Linux-Advocacy Digest #352, Volume #34 Wed, 9 May 01 04:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows makes good coasters (Ed Allen)
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" (GreyCloud)
Re: Yet another IIS security bug (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux Users...Why? (jtnews)
Re: Pesky lack of support (kosh)
Linux still not ready for home use. ("Chaparral")
Re: Linux and MP3s (.)
Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux Users...Why? (Ian Pulsford)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Windows makes good coasters (GreyCloud)
KDE tutorial for newbies (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux Users...Why? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux still not ready for home use. (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (GreyCloud)
Re: Double whammy cross-platform worm (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Linux disgusts me (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 07:00:36 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 07 May 2001 23:49:35
>>As far as Jans comments that ONLY linux users have this problem... he's
>>cruising for the Darwin of the year award.
>
>I know about "the Darwin Awards", but this 'Darwin of the year', thing,
>V, I don't know about that. Jan's just... a sock puppet.
>
Winning a Darwin requires the death of the recipient.
He is being celebrated for removing his genes from the pool of
potential breeders.
--
Microsoft Motto: Illegal we do immediately.
Unconstitutional takes a little longer.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Linux -- The Unix defragmentation tool.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature"
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 00:03:21 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 07 May 2001 20:25:59
> > [...]
> > >Lets put it this way... if Eric used a 4-bit key and did everything he
> > >says he would do, NSA would have it deciphered in less than a minute.
> >
> > The NSA? Sure, 'less than a minute' is accurate, but 'a few
> > milliseconds' is more precise.
>
> Sure. If you are so confident, i'll give you an encoded bit of data. I'll
> give you a week to figure out what it is. It uses a 1 bit key, and the keys
> value is 1.
>
> The encoded data is (just the one line, not including carriage return):
>
> 2jhGjyD<qYwDgilj0sohkVuAy.
>
> Hell, I'll even give you hints when you need them. Here's the first, it's
> plain text words, but the values are not in ASCII.
>
> So, show me how simple it is to crack. Hell, after a week, I'll even tell
> you what the clear text is, and let's see if you can figure out a way to
> recreate a second encoded text that is encoded using the exact same
> algorithm. I'll bet you can't.
Who said "WE" had the equipment?? But I'll bet that NSA has already
read this and has deciphered it. Doubt that they'll respond to it tho.
I've seen them decipher messages out of a continuous data stream. There
was no beginning of the message and no apparent end of the message. But
they did it anyway. One of the Doctors could actually look at the data
encrypted stream and could see where the message started and ended. I
couldn't see if my life depended on it.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Yet another IIS security bug
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 23:58:38 -0700
Hi Max... this is totally off topic.
A friend of the family needs a little help in the court system.
Do you or anybody know of the use of computers in court to prove one way
or the other who is at fault in a traffic accident? This particular
approach would use the laws of physics to determine the speed of the
offender. I would think that the side of the car bashed in by an SUV
could give clues to the approximate speed of the SUV.
------------------------------
From: jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Users...Why?
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 06:59:36 GMT
My first introduction to UNIX was in
the late 80's. I never have been a fan
of Windows primarily because I do mostly
large scale software engineering,
computer engineering, and scientific work
which involves the manipulation of large
amounts of data files.
Up to the mid 1990's I used mostly Sun workstations
running SunOS and Solaris because they were the
only viable UNIX vendor at the time. At the time
I was beginning to experiment with Linux.
Now I use RedHat Linux 7.1 for all my 5 computers
at home. I download and process approximately
400MB worth of data per day and integrate that into a
1.76GB database.
I have about 50GB of files and do daily backups
to 3 alternate file servers which serve as backup
machines in case my main server goes down due to
hardware problems.
The total disk space capacity of my network is
about 200GB.
I couldn't imagine implementing what I've got
with Windows. Not only would it cost me more,
but it wouldn't be nearly as reliable or have
the functionality I require.
