Printable View
Microsoft Acquires Giant, Plans Antispyware Release
Microsoft today announced its acquisition of New York–based Giant Company Software Inc., makers of Giant AntiSpyware, Spam Inspector, and Popup Inspector. (Microsoft will continue to provide support for users of these products).
Read more here:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1743165,00.asp
I dunno. The cynic in me cringes at this thought given the issues that IE had this year...
I second that. If they can't get their browser right... what makes them think that they can fight spyware? I applaud their efforts... but with as most m$ attempts... I'll wait and see.Quote:
Originally posted here by MsMittens
I dunno. The cynic in me cringes at this thought given the issues that IE had this year...
I wonder if that means that they are going to be releasing it as part of the OS? Or, if users will have to pay for it... if its the latter... I'll continue to use freeware.Quote:
He points out that where Microsoft at one time suggested that the security enhancements in Windows Service Pack 2 would lessen the need for spyware protection, the company now says antispyware will "complement the enhanced security features" of SP2.
Why should users have to pay for anti-spyware from a vendor that created a situation that allowed for the OS to become infected in the first place? How many times have we seen flaws in IE that allow your computer to become infected?Quote:
Details such as release date and pricing are not yet available. Watch www.microsoft.com/spyware for updated information.
Now, I can understand if they are charging to remove spyware that was intalled by the user... but if spyware is installed via exploting IE or the OS... users should not be responsible to pay for a product to remove the offending malware.
I'm also wondering if the "anti-spyware" will look for and remove m$ "warez" from computers.
That could be considered "malware" in m$'s eyes? Doesn't bother me... I use legit software.... *most* of the time.
Do you think he figures that Microsofts effort will be half-assed and will drive new customers his way?Quote:
For additional perspective, we checked in with David Moll, CEO of Webroot Software, makers of Webroot Spy Sweeper, PC Magazine's current Editors' Choice for antispyware. Mr. Moll told us that the acquisition will benefit the antispyware field as a whole by lending it added legitimacy and visibility, and by raising Microsoft's own "security IQ."
Awww... C'mon, don't be so hard on M$.... Think of it as the latest patch for IE... ;)
Micro$oft just wants a piece of every part of the whole computer industry. they want to dominate the world lol. but, we will see how they do...
Hey Hey,
I would really question this product and it's usefulness.... Mind you how long before we'll be seeing it labelled as an MS product..... I mean initially they said we'd have AV with SP2 and that never happened. This could end up on the backburner for a long long while... and they could just continue to market the current product.... all the while never releasing updates.
Anyways do you really want to trust a company who say's that to protect your computer you need three things
1. Use an Internet Firewall
2. Get Computer Updates
3. Use Up-to-date Antivirus Software.
Hrm..... If they were better at OS design I wouldn't need those things.
1. A firewall shouldn't be necessary... we've seen that proven time and time again by several of the members here.... I've existed for many years without a firewall... The only thing that a firewall assists against is blocking worms that are spreading... beyond that you should have no real need for a firewall in a home environment unless you're a complete tool. As for the worms.. that kind of goes with #2 so I'll leave it for their.
2. Get Computer Updates... now I realized they've dumbed these sentances down (I mean they added the word Internet in front of Firewall.... See I'd be confused if they told me to Use a firewall.. my car already has one)... But I consider Computer Updates to be Upgrading/Updating the hardware in my PC... Also how up-to-date can you stay when updates are released once a month.... that's rather slow response time.... Compare with the SuSE 9.2 Pro that's running on this laptop... It's got its bugs and holes.... there's no doubt about that... After all it's a new OS.. but I get updates every day.. I don't have to wait 30 days for updates....
3. How about I use safe computing instead? I don't open viruses that come in email.... Like Mugly... how could anyone be stupid enough to infect themself with that? Do you have no common sense. What's that? Most people don't? That's fine.... the AV is fine for social engineering viruses... But after that how does most malware enter your PC??? Oh yeah.. through holes and problems with the MS OS and Browser software...
They are adding anti-spyware software for one reason.... They're trying to take the blame off their shoulders.. 'Look we've given you this arsenal of tools to protect yourself... if you're still getting infected it's your own fault.' That's like saying you've got every weapon and type of defense known to man... in addition to an impenetrable fortress. That's all fine and dandy, but if you leave the front, side or even back door open... someone can still walk in and do a lot of damage... That's exactly what happens with MS operating systems... They give you all types of defenses but then they leave the side window open and tell the guards to stand down from their posts.
Anyways... that's my opinion.
Peace,
HT
Wow HT.... Nice rant.... (You forgot the tags BTW.... ;))
1. I use a firewall at home.... Am I incapable of setting up my domain in such a way that it is protected from the public network yet functions perfectly within it's self... No.... But it's a **** load easier to throw up a firewall and run the domain behind it..... Let's be fair from that standpoint.... Then let's look at Joe Public. It's far from "easy" to close all the ports that M$ has open by default so Joe has little hope of protecting himself. OTOH, if the ports weren't open by default then Joe wouldn't be able to network his two computers.... So he wouldn't buy M$ because his buddies have told him he can't network it.... he'd buy something else, equally full of holes as M$, that fills that "hole" that M$ didn't.... So we're back to square one on that argument....
2. Get updates.... Well, we can argue the semantics of the language all day... It's irrelevant really... The issue you really have is the frequency. Now, IRRC, everyone and their dog were bitching, (nice pun huh? ;)), about M$ issuing a patch every few days... Now your bitching about them issuing a patch "block" every month.... But you praise SUSE 9.1 for issuing a patch every day.... Where's the equity there? You might also remember that M$ issued an emergency patch mid-month last month.... Doesn't that help to satisfy your "only once a month" issue?
3. Hmmm.... There's AV for *nix.... ClamAV comes to mind.... People in the *nix world see fit to write AV programs.... Could it be that there are viruses in the *nix world? Of course.... Wherever there are people that will try to exploit computers with malware, regardless of the OS, there will be the requirement to have protection for every OS.... So the advice is good....
HT.... You and I and many members here are quite capable of doing almost anything they want to lock down their computers.... But we are a "little different".... We are in the 1000th of one percent that can do it or even knows it's important and why.... You can't blame M$ for selling a product any more than you can blame SUSE 9.1 for needing an upate every day..... If you think about it they are becoming synonymous....
Let's see - last time I tried upgrading M$ office, and other M$ products I use, I got inundated by spyware from their site. So M$ swears they're going to start fighting it - ok.
Percent chances I'll use their antispyware stuff voulentarily? - 0% or less
Percent chances I'll "trust all downloads from Microsoft.com" - 0% or less
Percent chances you'll get this anti-spyware package forced on you either in some future windows SP, or windows edition - 100%
Percent chances you'll get spyware from it? - I'll leave that one as an exercise for the student.
Excellent thread thus far - I have a question though.
