Windows Media Player 9 is a security risk

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Steve Young, Oct 22, 2003.

  1. Steve Young

    Mxsmanic Guest

    I take it that you never shop for clothing with women?
     
    Mxsmanic, Oct 28, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. Apple in and of itself might not have fared so well, or it may have
    fared much better; impossible to predict. The platform itself most
    likely would have fared *much* better than it has, though. And had
    Apple paid particular attention to the OS, it's most likely that
    Microsoft would be little more than a blip on the radar at this point
    in time. Apple fans have *really* gotta love Jobs and the rest of the
    management crew at Apple.
    Foremost, having taken a class in operating design, to state that any
    version of Windows Microsoft has shipped is an OS is inappropriate.
    The NT family, as a derivative of OS/2, is the closest to an OS as
    Microsoft has gotten, but then as it's the result of a cooperative
    effort between a company that knows something about OSs and Microsoft,
    that's bound to show through.

    It is a shame that Apple dropped the ball with MacOS.
    I guess the powers that be (or were) at Apple were too interested in
    maintaining control than they were in pushing technological progress.
    One reason is Win16 ran on top of DOS, which didn't have a re-entrant
    kernel, so multi tasking was out. Win16's multi tasking is not
    pre-emptive; it's cooperative, as in the app "in control" has to
    relinquish the processor in order for another app to be able to do
    it's job in the background. In this regard, I've written multi-tasking
    DOS applications. I'm not exactly certain why Microsoft runs 16 bit
    apps in a VM, although I'm certain that when I ran Win16 apps in a VM
    under OS/2, the machine was a lot more stable than doing the sam under
    Win32.
    Glad to know Alzheimer's hasn't gotten me yet. :-D
    It still couldn't touch OS/9, which predated it by a couple of years.
    :-D
    Agreed; but Microsoft did have the source code to DOS. And there were
    products (DeskView) that did a reasonable job of multi-tasking DOS
    sessions.
    Certainly. Which reminds me; I wonder if that old version of Defender
    for the IBM PC (which used software timing) would even run on this
    "new" PC, and if it did, what it would be like. On the old 12Mhz '286
    I last ran it on, it zipped three ships quickly from the center of the
    screen to the upper left hand corner before displaying "Game Over."
    I might have to dig on this one; my memory's fuzzy here, too.
    Oh, mentioning "control sections" is just starting to bring back some
    unpleasant memories. :)

    I understand the "engineers underestimating capacity requirements." A
    rather large software system a coworker and I worked on had varying
    storage requirements, depending on the data the applications
    interacted with. He set a particular buffer for encoding/decoding to
    be (at the beginning) 4k. On my side, instead of using a hard coded
    buffer size, I utilized a dynamically allocated buffer, so that if the
    data set became more complex, the program(s) (there were 65 proggies
    by the end) would not have to be re compiled. The other developer
    ended up having to increase the buffer size 4 times over the course of
    a number of years, which meant he had to recompile his suite (5 apps),
    before the president ordered him to utilize my techniques. I abhor
    abitrary limits.
    Again, on a 6809, it didn't incur a penality. One of the reasons I
    favor Motorola over Intel. I remember a joke among the propeller heads
    when the 80386 and 68030 were the newest offerings on the block: the
    80386 took 3 cycles to do a NOP, whereas the 68030 (and I *believe*
    all of it's predecessors) took one cycle; it took Intel three times as
    long to do nothing as it took Motorola.
    My employer about 12 years ago purchased a Mac to perform some
    conversion of CAD files from a Data General CAD system to a Xenix
    based AudoCAD system, which was a very tedious process given the
    quantity legacy drawings we had. I suggested to management that I
    could write an app to automate the process significantly, thus they
    began to search for a compiler. The only one they found was in the
    $4000 range, if memory served. Naturally this didn't float well, so
    after the conversion was done, the Mac went into storage. I did offer
    to provide a nice home for their dead equipment, though. :-/
    You didn't miss much. My only hands-on with a MCA machine was when
    myself and my employer spent about three hours trying to get the
    darned thing (I believe a 60?) to see an MCA ethernet card.
    Yeah, oh Phil did go off on a tangent, didn't he? Shame, too, as
    Borland was truly inventive in the compiler department. Their C++
    compiler was more C++ compliant than Microsoft's at the time, and I
    find it humorous that they beat Microsoft to the punch at writing an
    IDE that would run within Windows.
    This sounds plausible, but again, my bitching is not as a competitor
    of Microsoft's, but as a customer, and a one-time *very* big fan of
    Mr. Gates and company. I'll concede that the mismanagement of some of
    Microsoft's competitors have worked against them in the battle, but by
    the same token I maintain that Microsoft hasn't played fairly, and
    some of the complaints by management of it's competitors are correctly
    founded.
    I'm not certain how to take that statement. With as much resources as
    Microsoft has at their disposal, it would be nice to seem them put
    more effort into the research side of the equation, and produce
    something truly inventive.
    Microsoft changed it's browser/internet stance when Anderson
    (spelling?) made the comment that he did regarding the browser
    replacing the desktop.
    I am in disagreement (little surprise there, huh?) IE didn't really
    catch up to Netscape's until IE5.
    That hasn't been my experience in the least.
    I'm not a big fan of AV software, either, but I guess an individual's
    habits make them prone to needing such applications. A friend of mine
    using OE (unknown to me at the time, as our emails were exchanged
    through a web based account of hers) recently lost her hard drive
    because of improper configuration of OE. Strange, too, as she had
    heard my bitching about Microsoft so much before, although I think
    she's seeing my side of the argument a little more, now.
    SPAM? What's that?

    It never ceases to amaze me how many people need to run SPAM filters.
    Easier just to use Mozilla and be done with it, IMO. There are better
    things to do with my time, IMO, than to have to adjust settings on a
    product that don't exist (nor do they need to) on it's contemporaries.
    If they weren't important to the geeks, then those who fall into the
    category of "most users" would be using type writers as opposed to
    word processors.
    No, but they significantly predate it, and for the most part, are just
    as capable of performing the same functions as Excel. Remember, by
    your own statements the average Microsoft user isn't looking for
    something that complicated.
    And again, I'm not a competitor, but a customer.
    That the only time they seem to bring a new product to market is when
    another company is invents and appears to profit from a product of
    that type.
    Not to this customer; the reason I bought their product is because I
    didn't have a choice. The retailer I purchased this machine from would
    not sell me the machine without Winblows preinstalled.
    Microsoft is not done with Publisher, and sooner or later it will be
    the only viable product in it's field. They will manipulate the market
    until the competition disappears. Microsoft doesn't give up like that.
    As a proponent of Microsoft's, I would think you would understand how
    they do business by now.

    As for quality of compilers, as someone who's experienced their
    products as well as their competitor's, I can say with all assuredness
    that Microsoft has been behind the curve in this arena, too.