The strange thing about what I've got now
is that 5 years ago, 200GB was the total disk
space used by a 200 employee company I worked
for back then. Now I've got all the functionality
of what that entire network had on my home
network that I use for my home based business
of 1 employee (me), all for a total capital
expenditure of less than $7,000, with a net
annual fixed cost less than $2000/year.
Broadband, improvements in computing power,
and free software have really made stunning
advances.
It's funny how far technology advances and
how much it can empower a single person to
do things that simply weren't possible
even a year ago.
"Mad.Scientist" wrote:
>
> This topic is about why you made the switch to Linux.
>
> I made the switch mostly because of what I learned about recent M$
> practices.
> I really resented their paranoia, and their need to control everything.
> Their statements against Open Source were very fraudulent, especially as I
> read upon it.
> I believed in the OS model, and that made me think about what M$ really did.
> So I became skeptical of them, and decided to research Linux and M$. The
> more
> I read upon it, the more I was interest. I am a geek to the core, so I
> really wanted to
> try it. The final straw came when I learned of M$ plans for WinXP, such as
> the
> uses of .NET, I lost all hope for them. Then came the news of their
> crackdown of
> casual copying. And then accusing Open Source as being "un-American". So I
> installed
> Linux. Now, M$ has fucked AOL over, starting a war, and the industry is
> turning against M$.
>
> My reason for switching is more ideological, as my WinME runs well, but does
> crash every few
> days still.
>
> What are your reasons?
------------------------------
From: kosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pesky lack of support
Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 01:03:11 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ray Chason wrote:
> kosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>A newgroup is not the best plaec for these questions.
>
> More precisely, an *advocacy* newsgroup isn't the best place; other
> groups in comp.os.linux.* would be a better choice.
>
>
Yeah was typing faster then I was thinking on that one. However I have
often found things like irc.openprojects.net provide better support then
the newsgroups do.
------------------------------
From: "Chaparral" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux still not ready for home use.
Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 02:02:03 -0500
We can all say what we want about how Windows sucks and that Linux is the
end-all-be-all, but after trying almost every Linux version to date, the
bottom line folks is that Mr Gates has made operating a home computer easy
enough for my great uncle to run. The Penguin still doesnt come close!
What Linux is VERY good at is the handling of servers... this is stuff that
you are expected to fiddle with and fine tune. Home users don't want to
fart around all day trying to figure out what to click and then having
barely predictable responses.
So, Linux sucks hard for the home user but beats the hell out of WinBlows on
the server farm... especially when you can tell a client that full-blown
server software will only cost him $75 compared to $2000 plus for
2000Server!
Microsoft will rule the home front for many years I think, but their
exorbitant pricing and draconian licensing policies will soon cause the
server market to dry up.
Im done now.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Linux and MP3s
Date: 9 May 2001 07:11:30 GMT
Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." wrote:
>>
>> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > "." wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> > "." wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> > Mark Styles wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Fellow advocates,
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I currently have my entire CD collection stored in MP3 format on a
>> >> >> >> 30Gb hard drive in a Windows PC.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Because I use that PC for other things, which sometimes interfere with
>> >> >> >> the music, I've been busy building a new PC to be a dedicated
>> >> >> >> 'jukebox' on our LAN.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I've decided as an experiment to install Linux on the new PC to see
>> >> >> >> how well it handles my musical needs.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> My question is, what applications should I use to emulate XingMP3
>> >> >> >> Player functionality?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > There are several. When you do the install, they'll be available
>> >> >> > on the appliations menu.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Uhh...wrong. The default xmms install (assuming that you do not have
>> >> >> gnome installed) drops everything in /usr/local/bin, but not into any
>> >> >> "applications menu".
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Unless you are *specifically* using mandrake, you fucking moron.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > If you put the drive with the MP3's in during installation, and
>> >> >> > leave it alone (with it's current formatting, etc.), then it will
>> >> >> > be mounted into the filesystem on your first boot-up.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Are you insane? What the hell is the matter with you? It very much
>> >> >> depends on which distribution youre using, cocksmack.