I understand it's possible to fortify a computer without the usage of a firewall. Here's my question: Let's say you've closed off all uneccessary ports and processes. You've pinned down all legit processes and ports inherently used therein. How do you control hidden processes that "piggyback" legit processes? Personally, I like the ease at which firewalls allow me to control not only the executables but all components associated with it as well (including hidden processes). Another thing I like is stateful inspection:
I may be crazy, but this seems like a good thing (being I'm not sitting behind a router either). That's my thoughts on the matter. Any ideas?Quote:
stateful inspection tracks each connection traversing all interfaces of the firewall and makes sure they are valid. An example of a stateful firewall may examine not just the header information but also the contents of the packet up through the application layer in order to determine more about the packet than just information about its source and destination. A stateful inspection firewall also monitors the state of the connection and compiles the information in a state table. Because of this, filtering decisions are based not only on administrator-defined rules (as in static packet filtering) but also on context that has been established by prior packets that have passed through the firewall
[rant][/rant] and [edit][/edit] should be added as valid tags :)Quote:
The firewall makes things easier sure.... but saying you should have it to protect yourself is what's wrong... They're trying to say that having a firewall is needed to protect yourself.... Having a firewall is all fine and dandy.. but the way I see it they're just passing blame.Quote:
1. I use a firewall at home.... Am I incapable of setting up my domain in such a way that it is protected from the public network yet functions perfectly within it's self... No.... But it's a **** load easier to throw up a firewall and run the domain behind it..... Let's be fair from that standpoint.... Then let's look at Joe Public. It's far from "easy" to close all the ports that M$ has open by default so Joe has little hope of protecting himself. OTOH, if the ports weren't open by default then Joe wouldn't be able to network his two computers.... So he wouldn't buy M$ because his buddies have told him he can't network it.... he'd buy something else, equally full of holes as M$, that fills that "hole" that M$ didn't.... So we're back to square one on that argument....
I've never once bitched about frequent patches from MS... I prefered it that way... I'd rather know that my computer is up to date immediately, rather than waiting 30+ days for a patch.. Even if they don't put them on on Automatic Updates and put them on another page... or even the MSDN I'd be more than happy with that. BTW if this exists somewhere could someone link me to it? BTW it's SuSE 9.2 :D ... 9.1 is old now.Quote:
2. Get updates.... Well, we can argue the semantics of the language all day... It's irrelevant really... The issue you really have is the frequency. Now, IRRC, everyone and their dog were bitching, (nice pun huh? ), about M$ issuing a patch every few days... Now your bitching about them issuing a patch "block" every month.... But you praise SUSE 9.1 for issuing a patch every day.... Where's the equity there? You might also remember that M$ issued an emergency patch mid-month last month.... Doesn't that help to satisfy your "only once a month" issue?
That's not fair.. I never mentioned *nix in my AV discussion. There will be viruses... but if patches were released more quickly and efficiently and if the OS was coded better... than the need for AV would be greatly decreased... Mind you end-user stupidity plays a huge role in this... but when we're getting computers in that are Fully Patched and up-to-date (in theory) and they're being infected with both viruses and malware across the internet... that tells me there's a problem with the OS... A firewall would prevent this.. but again shouldn't be needed if they released an OS that wasn't full of holes.Quote:
3. Hmmm.... There's AV for *nix.... ClamAV comes to mind.... People in the *nix world see fit to write AV programs.... Could it be that there are viruses in the *nix world? Of course.... Wherever there are people that will try to exploit computers with malware, regardless of the OS, there will be the requirement to have protection for every OS.... So the advice is good....
If XP was a new OS... I wouldn't complain as much.. but how long does it take to patch major holes in an Operating System? They've had a good amount of time already. Couldn't they in however many years it has been available to the public block these problems that are causing the spread of this malware?
I can blame MS for selling a product that will no doubt be less effective than Spybot S&D and AdAware SE (both of which are available free of charge)... I'll try their software (assuming they make a trial available) but much beyond that I doubt I'll touch it..Quote:
HT.... You and I and many members here are quite capable of doing almost anything they want to lock down their computers.... But we are a "little different".... We are in the 1000th of one percent that can do it or even knows it's important and why.... You can't blame M$ for selling a product any more than you can blame SUSE 9.1 for needing an upate every day..... If you think about it they are becoming synonymous....
Don't take this, or my previous post, as Microsoft bashing... I use their software quite frequently... I work in a 95% MS Shop... Besides my laptop (Linux) I work with 2 Linux servers, a 2K3 server and a 2000 Workstation... Also an XP VM... of those two servers, one of them is a VM and they prolly account for 25% of the *nix around here... It's not used frequently... I also run XP at home.. I'm even connected to it right now by Remote Desktop... I just have some issues with the way Microsoft describes security... Being the company they are.. they should be working for user education... and pushing to better the IT community. Instead they are trying mask the need for computer knowledge and give users basics... It'd be like handing someone keys and saying here go drive... without ever training them or showing them how it's done... It's not right.
Peace,
HT
This is going to leave a bad taste in my mouth (defending Microsoft :p ).. but here goes.
People bitch and gripe about how insecure Microsoft is, when 90% of the time, they are the ones that went "Ooh..what happens if I click here". This is keeping in mind that I am talking about the common, everyday user. They do something you and I know better than to do, and it is Microsoft's fault that they didn't protect them from being idiots.
So then Microsoft goes out and purchases on of the top rated anti-adware/anti-spyware applications on the market (Don't take my word for it, check out Eric Howe's results and here. )
So, in addition to being able to provide new tools to customers (I know they'll make money from it, that's what they call capitalism),Quote:
Microsoft will use the acquisition to provide its customers with new tools to help protect them from the threat of spyware and other deceptive software. In addition, key personnel from Giant will be joining Microsoft’s security efforts.
...key personnel .... will be joining Microsoft’s security efforts. <--- that is the part that is important. If all they wanted was to make a buck, why bring along the personnel? I'm sure they have their own capable staff that could do that, but what they are lacking are people that understand malware.
We're not talking just little script kiddie crap. CWS and VX2 have just come out with some very nasty variants. The most recent version of CWS modifies PE files (which I believe puts it in the category of virus, and out of the realm of just being a nuisance). That variant should be on your shelves just in time for the New Year. How many here know how to repair an 'adjusted' PE file? I used to be worried about viruses and worms. Right now, I'm worried that script kiddies are going to learn from CWS and VX2....
But I digress. Microsoft puts out patches, and gets bashed. Microsoft buys a really good application to hopefully help protect the end user, and they get bashed. ( I hope they keep a free version available, even if it is a trial version. In many cases, that's all I need to get a user fixed up). The common user isn't protected from themselves, and Microsoft gets bashed.
The common user doesn't want to be educated about safe use, and proper set up. They figure if they pay $1800 (US) for something that is small enough to fit on a desk, then it should be good to go. So now Microsoft is put in the position of protecting people from themselves, and at the same time, not pissing off the people that don't need protecting by taking away functionality?
