7.5 phones out. The 800 arrived but "wait for 710".
Now it is "Wait for Windows 8". The message is that Windows 8 will run everywhere (eventually) and the WM6.5 to WP7 discontinuity is still remembered so it may be that WP7 is another dead end.
A sense of ethics?
What are you on about? Are you suggesting that it is unethical of MS to charge for the use of their IP? Perhaps they should take the apple or motorla route and just ban any sales of such infringing devices? Cos that makes it much fairer dor the sonsumer doesn't it? Just plain restrict choice.
And since when did laptop users pay a 'tax'? If you want to make a stupid point, at least try and back it up with sense.
We could just leave it at that. However...
"And since when did laptop users pay a 'tax'?"
Since the majority of laptops sold carry a product that cannot be conveniently unbundled or swapped out, with a bunch of excuses ranging from the product being "free" or some low price you can't actually get that product for, to the suggestion that it is actually subsidised by "sponsors" whose crapware you have to endure who kindly bought you a product you didn't want.
Ethics: you have heard of them, surely.
>> Are you suggesting that it is unethical of MS to charge for the use of their IP?
OK, imagine MS would have to pay for .... using the language C? For billions of far more someone else's innovative ideas than they use and sell on the daily basis. Their so far extremely profitable business would go extinct in a few weeks. Some of the IPs they claim being infringed by B&N have been in use (like by GNU Emacs) long time before MS had a multi-user OS. IT patents are baseless and a shame of our time, those in the case M$ vs. Android are even worse and more ludicrous. Reasons to pay upfront are the same as when you deal with US mafia in the 30-s. It stinks but it might be much cheaper, proving your case in court is not affordable...
>>And since when did laptop users pay a 'tax'? If you want to make a stupid point, at least try and back it up with sense.
Last time I checked all major stores and websites of OEM's who "recommend Win7". If MS is making a good competitive product compared to that free crappy how-so-they-call-ti.... GNU/Linux? What to be afraid it. At least, let me sell my OEM copy/key. They don't, right?
Remember the glorious "Get the fuc..facts " campaign? Lie and misinformation are not ethical and get stuck with a person/company for long.
So you ask why M$ is so much hated, again?
Because MS only goes after the small guys they can bully. If android violates their IP then go after the developer google. They don't because they'll get owned.
Secondly they won't go after google because it has nothing to do with protecting ip. It's about bullying companies into selling wp7. Companies that give into selling their rubbish have, in some cases got more money than they paid out.
So yeah if it's about ip go after google and quit bullying phone makers into selling phones no one wants.
I think the only people being victimized here are those trying to get something for nothing. It seems to highlight and entirely separate problem from the one being used for FUD purposes. Google needs to ensure that it's the owner selling the app. This seems to be more a case of piracy than of malware.
Freeloaders are certainly not unique to Android. Freeloading also describes most of the activity on either of Apple's app stores.
I NEVER thought I'd see the day where I would cheer Microsoft.... But, there is a reason:
If this (real or not) is what it takes, then, for ONCE, I APPLAUD Microsoft.
GOOGLE, GET THE f*ck OFF YOUR ASSSES AND give us decent firewall tools, intrusion detection, and forensice tools to help us assail in court the ASSHOLES who keep intruding our android phones! WHY do we have to ROOT our phones to add firewall tools, DAMMIT?
I get ticked off because the HTC/Google interface will spuriously, randomly just reset.
I hate that the DRM tools and other "call home" shit activates. I hate having nfl, amazon, blockbuster, adn that f*cking NOVA game, and the stock app on my phone, undeletable -- unless I root the thing. Why should we have to root our phones because a megalo-narcisso cell carrier demands it to be painful to remove?
Why should we have to root our phones just to install HiSurfing or other easy-to-understand traffic monitors?
For those who down-thumbed me: Don't get me wrong, I'm not giving up my Android for a winphone, and I am utterly not interested in an iPhone, either (soooo tired up looking up every where on any train (BART or MUNI) or any bus and seeing 7/10 phones within 10 feet of me being an iPhone. They DO look nice, but I'm not on that bandwagon. I don't WANT a phone that everybody and their friggen granny and cat and parrot will whip out. They're screen being smaller than mine would not be a win for me, either. I don't care about retina, either.
But, Android being non win and non iOS, and apparently being "linux" is a form of locked linux, or the devs of firewall tools WANT to force us to unlock our phones. Whether my perception of things is borked or not, Google are NOT helping their own image by not givnig up some of the control to us, locally, so we can feel more in control of what is coming and going. The processors are fast enough to run a packet sniffer or a logger so long as it's mainly web pages and no music or live video streams (I don't stream much of any entertainment to my phone because I don't leave much time for it, and yes, I'm knida paranoid that live streams make it easier to ignore "other" things the phone is doing behind my back...)