    As a student of computer science, I can also state that nothing
    Microsoft has released qualifies for an operating system, although
    NT/XP comes close. I guess they did learn something from their
    temporary alliance with IBM on OS/2.
    Give them time. They'll win with persistence, advertising,
    manipulation, and pricing, but not with quality. It'll be like how
    they won the compiler, operating "system", browser (sans pricing) and
    office suite wars. Patience, grasshopper; watch and see.
    Considering how much they learned with IBM in respect to OS/2, you'd
    think they'd have some of their staff digging through the internals of
    *nix or something to that effect.
    Agreed about not getting more educated end users, particularly those
    who are avid users of Microsoft's products. But to what benefit is an
    email application that automatically launches email attachments? I
    mean, if an individual can not be properly trained how to open one
    manually, I don't think they should be using a computer. For the same
    reason, if an individual doesn't know how to operate the brake pedal
    of their car, they really don't have much business driving a car.
    It's a good thing I'm not in management of a corporation, because I'd
    never agree to a rental/leasing plan unless the up front cost were too
    high. Support is something best done in-house, anyways. My last call
    to tech support at Microsoft occurred in '84; the individual on the
    other end of the phone was more clueless than I was. After I got off
    the phone with him, I resolved to figure it out myself, and I did.
    Spent less time figuring it out myself than I did waiting for him to
    tell me he didn't know the solution.
    So how do you feel about DRM? Are you on board with them in this
    regard, too? What if they turn it into a pay-per-play system with
    respect to software and/or audio/video content?
    I don't know; I'd never accuse Microsoft's management of being overly
    brilliant; just manipulative and assimilative.
    It certainly acts more like an entity that's fat and in control than a
    company that's "hungry."
    Yes, but in the case of the Japanese (particularly in respect to
    television) the Japanese manufacturers had the captive Japanese
    population subsidizing their efforts. Not unlike Microsoft as they
    foray into avenues they don't yet dominate.
    No, I meant as soon as someone gets a decent Win32 going on another
    OS, my machine will be Microsoft free.
    My experiences were quite the opposite. Once OE was loaded, I was
    reasonably certain my machine would be going down within the hour. In
    fact, I tried to time it so that I used OE right before a "safety"
    reboot.
    With no disrespect intended, your posts sound very much like you've
    subscribed to the Microsoft doctrine. My apologies if I've
    misinterpreted the situation.
    My OS choice would be motivated by my use for a given machine. If I
    were going to run a server, I'd prefer *nix. Until relatively
    recently, if I were going to run a desktop for image manipulation, my
    choice would have been a Mac. For most other desktop applications, I'd
    run Windows, but would prefer the stability and security offered by a
    different OS.
    Everything Microsoft has brought to the table was invented by someone
    else.

    Except Bob, of course. :)
     
    David W. Poole, Jr., Oct 28, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. No, it's quite the contrary. Computer science professors don't become
    professors because they want to achieve financial success (when's the
    last time you've heard of a college professor on the Forbes list?).
    They enter the field because they are passionate, and usually
    extremely knowledgable, about their fields, and they want to share
    this with their students. Good software engineers usually follow a
    similar mind set, although they are more interested in financial
    success, to varying degrees.

    The reason that Microsoft arouses so many emotions from these types of
    people is because they typically perceive Microsoft to be pollution in
    an area they love. I once argued against them, but now I understand
    and share their feelings. If some large corporation decided to buy all
    of the land around your house, and use that land as a dumping ground,
    how would you feel? If that company were to change it's stance, and
    fill the property with a nicely constructed park, I'd love to spend
    time there, and invite my friends to that wonderful place.
    In some, but not all, cases. Poor design skills have been their
    biggest weakness.
    There's no perhaps to it; as reported in either PCWeek (now
    InternetWeek) or InfoWorld, at least one company's representatives
    testified that Microsoft would not allow them the freedom they wanted
    to ship their machines as they saw fit.
    Fine for them; Mac's not polluting the landscape like Microsoft is.
    Because we're not forced to buy Apple's OS when we purchase a
    computer. Though there are options for buying a computer without
    Microsoft's garbage preloaded on it, those options are difficult to
    locate, and generally take some time, depending on the local market.
    In my area, if you need a computer in a hurry, you're not going to get
    one without Winblows preinstalled. I don't want the software; I have
    plenty of my own. All I need is a machine that runs "out of the box",
    off the shelf; I'll spend the time to load my own OS, thank you very
    much. I don't need to pay for another Windows license every time I buy
    a computer.
    None of the software engineers and computer scientists I've ever
    spoken with have ever mentioned applying for a job at Microsoft. Most
    of them laugh so hard at the Windows "operating system" concept that I
    always got the impression they think like me. I'd prefer to muck
    stalls than to work for Microsoft. I'd be working with very similar
    material, but most likely would have a higher class of coworkers.
    I guess that testimony offered in the courtroom regarding Microsoft's
    bullying tactics is in support of your argument. Which is interesting
    because this testimony came from a Microsoft *CUSTOMER*, not a
    *COMPETITOR*.
    They were never given the choice, even if they would have wanted it.
    As most Microsoft zombies don't know about the alternative, why should
    they even bother to look? The hardware vendors have the potential to
    exercise a great deal of input into what a customer of theirs does and
    does not see, and Microsoft, through exclusionary licensing
    agreements, prevented those vendors from exercising their rights. The
    net result of this is that the computing population, on all levels,
    has been short changed.
    It's a non-issue because a zipper costs a fraction of what a computer
    does, and is a far less complicated device.
    I talk to a Microsoft employee on occasion; a friend of mine's husband
    was employed by the company for over 10 years, although he recently
    got laid off. Interesting fellow; he's an Exchange expert, and yet the
    server he runs in his own household is so unreliable as to be
    pathetic. We don't discuss Microsoft much, because he seems to have
    difficulty defending the company and answering particular questions.
    Seeing what other platforms and operating systems were capable of, and
    then seeing Microsoft reach the same place, sometimes over a decade
    later.

    Seeing Microsoft ship products where default security options are set
    to the point as to be laughable. Watching uneducated users lose
    precious data because Microsoft was too lax to provide better defaults
    for options and services that really don't need to exist in the first
    place.

    Seeing that Microsoft can only provide a reasonably priced product
    when it has competition breathing on it, and then watching it's prices
    rise back up when they've obliterated the competition with inferior
    products (specifically, but not limited to, compilers).

    Seeing that the only way that Microsoft could compete with Netscape
    was to mandate that hardware vendors could not ship Netscape preloaded
    on computers with Windows based PC's.

    Seeing Microsoft try to push that assinine belief that the "browser is
    an integral part of the operating system" crap down our throats;
    anyone with even a minor amount of computer knowledge is well aware of
    this fallacy.