Ok, so maybe Microsoft deserves a little crap, but how could they possibly anticipate the lengths the people that write ad/spyware will go to make a buck? They try to make the Internet and computing an interesting and vivid experience, how can they be blamed for people exploiting that?
Microsoft has held several MVP conferences in which spyware and security was the focus. As a result of some of those conferences, developers from Microsoft have joined at least one well known malware removal forum to get a first hand look at just what goes on. At any rate, I am cautiously optimistic. You can't stop a runaway train on a dime (how is that for a mixed metaphor?)..it's going to take them a bit to get things turned around.
Excuse me...I need to go wash the taste out of my mouth...
So why isnt it good to go ? I mean it *should* be good to go. I know that most linux distro's are good to go. But they dont cost me anything like ms software does.Quote:
The common user doesn't want to be educated about safe use, and proper set up. They figure if they pay $1800 (US) for something that is small enough to fit on a desk, then it should be good to go. So now Microsoft is put in the position of protecting people from themselves, and at the same time, not pissing off the people that don't need protecting by taking away functionality?
Why is it that most of MS action is buying another company. I mean how hard is it too make a good antimalware program on themselves. The small ones are poping out all around them. They do sells the largest and best selling os on this planet right. That means they should be able to write it themselves.Quote:
But I digress. Microsoft puts out patches, and gets bashed. Microsoft buys a really good application to hopefully help protect the end user, and they get bashed. ( I hope they keep a free version available, even if it is a trial version. In many cases, that's all I need to get a user fixed up).
I'm not going to post much, lest I get out of hand. But here we go.
Install a defalt fedora core 3 installation, and then look at the running services/ports and the like on startup. Install Redhat 7 (which came out with XP, IIRC), and notice even after PATCHING that it still has a lot of unaddressed bugs with the dev responce "upgrade to 8, or fedora".Quote:
So why isnt it good to go ? I mean it *should* be good to go. I know that most linux distro's are good to go. But they dont cost me anything like ms software does.
Sometimes the work that goes into fixing something isn't worth the trouble due to the closing effects. Maybe they had a bad beginning coding team, and have since fired them, but still have to live with the effects?
So let me get this straight. You would also want Ford to make their own tires from scratch instead of use one from a company they have a deal/own? Like Goodyear? Why continue reinventing the wheel when someone already has a solid idea and product, and you can expand further upon it. Stand upon the shoulders of giants and you can get farther than they did because of their wisdom combined with yours.Quote:
Why is it that most of MS action is buying another company. I mean how hard is it too make a good antimalware program on themselves. The small ones are poping out all around them. They do sells the largest and best selling os on this planet right. That means they should be able to write it themselves.
That's not only a basic buisness stradegy, It Just Makes Sense too.
I would have to agree sometimes the work that goes into fixing isn't worth it. But xp is the most current MS desktop OS out. And it isn't the first one to have these problems. It was my understanding that XP was a "new" OS that it didnt have any parts of 9x or even dos left. Does this mean its really a hard thing to solve or are their different motives. I think the latter.Quote:
Install a defalt fedora core 3 installation, and then look at the running services/ports and the like on startup. Install Redhat 7 (which came out with XP, IIRC), and notice even after PATCHING that it still has a lot of unaddressed bugs with the dev responce "upgrade to 8, or fedora".
Sometimes the work that goes into fixing something isn't worth the trouble due to the closing effects. Maybe they had a bad beginning coding team, and have since fired them, but still have to live with the effects?
In the light of the example you provided I can only say. You are correct I am not.Quote:
So let me get this straight. You would also want Ford to make their own tires from scratch instead of use one from a company they have a deal/own? Like Goodyear? Why continue reinventing the wheel when someone already has a solid idea and product, and you can expand further upon it. Stand upon the shoulders of giants and you can get farther than they did because of their wisdom combined with yours.
Although comparing microsofts size to that of most others I fear MS will crush their new acquisition. Also (and I could be very wrong on this point) I believe ms media player was actually a company togherter with a product they bought. The first few versions I really liked the new ones suck. I hope MS wont do the same with this situation.
Because there is no such thing as secure code (and if there is, I can't think of an example). As long as I can get a dissassembled listing, I can modify it in any way I see fit. The longer the code, the more opportunities there are.Quote:
So why isnt it good to go
Umm, with all due respect, no. I'm no guru with Linux, but I bet someone here could tell us which Linux distros are completely secure right out of the box. There are not as many opportunities for exploitation for many reasons which have been stated on this board ad nauseum.Quote:
I know that most linux distro's are good to go.
You tell me...how hard is it to write a good antimalware program when the target changes daily? It's impossible to shat out a program overnight to deal with malware. by the time development, coding, and bug testing are done, there are enough new variants that by the time the code is finally released, it is already outdated.Quote:
Why is it that most of MS action is buying another company.
A good example. Intermute bought out the CWS Shredder. Within just the last day, they announced that it was now able to defeat a very *****ly version of CWS. But guess what. In the time they were taking to rewrite it, we have a brand new version. As mentioned above, this one alters PE files so that they start up Cool Web Search. Would you care to try to write a program that will kill that? Even the people that specialize in removing malware can't keep up.
That is a non sequitur. Sales does not indicate a an ability to write anti-malware programs. It only indicates they have a good marketing plan..Quote:
They do sells the largest and best selling os on this planet right. That means they should be able to write it themselves.
I'm not picking on you MoonWolf . My point was that Microsoft is trying to make inroads and improve their product. I said up above that 90% of the people bitching are the ones that infected themselves in the first place. The other 10% have legitmate gripes. It's so easy to jump on the Microsoft bashing bandwagon. Personally, I have had very few problems with the Windows OS. I don't necessarily agree with their business model. Maybe if I did, I would be a billionaire, instead of some penniless schmuck.
Further pushing the bandwagon are techs that have no clue what malware is, or how to fix it, so they reinstall the system, and blame it on Microsoft's crappy OS. (I can think of several in the town I live in )
All I am saying is if you have a legitemate beef about Microsofts OS, go ahead and gripe. If you are having a problem just because you don't understand the OS, that is something entirely different. (and I don't mean you personally). And if you are griping just because every one else gripes, grow a pair of stones and make your own decisions.
Ive noticed a trend in the AntiM$OMFG community of bashers. It is as follows:
1. MICROSOFT DOES TOO MANY PATHCES PER MONTH!!11 OMFG THE OS MUST BE SO BUGGY AND IT'S ANNOYYING!
Solution: Microsoft releases only one or two larger patches a month versus every few days.
Responce: OMFG MICROSOFT TAKES FOREVA TO RELEASE PATCHES!!!11 WUT ABOUT THE SECURITY HOLE YESTERDAY!!!111
2. OMFG THE WINDOWS FIREWALL IS HORRIBLE!11 IT'S OFF BY DEFAULT AND IT SUX ADN I WANT CHOICE. STOP FORCING SOFTWARE M$!!!11five
Solution: Microsoft turns on the firewall by default as well as releases an enourmous update to the firewall's capability in SP2.
