Linux-Advocacy Digest #959, Volume #33 Thu, 26 Apr 01 17:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows is a virus ("Kelsey Bjarnason")
Re: Microsoft hit new security 'level' :-) ("Kelsey Bjarnason")
Re: there's always a bigger fool ("Kelsey Bjarnason")
Re: Aaron Kuklis Arrested! ("Kelsey Bjarnason")
Re: Why do Win advocates suck? Part 1 ("Kelsey Bjarnason")
Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product (Chronos Tachyon)
Re: Impact of Internet ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Baseball (jim dutton)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Windows is a virus ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Windows is a virus ("Andy Walker")
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Exploit devastates WinNT/2K security (Bob Hauck)
Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP (clcobra)
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Peter da Silva)
Re: Aaron Kookis: over 340 posts in 6 days! (The Mudshark)
Re: What to do with Bill Clinton (was Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)) (The
Ghost In The Machine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows is a virus
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:19:11 GMT
[snips]
"Andy Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> What is the technical term to describe a virus?
> A piece of software involuntarily installed on a computer causing wilful
> damage?
> Well doesn't Windows fit this description?
Not that definition. One of the items in particular, "involuntarily
installed" cannot possibly apply; you voluntarily bought a machine with
Windows preinstalled, or you voluntarily installed it. I find it difficult
to accept the notion that someone actually held a gun to your head and
forced you to purchase a particular machine, or to install a particular OS.
> When I bought my computer I got
> an unwanted piece of software called Windows98 on it
So why did you buy that machine? I usually buy machines with no OS
preinstalled. Saves a few bucks, and since I generally repartition anyways,
having a preinstalled OS is simply pointless.
> I don't even
> think I need mention the deliberate attempts of Microsoft to screw up
other
> software not owned by themselves such as quicktime!
Don't know what they've supposedly done with QT; I've certainly always had
the runtime QT installed and it's always worked just fine. Hmm...
correction... I haven't _always_ had it installed; it's not installed on my
2KAS box. Still, I'd be at least a little surprised if it didn't work
there, too.
> Perhaps the courts might do better pursuing them for manufacturing and
> distributing a virus
If they'd actually produced one, which, even by your definition, they
haven't - and that's without looking at the "willful damage" aspect of your
definition, which I suspect you'd have trouble proving.
> No doubt Microsoft fans will whine about this but some people are so dumb
> they don't even realise how they have been ripped off for years, they're
> probably the same people who couldn't cross the right box in the U.S.
> elections!
> Some people you just can't get through to, so why bother even try!
And some people you can get through to - but simply because one rejects a
flawed premise such as yours doesn't make on a fan, or make one unable to
understand what the issues you're trying (but failing) to discuss actually
are.
------------------------------
From: "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft hit new security 'level' :-)
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:19:11 GMT
[snips]
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9c8t75$qoe$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> .net, I would go for it, however, on one condition, I expect 24/7/365
> uptime, and if there is any downtime, I expect atleast $100 for every
> minute I cannot access my data. If my data is corrupted in anyway, because
> of hackers, crackers etc. I expect a minimum compensation of $10,000.
Sounds good. Where can I find a Linux-based server that'll host my data and
guarantee the above repayment rates when the data isn't accessible?
------------------------------
From: "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: there's always a bigger fool
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:19:11 GMT
"Zippy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> this is an amusing conversation.
>
> i use StarOffice every day. unlike MS Office, it doesn't crash my machine
> every 15 minutes.
You must have a *really* bunged up system, if Office crashes it every 15
minutes. I run, for example, Outlook (not express) all day, every day, no
crashes. I run Word regularly, and can't recall, offhand, having had it
crash in at least several months. Access? Nope, no crashes. Excel? Nope,
no crashes.
So what part of Office is crashing your machine 4 times an hour?
------------------------------
From: "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Aaron Kuklis Arrested!
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:19:11 GMT
"David Goldstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> > > What possible benefits does HTML have over normal text? Apart from
being
> > > able to click on a click and the browser automatically loads?
