Microsoft have good reason to take viruses and malware seriously, more than ten years of complaints about Windows being insecure and prone to attack.  In truth though the company has made great strides in recent years protecting the latest versions of Windows against rootkits and all manner of other attack.

Windows still needs to be protected with anti-virus software however and, while Microsoft’s own free anti-virus package does a good job, the company’s past failures still maintain a multi-million dollar worldwide industry in third-party solutions.

Microsoft are good at responding to malware and viruses too, their operating systems include Windows Defender and once a month a Malicious Software Removal Tool will come down to those with automatic updates enabled.  The company always publicise details of threats on their websites and works closely with third-party security companies to minimise the risk to its customers.

With Windows Phone, their new smartphone OS, things are even better.  Because every app for the platform must be vetted before going into the official app store (the only way to get apps on the phones) then viruses and malware simply don’t get through.  This is an essential ingredient with smartphones which are linked far more closely than our home PCs will ever be to direct payment methods.

Apple too maintain tight control over their smartphone app store, which helps keep malware off the platform but it’s on their own desktop operating system that things begin to fall down.  Google are even worse and I feel that both companies are heading for a disaster.  So why is it that Apple and Google aren’t taking malware seriously?

To justify my point we’ll start with Google.  This company has a free and open smartphone OS with an app store devoid of the diligent scrutiny that Apple and Microsoft show.  Consequently in just one week last month, no fewer than 26 malware apps were found in, and removed from the Android app store with no word on how long they’d already been there.

These malware apps don’t just affect Android smartphones, where they can run up bills on people’s tarriff’s, access their email, contacts and more, but they’re also present on Android tablets.  These are devices on which we do banking and online purchasing.

Google’s response to malware is almost completely absent.  They’ll scour their app store for the stuff every month and remove it when they find it, but none of this helps the people who get infected by it.

I also have concerns about their new Chromebooks as there’s similarly no virus and malware protection for these.  Just a browser that people will use for banking and shopping.

Now you’ll probably point out here that every criminal is attacking Windows.  Well this is no longer the case any more as the ever-increasing proliferation of Android malware demonstrates.

Apple also has its own problems with OS X.  A recent malware attack by “Mac Defender” has left many people out of pocket when they were defrauded out of their credit card details.  Worse a new DIY Crimeware kit is now available through forums for Mac malware and virus writers.

It’s clear then that Google and Apple platforms are coming under increasing attack from criminals and this is a situation that’s only ever going to get worse.

To compound matters even further, a recent leaked memo from Apple to it’s support staff instructed that “AppleCare does not provide support for removal of the malware.  You should not confirm or deny whether the customer’s Mac is infected or not.” and an Apple helpline worker recently told PC Pro magazine “We don’t recommend installing security software,”

Clearly Apple and Google are going to have to raise their game if they’re not going to lose the trust and support of their very loyal customers.  It’s astonishing to me that they’ve never learned lessons from Microsoft’s past mistakes and that they still believe that anything Unix is immune and doesn’t need protecting.  These two companies need to wake up quickly before the really bad news begins.

I’m not only a PC, I’m a Microsoft lock-in.  I use Windows, Office, Live Mail and Calendar, Live Suite and Windows Mobile.  Why do I exclusively use Microsoft products?  The answer is simple really, it’s just so convenient to do so.  It’s called the lock-in.

Other companies have lock-ins too, top of the list being Apple.  But why isn’t the Apple lock-in something that you choose?

For this article I have installed software from Apple and Google on my PC, the Live Suite was already installed, to see the effects they have on my computer and on my life.  I didn’t choose much, just the types of software you would normally have installed, iTunes, Chrome and Picasa, all using the default options.

So first things first, why would I want to do this?  Surely it’s just an opportunity, as someone who uses exclusively Microsoft software and services to slag off the competition.  No, there are good reasons why I switched away from Google services two years ago and don’t touch Apple services with a bargepole.  In this article I hope to prove why to you.

When I was interviewed by the IEEE Organisation recently about Google Chrome OS and cloud services, one of my criticisms was that there was no interoperability between the services provided by different companies, nor was this likely.  Firstly this was due to protectionism of these companies’ own markets, but a large part of this was the lock-in.  This is where a company will try and make all their products and services interoperate with each other seamlessly, to help give users a more complete service and to encourage you to stick exclusively with that company.

This is where Microsoft excel.  They’ve still got a considerable way to go, integrating services such as Live Mesh and Skydrive into Windows for example (Skydrive integration with Office 2010 already exists) but generally their services don’t only work well together, they compliment each other.

Let’s compare this approach to that taken by Google and Apple.  Google have one of the biggest software and cloud-computing suites in the world, with a vast array of products and services available for download.  Unfortunately these services aren’t very good at interacting with each other, or allowing you to share files between them.  This is a shame as they’re otherwise very good, Their Chrome browser and Google Earth being two brilliant examples.

Apple are even worse however.  Everything that Apple are about these days is centred around the iTunes software, and everything about iTunes is designed to get you to part with your cash.

It’s unfortunate that Apple’s business model is so mercenary.  Clearly it’s working for them and millions of people around the world don’t mind.  I however can’t help but compare iTunes to Windows Media Player.  Both are good music players and in both you can buy music and video, but with WMP it’s so much more understated.  It’s never thrust down your throat the way it is in iTunes.  Microsoft just aren’t so desperate to get you to part with your cash.

Then there’s the effect these programs have on my PC.  Both Google and Apple install ‘updater’ software with their software packages.  Why?  Please can somebody explain to me why I need a constantly running updater for a software package that I’ll use perhaps once or twice a week?

