Microsoft has paid extra attention to security issues with Windows Vista. When Vista was released, every interview with Bill Gates always included a huge focus on discussing all of the great new security features. Trying to avoid another repeat like what happened with Windows XP exploits, they paid extra attention to security this time around. Hopefully it pays off.
With that said, in a recent interview with Bill Gates, a journalist posed this question:”Let’s Imagine a hospital where life support systems are running Vista. Would you trust it with your life?”
In a nutshell, his response was “absolutely, but…” Here’s his complete response:
Security has been the top priority for Microsoft for quite some time and that’s why I put out a key call for us to focus on that in a very big way over three years ago, and that’s why we’ve made investments like having people from Gecad ( Romanian company ) join on the security action from Microsoft. The answer to your question is that, absolutely, Vista is the most secure operating system we’ve ever done, and if it’s administered properly, absolutely, it can be used to run a hospital or any kind of mission critical thing. But it’s not as simple as saying “If you use Vista, that happens automaticallyâ€. The issues about patient records and who should be able to see them, the issue about setting up a network, so that authorized people can connect up to that hospital network, the issue about having backup power, so that the computer systems can run even if the generators go down. There are a lot of issues to properly set up that system, so that you have the redundancy and the security walls to make sure it fulfils that very critical function. So we are working with partners to raise their skills to make sure that when get involved in an installation like that they can make it secure. So I feel better about Vista than any other operating system, but there’s a lot of things that need to be done well, and we’re certainly committed to step up and make sure these security issues are easier and better understood.
After reading that, you can’t help but picture the Blue Screen of Death 
Source: Our-Picks.com
Enjoyed the post? Subscribe to our feed to get a daily dose of CyberNet!
Tags: Software, Windows, Apple, Bill Gates, Downloads, Microsoft, Screenshots, Windows Vista
Related Posts:
- Bill Gates CES Keynote From Engadget
- 20% Chance Of Another Vista Delay
- Bill Gates CES Keynote 2008
- What’s Going On With Microsoft’s Ad Compaign?
- Bill Gates, the Harvard Dropout will Finally Get his Degree
Genius, so if someone misses just one little security thing, boom. Sounds a bit like MS leaves users to do actually set up the security, hmmm…sound familar?
What Bill said is true for any system and more often than not Windows based system are easier to administer than other Operating systems. That’s one of the main reason that TCO (total cost of ownership) is much lower for windows versus “free” operating systems.
Question: Would you trust your life to a poorly administered Linux system running on an unsecured network without a backup power supply? I didn’t think so.
This makes me wonder what hospitals actually use? Maybe just some simple command line thing that’s tailored to their needs?
Hospitals are using UNIX. It is is stable proprietary operating system. They use older, tested, versions of UNIX, built SPECIALLY for given hardware, with minimalistic set of applications, just kernel and single main application. 100% tested, 100% working.
Now about Vista. I have tried it, and it is so raw, so half-done, that I reinstalled Windows XP back. I wouldn’t use Vista even for home PC, not to mention production PC, and what about hospitals — Bill is just kidding.
It is absolutely impossible. There is NO hospitals in the world, where ANY Windows version is used on serious medical computers.
BTW, in the beginning, Windows 1.0 was just a “cool” add-on for MS-DOS, something like computer game, something useless. It was created for desktop computers only, and it will never be used for “serious” purposes. Also, Microsoft perfectly understands, that modern Windows is extremely buggy, and Microsoft programmers are inexperienced folks.
My wife is a Nurse Practitioner and has worked in several hospital in three different states and each one of them used Windows. That’s not to say that there aren’t other operating system in use but the machines the Nurses and Doctors use to perform charting and other functions (like heart monitors) run on Windows. Recently, a lot of hospital around the nation have “upgraded” to windows.
You’re commenting about something you know noting about. Hospitals around the country are switching to Windows. I’ve seen Windows 2000 and XP in use at several hospitals for mission critical tasks. Like, heart monitors, viewing X-rays, medical charting, processing orders, labs are ordered and results put into the system, pharmacy orders are processed, EVERY THING is done on Windows based systems. My wife, a Nurse Practitioner, has worked in several hospitals over the last 7 years and knows what she is talking about. In her words, “Everything is done in Windows because that’s all anyone knows.”
Would you want your nurse using a command-line tool to chart your medical history? It would take them hours! They need an application that’s easy and fast to use.
As a hospital administrator, would you want to train hundreds of nurses and other staff members to use tons of different command-line tools? How many switch commands do yo think there would be? I can see it now, “Oops, I didn’t mean have his testicles removed, I guess I used the wrong switch.”
Almost every hospital worker has to use these application. Transportation, pharmacy, bed control, all nursing staff, aids, all therapy staffers, x-ray and imaging, surgery, dietary, the list goes on-and-on.
Nearly ALL electronic medical records (EMR) are Windows based.
I’m sure that UNIX comes in to play with database servers. I’m betting a lot of hospitals use Oracle on UNIX.
I can hear it now…
“…In tragic news today, the soon-to-retire Chairman of Microsoft, Bill Gates has died in a terribly ironic accident. While driving his custom-built automated car, which runs on Vista, the car blue screened, causing a crash at 100mph.”
Thanks for the insight Cory. I really wasn’t sure what hospitals use, but it does make sense that they would use Windows.
As a side note:My doctor’s office recently switched to “paper-less” records. I don’t know if that’s new or not, but it is around here. Each nurse carries around a laptop, and when you go in, they type in the medications your on, symptoms if your sick, etc. I’m actually surprised it’s taken them this long to make that switch, but they finally have. No more cases full of files!
OH MY GOD, ARMAGEDDON JUST BEGAN!!!
[quote]In her words, “Everything is done in Windows because that’s all anyone knows.â€
OK, Linux GUI have the same familiar windows with buttons, scrollbars, and so on, just like any modern OS. Why hospitals use this must-die buggy software, when there are operating systems, created by real hackers, like Linux, BSD and UNIX?
For example UNIX stability is tested for ages. It is quite old, but wisely organized and extremely stable and secure OS.
What’s wrong with this world?
Or maybe this is in USA only?
That’s what I was thinking.
I could understand that hospitals use Windows for nursing stations and everything, but I figured for some of the more critical equipment that is used they would have something that is a lot more stable. Actually, Windows 2000 is really stable and I could see that being used.
I think I almost died on the floor laughing!
Now that you said that, I wonder what runs the autopilot system on a plane.
Given the planes require a different operating environment (namely real-time requirements) than PCs, I’d say something other than Windows.
I believe, they are using special software, which is hard-coded on microprocessors (just like military anti-aircraft security systems). Such software starts up in less than a second.
Cool, I never really thought about it being hard-coded on the microrocessors. I once heard that operating systems may eventually go that route as well because of the performance increase it offers.
Haha, maybe if you go back in time. That’s how computers worked in the olden days, software is the new thing. The only thing people use ROMs for is equipment they expect to be using in harsh environments that is critical – space shuttles, military equipment, etc. Our PC equipment today is much too susceptible to alteration by stray charged particles.