Responce: OMFG THE FIREWALL DOESN'T DO IDS OR OUTBOUND CHECKING JUST INBOUNDCHECKING!111 I WANT CHOICE IT SHOULDN'T BE FORCED ON ME!!!1
3. ROFL MICROSOFT HAS SOOO MANY EERORS!!!1 ITS BUGGY AND HAS SPYWARE A LOT!! THEY SHOULD HAVE MADE THEIR SYSTEM MORE SECURE AND STOPPED SPYWARE SOME HOW
Solution: Microsoft fixes over 500+ security bugs in SP2, rewrote the majority of Windows DLL files and executables for buffer overflow bounds checking. Now they are going to modify a 3rd party spyware-removal product to better suite their direct OS needs to help fight spy/adware.
Responce: OMFG THEY ARE JUST TRYING TO MAKE MONEY!!!11 SP2 BREAKS A LOT OF PROGRAMS, AND I DON'T BELIVE THAT IT WAS BECAUSE THEY WER CODED BAD!!!!11 OMFG I DON'T WANT SPYWARE REMOVAL I WANT A CHOICE ON WHAT TO USE!!!!11 STOP FORCING SOFTWARE ON ME MS!!!
This is everywhere. Once Microsoft attempts to solve a problem the MS bashers come out and find something to complain about the solution... usually contradicting what they were origonally complaining about. Let's face it, the majority of the people using and bashing windows are those who are not taking the time to understand it. Like many on AO, I trust in Microsoft's products because I've tested them, learned them, and use them. Think microsoft is sending spyware to report your 31337 files? Why not run your own packet sniffer and see? Think Windows XP is a RAM hog? Well... did you read the manuals and general information about the OS configuration, down to a kernel and service level?
Windows could eventually become a perfect OS, and those who do not understand it will still complain about it. I'd be fine with the complaining if people would remember to stop screaming and give a general nod of thanks towards Microsoft. They are striving to solve the problems you complain about constantly. But if you don't send bug reports, send crash reports, and help them directly on issues... then chances are they are shooting in the dark trying to fix things.
Luckely there are linux/unix/* bashers too.
I'm not here to bash Windows or Microsoft(Although I must say I don't like them too much). Hell i love my xbox.
My concern is that Microsoft in an attempt to fix something is going to **** up this though. K ill shut ip now.
And I hold them with as equal distaste as I do Windows bashers.Quote:
Luckely there are linux/unix/* bashers too.
They might, but at least applaud them for trying. Instead of ignoring you and giving a company middle finger, they listened and will at least attempt to construct a solution. And don't shut up, please. What I said above was not intended directly to you, but a general rant. Your ideas are welcome here, regardless of how conflicting they may be.Quote:
My concern is that Microsoft in an attempt to fix something is going to **** up this though. K ill shut ip now.
Without different ideas and thoughts there would be no discussion, no improvement, and no change. Glad to have you here, so please continue participating :)
seriously good to have you back, pooh =P
Don't you dare try to lump those who say they were too frequent and those who say it takes too long.. and what's with the typing? I don't talk like that and I bash the f@#$ out of MS. Most of the skiddies that type like that run Windows because it's an idiots OS to use and it's all their little brains can handle. Anyways.. I think they are a company that lacks ethics and convinces the weak minded that they are doing a good job. As far as updates... they should be out frequently... we shouldn't have to wait a month... or even 2 weeks (if they release an emergency mid-month patch)... There's no reason why they shouldn't release a patch, fix or at least even a workaround for problems within 72 hours of the discovery and report of the problem. After all we've paid a shitload of money for their products. Here's my question... what's with all this rebooting on updates after Service Pack 2? and the constant reminders every 5 minutes? I thought the thing about XP was that you didn't have to reboot as often as other MS OS's... I now find I'm rebooting XP more frequently than 98.. New Hardware... reboot.. new update... reboot.. new software... reboot.. This is still one place where *nix blows MS out of the water.Quote:
Originally posted here by poohsuntzu
1. MICROSOFT DOES TOO MANY PATHCES PER MONTH!!11 OMFG THE OS MUST BE SO BUGGY AND IT'S ANNOYYING!
Solution: Microsoft releases only one or two larger patches a month versus every few days.
Responce: OMFG MICROSOFT TAKES FOREVA TO RELEASE PATCHES!!!11 WUT ABOUT THE SECURITY HOLE YESTERDAY!!!111
After reading this section... I'm not sure why you got greenies for this post... blame it on old friendships I guess.. You wouldn't complain about something being off by default and wanting choice... Having software off is what gives you choice in what you use... Also having it off doesn't force anyone to use anything... You could have come up with something much better than this. The firewall did get a nice security update... and it's not bad.. but turning it on by default did remove some choice... It wasn't the greatest of ideas but it is still a limited firewall since we know that inbound firewalls are basically useless (unless you run an OS that can't keep itself patched against worms)... the outbound firewall is the important part... Again you are twisting words to play with those here on AO that don't entirely comprehend everything.Quote:
2. OMFG THE WINDOWS FIREWALL IS HORRIBLE!11 IT'S OFF BY DEFAULT AND IT SUX ADN I WANT CHOICE. STOP FORCING SOFTWARE M$!!!11five
Solution: Microsoft turns on the firewall by default as well as releases an enourmous update to the firewall's capability in SP2.
Responce: OMFG THE FIREWALL DOESN'T DO IDS OR OUTBOUND CHECKING JUST INBOUNDCHECKING!111 I WANT CHOICE IT SHOULDN'T BE FORCED ON ME!!!1
Quote:
3. ROFL MICROSOFT HAS SOOO MANY EERORS!!!1 ITS BUGGY AND HAS SPYWARE A LOT!! THEY SHOULD HAVE MADE THEIR SYSTEM MORE SECURE AND STOPPED SPYWARE SOME HOW
Solution: Microsoft fixes over 500+ security bugs in SP2, rewrote the majority of Windows DLL files and executables for buffer overflow bounds checking. Now they are going to modify a 3rd party spyware-removal product to better suite their direct OS needs to help fight spy/adware.
Responce: OMFG THEY ARE JUST TRYING TO MAKE MONEY!!!11 SP2 BREAKS A LOT OF PROGRAMS, AND I DON'T BELIVE THAT IT WAS BECAUSE THEY WER CODED BAD!!!!11 OMFG I DON'T WANT SPYWARE REMOVAL I WANT A CHOICE ON WHAT TO USE!!!!11 STOP FORCING SOFTWARE ON ME MS!!!
Service Pack 2 Did break a lot of things.... That's not something that an update should do.. that's something that a new OS should do... They released 500+ but they've still got just as many to go.. As for the whole spyware thing... Microsoft has never been an upfront company... They've always got at least one of their paws lurking in the shadows... Who's to say they won't accept pay-offs in order to 'accidently' forget about certain pieces of software?