What also pisses me off is that randomly, in the middle of texting, the phone gets sluggish as hell, loses touch sensitivity, and acts like it is not itself. I keep fearing that an off-load of content is happening. But, honestly, sometimes a damned phonecall will come in while I am trying to fire off a text, and when I decline the call, the texting session gets bogged down, acts crazy, and so on. Irritating. No, a faster processor should not be part of the solution. This is an HTC EVO 4G.
Maybe my next phone will be a bigger one, something from Samsung, and maybe, maybe I'll get around to rooting it. Or, I'll just downgrade to the dumbest, non-multimedia-featured phone I can find.
of another.
But, I suspect that I've ranted on and disparaged google/htc/sprint/et al so much that someone's weak soul has had enough of it...
(Personally, FWIW, I think I have yet to thumbs down any post in ElReg -- I either abstain or thumbs up....)
Some fail all round here.
Yes users shouldn't give permission for apps to access these services but there are lots of trivial apps which ask for stuff they don't need. There's a bit of "UAC fatigue" in being asked for permissions for every poxy app people fancy trying.
Having said that, we probably should have expected that this would happen. There should be no background dialing services. This is not the same class of access request as asking for GPS location or internet access. All phone calls & SMS should drop you into the default phone/sms application and then switch you back once you have confirmed the connection. This is something that the standard Android OS build could & should enforce. There's nothing to stop a compile-time flag being set to disable this if you want to embed android in some other device where perhaps sms is all it does. There's also nothing to stop the "default" apps being changed but that can be flagged with all sorts of warnings and password requests that you don't normally get from installing an application.
"Microsoft is offering free Windows phones to Android malware victims, providing they are prepared to tell world+dog about their problems."
So what they are really saying is that their manufacturing partners have a lot of phones sitting on the dock that they can't get rid off and MS has found a way to buy market share.
Well that ought to double the user base nicely. Why not give away 10? Then they could report a 200% increase in users!
It could be the best phone platform in the world and (to be completely honest) I still wouldn't think of going near it. MS have been downright evil over the years, and the sheer number of Win Phone 7 shill you see on the internet has put me right off.
No, I don't mean anyone making the slightest comment in its favour. I mean the people who have been part of a concerted campaign, since before the platform was even available for preview, to paint it as the BEST THING EVAR for user and developer alike, and clearly the natural heir to the entire smartphone arena, no contest, and continue this blind optimism in the face of continued indifference from the public and total market failure.
I like the look of the OS, but I have been an Android user since the G1, it does everything I need it to and I'm happy with it.
Stunts like this won't make me move from Android to WP7. If they want to make me move, then they need to emphasize why I should do so by highlighting how WP7 will meet my needs better than Android.
I'm no fan of the iPhone, but I think the Original iPhone adverts were the best example. They showed the phone bring used to do certain things, like finding the nearest cinema using maps, checking what films were on using the browser, and the calling to book the tickets using the phone. If MS want to get anywhere with this, then this is the kind of advertising they need. Show us what it is, what it does well, and so on.
This all just comes down to the trade-off between “safety” and “freedom”. Windows Phone and the iPhone only lets you load approved apps that are written in an approved way, so they give you more safety.
Android give you freedom and hence high risk and complete confusion by the phone makers, app vendors and networks being allowed to do what they want.
I like Window Phone, as it lets me choose for a reasonable selection of handset designs while still giving me safety – I am willing to give up some control to get the safety.
I want a new laptop, it's probably going to have Debian on it, or perhaps Arch, but not windows.
I go to a shop, I ask for the laptop, it comes with Windows, which is factored into the price. I cannot have the machine without Windows, so I am forced to pay the price.
It is a tax, and one of the reasons that I, who remember DOS 3.3 with fond memories, which is way too much drink will do to you, won't touch the WinPhone.
I don't like the way MicroSoft do business. The behaviour destroying a Standards body to try and thwarf ODF was vile, and that's only ONE of their practices over the years
I don't buy from Murdoch, why would I buy from MicroSoft?
Sorry, but you are NOT forced to 'pay the price'.
If YOU choose to buy a laptop from a shop, first off, you DO have a choice, usually Windows or OSX. At least with Windows you get a far greater choice of config.
Secondly, if you really want an OS free device, choose one that ships in that way. Just because the shops that YOU choose to buy from don't shop the laptop YOU want to buy in the configurationYOU want, don't blame MS for that...
It's an everlasting excuse for every monopoly advising the dissidents to go someplace else or f...ck out of here/there. The problem is that an OEM version is IMPOSED, since you can't resell it. If it is bundled with a PC, then call all OEMs subsidiaries of MS or vice-versa. If I buy a car with "bundled" tires, I can resell'em if am willing to. I if there is law that a forbids this action, Soviet Union was more free.
