I'm sorta surprised that so few people mention the OneNote feature in Office (Home & Student edition) It's a really great program for journaling and taking notes in class, etc. Fast, versatile, intuitive and even searches and reads text within graphics. As just "Mr. Average User", I think Office is an example of where Microsoft got a lot of things right, and that is why the program is doing well in the marketplace. With Vista...well...it seems some other bunch of folks on the Redmond campus need to take notes (using OneNote) from the Office creators on how to make things work.

You said "Microsoft missed an opportunity to create more interdependence between the products, for which the choice of Office 2007 could also have meant Vista, too."

I am glad they didn't do it. Not only would it stink of monopoly power abuse, but the principle behind the antri trust thing years ago was that at times such integration is pointless, other than the producer making more money.

MS has shown that Office 2007 doesn't need to be tied in with Vista, so they should keep it that way. It is the user that counts...

Hm... maybe splitting up MS into OS, browser, office, and so on would help ensure unnecessary linkages... :)

"Although the ribbon is supposed to give great visibility to stuff that I'm most likely to use, I found it incredibly difficult to find the thing that adds a new slide�surely something that any PowerPoint author is going to use. Apparently it's in some other button somewhere."

I was so surprised at this I've just opened PowerPoint 2007 to check, because I usually add new slides with the Ctrl+M shortcut, or by right-clicking on a slide thumbnail.

Well, the thing is, if you don't find the "Add a new slide" immediately on the ribbon, that's because either you're blind, either your forgot to turn your monitor on.
It's the SECOND button in the default tab (called Slides). The second, you know, just after the classic cut/copy/paste things. And this button ain't small...
Did I misunderstand something? :o/

Don't forget you can also add this feature to the quick access toolbar. I did. Now adding a new slide is one quick click. I found this useful:
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/powerpoint/HA012341051033.aspx

Just the newest problem with windows found, titled:

Windows Vulnerability Could Compromise Millions Of PCs

http://www.crn.com/security/204300485

Quote: "A serious security flaw affecting every version of Microsoft (NSDQ:MSFT) Windows operating systems, including Vista, could enable cyber criminals to take control of an untold number of machines around the globe and manipulate personal information."
---------------------------------------------------
Thats right, it includes Vi$ta. There is not really that much new in Vi$ta, except a whole lot more DRM and WGA, so why wouldn't it be vunerable?

McAfee: Vista Likely a Hacker Target in 2008

http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=12300C9JASVF

Quotes: "Windows Vista is being relegated to the doghouse again this week for being slower than XP, and security Relevant Products/Services experts are warning that Vista might face more serious malware Relevant Products/Services in the upcoming year.

New tests show that Windows XP, coupled with the forthcoming Service Pack 3, performs twice as well as Vista with SP1. Devil Mountain Software discovered that a preview version of SP3 for Windows XP offered a 10 percent performance boost. The software development firm said that performance gains with SP1 for Vista were negligible.

However, slower speed is one issue, security is another. Considering the probability that more businesses will begin migrating to Vista in 2008, security analysts say that the security of Microsoft Relevant Products/Services's latest operating system might be a larger problem than performance."

I don't think it's fair to compare Office 2007 to Vista. I understand that the aim of the comparison is to point out that office 2007 is successful, so why isn't vista? And don't you think that Vista is facing enough trouble on its own without comparing it to Office?
There are number of reasons why the comparison is not fair:
1. Maybe, as some might say, Vista's biggest rival is XP as more people are still using XP and not considering upgrade. But there is competition in the OS market. The only thing more surprising than Linux large distribution numbers is Mac's. Microsoft took a lot of time working on Vista (around 5 years), but actually almost half of that time they were working on XP SP2. And with the heat of other OSs reaching out to people, Microsoft had to cut short with their development plans, remember how many features were delayed or even canceled (WinFS is the one I miss the most). On the other hand Office is REALLY competing with Office, don't believe those talks about Google Apps taking over, that's only because it's a Google's product not a great product.
2. Despite that Microsoft is competing with themselves in the Office area, They did a great job on Office 2007. They didn't take for granted that customers will upgrade. The Ribbon is revolutionary, it's the new Menu and Toolbar.
3. Office compatibility with XP is a must. It's Vista's incompatibility with applications that was unjustified. I had to wait 3 or 4 months before upgrading to Vista because half of applications were incompatible (some still are, God bliss Virtual Machines for taking care of that). Of course we expect some incompatibility in any new OS, but the question is "Is it worth it". In Vista, we got the Eye candy, the quicker search results, the annoying UAC messages, and for that we had to buy new hardware and suffer from incompatibility. I mean it's really not worth it.