>> >>
>> >> > Worked for my Linux-illiterate friend on his first install.
>> >>
>> >> You dont even actually know what a 'distribution' is, do you.
>>
>> > I own several, you fool.
>>
>> You dont OWN any of them, you damnable moron. You own the MEDIA.
>>
>> Idiot.
>>
>> Fool.
>>
>> Asshole.
>>
>> Liar.
>>
>> Poser.
>>
>> -----.
>>
>> --
>> "George Dubya Bush---the best presidency money can buy"
>>
>> ---obviously some Godless commie heathen faggot bastard
> I can't believe I'm defending Aaron but at least he doesn't hide behind
> a handle like the shivering little girl you are.
You're a nutslap. Theres nothing anonymous about me.
=====.
--
"George Dubya Bush---the best presidency money can buy"
---obviously some Godless commie heathen faggot bastard
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 00:28:22 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 7 May 2001
> > > > [...]
> > > > >COM existed before SOM as well.
> > > > >
> > > > >SOM was first introduced with OS/2 2.0, which came out in early 1992,
> > > just
> > > > >weeks before COM was officially launched in Windows 3.1. They were
> > > > >contemporaries, created independantly at about the same time.
> > > >
> > > > Which is it? First you say that COM 'existed before SOM', and then
> you
> > > > say they were 'created at about the same time'. What besides the
> donuts
> > > > at the sock puppet briefings leads you to believe that MS didn't do
> what
> > > > they typically do, and just "steal IBM's ideas", implementing their
> own
> > > > technology more as vaporware than anything else, to scare off the
> > > > competition? You know, like the way they stole pen computing from Go?
> > >
> > > I can no longer find the reference, but the basic workings of COM were
> > > developed in 1988, however, they didn't at the time know what to do with
> it.
> > > In 1990, when they began work on Windows 3.1, that work was put to use
> to
> > > make OLE 2. In other words, COM existed before OLE 2, it had to, since
> OLE
> > > was based on COM.
> >
> > Why did they develop COM if they didn't know what to do with it??
> > I have the Windows Software Development kit and docs. Copyrighted
> > 1987-1992.
> > No where do I find any mention of COM.
>
> As I said, it was released until they released OLE 2 in 1992 (the same time
> IBM released SOM).
>
> COM was not originally marketed as a stand-alone technology, it was only
> marketed as OLE 2. In 1994, they actually formally released COM as a
> seperate technology (then called Common Object Model, later changed to
> Component Object Model).
Right now I'm looking at the OLE docs. Trying to catch the gist of any
differences between OLE and COM. ( My weakest subject) Left in 93, so
I'm only now beginning to do catch up studies in this area.
>From what I can get out of the SDK "A file can be more compact, because
linking to objects allows a file to use an object without having to
store that object's data."
>From that point in the SDK it doesn't say where the object data is
located or stored.
I'm also trying to see if there is a comparable feature in the Solaris
libraries.
The OLE seems to allow a security hole by the description or example
that was being given in the SDK ... "Linked and embedded objects also
lend themselves to implementations such as animated drawings, executable
macro scripts, hypertext, and annotations."
(???)
Another one ... "The OLE libraries do most of the work when an
application is using the clipboard to copy and paste links or exchange
objects." This feature is unified under CDE of Solaris. They don't
call it OLE under Sun, but I need to find their correllary.
Interesting to say the least.
Around that time I've heard of IBMs SOM but were eyeball deep in VAX VMS
programming and didn't have anytime to look into it.
--
V
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 17:35:45 +1000
From: Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Users...Why?
Brent R wrote:
>
>
> It has never ceased to astound me that people would do away with their
> favorite apps just for a moderate increase in OS quality. That's one
> thing I've never really understood about this movement I guess.