> >
> > Several, actually, including, for example, some degree of layout
control,
> > the ability to highlight important items, to define headings, etc, etc.
> >
> > I know, I know, the idea of allowing users to have flexible control over
> > things like layout and appearance is anethema to the folks who are all
> > for allowing users to have flexible control over things like OS
settings.
> > Go figger.
>
> When you are posting to a newsgroup, there is no benefit to HTML
> encoding.
Despite my having just outlined several benefits. Interesting thinking,
there. "Several means none."
------------------------------
From: "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why do Win advocates suck? Part 1
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:19:12 GMT
[snips]
"David Goldstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> install the number of different packages that I have installed with SuSE
> 7.1 (the best Linux distro on the market) and use less disk space than
> what I needed to use.
Local pricing($CDN):
Maxtor 61.4Gb ATA-100 5400RPM drive: $265.
Cost per GB: Approx $4.35.
Cost to store the 1.5Gb mentioned earlier: Approx $6.50.
Around here, at least, that's about the price of 2 2L bottles of Coke from
the corner store. It's not an issue I would consider remotely significant,
personally.
Okay, so Win2K yadda yadda sucks up 1.5Gb of disk space. And?
------------------------------
From: Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:24:29 GMT
On Wed 25 Apr 2001 10:18, "JS PL" <hi everybody!> wrote:
[Snip]
>>
>> Then your setup is insecure. Do you have Win2K installed on a FAT32
>> partition, by chance?
>
> Here's an idea...shut the fuck up quit trying to grasp at straws. It's an
> NTSF file system, your just plain_fucking_wrong about the Win2K burning
> issue / FUD! End of discussion.
>
Thanks to Erik Funkenbusch(!), I managed to get CD burning working as a
regular user, and it required altering the local security policy to permit
mortal users to load and unload drivers. Yeah, that's plain wrong, huh?
*Plonk*
--
Chronos Tachyon
Guardian of Eristic Paraphernalia
Gatekeeper of the Region of Thud
[Reply instructions: My real domain is "echo <address> | cut -d. -f6,7"]
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.arch,comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.theory,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: Impact of Internet
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 22:27:05 +0100
>> World Wide Web is nothing more than web servers.
>
> There are other URL prefixes than "http". For instance, "ftp", "wais",
> "telnet", "gopher", ...
yes, and the www refers to the http ones.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jim dutton)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Baseball
Date: 26 Apr 2001 20:26:23 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>jim dutton wrote:
>>
>> Well as this is a written medium your falacious
>
>Ooooh, that misspelled word there almost sounds dirty
>to me. Keep on talking, sailor!
Ate me gorgeous.
>> ploy at voice tone
>> is a dog that isn't gonna hunt.
>
>A quaint metaphor!
That made you look stupid.
How sad!
>> As far as sarcasm being annotated by
>> quotes you simply pulle dthat out of your ass.
>
>Is your thumb paralyzed?
Yes it's up your mothers snapper. Thanks for asking.
>> Nice try but considerably
>> lame. Other symbols! You really are one dumb muthafucker.
>
>I suppose you mean this "insult" to goad me to a rash
>and silly response. Unfortunately for your jollies,
>I'm a rather poikilothermous individual where trolling
>is concerned, especially when the trolling is so glaring.
Thank you for admitting you where in error.
>> >Although jackie may have meant sarcasm, his writing did
>> >not convey it.
>>
>> On planet Chris the sanctimonous tard.
>
>You got the sanctimonious part right (except for the
>spelling.)
NIce I.
>> >> Never mind we saw the answer.
>> >Who's "we"?
>>
>> Your mother and I.
>>
>> >> -Jeem, The stupidity runs deep in that one
>> >
>> >Uhhhh, is /that/ one "sarcasm"?
>>
>> Is that tard script?
>>
>> -Jeem, Look Chris---------><blink><bold><font size=10billion><ul>""SARCASM"".
>
>Good one! Ha ha!
>
>> http://www.ejeem.com Autococker2000/Dye SS
>
>Cool little site!
Thank you sir.