To sum up, Microsoft next move in Office should be in offering more applications in the package (expand horizontally rather than vertically). and for Windows, Microsoft should stop copying ideas from other people (specially if they have a big mouth like Apple) and They also should keep quiet a bit about new technologies that aren't certain yet.
Sorry, I know that this post is about Office more than Windows, but it's all Microsoft after all.

Bots and worms among computer security threats for 2008

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5jeepx7dIUVaYBLjnLDYFdly5aUmw

Quotes from the link:
"The number of vulnerabilities exposed in Vista in the first nine months was roughly the same as for Windows XP in a comparable period of its introduction, says Dave Marcus, security research and communications manager at McAfee Avert Labs. Michael Murphy, vice-president and general manager of Symantec (Canada) Corp., notes that stronger built-in security was pitched as one of Vista's main selling points. The fact that it appears no more secure than XP, based on the number of security patches Microsoft has issued, means that marketing approach was a mistake, he says.

--------------------------------------------------
I keep saying this, every computer that comes in the door for spyware removal is a windows computer, 100% of the time.

Study: 'Huge jump' in Microsoft flaws since last year

http://www.news.com/Study-Huge-jump-in-Microsoft-flaws-since-last-year/2100-1002_3-6220719.html?tag=nefd.top

Quote from the link: "The past year has seen a massive increase in the number of flaws found in Microsoft software, according to vulnerability-scanning company Qualys.

Between 2006 and 2007, there was an almost threefold rise in Microsoft flaws, Qualys said on

"We have seen a huge jump in the vulnerabilities in Microsoft Office products," said Amol Sawate, manager of Qualys' vulnerability-management lab. "These charts show growth of nearly 300 percent from 2006 to 2007, primarily in new Excel vulnerabilities that can easily be exploited by getting unsuspecting users to open Excel files sent via e-mail and instant message."

In the Windows world, a rather comical debate is occurring. Some VARs are recommending Windows XP (faster but less secure than Windows Vista) but other VARs are pushing Windows Vista (a memory hog that's somewhat secure). Let's face it, folks. Customers deserve a fast, secure, reliable desktop that costs you very little to manage and support every month. And Microsoft doesn't currently offer an operating system that fulfills all three needs (fast, secure, reliable).
...
This got me thinking: Why are managed service providers always pushing Windows systems on their customers? I suspect 10 to 20 percent (perhaps a whole lot more) of small business users are ready for open source.

"Poll shows majority favor Vi as their editor of choice"

FBI: Millions of computers roped into criminal 'robot networks'

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/11/29/fbi.botnets/index.html

Quotes from the link:

" More than 1 million computers were infected with botnets when the FBI announced Bot Roast in June, and roughly 1.5 million more have been identified since then, the FBI said. Industry numbers suggest there are as many as 5 million infected computers.

The schemes target more than networks and individual computer users. The FBI in a news release said attacks have ensnared the University of Pennsylvania and a major banking institution in the Midwest.

FBI Director Robert Mueller noted in a speech earlier this month that there is potential to attack entire networks, send spam, infect computers and inject spyware -- not to mention more sinister crimes that threaten national security.

Here's how botnets work: A hacker known as a "botherder" takes over computers using viruses, worms or Trojan horses. A Trojan horse is software that appears to perform a harmless task while cloaking its true function"

"Z4 Sues Microsoft Over Windows Vista, Office"

A jury sided with z4 in that case, and in 2006 awarded the company $115 million in damages. The trial court later hit Microsoft with $27 million in additional penalties. Last week, a federal court rejected Microsoft's appeal of the decision.

In its latest lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for Eastern Texas, z4 claims that Microsoft's new Windows Vista and Office 2007 products contain the same infringements.