    Seeing the recipients of all this horse crap line up under Brother
    Bill's rear and say "feed me more; tastes great!"
    Apple held the OS and the hardware under lock and key, and they
    miscalculated. If Apple would have eased up on the pricing of the OS,
    and allowed hardware vendors to clone their hardware without
    restriction (as happened to the IBM compatible family) IBM wouldn't
    have had near the success they did.

    As clone manufacturers on the PC side ran unchecked, IBM nearly lost
    it in the PC business, particularly to the home customer. IBM
    compatible hardware was just as good, if not better, than IBM branded
    hardware. In fact, the only real difference sans the placard was the
    presence of a BASIC ROM in the old IBM PC boxes. *Something* had to
    run on those boxes, and as Digital Research's MPM/86 was selling for
    $500 a seat, as opposed to Messy-DOS's seats for $50, market economics
    explain it's success.

    More and more apps began to be developed for this cheap, but inferior
    platform, and a cycle has been entered.
    Pricing, mainly. Had Jobs not been so egotistical, and allowed the
    clone makers to get in to bring the hardware cost down to the price of
    the PC and it's clones, and the Apple OS followed suit with pricing in
    respect to Messy DOS, I believe Microsoft would exist solely to write
    applications for the Macintosh platform.
    Interesting; where did you pull that figure from?

    Let's try it this way. I forget the exact number, and that one of the
    states pulled out at the last moment confuses the issue somewhat, but
    it was around 20, not including the fed, that brought suit against
    Microsoft. Ignoring population, and just going on a count of states,
    I'd guesstimate that figure is closer to 40%.

    If only 0.0001% care, then why does Linux or MacOS have any seats out
    there?

    When did you get elected to represent the 99.9999%?
    If it wasn't for Microsoft Outlook, she would have lost *no* data, and
    she would be computing merrily along as she was prior to this. Aren't
    you the one that said Microsoft was the best solution for these types
    of people? So are you saying Microsoft customers are or are not
    ignorant?
    Knowing this makes it a little easier to understand why you are a
    Microsoft advocate; thank you for the elaboration.
    Are you saying they are above or below average?
    With Microsoft's assistance.
    If only I could charge a doctor's or lawyer's fee for the questions
    that friends and family pose.
    Simple. I've read on numerous occasions in various trade rags where
    beta testers have found holes in Microsoft O"S"s security, and have
    published them for all to see. Does Microsoft address these publicly
    addressed holes? Traditionally these holes have not been addressed
    until *after* an attack that successfully exploits these holes has
    been launched.
    Ah, but when Microsoft first came to the 'net, they were not the
    dominating force of the net. And yet the majority of attacks were
    against Microsoft products, even though they weren't dominating at the
    time. The easiest targets, even in the minority, will draw the most
    attention.
    Not much; it draws on the ignorant for it's loyal customer base.
    As am I.
    $30 (or whatever) is a much higher percentage of the $400 machine I
    purchased. Plus, that $30 you through away still goes to Microsoft
    (would you write them a $30 check and mail it to them without some
    kind of return?), and it still counts as a seat, even if it's not
    used.
     
    David W. Poole, Jr., Oct 29, 2003
  4. Steve Young

    Mxsmanic Guest

    Windows is pretty obviously an operating system, no matter what people
    might think in classrooms.
    Just like any religion.
    In order to provide a transparent emulation to the apps. It can run
    multiple 16-bit apps in one VM (and will do so by default). It
    eliminates the side effects of preemptive multitasking for the most
    part, as the 16-bit apps are less likely to "see" that.
    So where was OS/9 when MS-DOS came around?
    That and other products were mostly a joke, even by the standards of the
    time.
    Those are probably the correct memories, then. They were called CSECTs
    in the code, as I remember. And there were no conditional branches
    between CSECTs, so you had to do an inverse conditional branch (Jxxx, I
    think) around another instruction (BALR?), in order to accomplish that.
    A 4096-byte control section could only hold 1000 instructions or so, so
    you were jumping around all the time.

    The only advantage was that relocation was easy--you could shift control
    sections to anywhere you wanted.

    Come to think of it, aren't the descendants of the 360 (the 370 and its
    successors) still running these machine instructions?
    It is the universal affliction of engineers. The IT world has been
    shaken countless times by the failures of engineers to plan for
    sufficient capacity. Just look at the Y2K problem, or at the gyrations
    to which MS-DOS resorted in order to get around the 64K barrier.
    I hate being caught unaware. I don't want anyone saying that my code
    failed to foresee something. So I plan with the most generous and
    flexible limits possible. I once wrote a routine to calculate day
    numbers for some insurance applications that was designed to be accurate
    for at least the next three million years (if no calendar changes are
    made), and the field in which I put the day number would not roll over
    for nearly 200 million years. And it only required a few extra bits (in
    fact, it ran more efficiently, since I just allocated a full word to the
    integer).
    The best joke I ever heard about Intel referenced the Pentium when it
    came out:

    Have you heard about the new Pentium-powered Barbie doll? When you pull
    a string, she says "math is hard!"
    He got a big head, and spent more time blowing his money than running
    the company, or at least that was my impression.
    My first IDE on Windows was Borland. It took several versions of
    Microsoft's IDE before I finally made the switch.
    Microsoft is not a public-service organization; it is a company
    organized to show a profit, just like practically every other company in
    the world. R&D is expensive and has to be cost-effective. It's easier
    to rehash existing software in endless bloated upgrades, and it's more
    profitable. That's what Microsoft does much of the time, and that's
    also what just about every other software publisher does (cf. Adobe).

    To Microsoft's credit, it does undertake some pretty large development
    projects for operating systems. Office doesn't seem to change much,
    though.
    IE 3.x was very respectable. That's when I switched.
    Try some W3C or CSS tests against it, and then against MSIE, and you'll
    see.

