Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Support > Re: Micoshaft recommends Linux

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Micoshaft recommends Linux

 
 
Simon Finnigan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2009
"Aardvark" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:YZVRl.102338$(E-Mail Removed)2...
> On Sat, 23 May 2009 14:21:02 +0100, Simon Finnigan wrote:
>
>> "Andrew Halliwell" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Simon Finnigan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>> it is strange that people who get hung up on different OS`s al seem to
>>>> have
>>>> the same ideas about their product of choice. E.g. Linux zealots
>>>> claiming
>>>> that their OS is utterly secure,
>>>
>>> No-one with clue ever claimed that.
>>> Only the wintrolls use that argument as a form of attack. Linux is fort
>>> knox compared to the windows wet paper bag though.

>>
>> So Wintrolls use the arguement that Linux is invulnerable as a form of
>> attack? You sure about that?
>>

>
> Where did he say that? Try READING what people write once in a while.


I did, and that IS what he said. You gonna get a grown up to check your
next post so you don`t make so many mistakes?

>>>> despite it having large numbers of security holes.
>>>
>>> Most of which are plugged in less than a month. Again, unlike windows
>>> where
>>> some have remained for years.

>>
>> You`re comparing apples and aranges here.

>
> Nope. Seems to me and exploit on one OS and another exploit on another OS
> are just that: exploits. Not apples and oranges, exploits and other
> exploits.


He`s comparing exploits in one OS that are patched quickly, against
SPECIFICALLY exploits in another OS that aren`t patched for a long time.
Comparing like with like would be comparing say the first set of exploits on
both OS`s.

>> You state that most Linux
>> exploits are fixed in under a month, and then complain that Windows
>> still has security holes that have existed for years.

>
> He did indeed. And the statement is true.


I`m not disagreeing with him.

>> From the
>> information given, it can also be equally argued that Windows has most
>> holes patched within a month,

>
> You think?


Yes - he has provided no information to the contrary.

>> and that Linux has some that exist for
>> years.
>>

>
> Highly unlikely, if not totally improbable.


As Connor posted, and I`m quoting here:

> How about the 25 year old BSD bug that carried on into Unix and then
> Linux?
>
> http://www.osnews.com/story/19731/Th...r-Old-UNIX-Bug
>
> FTA: ""Sorry that it took us almost twenty-five years to fix it,"
> Balmer adds, jokingly."
>
>
> Or the 33 year old overflow one:
>
> http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=artic...20080708155228
>
> FTA: " Funny thing is that I traced this back to Sixth Edition UNIX,
> released in 1975.""


You`re really not doing well here, can`t your mummy or daddy help you?

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Hadron
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2009
Tony Houghton <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> On Sat, 23 May 2009 22:44:56 +0100
> Conor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Tony Houghton says...
>>
>> > It insists on running with the RTC set to local time instead of using
>> > UTC and applying the timezone/DST setting on the fly.

>>
>> Well my computer is set to UTC...
>>
>> Change it by clicking on the time in the systray and altering it
>> there...

>
> The computer you're posting from isn't set to UTC, it's set to BST. Did
> you honestly not realise? <Shakes head>.


And you can tell that from an nntp doctored/added timestamp field?
Wow. You remind me of High Plains Hypocrite.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tony Houghton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2009
On Sun, 24 May 2009 04:33:31 GMT
"Hu Flung Dung" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Tony Houghton, ye depraved lunatic, thou is too mean to have thy name
> repeated, ye vacillated:
>
> > On Sat, 23 May 2009 22:44:56 +0100
> > Conor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Tony Houghton
> >> says...
> >>
> >>> It insists on running with the RTC set to local time instead of
> >>> using UTC and applying the timezone/DST setting on the fly.
> >>
> >> Well my computer is set to UTC...
> >>
> >> Change it by clicking on the time in the systray and altering it
> >> there...

> >
> > The computer you're posting from isn't set to UTC, it's set to BST.
> > Did you honestly not realise? <Shakes head>.

>
> You complete and utter ****wit. Some NNTP servers use the computer's
> timezone setting by virtue of the server not changing the datestamp of posts
> comong from a user's machine. Many others convert the user's timestamp to
> the NNTP server's local timezone.


That could have been a possibility, but as he described how he'd
configured it with the Windows clock it was obviously not the case here.

> Hope that ****ing helps, you stupidly gormless ****rag.


Hopefully Conor is gaining understanding. You never will.