Z4 is asking the court for triple damages in the new case because it claims the violation is "willful." Microsoft has yet to file a formal response.

why am i the only one who doesnt have serious comments lol

Uncovered: Evidence that Mac OS X could run Windows apps soon

http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2007/11/30/uncovered-evidence-that-mac-os-x-could-run-windows-apps-soon

Quote: "Once Intel chips landed inside Macs and Boot Camp made its debut, it got a lot harder to blame rumor mongers for making a certain leap: Mac OS X could one day run Windows apps sans-Windows. Indeed, projects like the open source Wine have facilitated some of this functionality, albeit in a limited fashion, for some time now. But a new discussion on a Wine mailing list could refresh hope for those looking to get their Frankenstein on with Mac OS X and Windows computing.

The discussion begins with a mailing list message called Interesting Behavior of OS X, in which Steven Edwards describes the discovery that Leopard apparently contains an undocumented loader for Portable Executables, a type of file used in 32-bit and 64-bit versions of Windows. More poking around revealed that Leopard's own loader tries to find Windows DLL files when attempting to load a Windows binary."
--------------------------------------------------
As I see it the only real advantage to using Windows is the vast amount of commerical software made for it. Where Wine lets you run many of these Windows apps and games on Linux, it has to be a major concern to Microsoft, as Wine keeps improving and adding the number of usably programs to its list all the time.

And now there is prehaps, the start of something happening on the Intel platform for Mac. There would be little incentive to run windows program in an unsecure windows enviroment, if one could run them in Linux or Mac. Although, most will run in a virtual machine inside linux anyway.

Image, Dell and Apple, merging, and the next OS/X also running almost all windows programs natively. Even Linux using Wine is not that far away from that goal.

Chips
So what if OSX will be able to run Windows apps soon or not.
Two reasons
1. OSX is not as good as Vista

2. OSX will not run games made for Windows.

End of Line.

Joe: It would appear that, like any other large company with a long run of success behind it, it's a fallacy to believe that "Microsoft" speaks with one voice. From your post:

Office 2007 runs just fine on Windows XP, with no real compelling advantages when used on Windows Vista. Microsoft missed an opportunity to create more interdependence between the products, for which the choice of Office 2007 could also have meant Vista, too. Instead, Office 2007 gave many IT organizations reasons to stick with Windows XP when deploying the productivity suite.

This seems to suggest that even within Microsoft itself, the Office people are deeply suspicious of the Vista people and aren't willing to miss any opportunities to sell Office, and seem to view Office as a much, much safer bet than Vista.
Because you and the others are right in stating that people buy applications, not operating systems. Isn't the #1 complaint about Linux is that it doesn't support the gaming applications, office applications, and video and graphics applications that most people use?
It would be foolish indeed to sacrifice the strong sales of a popular application on the altar of a new and not-so-awfully-compelling operating system.

To Iman:

Quoting;
Neil :

Chips
So what if OSX will be able to run Windows apps soon or not.
Two reasons
1. OSX is not as good as Vista

2. OSX will not run games made for Windows.
-----------------------------------------------------
Actually Iman, I think Neil's conclusions here are wrong, at least on 1. While my experience with Mac OS/X is limited, it appears to be a far better internet OS than any Windows version. As far as his second point, that is more interesting. He might actually have a small point here. Wine runs a lot of windows apps and games already, even more and more directX games all the time. Wine has both Linux and Mac versions. Wine just released version 0.95, with a whole lot of fixes, including directX fixes.

But the interesting thing is, that Mac OS/X may not be using Wine to run these windows programs. Not that its running anything, yet, but it looks like the basis is in OS/X to do so. Remember, that Apple, is actually a partner to Microsoft. Heck, MS owns about 25% of the net worth of Apple. That 150 million stock purchase back when Apple was dieing was moment of genius on the part of Bill, look at how much its worth now. Now being a partner, Apple got MS Office for the Mac. If you think there was not some code sharing going on there, well, it just had to be. Mac knows more about running Windows software, than perhaps even Wine. It could be Mac is not using Wine, when and if they decide to make it happen. But it looks like Mac has the basics in the OS for future Mac OS/x releases to run the Windows programs.

Now, I for one, don't like Mac because I view it as too expensive, and owned 25% by Microsoft. Linux is the choice for me. But Mac has some options to be a clear spoiler for MS. This is one of them, the other is a merger with Dell. Think of running OS/X on a Dell, it just a TCM chip on the motherboard, and Dell runs it. Mac on the high end, and Dell on the lower end, both running OS/X.