>
> To me, I like Linux but Windows has so many great apps that I cannot do
> without it.
Me too. I hardly ever do any word-processing, but I would rather do it
under Windoze (using a free word processor). Then are a few games I
enjoy occaisionally. My Windoze machine is highly dependant my FreeBSD
machine via Samba, web connectivity, etc.. Recently I discovered X2VNC
which allows me to control Windoze with the same mouse and keyboard I am
using on my FreeBSD machine. It's great for viewing documentation on
the Windoze machine while working on the Unix machine. Windoze is still
OK as a client as far as I am concerned, but I just can't conceive of it
running Apache, Squid, PostgreSQL, Samba, NFS, (or Win equivalents) and
all those other little perks without crashing or struggling.
Best solution: have two computers (or more).
IanP
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 09:35:37 +0100
> Then how come, if someone asks "what the hell did you do to get this
> deadly, but very UN-contagious disease", they are accused of being
> anti-homosexual?
They are nor.
> If AIDS != homosexuality then why is less than enthusiastic support for
> AIDS groups = anti-homosexuality?
That is not true.
-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: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 00:34:21 -0700
Steve Sheldon wrote:
>
> "Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > You might as well complain about the inadequate amount of storage
> > capacity on a hard drive cause the last time you used one was
> > 1996. Notice where 1996 is in the following:
> >
> > Linux kernel history:
> > ---------------------
> > Pre-1.0: 1991 - 1994
> > version 1.x.xx: 1994 - 1996*
> > version 2.0.xx - 2.1.xx: 1996 - 1999
> > version 2.2.xx: 1999 - present
> > version 2.4.0 - January 4, 2001
> > version 2.4.1 - January 29, 2001
> > version 2.4.2 - February 21, 2001
> > version 2.4.3 - March 29, 2001
> > version 2.4.4 - April 27, 2001
>
> Yes, and notice how little has really changed... Version numbers don't tell
> the whole story.
That's probably why MS doesn't use version numbers anymore. They rely
on marketing glitz and catchy monikers.
--
V
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: KDE tutorial for newbies
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 19:37:00 +1200
http://www-105.ibm.com/developerworks/education.nsf/linux-onlinecourse-bytitle/B390A002F1F75BD186256A29005F94ED?Open&l=kde3,t=gr,p=KDE-Tutorial
Covers all the "in's" and "out's" of kde.
Who said Linux was too hard?
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 00:44:45 -0700
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
> Steve Sheldon wrote:
> >
> > > Then you don't know much about it.
> >
> > Oh I think you'd be surprised. I was quite the Linux advocate at the time
> > it was new and cool. Was even involved in the early stages of the Linux
> > Documentation Project.
> >
> > I simply do not find it to be a very appealing operating system and find it
> > disappointing that uneducated people are going around advocating it be used
> > over technically superior solutions such as Windows 2000, Solaris, etc.
>
> Again, it sounds like your experience is too old to apply today.
>
> I will agree that some facets of Windows 2000 and Solaris are superior
> to some facets of Linux. On the other hand, Linux is about as powerful,
> and unencumbered by corporate goals. It is very open to study.
> It works well. Unlike you, I find it appealing, so obviously we look for
> different things.
>
> I actually kind of like Windows 2000, but then, I also liked NT 4
> when it first came out. Then came the service packs....
> Even now, Win 2000 exhibits some of the same irritating traits
> as its predecessors. However, since I work on a Win 2000 project,
> I'll have to master those problems somehow. Luckily I don't
> pay for the Win tools and Win books.
>
> Solaris, I know little about. I'd like to try it some day.
