to sue or not to sue?

laws written by man have one flaw, which is that money can change anything. considering microsoft is the richest franchise in the world? i don't believe that anybody could successfully sue them to the point it'd actually make a difference.

Suing and not suing are not the only two options; let capitalism work and the marketplace will decide how important security is compared to other aspects of a software product (e.g., ease-of-use, compatibility, timeliness, cost, reliability). (I know the whole monopoly thing sort of gets in the way, but I submit that it is less effective now than it was a couple years ago since there are more and more legitimate competitors to MS in all arenas.).

Corporations are not stupid when it comes to their bottom line (sluggish, but in general, not stupid). If poor security in MS products becomes such a big problem and costs people so much money, they will stop buying from MS. Only then will you see better security implemented in Windows et al.

I don't think sueing is the answer. That would be tough to go about. But if they had some sort of "security specialist" (aka hacker) to assess all avenues of intrusion. There are bound to be bugs and holes, but those should be small and fixed before release or soon after. Also if there is not a standard law regulating the errors or security holes there should be. And every past occurence of viruses should be fixed to where that does not happen again then viruses should be dealt with before or right after they are discovered. I think that it will take time and eventualy there will be a better way to make OS's. Only time will tell.