There is another option that OEM's like Dell could employ to sell their computers. Where Dell sells Linux computers, they could sell computers with a choice of hard drives. Image going to say Best Buy, and buying a laptop with a choice of hard drives, one with Windose, and one with Linux, on it. Of course there would be a cost saving on the Linux one. This could be done also with Mac OS/X if Dell and Apple merged.

i don't like the ribbon, but don't use office 2007 because all the code i've written in excel runs twice as slow under 2007 than it does under 2003.

now that's significant. just an example, one app takes 10k+ rows of data and summarizes it. takes 9 seconds in o2k3, 20-22 seconds in o2k7.
completely unacceptable.

Choose most are free, if you don't like it ..simply uninstall it.

Reviews in This Roundup
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2222302,00.asp
Apple iWork '08iWork
The Mac-style office application suite is excellent for personal and small-business use, but not ready for the corporate world.

OpenOffice.org logoOpenOffice.org
This enterprise-level open-source Microsoft Office alternative is powerful and highly compatible with Office-format files (through Office 2003)

Corel WordPerfect Office X3 Standard EditionWordPerfect Office X3 Standard Edition
It's mostly going to appeal to WordPerfect's long-standing legal, academic, and professional audiences, but Corel's Office suite is definitely worth a look if Word's peculiarities get on your nerves.

IBM Lotus SymphonyIBM Lotus Symphony Beta
This free productivity application suite is based on OpenOffice.org, with IBM's professional-level interface on top. It's not as flexible or as advanced as MS Office, but it is one of the best desktop-based Office alternatives.

Google Docs betaGoogle Docs Beta
Google Docs Beta is fast, elegant, convenient, and free—all of which adds up to an Editors' Choice—winning online office suite.

ThinkFree Office OnlineThinkFree Office Online
This free on-line office suite uses standard Microsoft-Office file formats for its default formats, making it the most Office-compatible of the online productivity suites.

ZohoZoho
This smorgasbord of free online services has more functions than any other MS Office alternative, but that doesn't add up to a best-of-breed service.

Micro$oft has used the power of its monopoly to try to delay the advent of Linux/BSD to the desktop.

As most noted, by Joe Willcox in previous articles, one of the way that M$ does this is by not releasing a Linux version of M$ Office. Which many of us, (especially me) would not use anyway. But Joe's point that MS Office is missing from the Linux lineup of apps does raise an interesting point. Although, it should be pointed out that MS Office can be run (at least some version) by using Wine or Crossover in Linux, or running in a Virtual Machine any version of MS Office.

The point is, Linux is growing, and at what point will M$ realize, that the market is passing them by. Their failure to release a product for linux means that Linux users will use OpenOffice, KOffice and Abiword, and never learn the lockin of M$ Office. MS by not releasing the product will have a hard time getting people to buy it, when Linux has a larger market share. So really, its a good thing in my opinion, that Linux users do not have a native port of MS Office to waste their money on, when there are better alternatives to MS Office available for free.

We don't need M$ Office, and all its bugs, exploits, spyware, inflated price, when better products exsist.

Vista Is Still Plagued by Incompatibilities

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,138693/article.html

Quote: "Nine months since its release, lots of hardware and software products still don't work with Microsoft's operating system, including some that are certified as Vista compatible."

----------------------------------------------------
Not sure, but I believe I found WinAVI version 7 on one of those compatible lists, that would not install at all in Vi$ta. To be fair, to M$, it might not have been "their list," but perhaps a 3rd party list, do not remember, its been awhile now. Now I know WinAVI is not an expensive program like say Autocad for example, but it was what the customer had and wanted installed. Businesses will probably have problems also with the expensive software.

Not only are there many "missing" printers drivers that will never be made, there are many existing TV cards that will never work in Vi$ta. One wonders about scanners, cameras and modems.

Heres the link you all been waiting for:

http://www.openoffice.org/

download your FREE, yes FREE copy of OpenOffice now, including for Windows. No spyware, no bloat, no serial to enter. Set yourself free, and save up to $500 off that piece of LOCKINWARE, know as M$ Office. And if you like it, remember, that you can save even more, by installing Linux as well.