    Netscape is so bad that sites had to have separate versions of each page
    for Netscape browsers. Now that Netscape is less than 2% of the
    browsers out there, however, nobody bothers writing special HTML to work
    around its bugs. (I dropped Netscape support on my own site three years
    ago.)
    It's unwanted commercial e-mail. I receive several hundred such
    messages a day. I look at all of them, though (at least the headers),
    because I can't afford to lose any legitimate e-mails.
    It depends on how widely your e-mail address is known.
    I've heard of too many problems with Mozilla to bother.
    So? It's still not important to the masses.
    I use Excel in very simple ways. I don't use the other Office products
    at all these days.
    So? That's what most companies do. Why is it a problem?
    You can build your own, or find another vendor (there are thousands of
    them).
    Publisher is not even on the radar. They don't have a ghost of a chance
    in that domain.
    They may not give up, but they don't have the competence necessary to
    compete in that niche, so they can try until doomsday and still lose.
    See above.
    Most compilers look the same to me.
    Even CP/M was an operating system. Even a BIOS is an operating system.
    Try spending less time in the classroom.
    They've had a quarter of a century, and they've made no progress.
    The OS, compiler, and office suite wars are old news. Browsers are
    insignificant--like text editors. Microsoft isn't doing well on
    anything else. Virtually all its revenue comes from Office and its
    operating systems. And yes, Microsoft does worry about that, although
    perhaps not enough.
    My impression is that it simply never occurs to them. They are all
    PC-born. They've never been near anything larger, and they've never
    been exposed to anything outside the microcomputer world. They have no
    clue. I see them inventing crude versions of concepts that were old
    news on large systems thirty years ago. They haven't even mastered
    backups yet, and they have no concept of robustness in databases or
    fallback/rollforward capability in OLTP systems. Their database designs
    aren't very performant or advanced, either.
    It relieves the user of having to know how to do that himself.
    That is increasingly like saying that anyone who doesn't understand
    three-phase power supplies should not be using electricity. _Everyone_
    is going to be using computers in the not-so-distant future.
    So you'd always buy your plant real estate, and never rent it? No car
    leases? You'd buy your corporate jets outright?
    It's worse now. You have to try and understand them even with their
    thick accents.
    There are very few companies with good support organizations, especially
    large IT companies.
    It will get worse before it gets better.
    No. DRM is a waste of time.
    It only takes twenty minutes to install a new OS, and I don't need to
    listen to music or watch movies on my PC.
    Brillance is what put them at the top.
    It is well into middle age now. You won't see the old Microsoft again.
    But it's not exactly in retirement yet.
    Anyone who does that will have exactly the same problems that straight
    Windows has, _plus_ all the problems of the emulator and the underlying
    OS. You may as well run Microsoft stuff.
    I had the same problem with The Bat. But apparently we are both
    exceptions to the rules for these respective products.
    I'm objective. To someone who isn't, it naturally seems like I'm
    biased. "If you're not with us, you're against us."
    So would I, and in fact I run a FreeBSD server here for exactly that
    reason. It's a great system.
     
    Mxsmanic, Oct 29, 2003
  5. They are trying to encourage you to 'upgrade' to Office. Odd; "Works"
    doesn't work?
    I agree with you; I'm eagerly awaiting a decent alternative myself.

    But they don't really have to worry about customers; as P.T. Barnum is
    quoted as saying: "There's a new one born every second." :-/
     
    David W. Poole, Jr., Oct 29, 2003
  6. Steve Young

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    MUST be true, and that explains why NYC photo-vendors
    can STILL pull the old "bait&switch" scam and get away with
    it...
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Oct 29, 2003
  7. Steve Young

    Mxsmanic Guest

    Where can you buy a Mac without an Apple operating system installed?
    So does an OEM copy of Windows.
    He runs Exchange Server in his own home? That's like installing an
    Instrument Landing System in one's backyard to fly a kite.
    Outlook does not destroy file systems.
    Usually, although Outlook Express would be her best choice, not the
    bloated Outlook client.
    Most of them are ignorant of IT.
    It also undermines your argument, but you seem to have overlooked that.
    I'm saying that average people wouldn't care, so they wouldn't ask
    questions.
    No, it's an unstoppable social trend, and it has nothing to do with
    Microsoft.
    Doctors and lawyers often don't charge friends or family.
    That's because they are _looking_ at Microsoft operating systems. They
    can't find holes in Linux if they aren't looking at Linux.
    In the olden days, I seem to recall UNIX being the preferred target.
    So?
     
    Mxsmanic, Oct 29, 2003
  8. I disagree. Any operating environment that expects an application for
    being responsible for returning allocated resources to the OS prior to
    termination is not an operating system. It's the operating system's
    responsibility to clean up if the resources aren't properly released
    by a terminating or terminated app. Microsoft operating "systems" have
    never been good at doing this, although NT/XP is getting better in
    this regard. But what the hey; Microsoft has only been in the O"S"
    game for nearly two decades, they should get it right sooner or later.
    Running happily on 6809 processors. :)
    Yup; the foundation of that joke being Seattle Computer Product's
    operating "system", and we've had to live with it up until ME.
    Fortunately for me, the experience was limited to a single summer
    semester. All I can remember is that it was the worst assembly
    programming experience I had encountered, and by that time I had
    experience with three other processors.
    That makes since.
    I haven't got a clue. The university experience left me with a very
    bad taste regarding big iron. I am a microcomputer kind of guy.
    I was very fortunate in the Y2K issue. As a programmer, I didn't have
    a Y2K concern except for an old contract I did in '86, and I just put
    a pivot point of 85 in the one date calculation function the entire
    system used. I got $500 for about 15 minutes of work. :-D

    What problems did MS-DOS have with the 64k barrier? As I can recall,
    it was the MS-DOS applications that had the problem with this barrier.
    And in truth, only very specific and esoteric applications would truly
    have issues here. The applications I was developing in those days
    utilized every bit of memory, above and below the 1mb mark, with a
    granularity of 1k, if the data set required it (which it often did).
    Agreed. The previously mentioned dynamic buffer allocation failed only
    if there wasn't enough RAM to satisfy the request, which wasn't
    feasible because of the data sets we were throwing at it. The other
    programmer, on the other hand, had those limits in there which caused
    the system's users to have to jump through hoops on occasion. What
    screwed him over is that some of the functions I wrote, that the users
    would put the data through, would produce a data set too large for his
    apps to digest. I had to write an application that would throw some of
    the data away, in the event he wasn't around to recompile his suite.
    *Very* cool.
    LOL! Thanks! I'll be sure to share that one with a few friends.

    I'm certain you've heard: "Intel inside, but can it divide?"
    I really didn't follow his leadership skills that much. I was so
    enamored with his company's offerings I didn't care what he did.
    Borland, in my opinion, produced some very cool products. They helped
    me to grow immensely as a programmer, although I'm not certain what
    type of statement that makes. :-D
    Not like you had a choice, if you were an early Windows coder. :)

    I had some exposure to VC 1.52, but as I didn't know much about
    Windows programming at the time (not like I know much now, either),
    and I was using it to maintain a project someone else wrote with very
    poor documentation, I have a bitter taste in my mouth. I've been
    tinkering around with VC 5 a little lately, and am considering giving
    Borland's free command line tools a run for their money in the near
    future. After all, I do enjoy make and vi. :-D
    Agreed, but I believe you see more from Adobe (and most other vendors)
    per upgrade cycle than you do with Microsoft.
    My only experience with Office has been with 97.