So make MS/OEM return the money with the first demand. If not, apply the anti-trust charges against the both.
Can't you understand with or without reference to MS, that monopoly is detrimental to progress.
is that NONE of the shops that I CAN buy from have the configuration that I DO want. Of course, that's part of why I build my own machines (and knowing exactly what went into them - I have a fairly low attrition rate due to buying good quality components in the first place). For the average user, though, there's no choice - you go to the shop and you get sold a machine with Windows on (unless you've got enough money to go to the shop where they sell you one with OSX)
Exactly, as far as the MS Tax is concerned, were a preinstalled copy of whatever Windies a product, one could RESELL it, not for the same price, but still for a few bucks. It takes good will of some OEM companies to reimburse it if they are willing to and a looooong time.
It's actually up to MS to impose whatever they want, however this does stifle competition not as impudently as with patent trolling, but still... MS should be declared a vile monopoly and banned from governmental institutions, schools and universities (as should Apple).
This really isn't that hard...
An OEM copy is a CHEAPER version of the full product ties to a single machine. If you want to resell a copy of windows, buy a full retail copy. The OEM is cheaper (substantially) for a reason.
The car analogy isn't valid either. If you buy a full price car, do with it as you want. But if I buy a subsidised car (PHP, or PCH) then I am not free to do with it as I want. But I get it cheaper.
And as I said before, if yuo want a laptop without Windows, buy one without windows. Don't look to buy one that has it, then moan.
How about you try to buy a macbook without OSX? And don't tell me it's free, it's just built into the price, you know, like Windows is.
The differencebeing of course, is that I can buy a PC spec laptop without Windows. Maybe not the exact one I want, but hey, that's supply and demand. If enough people wanted them, they would be there.
Dell tried, remember?
Flame away.
All the agreements between OEMs and MS are strictly non-disclosure. It is like MS is doing everything wrong, they try to keep secrecy of their every day very immoral and maybe illegal negotiations. So, no one knows how cheap this OEM version is. When people are successful in getting it returned they get a similar to regular copy amount back. Moreover, OEMs include as a percentage of the PC cost.
OK, Dell tried what? I though, yeah, cool. Then you compare the specs of the Win and Ubuntu laptops, you find that higher end ones are with Windies and they are even cheaper. What was there in the non-disclosure agreement between Dell and MS? I am using Dell's old E510 machine . WinXP died in a year, it still runs flawlessly with Debian on-board. But I will never buy from them again, unless they undo their wrong.
The perosn who win this would have to know how to get lot of infections on thier machine INCLUDING rooting it.
a few random ones wont do.
And that person would know thoir android quite well.
hmmm......could make £300 quid out of this!..
time to warm up my ebay account
anyone know were I can get a few infected android install files?
Why is everyone taking this so seriously? Its a bit of tongue in cheek marketing hype. Chill out.
Disclaimer: I currently use a windows phone and I like it, my last phone was an android and for the most part I liked that too. I switched for the simple reason that as a developer who uses visual studio it was nice to have a phone I could write apps for without learning a new language.
Microsoft has done quite a few unpleasant and shady things over the years, but on the other hand so have google, apple and infact just about any other large company you could name.
I doubt a voice of reason will go down well in a heated environment like this but I have thick skin so feel free to flame on.
I found Android sucked due to the restrictions of the handset and service provider's modifications to the supplied phone. I don't think Android itself has much in the way of issues. I stopped all the background stuff that the service providers run by rooting the phone and running a custom ROM (Cyanogen mod) and I haven't had a problem with any odd behaviour, malware or anything. I would say my phone has been more stable over the last year than any desktop operating system I have used.
I think it's more that the service providers interference with Android which tends to throw a spanner in the works for a small group of Android users. Friends and colleagues with iPhones have switched to Android and they think it's an improvement. As for WP8, they just will not switch to it based on their experience of desktop Windows. Maybe that is a bit prejudiced towards Windows, but that is down to the user experience of people not wanting endless updates every 12 hours.
Just to note, many Android users (including me with the phone as supplied and tweaked by my service provider) do not receive updates because service providers turn off the OTA (over the air) update service for many and exercise their own controls. It is in their interest to try and make you upgrade handset and get locked in to a new contract for 18 months to 2 years. It is this that prevents patches being available to many Droid users, not so much anything else.
Having a rooted phone on Cyanogen gives access to nightly builds and regular patches, which I have to say are not really required. I just move between major revisions when they are officially released and that's more than enough.
When replacing my ancient WinMobile 6 phone, I didn't want very much {a few days battery life; a phone that works; email; word & pdf docs; internet browser} preferably with Google Sky but mostly cheap, cheap as chips..