I take great offense to that... I've prolly clocked twice as many hours in MS environments as you have... I have tested their software... I've used it to great extents... and it has it's benefits.. but I've also seen it fail time and time again... This isn't bashing MS because of a blindfold on my eyes... However I think that sometimes you are blinded in your responses... You are too full of pride for Microsoft... it's like your own ego is hurt when someone attacks MS's flaws... and they have many flaws... regardless of what you think. As far as XP being a RAM hog.. it is... Sure you can streamline it.. but then you lose functionality... I have to have 3 services enabled just to use Automatic Updates... that's ridiculous... They assume people have more RAM so they don't streamline their code... this is a known problem with a lot of companies.. MS is just one example of itQuote:
This is everywhere. Once Microsoft attempts to solve a problem the MS bashers come out and find something to complain about the solution... usually contradicting what they were origonally complaining about. Let's face it, the majority of the people using and bashing windows are those who are not taking the time to understand it. Like many on AO, I trust in Microsoft's products because I've tested them, learned them, and use them. Think microsoft is sending spyware to report your 31337 files? Why not run your own packet sniffer and see? Think Windows XP is a RAM hog? Well... did you read the manuals and general information about the OS configuration, down to a kernel and service level?
As long as MS wants to make things easier first... they'll never have the perfect OS.... They need to follow in the footsteps of *nix in that aspect... Give the advanced users what they need and then build simple GUI controls on top of that. Was it not you before that said they wanted to remove the command line? That's going to ruin the OS.... it'll be the job of the administrator much longer and much more complex..Quote:
Windows could eventually become a perfect OS, and those who do not understand it will still complain about it. I'd be fine with the complaining if people would remember to stop screaming and give a general nod of thanks towards Microsoft. They are striving to solve the problems you complain about constantly. But if you don't send bug reports, send crash reports, and help them directly on issues... then chances are they are shooting in the dark trying to fix things.
Peace,
HT
The whole issue of MS and Earthlink adding anti spy ware and MS stating that there will most probably be a charge for this premium is a joke to me. I see a consistent thread here AOL adds anti virus MS and Earth line follow. AOL adds Spy Zapper guess what happens MS and Earth Link Follow and are almost ready ( 6 mos later) to add anti spy ware. Oh wait AOL offers it at no additional \charge. Anyone see a trend here?
-will post again after I've calmed down-
^---- Figure people should see what you said....Quote:
Originally posted here by poohsuntzu
Okay regs, want to get serious again? Let's rock.
Havn't been on IRC channels or slashdot much have you? It's continual and from the same people, so yes I will dare to lump them together.
It seems everyone but you detected the huge flash of sarcasim in terms of how these complainers usually respond.
Funny, because yet again it sounds like you havn't gotten out into society to check your opinions. The majority of people who MS bash are running a krad31337 UNIX/BSD/*NIX system because it's the latest fad, and I know this because I see it everyday with where I work... where I chat, and the comments on this thread.
This is a case in point, right here folks. Microsoft switched from multiple updates in a month to only a few because of the huge outcry administrators had due to how many times they had to run saftey tests on the new patches before releasing them onto the network... over and over. But.. as always.. someone will complain about it the other way around.
There is a common equation when it comes to uptime:
uptime = online dick size
I don't care if my slackware box has a year and a half uptime, big deal. Doesn't do a damn thing for me or you. I don't care that my XP machine has to reboot every so often for new drivers. The process takes 20-25 seconds, that's it. So until you get over the old-school-elitist OMFGUPTIMEISLEET attitude, you won't ever see that uptime (unless it is in a mission critical server aspect) means absolutley nothing more than the above equation.
Then yet again, you havn't be reading a damn thing on the internet. And please, anyone who has ever seen someone complain that the windows firewall is off by default, comment and let me know. It happens on multiple forums, slashdot, IRC channels, and linux communities. Hell, it even happens on Windows communities. But yet, when you turn it on to please their security aspect... well now they don't like it because they see it as forcing software down their throats.
Do you think I just make this up as I go?
This isn't a matter of twisting, it's a matter of you trying your abolute hardest to make Microsoft seem like an uber-evil company with an OS that you can't grasp. I don't care how many hours you've "clocked" on Windows. IF you honestly feel time == knowledge when it comes to ANYTHING in life... well.. that would explain why you still feel uptime is the king of kings.
You think the firewall on by default removes choice? (another case in point, take notes class) Then turn it off and install your own. How hard was that?
First off, your first sentance comes off as someone who never read the SP2 whitepaper nor tested any sort of release against it's implimentations. A LOT of software broke with SP2 because.. and I'll tell you since you didn't read the paper... that software was using improper memory bounds handling/checking. A lot of MS products broke because those departments were coding improperly. Wait.. wait.. what's that? Different departments might be doing different things under different managers??? Yes. It happens everyday.
And about MS and their spyware evil plan to conqure the world. I'll give you that idea, and a tinfoil hat to go with it. Prove it, and I'll take the hat back from you.
Blah blah blah time == online dick length
Now that's interesting, considering 2 of my 3 boxes are on linux, and only my gaming machine is windows. No, sorry bud, you've messed up again. I only defend Microsoft and Windows because the majority of people havn't a clue what they are saying. You aren't the typical MS basher, I grant you that. But if you are complaining about SP2 security features... but complain still that it breaks things... but won't accept it because you didn't read the whitepaper and thus have NO clue why it does what it does.... well... your a case in point.
If you are losing functionality while streamlining it, then you don't know a damn thing about windows service management. My Windows runs on 75 megs of RAM, period. I'm not the least bit restricted, and since I leave most things to manual settings... that functionality comes on only when I need it and shuts off immedaitally after I don't. Peice of cake. Of course... you would have to care enough to research to know that.
Htregz, sorry. But you wanted to take this personal. You wanted to shout facts. Let's do it. Show me you know what you are talking about before trying to bash (and in the post you made prove my origonal point of MS bashers) and I'll listen. Because right now, this is old school "I've got a linux crush" bashing on a topic you may have sat longer in your chair looking at... but spent less time researching.
Well I'll tell ya what since I'm not about to turn this into a flame war and you've proven time and time again that you are a stubborn bastard.... I'll leave it at this...