    I have a friend, however, who's husband worked until a month ago for
    Microsoft, so she always had the latest and greatest Microsoft
    software. She is self-employed, as a medical transcriptionist, and she
    charges her clients by the typed line. She has been doing this for
    years with products other than Microsoft Word, but with her relatively
    recent new hubby and the progression of technology, she jumped into
    Word with both feet. She found an app by a third party that
    automatically produced invoices for the transcriptions she performed,
    and she registered and utilized it. Another version of Office comes
    home with her husband, she installs it, and then complains to me
    because her invoicing app doesn't work. I tell her that the first
    person she needs to take it up with is the software's author, and then
    perhaps a Microsoft technical support person (which her husband was),
    and if no resolution was available from either of them, then bring the
    issue to me. Well, as it was, the author was just putting the
    finishing touches on the "upgrade." The next time this cycle was
    repeated, she informed me the utility's author told her that he most
    likely wouldn't be upgrading the app as quickly as the first time. The
    time after that, he informed her that he wouldn't be upgrading the app
    at all, as she was the only customer complaining about it. She then
    asked me to do something about it, and after explaining that without
    source code I was powerless (and wasn't really interested in the task
    in the first place), I couldn't do anything about it. She then said
    "What am I going to do?" I asked her if she used any of the features
    that were present in newer versions of word, that weren't present in
    older versions. She said that she didn't, that the first version of
    Word was overkill for her needs. I asked her why she didn't go back to
    the first version that worked sufficiently for her. And the reply I
    got back was "Because I have the latest and greatest Word!" I asked
    her how well it was working for her, and got silence as a result.
    During a later conversation, I learned that she went back to an older
    version of Word that worked with the utility she purchased, until
    someone else came out with a similar utility for the versions of Word.
    She purchased the new utility, and upgraded to the newest version of
    Word, but pissed and moaned because this new utility didn't do as good
    of a job as the older version. The logic escapes me, because we met as
    a result of her being an assistant sysop on a networked BBS I
    subscribed to back in '91. It's this type of mentality of the
    Microsoft groupie that floors me. "I'll pay more for the latest and
    greatest (even though hers were free), even though the older stuff
    worked just fine." Strangely enough, we communicated heavily for years
    before she met and married this guy, who's expertise is Exchange. They
    started running Exchange on their own domain, and now she's losing
    about 50% of her email.
    I used it, briefly, on other people's computers. Never saw the reason
    to switch myself.
    Will do.
    Sorry; I was being sarcastic. I've received less than 40 spams to this
    account (a closer guess would be 20, but I'll play liberal) in 2003.
    I'm posting mine unmangled into usenet, and I get tons of forwards and
    cc's. The last spam I received was the 14th of this month. I believe
    the majority of the SPAM bots automatically reject spamgourmet.com
    addresses.
    Great browser. Remember, if IE brings you tabbed browsing, it was a
    Mozilla innovation. :-D
    Then why do they bother to purchase computers?
    I use a $15 spread sheet I purchased for my PDA for my trivial spread
    sheet needs; for word processing I use HTML for the most part.
    Because personal computing could be much more advanced if the leading
    company didn't settle into a pattern of complacency.
    I spoke with a friend of mine who runs a business that at one time
    custom built PCs; he informed me there was not much of a way that I
    could build my own new computer for cheaper than I could purchase one
    off the shelf, especially if I was shooting for a new low-end
    computer. My old faithful, and perfectly sufficient, 500Mhz AMD died
    during the winter storm of December 2002 wreaked havoc on the power
    lines. Even with a surge processor and a UPS, it was more than the old
    machine could handle. As I had just been laid off, and needed to work
    on my resume as well as perform internet job searches, immediate
    replacement of the PC was mandated, and repair was not economically
    feasible due to the price and availability of parts. I still wish I
    could have purchased the machine off the shelf without Windows
    preloaded.
    At one time IE wasn't on the radar, nor was Windows, or Word, or
    Excel.
    Microsoft doesn't lose.
    Were you following the compilers during the migration from C to C++?
    There were some very obvious differences.
    Why spend less time in the classroom? Doing so has taught me lessons I
    would not have learned anywhere else. As a result, I can tackle much
    larger projects, and manage them with far less effort. Without the
    classroom experience, I'd still be hacking crap together in BASIC.
    But those old wars can flame up at any time, although I believe less
    people are motivated to go up against the giant.
    An interesting observation. I'm a microcomputer fan myself, so I can't
    argue for or against your statement. But I believe with the hardware
    we now have at our disposal, had an inventive company been at the
    lead, we'd be a lot further down the microcomputing road than we
    currently are. I think Microsoft is more of an anchor, and not a
    propeller, in this market.
    That makes sense. A vendor that allows person A to have such radical
    control over person B's computer is not a vendor I would trust. That
    just screams out "destroy my data when I piss you off."
    And by the same token, I don't want someone who doesn't understand how
    to operate a steering wheel or the brakes sharing the road with my
    family and myself.
    I prefer to rent for the sole reason that I don't currently care for
    real estate ownership and the associated responsibilities. This may
    change in the future.

    As for car leases, never.

    If I had a company where a corporate jet was a necessity, I'd buy it
    outright. And I'd made damned sure the pilot taught me how to fly it.
    :-D
    Yeah, my friend's ex-Microsoft-employed husband lost his job to an
    overseas firm. Hmm; I wonder if he'll still argue as fervently for
    Microsoft as he used to...
    That's my conclusion. My ex-employer used to ride my case because I
    didn't spend enough time on the phone to various company's tech
    support departments when I has having problems with different things.
    But it's been my experience that the types of problems I get into are
    so far advanced, the calls I have made in times past have been a
    complete waste of time. Better to get the ball started immediately if
    you're going to have to figure it out yourself, anyway.
    I don't think it will get better.
    At least we are in agreement here. Why do you think DRM is a waste of
    time?
    I don't need to listen to music on my PC, either. It is nice, however,
    that while I'm working on a program or hanging out in Usenet that I
    can be listening to tracks from my CD collection, without having to
    touch a disc. I've got to question the logic of anyone who would watch
    a movie on a PC, though, unless they are in an environment similar to
    a dorm room or the like. I believe in the near future this will
    change, though. I've had my last PC integrated with my entertainment
    center, and I'll be rebuilding a Win98SE box in the near future with
    my old video capture/output card to reintegrate to the entertainment
    center.
    Brilliance in what regard? Nothing I've seen of their software
    indicates brilliance, although their business tactics are brilliant,
    brutal, and relentless.
    So you believe it'll die out? Why? For every customer they loose,
    they've got to get at least two more.
    Why emulate when you can translate? And if the translator or emulator
    is running on a more secure, stable, and/or efficient kernel, that's
    motivation enough for me to make the switch. I can load the Win32
    subsystem only when I need to run a Win32 app, much like I did with
    Win16 under OS/2.
    A friend of mine (who is responsible for coercing me into considering
    OE in the first place) had similar problems, so I'm not entirely
    alone. :)
    Agreed, and I see a hint more of that in this recent post.
    The same guy who convinced me to run OE is running a FreeBSD server.
    It's been interesting giving him some VI pointers. :)
     
    David W. Poole, Jr., Oct 29, 2003
  9. My apologies; I wasn't specifying a particular brand of computer, just
    a computer. I don't need to purchase an OS when I purchase a PC
    compatible computer.
    But the OEM copy of windows costs way more than that zipper does. If
    Microsoft would sell me copies of Windows for the cost of a zipper,
    I'd buy it and be grateful.
    Fact is stranger than fiction, isn't it? I'm sure it violated his CSA
    with his ISP. And interestingly enough, as soon as he started doing
    this, the mail flow became very erratic, to the point where I don't
    bother to email them anymore. A mutual friend of ours has shared with
    me the same sentiment. And this is an ex-Microsoft employed technical
    support person who's sole job responsibilities was Exchange. If an
    expert from the company who wrote the thing has trouble running it,
    why should I believe it to be a quality product?