--
TH * http://www.realh.co.uk

 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Houghton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2009
On Sun, 24 May 2009 14:25:36 +0200
Hadron <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Tony Houghton <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
> > On Sat, 23 May 2009 22:44:56 +0100
> > Conor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Tony Houghton says...
> >>
> >> > It insists on running with the RTC set to local time instead of using
> >> > UTC and applying the timezone/DST setting on the fly.
> >>
> >> Well my computer is set to UTC...
> >>
> >> Change it by clicking on the time in the systray and altering it
> >> there...

> >
> > The computer you're posting from isn't set to UTC, it's set to BST. Did
> > you honestly not realise? <Shakes head>.

>
> And you can tell that from an nntp doctored/added timestamp field?


No I can tell because he as good as told everyone he set it to BST. The
fact that he'd used the clock in the systray made it obvious enough, now
he's confirmed it by explicitly mentioning he's ticked the DST option.

> Wow. You remind me of High Plains Hypocrite.


Right. You're trying to claim that UTC = BST, and that because you know
about NNTP headers you're cleverer than an NNTP software author. Who
does that make the hypocrite?

--
TH * http://www.realh.co.uk

 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Houghton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2009
On Sun, 24 May 2009 12:01:27 +0100
Conor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Tony Houghton says...
> >
> > On Sat, 23 May 2009 22:44:56 +0100
> > Conor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Tony Houghton says...
> > >
> > > > It insists on running with the RTC set to local time instead of using
> > > > UTC and applying the timezone/DST setting on the fly.
> > >
> > > Well my computer is set to UTC...
> > >
> > > Change it by clicking on the time in the systray and altering it
> > > there...

> >
> > The computer you're posting from isn't set to UTC, it's set to BST. Did
> > you honestly not realise? <Shakes head>.

>
> From Windows:
>
> "Time Zone
>
> (UTC) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London"
>
> ...with the "Daylight saving" option box checked.


Yes, and as we're in DST/BST now, local time is an hour ahead of UTC.
UTC doesn't go forwards an hour for Summer. It's a bit misleading to
refer to a local timezone with DST adjustment as UTC.

> > And because it's Windows the RTC (the one you see in the BIOS) is also
> > set to BST [1]. That means if you dual boot you can't have both OS's
> > automatically adjust between winter and summer time. If both OS's assume
> > the RTC is in UTC they can both display whatever timezone they like
> > without interfering with each other and there are no disadvantages I can
> > think of. Except that Microsoft think their users are too stupid to cope
> > with seeing the "wrong" time in the BIOS; perhaps you've proved them
> > right.

>
> Different to my experience of dual booting.


You probably haven't been dual booting at the time the clocks went
forwards or back then. Like I said, limited expereience.

--
TH * http://www.realh.co.uk

 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Houghton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2009
On Sun, 24 May 2009 13:38:51 +0200
Peter Köhlmann <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Conor wrote:
>
> > ...with the "Daylight saving" option box checked.

>
> Thats fine. Because you actually live in the UTC zone


[Snip]

> Because for you there is no difference


There is at this time of year.

$ date
Sun May 24 15:41:33 BST 2009
~ $ date --utc
Sun May 24 14:41:36 UTC 2009
~ $

--
TH * http://www.realh.co.uk

 
Reply With Quote
 
Mart van de Wege
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2009
"Simon Finnigan" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> "Aardvark" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:YZVRl.102338$(E-Mail Removed)2...
>> On Sat, 23 May 2009 14:21:02 +0100, Simon Finnigan wrote:
>>
>>> "Andrew Halliwell" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> Simon Finnigan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>>>>> it is strange that people who get hung up on different OS`s al
>>>>> seem to have the same ideas about their product of choice.
>>>>> E.g. Linux zealots claiming that their OS is utterly secure,
>>>>
>>>> No-one with clue ever claimed that. Only the wintrolls use that
>>>> argument as a form of attack. Linux is fort knox compared to the
>>>> windows wet paper bag though.
>>>
>>> So Wintrolls use the arguement that Linux is invulnerable as a form
>>>of attack? You sure about that?
>>>

>>
>> Where did he say that? Try READING what people write once in a while.

>
> I did, and that IS what he said.


Erm. No.

Not sharpest knife in the drawer, are we?

Mart

--
"We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes."
--- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Hadron
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2009
Tony Houghton <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> On Sun, 24 May 2009 14:25:36 +0200
> Hadron <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Tony Houghton <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>
>> > On Sat, 23 May 2009 22:44:56 +0100
>> > Conor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Tony Houghton says...
>> >>
>> >> > It insists on running with the RTC set to local time instead of using
>> >> > UTC and applying the timezone/DST setting on the fly.
>> >>
>> >> Well my computer is set to UTC...
>> >>
>> >> Change it by clicking on the time in the systray and altering it
>> >> there...
>> >
>> > The computer you're posting from isn't set to UTC, it's set to BST. Did
>> > you honestly not realise? <Shakes head>.