This is by far my biggest beef and the biggest reason why I won’t use this software at all.  The Google Update, QuickTime and iTunes update software (the latter of which is consuming 4Mb of my precious memory when I don’t need it) that runs automatically is only just the start of it. 

Both companies also install services that will run automatically with Windows every time it starts.  These services are very difficult for inexperienced users to switch off.  Google is bad enough with not just one but two updater services but Apple takes the crown by installing a service to interact with an iPod, a piece of hardware I don’t even own and a service that should never be installed unless I buy one!

I also can’t understand why the iTunes software must install QuickTime!?  QuickTime video is hardly used outside of the USA and I almost never come across a video that requires it.  Why do I need this software running all the time on my PC when it could instead simply install a codec that works with iTunes, Windows Media Player or both.  After all, this is what every other company does.

But then Apple commit the worst crime of all.  Anybody who buys their hardware, such as an iPhone or iPod can only interact with that device through iTunes.  Why?  Google and Microsoft see no need to do this.  Are Apple being insecure?  Worst still you can’t even use an iPhone until you’ve installed iTunes on your PC to activate it.  This is madness.

Let’s compare all of this with Microsoft who certainly seem to have got things right.  When you install software such as the Live Suite, not only are they providing software that interacts with other products in the suite reasonably (though there’s still much room for improvement), you won’t get a single program or service running in the background.  The software if necessary will check for updates when you start it, which is what they should all do and the resulting drop in memory and processor usage can have only one effect.  My PC is cheaper to run with Microsoft software installed on it!  I can be absolutely certain that if were using a low-power device such as a netbook instead of a top-end PC, I would notice my PC get a little more sluggish with Google and Apple software installed.

As a proof of this I used to run Windows with the Deskscapes animated desktop running from Stardock.  I stopped using this however when, after some tests I found that just having this one piece of software running on my PC increased it’s power usage from 130 watts to an incredible 151 watts.  That’s a big power increase from having one piece of software running.  Now the iTunes and Google updaters won’t increase power usage by anything like this amount, but any extra, and unnecessary, program running on you PC is guaranteed to push up power consumption.

I’m not averse to the lock-in, I’m a willing participant but one who knows and understands what the implications and ramification of making such a choice are.  I’ve also come out in support of Apple on many occasions, but I wonder if the millions of users of Google and Apple products out there know just what’s going on behind the scenes on their computer when they choose to lock-in with them?

Microsoft have been extremely quiet in recent weeks about their proposed browser ballot screen for Windows 7 users in the EU.  Finally today they made some announcements, as has been reported by Mary-Jo Foley.

The ballot screen, see above, will be delivered via Windows Update.  This means it looks as if Internet Explorer will initially be available after installing Windows 7.  Indeed in the screenshot above they say…

“The browser ballot has unpinned Windows Internet Explorer from your taskbar”

What this means for people who use Windows 7 is that, at some point shortly after you begin using it you will be asked to choose which internet browser you would like to use.  You may decide to choose Internet Explorer, and my guess is most people will, in which case it will switch it back on.  However you may choose to opt for the also excellent Firefox or the minimalist Chrome.

Microsoft have designed the screen to make the choice ‘more palatable’ to customers.  They say the changes…

Make it so competing browsers can be downloaded from the ballot screen more quickly and easily

Ensure equivalent placement on the Windows 7 taskbar for Internet Explorer and all other browser icons

Add introductory information, improving the design of the ballot page about each browser to help users make more informed choices

Alphabetize the list of browsers so that the five most popular are listed first (by vendor), followed by the next seven most popular (also alphabetically ordered), so that 12 choices are displayed in total

Provide the browser ballot to users for five years

The system will check that the user is connected to the internet before offering the choice of browsers for download and to display an initial screen explaining to users what a browser is.

This has all come about because of an initial lawsuit in the EU brought against Microsoft by Opera, who felt the bundling of Internet Explorer with Windows was anti-competitive.  This is despite Firefox and Chrome both gaining significant market share over IE in recent years without any lawsuits being required.

Some people will see this as an annoyance, others as giving them choice.  Microsoft have not been forced into this action by the EU, but they have proposed the ballot screen on their own and the EU has agreed it’s a good way forward to help competition in the browser marketplace.

…but I want one!

Microsoft Surface is probably to coolest technology you’ve never heard of.  It can reasonably be argued that without it we wouldn’t have the iPhone, at least not yet.  Many of the technologies and features we see in the iPhone, namely those based around the multi-touch, touch screen technology it uses, debuted here the year before.

The only place you’re likely to see one though is if you’re staying in a Sheraton hotel, and then they’ll only appear in the poshest ones.  Why?  Well, it’s a $5000 coffee table for starters, and if that’s not a good enough reason to not fork out for one I we could move on to the fact that it’s not the prettiest thing in the world… yet, and there’s nowhere to put your legs.

Microsoft definitely hit on something with this, Apple obviously thought so and multi-touch is coming to Windows 7 where it will be completely useless except on a few tablet PCs.  The best use for mutli-touch away from a mobile phone is, I have to say it, on a coffee table.

In the average home the most uses a PC is put to include checking email and some casual web browsing.  Imagine being able to do that on your sofa, without worrying about having a laptop sitting around you can spill coffee on or squash, instead doing in on the table that gives out pleasant animations when you put your coffee on it, and without having to worry what side of thing you’re sat on.  Two or more people could even do it simultaneously from different sides of the table, and I’m not even going to speculate how that’ll revolutionise a game of Monopoly with the relatives!

This is the next killer appliance for the home, you mark my words!  Anyway, check out the link at the beginning of this blog entry and see the videos for yourself.  Roll on version 2 I say.