----- Original Message ----- From: "Curt Purdy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 11:59 PM Subject: RE: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
> > Upgrade W2K to XP? I call that a downgrade! I won't allow XP (sp2 or not) > on my network. All new boxes must be reformatted and W2K or SuSE Linux or > BSD installed (unless of course it is a Mac with OpenBSD kernel that is > always welcome). > Why? XP has System Restore in it which certainly beats the hell out of restoring an image any day when a minor problem crops up. Also, as you know what you are doing, it is no less able to be protected than W2K. The only annoyance I have with XP on a network is it is dog slow to become part of the network unless you manually assign it an IP number, which I always do anyway. I never saw an auto assigned IP on a network so slow before this. I find XP to be basically W2K with a few extras in it but note I don't have anything to do with large networks when saying that so haven't had the chance to see it operating on one. 20-30 together though, it seems as good as W2K and when properly protected - as you would do with W2k - seems fine to me. What am I missing? Greg. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