>> Steatopygias's 'R' Us.
>You selling fat asses?
Givin em away.
>> Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us.
>I prefer the metric system!
Check your dicktionary again.
No that wasn't a misspelling.
-Jeem, Goodbye
========================================================================
http://www.ejeem.com Autococker2000/Dye SS
Steatopygias's 'R' Us. doh#0000000005 That ain't no Hottentot.
Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. tbtw#6. s.s.m#8. There ain't no more
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little long
er. " -- Henry Kissinger
========================================================================
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 16:33:42 -0400
JS PL wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > JS PL wrote:
> > >
> > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > > JS PL wrote:
> > > > > [snip]
> > > > > > > Actually, IBM offered three OSes originally: MS-DOS, CP/M,
> > > > > > > and one other- I think it was Xenix or something like that.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > MS_DOS was low cost and the others were artificially high.
> > > > >
> > > > > Presumably their makers throught they were worth it.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > No, the costs of other OS's were artificially high. They M$ started up
> > > > the per preocessor licesnses. Vendos would have had to pay for -2- OS
> > > > licenses per machine if they bundled anything but M$ OS's
> > > >
> > > > > Can't think why.
> > > > >
> > > > > [snip]
> > > > > > > It was also so trivial that it bought Microsoft
> > > > > > > very little. It was Windows that put MS where
> > > > > > > they are now- but that is another story.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It was having DOS chosen by IBM and the later per processor
> licenses
> > > > > > that did it.
> > > > >
> > > > > As I said, IBM offered three choices and MS-DOS was
> > > > > the one consumers favored early on. But that didn't
> > > > > matter much- had (say) CP/M won out, Microsoft
> > > > > could still have persued their Windows strategy
> > > > > by running Windows on CP/M.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yeah. Right.
> > > >
> > > > > Microsoft's volume discounts were no doubt helpful
> > > > > in a general way later on, but hardly a primary factor.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Volume licenses... oh, you mean the ones that state dyou had to pay
> for
> > > > an M$ OS wether you shipped one or not.. those licenses?
> > > >
> > > > > OEMs, after all, had to be shipped volume before volume
> > > > > discounts made any sense for them.
> > > >
> > > > I think you should re-examine your history.
> > >
> > > YOU YOURSELF ARE CLUELESS about per-processor history! You are the one
> who
> > > should re-examine history! It has been altered by numerous "I heard"
> quoting
> > > of anti-Microsoft fanatics playing the telephone game. Let's get back
> to
> > > some actual history shall we?
> > >
> > > Microsoft began offering per processor licenses at some point in the
> late
> > > 1980s at the request of OEMs who wanted to simplify the administration
> of
> > > their per system licenses. (Kempin FTC Testimony (Exh. 9) at 96-97;
> Hosogi
> > > Dep. (Exh. 8) at 27-28; Lum Dep. (Exh. 6) at 82; Fade Dep. (Exh. 7) at
> > > 103-07.) Because OEMs generally change microprocessors much less
> frequently
> > > than they change other components of their systems, a per processor
> license
> > > decreased the number of contract amendments that had been necessary
> under a
> > > per system license due to system changes. (Kempin FTC Testimony (Exh. 9)
> at
> > > 96-97; Hosogi Dep. (Exh. 8) at 27-28; Fade Dep. (Exh. 7) at 103-06.)
> > >
> > > Although per processor licenses generally obligated the OEM to pay a
> royalty
> > > on every machine shipped containing a particular processor, Microsoft
> > > negotiated exceptions with at least twenty-seven OEMs to allow those
> OEMs to
> > > ship up to ten percent of their machines containing particular processor
> > > types without paying royalties on those machines. (See Kempin FTC
> Testimony
> > > (Exh. 9) at 104-05; Lum Dep. (Exh. 6) at 92; Apple Dep. (Exh. 10) at
> 23-24;
> > > Microsoft's Second Response to Department of Justice Civil Investigative
> > > Demand No. 10300 (excerpts attached as Exh. 21) at C001309-11.) Other
> OEMs
> > > with no such exception in their per processor licenses nonetheless
> offered
> > > non-Microsoft operating systems with their computers during the term of
> > > their per processor licenses. (See, e.g., Fade Dep. (Exh. 7) at 111-13;
> > > Roberts DOJ Decl. (Exh. 11) at C005864; Lieven Dep. (Exh. 12) at 187.)