>
It's cheap. $75. I've got the x86 version. But you have to visit Suns
web site first and check out the Hardware Compatibility List (HCL). It
installed ok for me (IBM) but I hear that it doesn't install on
everything. A visit to alt.solaris.x86 will give you an idea of the
many problems of installation can have. The docs are complete and there
are more tools supplied than what I've been able to find on linux. Most
of these tools, however, are for networking. Wait till summer if you
like Gnome. They're are providing Gnome 2.0 then. I have the 02/00
distribution (1st rollout) and there have been many changes since. The
fonts are a lot larger than what I've experienced in linux, but then
that was with Xfree 3.3.6. They provide a program called AppBuilder
that is a drag and drop method to designing GUI Motif programs that
generates Xlib code boilerplate. Then you just have to add your core
code to make a complete program very much similar to VC++6.0. There are
many other features as well.
> Chris
>
> --
> Free the Software!
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Users...Why?
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 09:50:26 +0100
> But the BSD Demon is really neat!
It's a _Dæmon_.
-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: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux still not ready for home use.
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 19:50:57 +1200
Chaparral wrote:
>
> We can all say what we want about how Windows sucks and that Linux is the
> end-all-be-all, but after trying almost every Linux version to date, the
> bottom line folks is that Mr Gates has made operating a home computer easy
> enough for my great uncle to run. The Penguin still doesnt come close!
>
> What Linux is VERY good at is the handling of servers... this is stuff that
> you are expected to fiddle with and fine tune. Home users don't want to
> fart around all day trying to figure out what to click and then having
> barely predictable responses.
>
> So, Linux sucks hard for the home user but beats the hell out of WinBlows on
> the server farm... especially when you can tell a client that full-blown
> server software will only cost him $75 compared to $2000 plus for
> 2000Server!
>
> Microsoft will rule the home front for many years I think, but their
> exorbitant pricing and draconian licensing policies will soon cause the
> server market to dry up.
>
> Im done now.
I still don't buy that argument. A computer is a complex piece of
equipment. It fulfils many different tasks with in the same equipment.
The reason why people don't need to learn how to use a type writer,
telephone or drill is because they are single purpose appliances, the
only serve one purpose. That was the whole point of this so-called "net
appliance revolution", in that, if all a person what's to do is send
email, get an appliance that only does that one thing, aka, dedicated
appliance. However, a computer is different, there is an operating
system, applications, configuration. No configuration would be needed
for a net appliance because all it does is web surfing, hence, all
options can be pre configured. Computers on the other hand have
different roles to different people, hence, its almost impossible to
have a one size fits all policy. Yes, Linux is not the be all, and end
all of applications, however, unlike Microsoft, the Linux Community and
its associated parts (such as KDE and GNOME) are addressing these
issues, KDE for example is rapidly taking shape, version 2.1.1 is
snappy, 40MB of resources are used once the OS and GUI are fully loaded,
that is with default settings, throw off all the unneeded services, and
that memory usage will come down to around 25-30MB.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 00:52:40 -0700
Steve Sheldon wrote:
>
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Steve Sheldon wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Really? In your educated opinion what yet do they need to improve?
> >
> > Do not let an application manage its own window (except for
> > drawing the interior).
>
> That's pretty much already the case, and rather useful.
>
> > Implement X-Windows; get the graphics out of kernel space.
>
> Implementing X-windows would be a signifigant step backwards in evolution.
>
HAHA! Tell that to Apple!
> > Make the kernel more modular.
>
> Already is modular.
>
> > Provide options to customize the kernel.
>
> There already are.
>
> > Fix Kerberos support.
>
> Kerberos works fine.
>
> > Fix IE and IIS.
>
> IE and IIS work fine.
>
> > Make Windows 2000 portable to more machines.
>
> If the market isn't there, where is the incentive?
>
> > Bring the window manager up to the configurability and
> > quality of Gnome, for example.
>
> It's already far beyond the quality of Gnome.
>
> > Ditch the registration codes.
>
> Now this we can agree with. I dislike this new activation scheme.
>
> > Also...
> >
> > Test the OS more thoroughly.
>
> Hmm, pretty much there.
>
> > Be more conservative with changes to the OS.