You can go on and on about your white papers.... that's besides the point... You can quote all the research you want... I don't care if MS told me it was going to break every OS... the point is it shouldn't.. especially when it's their own software... regardless of different divisions and managers... I shouldn't install Service Pack 2 and lose functionality in VB... or with certain wireless features.. You can read all the theory you want and understand it as much as you want... and you can quote your tech support job all you want.. but at the end of the day theory means f@#$ all..... because software never functions in reality how it's supposed to in theory...MS ****s up (Yes I'm saying it this time instead of the comments because this needs to be emphasized) a lot of the time... More than a company of that size with that much money and that many customers should... and what do you get.... you get 'oopps... my bad'. I also love that you are quoting IRC Channels and Slashdot... while they may be geek central... they also have some of the lowest actual tech IQs... I could care less about what people in those places say... unless I've had previous experience dealing with them. As for your love of Microsoft.... you sleep in their bed (regardless of what your systems run).. I run XP as my primary OS.... I use it constantly and in depth.. As new viruses hit our networks I spend hours in the registry pinpointing changes... I also have 2 Linux boxes.... one acts as a server and one is my laptop.. See I can use them interchangeable and recognize the good in both.. however I can also recognize the bad... something you seem to have blinders to when it comes to MS... They have a lot of good.. VS .Net (2005 Beta looks amazing btw), MSSQL (blows Oracle out of the water), SMS is great for management on a large network.. Office Professional is great (if you have all the media)... Access is a waste and Word/Excel/PowerPoint can be easily replicated with free software... but OneNote and Visio are brilliant pieces of software... However with things regarding the Windows Firewall and Security, Patch Management and Resource Usage.... Microsoft has dropped the ball... I see that and know that it's evident... unfortunately in your theoretical world everything works out perfectly... Give yourself a few years... (yes, I realize we're nearly the same age.... but unfortunately you're fake beliefs and stubborn mind have warped you)... Then you'll understand how computers really work... and quit accepting theoretical reports as the word of God.
Peace,
HT
That's fine. I edited my post because I felt it was inappropriate. It doesn't bother me that you reposted it. So, let's get back to buisness.
I'm afraid not. A whitepaper defines how something works, why it works, and it's implications upon software. If you do not choose to read and follow the whitepapers, then the chances of having something go wrong during deployment are usually much higher.Quote:
You can go on and on about your white papers.... that's besides the point...
You are right , it shouldn't. But it did, and for a very good reason. People had begun coding sloppy, losing the proper secure coding techniques that used to be so highly valued. SP2 began to enforce some of that code in the name of security (like many linux patches) which some things broke because of their bad code. From improper C bounds checking, to bad permissions on memory management, things broke because they were an insecurity to the system. That's a very important thing to remember. So it broke bad programs, the majority of the programs had patches out in the first week after which fixed their shotty code on the affected areas.Quote:
You can quote all the research you want... I don't care if MS told me it was going to break every OS... the point is it shouldn't.. especially when it's their own software... regardless of different divisions and managers... I shouldn't install Service Pack 2 and lose functionality in VB...
No, I'm not talking theory, I'm talking first hand experience. My computers, my clients computers, my company's networks. I've seen it happen, made it happen, and thus base it on no theory. I am fully aware of software not preforming the way it was intended sometimes, but that doesn't mean it can't still be tested, researched, and those ascew possibiities accounted for.Quote:
You can read all the theory you want and understand it as much as you want... and you can quote your tech support job all you want.. but at the end of the day theory means f@#$ all..... because software never functions in reality how it's supposed to in theory...
I'm not trying to be degrading, but it sounds like you have not had much experience in a large scale enviroment (5000 + employees running multiple projects). When a company gets a certain size, with that many internal things happening at once... there are bound to be complications (much like the theory of perfect software just not happening). However, we shouldn't chalk this up to "It shouldn't happen" but instead "It will happen, eventually". I'll agree that MS has done some dumb moves in the past, but I respect what the company is trying to do as a whole.Quote:
MS ****s up (Yes I'm saying it this time instead of the comments because this needs to be emphasized) a lot of the time... More than a company of that size with that much money and that many customers should... and what do you get.... you get 'oopps... my bad'.
Well, that regs was the entire point of my previous rant. Not based towards you, nor the general "smarter admin" community, and thus the obvious scarastic capslock. It was meant for the majority of MS Bashers, the ones that hang on slashdot, IRC and the likes. That was the entire point.Quote:
I also love that you are quoting IRC Channels and Slashdot... while they may be geek central... they also have some of the lowest actual tech IQs... I could care less about what people in those places say... unless I've had previous experience dealing with them.
I'm far from blind, especially since I'm a very former beta tester for Microsoft's Longhorn testbed. I know Windows has it's flaws, and Microsoft as well. But I've just, over problem solving experiences, learned workarounds to easily bypass most of them. Instead of throwing my hands up and hating the OS, I adapted around it to work how I needed it to versus force myself to work how it wanted me to. I can write lists that I still don't like about windows, but that's for another topic.Quote:
however I can also recognize the bad... something you seem to have blinders to when it comes to MS...
Once again, I don't talk in theory, I talk from first hand experience. Belive me or not, it won't matter because you won't change and neither will I. We both have our experiences in which we speak from, but we both took different paths to overcome those experiences.Quote:
(yes, I realize we're nearly the same age.... but unfortunately you're fake beliefs and stubborn mind have warped you)... Then you'll understand how computers really work... and quit accepting theoretical reports as the word of God.
And my apologies about the origonal post. That is why I removed it, as it wasn't to hide what I've done from the others of AO, but because I was ashamed at my outburst towards you. Now, I would much rather talk facts and numbers with you, experiences and why we can have such conflicting opinions on the same OS resulting from our own trials with it.
Hey, if Microsoft wants to add in anti-spyware, then I'm all for it. It's going to make administration work that much easier, and the end users will have a much better computing experience.
I'm glad to see M$ taking more of an active approach to security.
--PuRe
Hey Hey,
Well now that I've talked to others I'm glad I've learned I'm not the only one getting a kick out of some of your comments...
You want to discuss numbers... so let's look at the bare basics first...and discuss stuff one topic at a time
You're computer uses 75MB of RAM (No Resource Hogging) and takes 25 seconds to boot (Reboots are insignificant)... that's all fine and dandy for you... but since we're supposed to be IT professionals.. how about taking a look at a corporate environment.
So let's take a series of machines on a large network... and let's work on one of them...
IT Support has brought me a freshly imaged machine and plugs it in and walks away saying it works fine... I boot the machine.. Now I'm on a domain so I've got the complete set of standard services plus some additional services... (SMS client, etc)... Messages are sent throughout the internal network by Messenger service... so it's enabled.. Wireless Zero was enabled by default and no one thought to turn it off..
You're saying so what... A few extra seconds in the boot time...
But now let's add my software.. The AV has to load, OneNote loads on startup so I can keep track of things... my office encrypts email so PGPTray loads, we have a Live Communication Server so Messenger loads, I have a USB Harddrive so that I can take my work home with me.. this has to be detected and added.
We're already up to a couple minutes for boot..
However.. I have to authenticate against the domain and there's no profile caching/local profiles so this has to be pulled down and policies have to be applied...
So we've got what about a 3 minute boot time.
Now that I'm in.... well I use Outlook for my office communication.. I've got to load it... It has to connect to the exchange server and display my email... There's another 30 seconds for it to complete. I hit my power button over 3 and a half minutes ago and I'm still not being productive. I'm also using TONS of resources, so I'm already noticing things start to drag...
