31–40 of 63 posts
But, by making it safe, easy and quick to install desktop applications again one could argue that BaseShield is really the enemy of every web application in existence. It's going to have to die.
I have to salute the Baseshields for their imagination. Originally the virtualization sw was going to be the product. Might still be. But then they realized that, having built it, they could basically take over the delivery of software on Windows. I was blown away when Patrick came by YC to give me a demo. I thought I was going to be seeing a demo of virtualization sw, which, frankly, is not that interesting, and ins…
The app store seems like a good idea. However, I don't understand the purpose of a virtualization layer on top of Windows.
To maintain the integrity of your computer in the face of potentially untrustworthy third party applications. You could compare BaseShield to a dating service (app store) that enforces the use of condoms (virtualization). Not that I'm recommending the BS'ers use that analogy though.
Wow, that's actually a really good idea. I always assume there can be no innovation left for the desktop. I've got to stop thinking that.
Such a good idea that it's been done, especially for games. (Steam, Direct2Drive, Stardock, etc.)
Having said that... nice one!
I see some code I wrote on there is being offered up! So can you please send me the source ;) You should provide any source for binaries you are distributing that require such things... including diffs to changes you've made (for software with those licenses).
There's lots of these types of app stores(portals) around... but I like how you've at least attempted to make it safe. I still think a process of review and trust will help just as much, so I hope you have those ideas mixed in.
Also, are you doing anything to try and stop piracy for paid apps?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The app store seems like a good idea. However, I don't understand the purpose of a virtualization layer on top of Windows.
> I don't understand the purpose of a virtualization layer on top of Windows. To maintain the integrity of your computer in the face of potentially untrustworthy third party applications. You could compare BaseShield to a dating service (app store) that enforces the use of condoms (virtualization). Not that I'm recommending the BS'ers use that analogy though.
I can see that the virtualization layer is more beneficial if you were trying to make it so applications behaved the same when running on Windows, Mac, or Linux. In this case, you'd be expanding on existing things like Apache's Portable Runtime, Wine or Parallels. However, the business case for your Windows sand boxing system is not something that makes sense to me.
I don't really see how you can claim it makes apps safe if you provide access to 3D hardware. Anyone who has done any 3D hardware programming will know that it's easy to crash/exploit through 3D APIs. Having said that... nice one! I see some code I wrote on there is being offered up! So can you please send me the source ;) You should provide any source for binaries you are distributing that require such things... inc…
Hi everyone! We'd like to especially encourage any news.yc readers who write windows apps to distribute them via BaseShield. Just get in touch with me at my personal email: pat (at) baseshield.com -- if you want to list it for free we'll get it up right away, if you'd like to charge you'll be at the top of the list once we get payments going. Thanks!
If I may suggest, please change your demo video soundtrack. Looping music was very distracting, as if something went wrong. Thanks to this it was painful to watch otherwise awesome demo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't understand the purpose of a virtualization layer on top of Windows. To maintain the integrity of your computer in the face of potentially untrustworthy third party applications. You could compare BaseShield to a dating service (app store) that enforces the use of condoms (virtualization). Not that I'm recommending the BS'ers use that analogy though.
Why would anyone need or want this? Running Windows as a standard user and/or Vista's UAC mechanism seems to provide the same functionality. I can see that the virtualization layer is more beneficial if you were trying to make it so applications behaved the same when running on Windows, Mac, or Linux. In this case, you'd be expanding on existing things like Apache's Portable Runtime, Wine or Parallels. However, the b…
This isn't true under Windows. It's not true under Linux or OSX either.
Think of your software security boundaries as an onion. In the middle you have kernel mode, then system services, then the administrator user land, followed by a common user. Application virtualization adds one more layer to the onion. Not only are applications insulated from your system, but they are also insulated from other applications.
The ultimate model is much closer to that of a web browser with domain restrictions on cookies and the like. This is the next logical step in fighting malware.