Looked at loads of Android phones with lots of version, but none compared to iPhone for experience; Nokia for a Phone, WinMo for Office, and no way of knowing which version of Android would work with the apps I need/want.. plus I'd have to buy an unlocked version to avoid Network spyware.
I ended up buying a discounted Dell WinPhone for the price of an Android 1.6 relic and got everything.. except the one (Google Sky) app I really wanted.. so I don't have any broken phones to trade.
so back in the day Windows and IE were a security joke, and the security vendors quoted in the article made a pretty penny protecting users.
Time moved on and with Win7 and IE9 the platform is regularly coming out as more secure than the alternatives... and Sophos and co are starting to see the gravy train dry out unless they create and maintain a wall of FUD
Microsoft have often been critisised for not being aggressive enough in marketing, especially the new Mango phone which is actually getting great reviews and has happy users - so the fan boys are feeling the heat and have to justify why they're thinking different and carrying the same fruitphone or feature race android that's out of date before it leaves HTCs factory ... so now they try something and those anti malware vendors see a chance to spread the FUD and the press (always happy to knock MS because they're living in the past and still think MS are the evil monopoly when that's now a long way from the truth) are happy to repeat the fact free spoon fed material.
Oh, and Mango has an SMS vuln which will probably be fixed and rolled to every handset in short order (just try getting that done on Android) ... but hasn't both iPhone and Android had similar issues as well as other problems reported in the past. At least Mango and iPhone have similar app store policies to at least add a level of protection for apps (vs the free-for-all in Android marketplaces) and Windows Phone is the only one CarrierIQ free on every handset/network...
"If YOU choose to buy a laptop from a shop, first off, you DO have a choice, usually Windows or OSX. At least with Windows you get a far greater choice of config."
USUALLY? OSX or Windows?
That word usually
Kind of implies a fairly large selection of "other"
But that's not true is it?
When there was another OS, back in the early days of netbooks, Microsoft moved heaven and earth to kill the CHEAP part of that market, and managed to undercut "free"
People speculated you were a Bell Pottinger style shill before, I think this works as an element of proof, that you would make such a patently ridiculous and untrue statement, suggestign that the market is free and level
Who are these 'people' you talk of? I don't even know who this bell pottinger is, and I can't even be arsed to google it.
People like yourself have absolutely no interest in a balanced argument, only shouting your own point louder and louder until you are the only one in the room, and you consider that a victory.
You seem to construe meanings from my posts that simply aren't there, and make them fit your own argument, with no relation to the actual intent.
How does my mention of 'usually osx or windows' imply a 'fairly large selection of "other"'?
It simply doesn't. Another example of shouting at yourself in a large empty room. It inplies that when you buy a laptop, you have a choice of at least two OS's. If you want another choice, seek out a laptop that has that option. Don't buy a laptop that ships WITH WINDOWS, then blame MS for forcing it on you.
I see no-one slating Apple for 'forcing' osx down your throat? Oh but can you resell that license? No, thought not.
Yes, MS were agressive in the early netbook days, but you know what? Consumers CHOSE windows, cos the linux alternatives that were about then, were shit. How do I know? Cos I bought two of the buggers, so don't say I'm some sort of 'shill'. Both my fairly technically literate wife, and my technically illterate mother hated it. So I stuck xp on them, and suddenly they could use them again.
I tried linux. I still do occasionally. I don't doubt it works.
For the record, I use a dell laptop with windows on it, cos it was cheap, does what I want, and I work with Windows, so it pays me to keep up my skills. I use linux occasionally as I come accross it in work scenarios. I also sometimes come accross Macs. I like Apple hardware. It's well made. I don't like Apple as a marketing machine. They have become everything that MS were at their worst. I've had android phones, I've had windows phones, and WM's, i also have a Wii, PS3 and a 360.
So what sort of shill does tha make me again?
At least I have the nerve to state my allegances, my biases, and my logic for all to see, as well as stick to the same name and account, never posting under anon, or other means.
Wait, are you suggesting, and I mean, MS, that Android has issues? No - wait, it's perfect! it has all the features you could possibly want! Ridiculously sized screens that all but the most humungous hands can use, over the top features such as Face unLock that dont actually work very well (Try holding a photo of yourself and see), battery drain with just a handful of widgets - and cluttered UI that favours screen clutter/bling over utility? Or a marketplace that isnt even on 100% of android phones, and that is hard to make any money from for the developer thanks to puracy and a lack of a decent payment experience for users, and is full of cut and paste apps that are merely pruated versions of other peoples work, or 1000s of fart apps, intermixed by serious security flawed apps that are malware?!
This cant be true! it must all be MS and Apple shills telling us this!
As we all know, all android users root and mod their phones and know about security and the implications of saying Yes to everything automatically - so it's all their fault anyway!
Stupid users!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