    As for why he was running his own server, heavens only knows.
    No, but she received something through O or OE (I don't know or care
    enough to find out which) that did.
    It may have been OE; I doubt she would have purchased Outlook.
    Interesting statement; my last employer functioned without an IT
    manager very well for about 9 years, and then hired one. The IT
    manager *loved* Microsoft, and IT expenditures went through the roof.
    Though other factors were involved, the company went out of business a
    couple of weeks ago. He, interestingly enough, hired her after her
    previous employer went out of business for similar reasons.
    And I don't, either. And I rarely charge acquaintance of family and
    friends for my services, either. But the stronger Microsoft gets, the
    more of my time I donate to charitable causes.
    Linux is open source, so the community has a better chance (although
    admittedly not perfect) of spotting them before the holes get too
    extreme.

    But that still doesn't justify the fact that Microsoft ignores the
    warnings and ships the product with the holes, after the holes have
    been made public! It's almost like a credit card company publishing
    your card number and other details in a reasonably circulated
    publication before issuing the card to you.
    It was, and it's had it's share of attacks.
    The seat count/market share is artificially inflated, leading less
    informed individuals to believe it's the best solution due to the
    number of users.

    Also, someone is paying for a product or service that is unused, when
    that money could be spent on something more useful if they had been
    given a choice. Personally I would have preferred to purchase a
    spindle of CDRs than to have paid Microsoft for a product I had no
    desire to use.
     
    David W. Poole, Jr., Oct 29, 2003
  10. Steve Young

    dadiOH Guest

    Thanks. Simple though, never messed with HTML umtil I set it up last
    December.
    _____________________
    Well, I don't think they do it randomly, they have a particular model in
    mind. But I don't think many actually know much about that particular
    model. They have been seduced by ads. Haven't we all? :)

    In the case of computers - and all consumer electronics for that matter - it
    is pretty difficult and time consuming for most to educate themselves. The
    biggest problem is the jargon...one needs to learn a whole new vocabulary
    including acronyms. Then one needs to learn what those new words actually
    mean, what the device or whatever actually does. OK, stuff like "CD drive"
    is pretty understandable to most now because most are already familiar with
    them in a stereo system and understand its function. But try 99% of users
    on "CPU" and you'll start getting blank stares. Not to mention "shared
    memory", "cache", "DDR memory", etc.

    Still, I agree that some research should be done. Unfortunately, I doubt
    many do; instead, they buy because of someone's recommendation or ads.
    Doesn't much matter because any computer - any configuration - will far
    exceed the needs of all but a small percentage of purchasers.
    ______________________
    I agree 100% with both statements.
    ____________________
    Thanks but I'm not all that knowledgeable, just fortunate to have bought a
    TRS-80 in 1978 or so. In those days, there were no apps so any user had to
    learn to write their own, usually in the included Basic. I did that but
    soon got fed up with the limitations and taught myself assembler to augment
    the Basic interpreter and DOS by setting up a system of what are now called
    dll files and allowing them to be flexibly loaded/unloaded in various areas
    of protected or unprotected RAM as needed by a running Basic app. Writing
    in assembler and interfacing with system programs teaches one how the
    machine and system programs work. Those machines/systems were much simpler
    but the basics will still be applicable.

    --
    dadiOH
    _____________________________

    dadiOH's dandies v3.0...
    ....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
    LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
    Get it at http://www.gbronline.com/xico/
    _________________________________
     
    dadiOH, Oct 29, 2003
  11. But any learning experience is a good one, IMO, and the willingness to
    share what's learned for other's benefit is also nice. Doing it for
    free is icing on the cake; you could have spent that time doing
    something more "fun." :)
    The ads can be seductive, but in most cases I try to do at least a tad
    of research before buying a product. I've been bitten because of
    failing in this regard before. But then again, it's a darned good
    thing everyone isn't like me. :-D
    And rightfully so, those terms, particularly the latter, aren't of
    particular importance to the majority of end users. What is important,
    though, is basic computer operating skills. It's my personal belief
    that if you don't bother to learn at least the basics of what a file
    is, where your apps store their files, and how to locate them with
    other apps, you don't really need to be using a computer.

    Example; my father is extremely computer illiterate. I wouldn't call
    him a genius, nor would I call him a dullard. But mom bought him a
    digital camera last year for his birthday, and he still has to get me
    to extract the images from it for him. This is his second PC; he
    bought his first perhaps 5 or 6 years ago. He kept complaining that he
    couldn't do anything with it, and I offered that it takes time,
    patience, and practice, and tried to explain some things in terms I
    knew he would understand. He still complained, so I suggested that he
    pick up the Windows 95 for Dummies book, and read it at his own pace.
    He bought the book, but hasn't opened it yet. Then he gets the camera,
    and can't navigate with it when it's plugged in. I ask if he's read
    the book, and get a negative response. I then examine the table of
    contents, and circle the four chapters I think would be most helpful
    to him. Next time I see him, he's cussing about the camera and
    computer again. I ask him if he's read the chapters, and am not in the
    least surprised that he hasn't even opened the book. And he's pissed
    off because he doesn't know how his computer works! I've got a friend
    in a similar situation, although she can't find the images she's saved
    that her friends and family emails her, even though she's got enough
    knowledge to locate chat rooms and download instant messenging
    clients. The mentality kills me. People will spend 4 hours playing
    Solitaire or in an IM session with someone gossiping, and won't spend
    15 minutes to try to figure out how their machines work. Hard to have
    sympathy for these types of folks.
    In most cases I ask how much a person is willing to spend, and then I
    send them to Circuit City, with instructions to tell that to the sales
    man. :-D
    That's the platform I got started on, although I got a used one in
    '81. And that's exactly what I meant elsewhere when I said that when
    you spoke to someone and learned they had a personal computer, you
    knew they had some kind of clue.
    We followed similar paths, although I didn't implement an overlay/dll
    system; my apps were never that big. :) I spent a majority of my time
    in assembler banging on the serial and floppy disc controller ports.
    :) I actually figured out how to write a disc track in both
    densities, which according to a posting in 80 micro was something that
    had only successfully been done by Randy Cook, author of NewDOS.