> > >
> > > During Microsoft's 1994 fiscal year - the final year in which it offered
> per
> > > processor licenses - approximately 59% of MS-DOS units licensed by OEM
> > > customers were covered by per processor licenses. In fiscal year 1993,
> > > approximately 62% of MS-DOS units licensed by OEM customers were covered
> by
> > > per processor licenses. The prior year, Microsoft's 1992 fiscal year,
> > > approximately 51% of MS-DOS units licensed by OEMs were covered by per
> > > processor licenses. Per processor licenses made up 27% in fiscal year
> 1991,
> > > 22% in fiscal year 1990 and smaller percentages in earlier years. 2a
> > >
> > > DRI similarly attempted to combat piracy by entering into exclusive OEM
> > > licenses that required the OEM (unlike in Microsoft's per processor
> license)
> > > to install and pay a royalty for DR DOS on **each and every computer
> shipped
> > > by the OEM.**!!!!! (See Vasco Dep. (Exh. 14) at 125; DiCorti 7/30/98
> Dep.
> > > (Exh. 15) at 165-71.) DRI executives have testified that these licenses
> were
> > > equivalent to per processor licenses. (DiCorti 7/30/98 Dep. (Exh. 15) at
> > > 357; Gunn Dep. (Exh. 16) at 165.) Numerous examples of these DRI per
> > > processor-type licenses are attached as exhibits to this memorandum.
> (See
> > > License Agreement with ABC Computer Co. Ltd. (Exh. 26) at C0309430;
> > > [REDACTED] ; License Agreement with Olidata SpA (Exh. 28) at A0228806;
> > > License Agreement with Athena Informatica (Exh. 29) at A0654065.) In
> > > addition to combating piracy, DRI had another business reason for
> offering
> > > its version of the per processor license: giving the OEM customer what
> it
> > > wanted. (Gunn Dep. (Exh. 16) at 166.) DRI pricing policies authorized
> price
> > > discounts for OEMs that elected to bundle DR DOS with every hardware
> unit
> > > shipped. (See DRI's Price List, Pricing Memoranda, and Pricing Policies
> > > (Exh. 30) at PC9653-54.)
> >
> > Can you please tell me why Vobis was, wssentially forced into per
> > processor licensing, and why per processor licensing landed M$ in
> > trouble with the DOJ if it was so benign and so requested by vendors?
>
> I don't know anything about Vobis, but the claim flies in the face the facts
> so is most likely false. It (ppla) didn't land Microsoft in trouble. The
> DOJ, after wasting 12,000 man hours crawling up Microsofts ass looking for
> ANYTHING, found absolutely no prosecutable offences. And thus had to stand
> before a judge and declare "We have found no prosecutable offences" but have
> reached an agreement with MS volunteering to cease and descist on a couple
> issues. MS was being extremely generous agreeing to ANYTHING because the DOJ
> didn't have a leg to stand on.
The Microsoft File, The Secret Case Against Bill Gates, Wendy Goldman
Rohm. Read it.
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Windows is a virus
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 21:38:28 +0100
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> >
> > Andy Walker wrote:
> >
> > > What is the technical term to describe a virus?
> > > A piece of software involuntarily installed on a computer causing wilful
> > > damage?
> > > Well doesn't Windows fit this description? When I bought my computer I got
> > > an unwanted piece of software called Windows98 on it and as for wilful
> > > damage, without including data wiped out due to BSOD, it does quite a good
> > > job of wiping LILO off the boot sector when you install it. I don't even
> > > think I need mention the deliberate attempts of Microsoft to screw up
> > > other software not owned by themselves such as quicktime!