Chips, Windows WordPad can do the job as well and it's free...

Windows WordPad can do the job as well [as OpenOffice.org] and it's free...
WordPad is a little toy that is better than Notepad but nowhere close to the capabilities of OpenOffice or Office 2003/2007.
And it certainly is NOT free, unless, of course, it is perfectly legal for me to copy wordpad.exe from somebody's Genuine Windows installation, run it on Linux using wine, and distribute it to others as I wish so that they can run it on their systems as well. Is that legal? If so, I stand corrected on your claim that WordPad is free.
However, evan, if the argument that "WordPad can do the job as well and it's free" has any credibility whatsovever, it means that most people won't even begin to use, or use properly, the rich set of features that are found in OpenOffice.org. And they won't even begin to use a teeny tiny fraction of those found in Office. And so it doesn't matter whether or not Office 2007 is way more capable than OpenOffice.org. Because most people only scratch the surface anyway. And most of the complexity that is added to word processing documents is needless and rarely is it actually needed.
And Microsoft knows this to be true. Witness the steady push of the "Get the Facts" campaign, and the constant threat of patents but with no actual proof. Microsoft wouldn't spend its time and money to attack OOo, Linux, GNU software, and open source software if they didn't think it was a serious threat. They wouldn't continue their tight integration around Sharepoint and spend so much effort to lock out or cripple all competition from applications on their platform.
If Microsoft is nothing else it is very astute about its market and its competition. And from their actions, Microsoft is very afraid.
They know that no matter how much they try, only a tiny minority of people actually know how to properly use, for example, styles and style hierarchies in documents. (Which for this example, OpenOffice does brilliantly, even though it's completely lost on most users.) And the rest could use a subset of OpenOffice just as easily as they could use a subset of Office 2007. And that the only real weapon they have is the tight integration that helps them lock out anyone else.

evan Says:
"...Windows WordPad can do the job as well and it's free..."

@evan:
"WordPad is a simple word processor that is included with almost all versions of Microsoft Windows ... but not at all as advanced as Microsoft Word."
...
"In Windows Vista, support for reading Word files was removed because of the incorrect rendering and formatting problems."

Lawyers have a saying: "never ask something of which you don't know the answer" In this case, we could say: Never state something of which you don't know the possible refutation.

Evans, evans: Your statement is stupid (not you, but the statement) Simply, there are enough gaping holes in it for it to be ripped to shreds easily. Be careful with your asseverations.

"With friends like these, Ms does not need enemies".

evan Says:
"...Windows WordPad can do the job as well and it's free..."

@evan:
"WordPad is a simple word processor that is included with almost all versions of Microsoft Windows ... but not at all as advanced as Microsoft Word."
...

n0neXn0ne
"OpenOffice is a simple word processor that is free ... but not at all as advanced as Microsoft Office." :)

someone give me attention rofl

Microsoft uses boilerplate language in their infringement defenses.

They claim they are not infringing because they consider the patent not valid.

Meanwhile, they work to build a market overseas out of the reach of US patent law. So they do infringe, but they claim they don't because they believe the patent doesn't exist.

And they proclaim thievery as a valid business strategy and their shareholders uphold that philosophy.

Microsoft uses its size to out wait smaller companies. But now Microsoft can't afford to wait... yet they are being forced to wait as their competitors are not waiting but continue to secure market share in the United States; where MSFT can't show what they're doing for fear of being enjoined by the court.

Joe, here's another good reading link dominated by the technology knowledge of Portuno Diamo

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_M/threadview?m=tm&bn=12004&tid=1319753&mid=1319753&tof=4&rt=1&frt=1&off=1

evan Says:
"OpenOffice is a simple word processor that is free ... but not at all as advanced as Microsoft Office."

@evan:
Special thx to Marco:
"Your statement{s} are stupid (not you (?), but the statement{s}) Simply, there are enough gaping holes in them for them to be ripped to shreds easily. Be careful with your asseverations."

@evan:
OpenOffice.org is a collection of applications that work together closely to provide the features expected from a modern office suite. Many of the components are designed to mirror those available in Microsoft Office.

layta...

My daughter uses "open office", The only is though that she only uses "Word" and as she herself has said to me "It is not as good (feature wise)as Office but it does for what I need to do at the moment".
I myself prefer to use "Office" for the extra features.