    What did you write that required paging?
     
    David W. Poole, Jr., Oct 29, 2003
  12. Steve Young

    Max Burke Guest

    Mxsmanic scribbled:
    I have been using MS works from the Windows for workgroups version. I
    dont have much use for MS Office at home, but all my employers in the
    last 10-12 years have....
    I prefer to call it 'feature ware' ;-)

    I dont mind buying software that has a lot of features I might not have
    an immediate use for, but it is nice to know that they're there if ever
    I do need them.
    It's a lot better than having to buy add ons when you do need them...
    Yeah I cant see them wanting to have the burden of keeping up with the
    virus definitions for all their customers....
    My current AV program averages 1 to 3 new definition updates a week.....

    But then why did Microsoft recently buy an anti-virus company?
    http://www.entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=5842
     
    Max Burke, Oct 29, 2003
  13. Steve Young

    Max Burke Guest

    David W. Poole, Jr. scribbled:
    Why did they sign the contracts with Microsoft? Didn't they read what
    they were signing? Didn't they have their expensive lawyers look over
    the contract and and advise them *BEFORE* signing on the bottom line,
    rather than signing the contract then having the expensive lawyers
    create a court case for them?
    These 'stories' are mostly BS David, it's mostly just lawyer talk and
    coaching of their clients to keep the *lawyers revenue stream healthy*
    ........

    snip rest.....

    Computer people have this bizarre notion that normal people should be
    technologically literate about computers.....
     
    Max Burke, Oct 29, 2003
  14. Steve Young

    Max Burke Guest

    David W. Poole, Jr. scribbled:
    More anecdotal experiences? For sure...... ;-)
    Going by the number of support websites devoted to *all popular OS'es*
    fundamental design flaws appear to be the norm. It isn't a unique
    Microsoft problem you know.
    The real reason why Microsoft is most often 'in the news' because it is
    the most common 'environment' that affects the most people......

    Do you make sure all your programming efforts are 100% bug free before
    releasing the code to your users? If you dont why dont you? Or is it
    because you, like most people, realise that achieving a 100% bug free
    code release is not usually possible.....

    So here's what it does mean: Linux is a normal operating system; so is
    XP. Both have bugs, some major, some minor. Anyone who tells you that
    Linux is "inherently more secure" or "much less buggy" than XP simply
    isn't working from current facts. The reality is that bugs happen, even
    in Linux: Get over it.
    http://www.informationweek.com/story/IWK20030124S0013/4

    Supply Contracts with Microsoft that the hardware vendors read and
    understand *before* signing them. They KNOW what they sign up for
    David.....
    They also know that they will be more profitable being a contractor with
    Microsoft than with any other company....
    They're NOT denied anything, they're NOT prohibited from anything,
    they're NOT prevented from doing anything by signing contracts with
    Microsoft.
    If and when they DONT like the terms and conditions of a contract with
    Microsoft then they dont sign them.
    Why do YOU keep insistinmg that they're somehow being denied that which
    they dont want or need to do?
    More anecdotes. We need more than this David......

    Lets talk about the Hardware vendors you claim are denied 'things' by
    Microsoft. Are you REALLY claiming hardware vendors sign supply
    contracts with Microsoft without reading and understanding those
    contracts? Are you REALLY claiming they're forced to sign those
    contracts by Microsoft?
    BS.
    Nothing more need be said about that.

    I'm a Microsoft customer; I can use whatever OS I like on my computers;
    I load and *remove* what ever software I want on my computers; Anyone
    can do that David. Even you. OOPS you *alreay* do that. Why do you make
    these *stupid* claims David?
    Therefore it's in their customers best interests......
    And you're *everyone; Everyone is you...... ;-)
    No it isn't.
    When ANY customer wants a computer with Microsoft installed then that's
    what they're entitled to. They dont actually NEED to choose once they
    have made that decision. They dont need to have Microsoft say hey
    before you buy our products you had better find out what other choices
    you have. They (the customers) dont have to do that. Microsoft
    dosen't have to do that. (for their customers) The ONLY ONES who DO
    have to do that are the competitors of Microsoft. If these competitioprs
    DONT do that then it's THEIR fault that Microsoft customers dont know
    about their products that dont get chosen, and their company on the line
    NOT Microsoft.
    Yes it did.
    If Microsoft products weren't quality products they wouldn't sell and
    Microsoft would not exist.
    EOS.

    snip rest of why *YOU* dont like Microsoft and expect everyone to agree
    with you......

    You need to realise that what you like or dislike about, well anything
    at all, is NOT what evryone else likes or dislikes.....

    Computer people have this bizarre notion that normal people should be
    technologically literate about computers.....
     
    Max Burke, Oct 29, 2003
  15. Steve Young

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Having worked with both, I disagree. The 6502 was much simpler (the
    first RISC processor), but the 360 was vastly more sophisticated.
    Perhaps your coursework didn't get you sufficiently familiar with the 360.
     
    Ron Hunter, Oct 29, 2003
  16. Steve Young

    Mxsmanic Guest

    Like CALL EXIT, you mean?
    Not all OS architectures permit this. Some give so much control to the
    application that they cannot ensure the release of all resources.

    By your standards, none of the early mainframe operating systems were
    "real."
    Small operating systems typically never do this, irrespective of who
    wrote them.
    That much I've already surmised.
    The hardware wouldn't let you address more than 64K at a time, and
    consecutive versions of MS-DOS got weirder and weirder in an attempt to
    manage what came beyond. Don't you remember EMM386 and all that stuff?
    Then every application today is specific and esoteric, because none of
    them would even run in the memory that MS-DOS used to provide. Nowadays
    640K or 1 MB is barely enough to open a combo box.
    No, but it's cute.
    So were a lot of people, for a while.
    It's not unusual to have a restricted choice of development environments
    for specific platforms. How many Mac cross-compilers are there for
    UNIX?
    You must not be following Adobe's upgrade cycles very closely. The only
    thing that separates their philosophy from that of Microsoft is the name
    on the box.
    That was the last version I bought. It's still more than I need.
    It's not an attitude of Microsoft groupies; it's an attitude of many
    people in general. That's why they buy new cars before the old ones
    wear out, and new clothing while the old clothing is still fine, and so
    on.
    I know all about Exchange, but I run sendmail at home (mainly because I
    know all about Exchange!).
    I've received over 200 on my account in the past 24 hours.
    Why would I care who invented it?
    For the same reason they bother to purchase toasters.
    I have a PDA that's gathering dust, as I've not found much use for it.
    I use Quark XPress for all my word processing, although I still have
    PageMaker just in case.
    No, it couldn't. The advancement of computing is a social phenomenon,
    not the work of any one company.