Now The computer pop-ups a dialog box.. It has detected new hardware (Monitor is different than the one they ghosted with).. Windows fixes this and says I have to reboot (Now it's not really necessary here but I'm a basic computer user.... how do I know any better.. so I reboot)..
We all know Windows takes longer to shutdown than to boot (they changed this because people complained right).. but even so let's say with saving settings, logging off the domain and closing software.. 3 minutes... That's 6.5 minutes Total... add the 30 seconds to aminute for it to install the driver and you're looking at 7 (we'll round down)...
I reboot.. Another 3.5 minutes... now I'm at 10 minutes wasted..
I get everything loaded and remember I have to send my supervisor an email that's on my USB Thumb Drive... It's a cheapie no-name and I plug it in.... What's this message.. Windows has finished installing my devices please reboot (Now normally a Thumb Drive will say you can now use your hardware... however, on occassion we have seen please reboot messages)... Now you have to shutdown and reboot again.... another 6.5 to go down and back up... We're looking at 17.. maybe 18 minutes now..
I'm back up and running and I compose my message... By default Outlook uses Word to compose it's email.. but wait.. there's a bug that hasn't been fixed yet.. sometimes after sending email with Word... Word stays open in the background tying up from 20-40MB of RAM... now my system is even slower.. It takes a good 30-60 seconds for software to load... I'm twiddling my thumbs and remembering my 486...
I'm preparing a presentation so I've got word open with my notes... powerpoint open with my slides and visio open for some flow charts I have to create... All these MS Products and all this wasted memory... my machine is sluggish and seems unresponsive at times... I email a colleague for some additional documentation I need... oh look.. another copy of word in the background... now we're looking at 40-80MB of RAM wasted..
All of a sudden I get this pop-up that Windows has installed an update (look it's the BITS update)... I have to reboot again... There's another 10 minutes.. .Let's say I've lots a good half hour by the time I'm back up...
I have to open all my work again and I start in at it again.... I'm working for an hour and I get message that there's an update to be installed.. It looks big and ends up being SP2... I reboot the machine... another 10 minutes...
I'm back up and I can't log in... Oh wait.. Service Pack 2 firewall is running and it's blocking my communication with AD... with no cached profiles.. I'm really fubared. Time to Call IT Support again.
Now if I'm this person supervisor... I've lost over an hour to computer problems... if this was a dept. of 30 machines... that's a lot of lost productivity... Now in most corportate settings SP2 would have been installed or denied by Group Policy... but that doesn't have to be the case... Also automatic updates would prolly be set for the middle of the night and to a local SUS server with approved updates only...
However that wasn't the case in this scenerio... That's a lot of lost time... To you uptime may be the same as a big online dick... but in the real world uptime means productivity... and in an office setting you can't have a bunch of streamlined PCs... especially when you're supporting so many end-users...
Realistically this would skip the last steps of the auto updates but you're still looking at 30 minutes for everything to take place... that's 15 hours lost for these new machines to come in.... The boot up is also rather slow if our policy is to shutdown machines at the end of the night and boot them every morning.. That's 30 minutes of lost productivity each week from my employees....
Uptime is very important in a large evironment... even if it is the end user machine... The only time it doesn't matter is a single user machine at home... then it's just fun to test your competancy and knowledge.. see how long you can keep something that's working hard running without a reboot...
Anyways... you wanted a real world example.
There you go...
Peace,
HT
PS... forgive typos... I've had two days of First Aid and CPR training followed by 8 hour shifts of work.... I'm exhausted and going to bed... I'll see what this brings tomorrow... g'nite
That was uncalled for, and you know it.Quote:
Well now that I've talked to others I'm glad I've learned I'm not the only one getting a kick out of some of your comments...
Fine, I give up. You know more about large scale IT instances while my experience has been with small streamlined networks and singular streamlined workstations. Happy?
OK.... I'll bite...
HT... You are kidding me right... You dual boot a box with WinXP Pro and SUS 9.2 don't you? And you are saying that the SUSE boots faster than the XP? If it does then you stripped it down like Pooh says he does.... Not only is it slower to boot than XP Pro on the same laptop but it grinds on plently of other things during normal use too.
Getting back to the topic at hand.....
It's plain to se that M$ is damned if it doesn't do something and damned if it does. So any argument is moot.... It does make me giggle though when I see many who used to bitch that M$ posts a patch a day and they "can't keep up" now bitch that it isn't often enough. Then they bitched that autoupdates break existing loads so the patch a day is even harder but are very happy that their *nix is autoupdating every day... I bet that breaks sometimes too...
It's all a mess and when people start topics like this they are simply baiting, nothing more, nothing less.....
To anyone and everyone... I can prove that my operating system is better than yours in one simple statement:- I can't use yours properly so mine is superior..... for me!!!
Tiger, sorry to say, but I have to disagree with your boot time assessment from my own experiences.
The only reason (IME) any linux box will take longer to boot up than an XP box is if you have to do an FS scan or you have a LOT of services starting up. I've mentioned elsewhere that I have two lilo profiles for the same version of slack on this box:
Profile 1 boots up without Apache, Snort, MySQL, PostgreSQL, and Tomcat.
Profile 2 boots up *with* Apache, Snort, MySQL, PostgreSQL, and Tomcat.
I also have WinXP Pro on this box. For me to boot from lilo selection to desktop is roughly 45 seconds on the WinXP install, about 30 on my Slack Profile 1, and about 1:20 on my Slack Profile 2. That doesn't directly speak to SuSE 9.2's default install, however it gives me at least an indication of how a *slight* change to the boot profile (From Development Workstation to Home Use Desktop) could result in about 30 or more seconds faster boot.
As for "stripping it down", I really don't get why it's an issue. So what if you can boot to a Linux desktop faster than a Windows one?
PS: A comment regarding ClamAV for *nix. The reason it exists is to catch WINDOWS viruses. It's quite popular to use a *nix box as a fileserver to serve stuff up to Windows clients. I do that here at home, and yes, I run ClamAV on it. When you install it, it doesn't come with only definitions for the 7 or 8 viruses for *nix you know...
EDIT: Typos. ;)
csch:
I'll run with the 45 secs from lilo to login for XP on this box.... It's about right... I can get my glasses out of their case and onto my face.... ;)
The default install of SUSE 9.1 I have, (and you know it's default because I have no clue as to how to alter it..... :o ), is about 1:30.... About twice as long. I also find stuff takes longer in many cases, (trying to alter network card stuff for example), takes longer... It seems to always want to look for hardware or something while XP did that at the beginning and doesn't do it every time you want to change config, (it monitors for HW changes and picks them up as it goes along)....
I dunno... I don't see any great great advantage in *nix except for some of the more "advanced" security tools.... But then they are so badly supported that it usually means buying new hardware, (wireless NIC's for example), in order to use the tool in the first place... In many ways that doesn't make sense unless you have a high risk environment.... But even then a properly configured system in Win "whatever new" can be secured quite well.... Ok, it might need some _good_ ports of some *nix apps, (snort etc.), but it is equally doable. I'll concede that point every time.....