Neil wrote: 1. OSX is not as good as Vista.

This guy is hilarious. Neil, you ought to get a job as a court jester. While you're at it, get your head out of the sand or out of your rearend.

Vista is a security disaster. Neil is its most fanatical spin doctor.

I think if Microsoft take the trail you mention. To make Office 2007 privilege to Vista, then you will blame Microsoft as evil agian. I think Microsoft make dicision in the rigth way but not leaving XP user behind. Windows XP is in the market for long long time.

Maddog
Leopard was touted as a "Vista Killer".... it is not anywhere that !
Yo say anything shows how biased against Microsoft "no matter what" !
There has been more updates to Leopard since it has been out than Vista.
Even when Chips said against my statement he had to admit that he had very little experience with Leopard.
My son has used a Mac when overseas and was very thankful to get back to Australia and use a PC again !
You seem to have let your "one eyedness" against Windows (MS) influence your critical judgement.

Lastly there is no need to resort to personal insults, as it tends to show what sort of person your really are yourself.

Quote:
Neil:
"Even when Chips said against my statement he had to admit that he had very little experience with Leopard."
----------------------------------------------------
Actually, I have no, nada experience with Leopard, and not a lot of experience with Mac OS/X, mostly what I have seen with and used on "other" peoples computers. And of course, what I have read about. Just to let me set the record correctly. But Mac OS/X Tiger would seem to be, like Linux, unlike Windows, a secure Operating System for the internet.

I am not an advocate for Apple. In fact, several times now I have stated that I believe that their hardware is too expensive compared to PC hardware. Linux however I do advocate.

Just to set the record striaght.

and free versions of the free community distros can be downloaded from distrowatch.com

Wait till you use that Vista computer for while and it loads up on trojans and spyware, or you just get tired of the endless scans and updates to check for problems every week. Then perhaps you can see the need to use a modern operating system like Linux, BSD, OpenSolarius, or Mac OS/X. If not, go collect your paycheck from M$ for being a paid blogger.

Chips
I keep on telling you that I am not paid anything by MS and you keep on ignoring that fact.
For someone who doesn't use a firewall you are pretty good at putting your mind behind one !
If you know nothing about Leopard why are you advocating OS/X, Leopard is the "latest" iteraration of it you realise ?!
On the same subject ...why say "I am not an advocate for Apple" and then suggest people use it !
Isn't that the same thing and seeing that you (as you yourself have said) know nothing at all about "Leopard" why tell people to use it rather than Windows Vista ??

Vista is a total disaster. Most versions of Linux are far better in terms of security.

Counting patches (ala Jeff Jones) is a dumb way of judging security. Microsoft has many unannounced patches, so the entire business of counting patches is inaccurate and useless.

It is far more revealing to count the percentage of systems that have been compromised by viruses and malware (incidents vs. installed base). All versions of Windows fare terribly! Even when the data is normailized to account for the installed base, Windows is a dismal loser.

Apple doesn't need to come up with a Vista killer. Vista kills itself everyday.

Maddog
You can sling off all you like, nothing will change the fact that Linux doesn't do that many updates because there aren't that many people who can write them.
That is why you guys "eagerly" wait for NEW iterations of the Linux OS, so as to "FIX" what was wrong with the last version.
Yet another reason why there are Free Linux iterations !!!
I like the way how you said "Most versions of Linux", with the operative word being "MOST" !
You don't like counting patches ... I wonder why ?? Could it be that Linux has a whole lot of them ????

Neil said: You can sling off all you like, nothing will change the fact that Linux doesn't do that many updates because there aren't that many people who can write them.

Where did you get that little gem of idiocy? Do you even have a clue how many Linux developers there are? Nope? I thought so.

As for patches, that's what makes Linux so good. The product improves over time, which is not what Windows does. Patches don't only fix things, they add new things too. These include drivers and other stuff you need to keep an OS up to date. Maybe Micro$oft should learn that.

You like counting patches eh? I know why. Because you CAN'T count them accurately with all the hidden patches Micro$oft releases. It's a dumb method, and it's not surprising that YOU like it. You really have to divert attention away from the millions of virus infections hitting Windows systems all the time.