    Personally, I find that Microsoft changes too much too often. I don't
    like to "upgrade" when I have something that already works.
    So you needed to work on you résumé immediately, but you still had time
    to play with OS installations? Hmm.
    There was no real competition for any of these. Adobe is very, very
    well entrenched, and they are still writing good software.
    They lost with Bob, and with PhotoDraw 2000 (one of the worst products
    I've ever seen, and a laughable attempt to compete with Photoshop, which
    they have not repeated).
    I've only played with C++. It turned out to be more hype than reality,
    and I've never seen a reason to actually code in C++ except in some
    trivial ways.
    Because it is only useful if you plan on moving to a different
    classroom. The outside world is different. And unless you are
    independently wealthy or you plan on living in the dignified poverty of
    teaching, the outside world is an inevitability.
    Microsoft is less and less willing to step away from its cash cows as
    well, as it is getting harder and harder to do so safely.
    An inventive company HAS been at the lead, and we ARE a lot further down
    the road in consequence. Try having IBM lead the way, and you'll see.
    There's more to a computer than a steering wheel and brakes. In the
    future, though, there won't be, and everyone will be using one.
    The outsourcing decisions aren't made in the same place as the other
    decisions. Microsoft has a lot of deadweight intermediate management
    levels now, and a lot of useless parasites as well. All large companies
    end up that way. You can tell that the tide has turned when a large and
    formerly successful company carries out its first-ever layoff.
    Tech support people generally don't know any more than you do. They
    look at the same knowledge base you can look at online. They try to
    find previous incidents that match yours, and if they succeed, they
    recommend whatever worked the last time. If they don't find anything,
    they just recommend standard stuff: reinstallation, etc.
    Because IP law is going to have to change in the future. It is swinging
    way too far in favor of IP owners, and that is putting a strangehold on
    society.
    My PC is for data processing. I have a TV for DVDs. I don't listen
    much to CDs these days, as I threw away my CD player.
    Business and especially technical competence.
    They are no less brilliant than any other software companies I've seen.
    I've never seen this.
    Do you doubt it? How long have you been in IT?

    I remember when Digital was the Great Satan. I remember when IBM was
    the Great Satan. Where are they now?
    The one sure thing in the world is change.
    Why do either when you can execute directly?
    No such kernels exist, nor are any likely to. Emulators and translators
    are always relatively unstable.
    I never saw the point to vi. I guess I'm just not a religious person.
    I use a freeware application called "joe," which is essentially just a
    kind of Notepad for UNIX. I've found that it's about all I ever need.
     
    Mxsmanic, Oct 29, 2003
  17. Steve Young

    Mxsmanic Guest

    A computer costs way more than a pair of pants.
    If Leica would sell me cameras for the cost of a roll of film, I'd buy
    them and be grateful.
    If he is on dial-up, maybe. If he is on cable broadband, it's hard to
    say. If he is on DSL, it may well be permitted. If he has a fixed IP
    address, it is almost certainly permitted.
    Actually, Exchange Server is a superlative product, in the right
    environment (large organizations and corporations, specifically). But
    it is not at all suited to home use, nor is it suited to standard
    ISP-style e-mail environments. For those, you run OE (in the former
    case) or sendmail (in the latter case).
    I run my own server, too, but it is running under UNIX (and it does
    handle all my mail). I do have a NT server, but I use it only as a
    desktop.
    So it wasn't Outlook.

    If someone receives a bomb through the mail, that doesn't mean that the
    USPS destroyed his house.
    I think Outlook comes with some flavors of Office, and with Exchange
    Server.
    Linux is also very poorly written, so the holes are more likely to be
    there to begin with. If someone really wants UNIX, he should install a
    real version of UNIX, like one of the (freeware) BSDs.
    Have you ever worked on multimillion-dollar software projects for large
    commercial software vendors?
    Not quite.
    It still does. But it's not in the spotlight any more, thank goodness.
    And leading some individuals to incorrectly assert that Microsoft is
    much more dominant than it actually is.
    Most people spend more than that on far less.
     
    Mxsmanic, Oct 29, 2003
  18. It was one of two summer classes I've taken, both of which were too
    short to develop any true appreciation for the course work.

    My 6502 experiences were ventures I made on my own in the computer
    lab, whereas the Z80/6809 experiences were made on personal computers
    I owned.

    I was unaware that the 6502 was a RISC processor; that explains some
    things. I remember the 360 as being so different from the
    Z80/6809/6502 that my tiny mind couldn't grasp it well. :)
     
    David W. Poole, Jr., Oct 29, 2003
  19. That's similar to what I was trying to convey. I have an OS already; I
    don't need another one just because I decided to buy a new piece of
    hardware.
    In the case of Windows, it costing the price of a zipper is closer to
    "getting what you paid for." :)
    The ISP he's on was broadband cable, and the IPs were leased, and
    supposedly rotated on a weekly basis. However, to the best of my
    knowledge, his (and others locals I know) have the same IP as they did
    when they signed on.
    I'll take your word for it. Given the results I've seen that he's had
    with it, I'm not going to worry much about the product.
    Sounds like a reasonable set up to me.
    No, in hind sight. Unless it was preinstalled she wouldn't have had
    it. The only thing she installed after the purchase was the Palm
    desktop, and the software for her cable modem, to the best of my
    knowledge.
    No, but the USPS could have prevented delivery of that bomb. I'm not
    certain this is a good analogy, as it would be like having the USPS
    deliver *and* open your packages for you, which it doesn't do.
    I don't believe she installed Office; I may ask her about it the next
    time I see her. I'd email her and ask, but...... ;-)
    Perhaps it is, but the people I know who run Linux have yet to have
    been compromised.
    No; the system I worked on was much smaller, with a much smaller
    audience. But if I knew there was a problem, I certainly didn't allow
    the thing to be shipped.
    Why not? Microsoft is made aware of the risks, and ships the product
    anyway, saying it's the customer's responsibility.
    And leading other individuals to incorrectly assert that Microsoft's
    software is of higher quality than it actually is. :)
    I'm sorry, but at the present time I really don't have that luxury.
     
    David W. Poole, Jr., Oct 29, 2003
  20. The impression I got from the article was that the vendor didn't have
    any say in the provisions of the contract, if they want to sign one at
    all with Microsoft. It was Microsoft's way, or it was no way.
    I'm not so certain how much faith I would put in that. Before
    Microsoft had developed IE, I had seen some new machines with Netscape
    preloaded. Then it disappeared. After the antitrust suit, I've seen a
    machine with Corel Office products preloaded on it.
    I wouldn't expect a 'normal' person to write their own software. But
    by the same token, it doesn't make me feel "warm and fuzzy" when a
    user makes statements about computers and programmers when an email
    virus wipes out some information that is critical to her business.
     
    David W. Poole, Jr., Oct 29, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.