It doesn't??? No wonder it's such a hog.... ;)Quote:
When you install it, it doesn't come with only definitions for the 7 or 8 viruses for *nix you know...
Hey Hey,
My load time to XP is about 45-60 seconds... However when you factor in all my startup apps (AVG, PGPTray, Lexmark Photocopier Software, AIM, MSN, GMail Notify. and Tea Timer) along with opening Outlook and IRC... this is a lot longer... My computer is usable after 2 - 2.5 minutes. And it's not a slow machine.. it's a 2500+ w/ 768MB of DDR. Compare that with my linux box... it's 350Mhz w/ 256MB of Ram. It loads several servers (include MySQLd, HTTPd, FTPd, etc) and doesn't have a GUI interface... it loads in around 45 seconds. My SuSE 9.2 Laptop is somewhere in the neighbourhood of 1.5 min... however that includes all the server services and the full desktop.Quote:
Originally posted here by Tiger Shark
The default install of SUSE 9.1 I have, (and you know it's default because I have no clue as to how to alter it..... :o ), is about 1:30.... About twice as long. I also find stuff takes longer in many cases, (trying to alter network card stuff for example), takes longer... It seems to always want to look for hardware or something while XP did that at the beginning and doesn't do it every time you want to change config, (it monitors for HW changes and picks them up as it goes along)....
As far as bad support... I'm not sure what you're talking about....
Let's take my laptop
Dell Inspiron 1100
-- Intel Extreme Graphics i845G/GL
-- Generic AC '97 Sound
-- Broadcomm 440 10/100 NIC
-- Conextant 56k Modem
-- 3 Asst. Wireless Adapters -- USB Linksys Wireless Adapter; PCMCIA Linksys Wireless Adapter; Cisco Aironet 350
Windows
I get Graphics but not the correct driver.... I have to download it
I get sound
I have no NIC until I download and install the drivers
I have no Modem until I download the drivers
I had to install drivers for both Linksys cards.
Linux
I get Graphics with the correct driver from the Intel site
I get sound
I have a fully functional NIC
I have a fully functional Modem
I had to install drivers only for the PCMCIA Linksys Wireless Adapter.
As for changing configs... It's extremely simple in Linux to change the config ifconfig <device> new config.... Windows isn't nearly that easy... it's a whole lot of point and click BS which does nothing but waste time... and I'm not sure what you mean on the config... SuSE especially has a hardware monitor... it detects new hardware and that's the only thing it does.. If you're using Yast then the only difference is that It shows you as it loads the configs where as windows doesn't... You also have to remember Windows uses the registry for storing a lot of ****... making it difficult for the user to change... but faster for Windows to load settings... Linux uses flat files... allowing the user to make quick changes at the heart.. but operate a little more slowly if they need a GUI to walk them through.
You could argue that advantages and disadvantages for hours... but the plain fact of the matter is if you can't see it's advantages then you don't know the OS... As far as server and security sides go it is highly superior and much more functional... As a desktop it is now equal... It depends on what you are looking for. You can definately secure Windows just as well... I think that's a moot point in this discussion. That's a discussion for actual MS Bashers.. This is more those of us that are intelligent enough to realize Windows is quite flawed...Quote:
I dunno... I don't see any great great advantage in *nix except for some of the more "advanced" security tools.... But then they are so badly supported that it usually means buying new hardware, (wireless NIC's for example), in order to use the tool in the first place... In many ways that doesn't make sense unless you have a high risk environment.... But even then a properly configured system in Win "whatever new" can be secured quite well.... Ok, it might need some _good_ ports of some *nix apps, (snort etc.), but it is equally doable. I'll concede that point every time.....
Peace,
HT
I guess this falls under the category of let the buyer beware.
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5495994.html
Means..Quote:
Sunbelt President Alex Eckelberry said he and executives from Microsoft are in cordial talks about a number of "business and technical issues" relating to the Giant acquisition.
Give it to us or we crush you. :D
Means..Quote:
"There's nothing about these pre-existing commitments that will prevent us from bringing to market the product we think is needed and is right for our customers," said Amy Carroll, director of product management in Microsoft's security business and technology unit.
If you don't like it, sue us.
All this bloatware MS is adding to their products annoys me.
I have just recently cleaned a SP2 box (without that last IE patch) infected by a hackdoor variant. Several antivirus and spyware scanners could not do it so manual intervention was required.
Do you think they can do much better with a spyware scanner?. Sure, it will reduce malware more but remember that the malware writer wants their program undetected too and a spyware scanner by Microsoft sure isnt going to make them give up.
i wonder if microsofts spyware/adware implementation will allow me to finnaly remove and keep MSN off my system for good.
What I find particularly interesting about this aquisition is the following link...pay attention to topic #2 - Microsoft:
http://www.stusnews.com/
Personally, I've been prototyping CounterySpy Enterprise throughout its various beta releases, right up until version 1.0 came out a few weeeks ago. I find it to be the most "enterprise" of all of the anti-spyware/adware solutions I prototyped and getting into the product early enabled me to secure some very attractive pricing.
Anyway, my point is this: Let MS purchase a (dare I say more reliable) anti-spyware/adware company and try to develop a competing product. I'm interested in the definition updates which MS will have to share with Sunbelt and leveraging those definitions with an enterprise product I both trust and am comfortable with.
Cheers,
<0
If you're using default and you let SUSE do everything, you are using GRUB not LILO.Quote:
Originally posted here by Tiger Shark
[B]csch:
I'll run with the 45 secs from lilo to login for XP on this box.... It's about right... I can get my glasses out of their case and onto my face.... ;)
So you have time to grab a Coffee too. Big deal. As for the don't know how ****:Quote:
The default install of SUSE 9.1 I have, (and you know it's default because I have no clue as to how to alter it..... :o ), is about 1:30.... About twice as long.
Grab manuals that shipped with SUSE
Hold in hand
Check to be sure Manuals are right side up
Continue to grasp firmly in hand
Open.
Pay me a one time fee, pop SUSE box on Net, give me Root Password and IP, I'll configure it and shut down the services you don't need. For an extra 10 dollars, I won't make your BG pic Goatse.
So does it take longer for SUSE than XP does to reboot for those changes?Quote:
I also find stuff takes longer in many cases, (trying to alter network card stuff for example), takes longer... It seems to always want to look for hardware or something while XP did that at the beginning and doesn't do it every time you want to change config, (it monitors for HW changes and picks them up as it goes along)....
You're right ;)Quote:
I dunno...
Quote:
I don't see any great great advantage in *nix except for some of the more "advanced" security tools.... But then they are so badly supported that it usually means buying new hardware, (wireless NIC's for example), in order to use the tool in the first place...
Again, grab those books. Now I know it's something new to you, reading Email without having to worry the thing has a Worm attached, but you'll get used to it.