> > > Perhaps the courts might do better pursuing them for manufacturing and
> > > distributing a virus rather than a monopoly, you never know, it might end
> > > up with Gates doing a stretch. Hopefully he'll bend down to pick up the
> > > soap and realise what it feels like to be shafted like his customers have
> > > been for years!
> > > No doubt Microsoft fans will whine about this but some people are so dumb
> > > they don't even realise how they have been ripped off for years, they're
> > > probably the same people who couldn't cross the right box in the U.S.
> > > elections!
> > > Some people you just can't get through to, so why bother even try!
> > >
> > Windows isn't a virus. A virus is small, compact, fast, efficient and does
>
> No...that's not part of the definition. In fact some viruses are specifically
> designed to GROW without bounds and/or be inefficient.
>
> > the job it was orignally written for. Windows is the complete opposite!
>
> Windows does the job it was designed for: Corrupt user's data, and
> keep the dimwitted moron's expectations so low that they are easily
> impressed by a whole 36 hours of continous uptime.
>
Now I KNOW your taking the piss. 36 hours! Try 36 minutes.
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 22:37:20 +0100
>> Tell me why I should run Win2K on my computer. I have a P133 w/72M of
>> ram btw and I'm not willing to upgrade any time soon.
>>
>> Now how great would it work on that?
>>
>> -Ed
> Geesus Ed, you Luddite....how on earth do you expect to keep the wheels
> of commerce turning with your clear lack of social responsibility!!
Not at all, since I saved so much on software and lack of hardware
upgrades, I was able to really splash out and get a fantastic moniter,
and Linux looke absoloutely amazing running on it :-)
> After all the trouble Microsoft have gone to for their shareholders ...
> *Built in obsolesence
But if I don't upgade all my feirnds will think I'm poor because I have
an old computer. I don't want to loose my friends, so I'll thank MS for
reminding me so often. Now I have lots of friends.
> *Controlled Feature Release (tm)
But if they released features too fast, how would I be expected to cope?
The BSOD was enough on its own, I couldn't cope with stability as well.
> *Cross Intel Pollinisation
> *Advanced Hardware Takeup (tm)
If you can spend lots on advanced hardware, people will think you are
rich and will be friends with you.
> *Standards Improvement (tm)
And look how much better they are.
> *Latest Technology Recycling (tm)
LOL!
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Andy Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows is a virus
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 21:35:06 -0000
Kelsey Bjarnason wrote in message
<3p%F6.1367$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>[snips]
>
>"Andy Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> What is the technical term to describe a virus?
>> A piece of software involuntarily installed on a computer causing wilful
>> damage?
>> Well doesn't Windows fit this description?
>
>Not that definition. One of the items in particular, "involuntarily
>installed" cannot possibly apply; you voluntarily bought a machine with
>Windows preinstalled, or you voluntarily installed it. I find it difficult
>to accept the notion that someone actually held a gun to your head and
>forced you to purchase a particular machine, or to install a particular OS.
>
>> When I bought my computer I got
>> an unwanted piece of software called Windows98 on it
>
>So why did you buy that machine? I usually buy machines with no OS
>preinstalled. Saves a few bucks, and since I generally repartition
anyways,
>having a preinstalled OS is simply pointless.
I don't recall ever seeing a computer in the high street without Windows
installed. The only machine that doesn't come with Windows is one you build
yourself! I don't know if the case is different in other countries, but in
England you get no choice and certainly no money off if you ask for a
machine with no OS. I bought a machine which was to the spec I wanted and a
price I was willing to pay. If I found a machine to the same spec without
Windows that was cheaper believe me I would of bought it. The bottom line is
you are being forced to buy a product you don't want and Microsoft is
getting extremely rich on the result.
As for getting a refund on an unused copy, well see how far people got with
that one!
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 22:42:49 +0100
> :> They should have inspected some open-source software for ideas, like
> :> Fvwm95.
>
> : Fvwm95 is not software, it's a theme for FVWM2.
>
> More of a fvwm2 hack, really.
