From: Gary Britt 

Is this a Fox story or an eWeek story that is carried by Fox's website?

Gary

Rich Gauszka wrote:
> ROFL - looks like MS pissed off someone at Fox News
>
> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,246023,00.html
>
> The solution was quick and simple, but the irritation was enormous.
> Microsoft decided it would use the security patch process to sneak IE 7 onto
> the desktops of millions of PC users.
>
> If it was going to try this tactic, it should have at least made sure that
> the installation was so reliable that it would work virtually every time.
> Microsoft has likely set back IE 7 adoption by months at least for the
> people who experienced these problems.
>
> I know that I was prepared to make a permanent switch to Firefox if I found
> that I could not restore my IE 6 configuration. I may yet make greater use
> of Firefox just to reduce my dependence on Explorer.
>
> It's significant that Microsoft apparently hasn't tried a similar trick with
> its corporate customers who are much more particular about how and when they
> upgrade to any new application. The cries of outrage directed at Redmond
> would have been a lot louder and more anguished.
>
> There is no question that thousands of Windows XP users like myself have
> successfully or even deliberately installed IE 7 and are pleased with the
> new browsing features it gives them.
>
> But why does Microsoft believe it must treat its customers like children and
> trick them into installing a new application? It's like parents tricking
> babies to swallow bitter medicine by mixing it with some applesauce.
>
> It's bad enough that the Internet allows Microsoft to reach out and touch
> our computers whenever it decides to do security and application updates.
>
> Yes, it's true this is the most efficient way for Microsoft to patch its
> software. Without the Internet, prompt distribution of security updates
> would be impossible.
>
> Then there are those annoying automated prompts that pop up every time one
> of your applications crashes, asking whether you want to send a notice to
> Mother Microsoft, telling her what bad things those nasty applications did
> to crash Windows. You are never far from the comforting arms of Microsoft.
>
> But the security update channel shouldn't be used by Microsoft to launch
> marketing experiments on its customers. Nor should the patch mechanism be
> used to spring new products on users without their full knowledge and
> acceptance.
>
> There should be a further examination of this process to see whether
> Microsoft is violating the terms of its antitrust agreements with state and
> federal governments by using the security patch channel as a sly technique
> to head off competing applications from the PC desktop.
>
> As for myself, I will forever approach future "security"
updates with great
> caution. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5