>
> Well that'd be boring.
>
> > Finally, don't ever think that anyone "got it right" this time.
> > At best, it's an asymptote.
>
> Nothing is ever perfect.
>
> But it is looking like you really don't have any particularly valid
> complaints wrt Win2k. That's good, i was worried there for a second.
>
> > > > And Win2K still has some problems holding over from its legacy
> > > > application control model. It is still possible for one
> > > > app to lock up the system, although at least Win2K will eventually
> > > > respond enough to let you kill the offending app.
> > >
> > > And a similar case is true with Linux/Unix.
> >
> > Very true. But I've found it much more difficult to do under
> > Linux. And going to a virtual console is very easy.
>
> Yes, crashing out of X-Windows back to a console is pretty routine.
Never had that problem yet. Of course maybe because Xsun (X server) is
quite stable??
--
V
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Double whammy cross-platform worm
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 19:55:09 +1200
> To the uneducated blindly hating, lets all read along together eh?
>
> "CERT said the worm enters a Solaris system by using a 2-year-old buffer
> overflow vulnerability and then targets IIS-based Web servers via a security
> hole that was uncovered seven months ago. Software patches that are supposed
> to fix the problems have long been available from both Sun and Microsoft. "
>
> Hmm... so this "new" worm uses a 2 year old Solaris vulnerability combined
> with a 7 month old IIS vulnerability both of which have LONG had a complete
> fix available for.
>
> So, it's not ANY suprise at all that we also read:
> "Denis Zenkin, a spokesman at Moscow-based antivirus software vendor
> Kaspersky Lab International Ltd., today said he wasn't aware of any
> incidents involving the sadmind/IIS worm. The worm could turn out to be
> "merely another entry in CERT's virus encyclopedia," he added. "
>
> And equally it's no surprise that the blindly anti-MS haters simply see MS
> mentioned in some shady light and immediate dispatch what little brains they
> have left to out mongolia and announce this worm as if it were some sign of
> a MS weakness...
>
> weird...
>
> how this is even news suprises me... I would expect The Register to run this
> sort of crap...
Jan, I'm on your side. If someone is so bloody stupid not to update
their IIS server for two years, I have absolutely no sympathy for them
what so ever. They have been warned for two years! if someone is that
thick not to apply the patch, they how/why on earth are they being an
admin?
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[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: Wed, 9 May 2001 07:54:57 +0200
Steve Sheldon wrote:
>
> Honestly NT 3.1 didn't sell very well, and I have little to no
> experience
> with it. But you are correct in that OS/2 was always a vastly inferior
> OS in terms of features to NT.
>
> OS/2 was built to compete with Windows 3.1 which it did reasonably well.
> But it had a horrific user interface and very difficult configuration.
> It was obvious that it had been built by IBMers who had no idea of
> anything outside the mainframe world.
>
What stuff are you drinking? May I have some?
Honestly, did you ever *really* use OS/2, especially Warp4?
Peter
--
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 07:46:22 +0200
Electric Ninja wrote:
>> > I switch 'em on, and every Windows desktop is still faster than
>> > Linux.
>> >
>>
>> No, not NT4. *That* one is clearly not as fast as XFree4
>
> Seriously, Linux GUI's tend to be a lot slower than Win32 systems, even
> on
> faster hardware. It's because the window management is done in user
> mode with X-Windows, not because of poor programming on anyone's behalf.
>
*Not* in my experience. WinNT4 was *slow* as molasses on my machine
(Dual 500, Matrox G200 at that time). Even then with Beta XFree4 it was
actually faster with the video. XFree4.0.2 which I now have installed is
even a lot faster.
So, on my machine NT4 is not as fast. May depend on video-card.
I don´t care. NT now runs on a different machine and is used mainly for
testing win-apps I still write.
Peter
--
A blue screen is nothing to worry about,
just press [CTRL]+[ALT]+[DEL] and format c:
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