>
> http://www.plig.org/xwinman/fvwm95.html
I took a look at the site. I wouldn't say it was a hack, since FVWM2 is
flexible enough to allow this functionality without hacking: the task bar
is just a module running as a seperate process. The rest are jst window
decorations.
I was also disappointed to find I wasn't the first person to capture an
Xterm in my button bar :-(
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Exploit devastates WinNT/2K security
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:43:41 GMT
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:55:38 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Said Bob Hauck in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:11:22
> >On Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:38:16 +1200, Matthew Gardiner
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Microsoft love re-inventing the wheel over and over again. There was a
> >> perfectly adequate file sharing protocol, called NFS which all UNIX's
> >
> >NFS is not really suitable for the kind of peer-to-peer file sharing
> >that MS wanted to do. If you have root on your own machine, you can
> >easily read all the other files off the NFS server.
>
> Horse manure.
Why? I have a little NFS network here if you'd like me to demonstrate.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
From: clcobra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:02:25 -0400
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Dave Martel wrote:
> >
> > Why do I have the feeling that only Media Player 8 and later versions
> > will eventually be able to play content-protected media?
> >
> > <http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200-5712920.html>
> >
> > Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP
> > By Joe Wilcox
> > Staff Writer, CNET News.com
> > April 24, 2001, 1:40 p.m. PT
> >
> > "Microsoft is requiring consumers who want to use the latest version
> > of Windows Media Player to upgrade to the new Windows XP operating
> > system--a move that is reminiscent of the company's controversial
> > decision to tie the Internet Explorer browser with Windows."
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > "'There are some features with Windows Media Player that can only be
> > delivered with Windows XP,' said Jonathan Usher, Microsoft's group
> > product manager for Windows Media Player. These include CD burning and
> > DVD movie playback, among other features not available with earlier
> > versions of the product."
>
> I'm glad I'm using Linux, and don't have to worry about this
> kind of shit.
>
> Chris
>
what a joke!
those guys are runing bananas!
BE,Linux,Os/2,or MAC you decide.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter da Silva)
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: 26 Apr 2001 20:55:50 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With as much influence as Microsoft already had at the time, and the
> fact that porting network stacks is trivial, the reason that Mafia$oft
> never released this "superior" network protocol is ....what, exactly?
What exactly are you talking about? OpenNET was commercially available
for Xenix, MS-DOS, VMS, RMX, and System V. Lan Manager is still available,
and the related protocols (CIFS, Windows Networking) are in wide use.
--
`-_-' In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.
'U` "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disclaimer: WWFD?
------------------------------
From: The Mudshark
Subject: Re: Aaron Kookis: over 340 posts in 6 days!
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 21:00:35 GMT
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 16:18:47 GMT, chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Is there anyone else in the world so full of himself, so sure of
>himself, so in love with the sound of his own voice, so devoid of a
>life that on some days he'll post well over 50 obnoxious,
>argumentative messages into a single newsgroup?
>
Maybe Aaron administers Linux machines. They run so smoothly and
efficiently that they require minimal user intervention and he has a
lot of time on his hands.
No, I am not being flippant.
Mudshark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: What to do with Bill Clinton (was Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism))
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 21:08:40 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 23 Apr 2001 06:53:32 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Dave Martel wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2001 16:07:13 -0700, GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >LOL!! They could just use a bent hook on his bent dick! But even this
>> >wouldn't be good enough. We need to find somebody to bite him on the
>> >back the way he did to that other woman he seduced. As Far as I'm
>> >concerned, and keep the political parties out of it, he's a pervert and
>> >should be punished.... let him co-exist with a horny gorilla!
>>
>> Not horrible enough. Put him in a cell with nothing to do but surf the
>> Web on a 386-25 with 8 megs of RAM and a 14.4 modem - running Windows,
>> of course.
>
>and a CGA video card!
Oh, c'mon. I've only got a 386-20 with 4 megs and a 1200-baud modem. :-)
(Also, what version of Windows? Win2000 Personal? :-) )
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 10d:04h:51m actually running Linux.
Linux. When Microsoft isn't enough anymore.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