>>
>> And you can tell that from an nntp doctored/added timestamp field?

>
> No I can tell because he as good as told everyone he set it to BST. The
> fact that he'd used the clock in the systray made it obvious enough, now
> he's confirmed it by explicitly mentioning he's ticked the DST option.
>
>> Wow. You remind me of High Plains Hypocrite.

>
> Right. You're trying to claim that UTC = BST, and that because you
> know


Where did I claim that? Why did you throw in that blatantly obvious lie?

> about NNTP headers you're cleverer than an NNTP software author. Who
> does that make the hypocrite?


You can NOT tell from the headers what time system he is using because
news readers can be configured to change the headers, his nntp server
can change the headers.

The possibilities are endless.

--
In view of all the deadly computer viruses that have been spreading
lately, Weekend Update would like to remind you: when you link up to
another computer, you’re linking up to every computer that that
computer has ever linked up to. — Dennis Miller
 
Reply With Quote
 
Simon Finnigan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2009

"Mart van de Wege" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Simon Finnigan" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>> "Aardvark" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:YZVRl.102338$(E-Mail Removed)2...
>>> On Sat, 23 May 2009 14:21:02 +0100, Simon Finnigan wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Andrew Halliwell" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>> Simon Finnigan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>>>>>> it is strange that people who get hung up on different OS`s al
>>>>>> seem to have the same ideas about their product of choice.
>>>>>> E.g. Linux zealots claiming that their OS is utterly secure,
>>>>>
>>>>> No-one with clue ever claimed that. Only the wintrolls use that
>>>>> argument as a form of attack. Linux is fort knox compared to the
>>>>> windows wet paper bag though.
>>>>
>>>> So Wintrolls use the arguement that Linux is invulnerable as a form
>>>>of attack? You sure about that?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Where did he say that? Try READING what people write once in a while.

>>
>> I did, and that IS what he said.

>
> Erm. No.


He said "wintrolls use that argument as a form of attack", when discussing
the claim that Linux is utterly secure. Seriously, why are you having
problems understanding this?

> Not sharpest knife in the drawer, are we?


No you`re not,

 
Reply With Quote
 
Simon Finnigan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2009
"Tony Houghton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:r1p1.fx61$(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sun, 24 May 2009 14:25:36 +0200
> Hadron <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Tony Houghton <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>
>> > On Sat, 23 May 2009 22:44:56 +0100
>> > Conor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Tony Houghton
>> >> says...
>> >>
>> >> > It insists on running with the RTC set to local time instead of
>> >> > using
>> >> > UTC and applying the timezone/DST setting on the fly.
>> >>
>> >> Well my computer is set to UTC...
>> >>
>> >> Change it by clicking on the time in the systray and altering it
>> >> there...
>> >
>> > The computer you're posting from isn't set to UTC, it's set to BST. Did
>> > you honestly not realise? <Shakes head>.

>>
>> And you can tell that from an nntp doctored/added timestamp field?

>
> No I can tell because he as good as told everyone he set it to BST. The
> fact that he'd used the clock in the systray made it obvious enough, now
> he's confirmed it by explicitly mentioning he's ticked the DST option.
>
>> Wow. You remind me of High Plains Hypocrite.

>
> Right. You're trying to claim that UTC = BST, and that because you know
> about NNTP headers you're cleverer than an NNTP software author. Who
> does that make the hypocrite?


Are you claiming that you`re cleverer than (picking a few names at random)
Mr Newton, Mr Einstein or Mr Hawking, based solely on the fact that you have
written software based around NNTP?

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: Micoshaft recommends Linux Conor Computer Support 47 05-24-2009 07:11 PM
Re: Don't buy Micoshaft branded hardware - it won't work with Linux Sharp Dressed Man Computer Support 2 11-02-2008 11:21 AM
Re: Vista Will Exterminate Micoshaft, Desktop Linux will prevail Once And For All. 7 Computer Support 6 10-08-2006 06:36 PM
Re: Vista Will Exterminate Micoshaft, Desktop Linux will prevail Once And For All. 7 Computer Support 0 10-07-2006 07:00 PM
Holey Moley! Micro$oft Recommends Linux? --= ֧m K0 =-- Computer Security 19 01-12-2004 07:54 PM



Advertisments