dude, F U C K M I C R O S O F T

[thehacker]

i former coworker of mine - a project manager - used to work at aol... she was offered like BOUCOUP stock options to stay there after working there for several years - right before they went public too - but she SO hated working there and felt SO abused by, as you said 'brainless morons', that she ditched.

oh and btw, mac OS X is pretty sweet.

still a little too cute-sey but it's Impressive

that you can install whatever flavor of linux

on it that you want and run it as a server

as well...

[dr0ne]

if ppl rag on M$ because their software sucks...guess what, its impossible to write bug free software of any reasonable complexity (if I find the paper where I got this from I'll post).

when designing hardware, there's a whole procedure that designers go through to make sure shit works (and even that comes out buggy sometimes, like with the pentium FDIV bug)...this is called "formal verification/validation". Basically you take a system with a finite amount of inputs and outputs and test each combination. In software, the inputs and outputs are unbounded 90% of the time making this process MUCH MUCH harder if not impossible...the process of verification effectively becomes non-deterministic (except with very special purpose software, like the software that runs on embedded systems such as engine valve timing software for most cars nowadays).

the problem I have with them is just with their business practices, which guess what...any corporation enjoying their market share would also engage in. You think if Apple or Sun had 90% of the OS market share they wouldn't act the same way as M$? Yeah right.

And their shitty software comes in part due to their practices, namely using paying customers as beta testers for bug-ridden "final" releases (until service pack 472-sbd-245.345.43.1.23 comes out of course ).

l8z

[thehacker]

i'm not asking for bug-free software, by any means.

what i'm asking for - and microsoft has already proven they can't even grasp the fucking CONCEPT - is software that does not INTENTIONALLY open up WORLDS OF POSSIBILITIES for HACKERS with even HALF A WORKING BRAIN CELL.

[dr0ne]

Originally posted by thehacker

i'm not asking for bug-free software, by any means.

what i'm asking for - and microsoft has already proven they can't even grasp the fucking CONCEPT - is software that does not INTENTIONALLY open up WORLDS OF POSSIBILITIES for HACKERS with even HALF A WORKING BRAIN CELL.

the problem here is two-fold. first, microsoft's development "culture" has only recently migrated to a network centric model, so security wasn't something at the top of the list of most programmers there, that came from DOS, windows 3.1 and 95. there was no notion of multiple concurrent users in the truest sense as there is with unix. this is in contrast with unix coders, where since the late 60s the system was brought with 1 machine - many users in mind so security has always been an issue.

the second problem is convenience vs. security. some things in windows are insecure not because of bugs, but because they're open, unprotected by default, and this is typically chosen this way because its easier/ more convenient for the user. furthermore, OS's like 98 can't even support security, because there is no protection from who can open what port, etc like there is with unix. (example: in unix if you wanna bind below 1024, you must be root). I think win2k made significant steps in this direction, but they still got a long way to go. Don't know about XP, haven't even seen it running. All my boxes are BSD/Linux, and I keep a win2k box for all my sound shit, since all the good apps like cubase, rebirth, sound forge don't run on unix

[thehacker]

all troo, and all quite unfortunate.

they should have realized the DAY they decided to break into the world of networked environments that they needed to take steps to do it RIGHT. ... which, to be honest was way the hell back in 1994 with win 3.1 for workgroups - they've had TIME to do this ish right, they just haven't bothered.

[thehacker]

ALSO i find it interesting for a company that historically STEALS ideas from others that they couldn't just TAKE WHAT WORKS REALLY WELL IN UNIX and MAKE IT THEIR OWN... the mouse? XEROX. the interface? XEROX and APPLE. but networking? MICROSOFT's OWN SOCKETS - *AND QUITE BADLY WRITTEN*

[phuturephunk]

Originally posted by brooklynkid

*maybe* the inclusion of IE was an issue at one time, but at this point it's so integrated into the OS that the point is moot. But here's the thing...Internet Explorer WORKS. And it works pretty well too. I'm a web developer and I've encountered countless headaches with shit like Netscape's many many bugs and issues. Forms, tables, javascript, style sheets, dhtml...it all SUCKS in Netscape. Granted, NN 6.x is solid, but it's too little, too late.

But I digress. Ever notice why Linux is so solid? One reason is because there's no abundance of shitty ass shareware that can be installed by your 12 year old. If you want Windows to run well (this goes for you Mac OS users as well), maintain it properly like you would your own car's engine. And for God's sake, uninstall AOL. It fucks up your computer (if you don't believe me, check out how much shit it puts in your registry), and you JUST DON'T NEED IT.

just adding my €2

. . I'll give you the point on the improvements in IE, I'm running 5.5 and it hasn't given me any problems, I haven't yet got up the balls to download and test six . . I will also agree with netscape, although I used netscape for different reasons. . When I had IE 5 I would have this frequent (yet random) problem with displaying images on the screen and saving them . . I tried every tweak I could think of, but it just wouldn't display right, after a few attempts I would just shift over to netscape and browse, then netscape would hit a bump and I'd go back to IE. . I noticed that overall, my system performance seemed to degrade with both IE and Netscape installed so when I upgraded to windows 2000 I just used IE, and the problem would still happen, but not as frequently. . Since I've installed Win2k service packs and IE 5.5 I haven't had a problem . .

. . I will also agree with AOL software. . it's such a bitch and they're sneaky about it too . . The software doesn't really fuck with the Windows and system32 directory, so one would think that it doesn't really mess with the system . . that it's "contained" to the AOL directory on the HD. . but that is NOT the case when it comes to the registry . . Oh yes, those aol people are crafty . . In 98 it senses when the AOL dial up adapter is installed, and if not, installs it automatically, which had the wonderful side effect of fucking all the other adapters (Including actual NIC's) up on the computer, forcing a reinstall of all the drivers . . If you attempt to run it in 2000, it makes modifications to the registry every time it loads as well, IF it finds anything has changed with the configuration . . which, in turn, neccesitates the reinstall of the service pack to get the system running properly again . . Another thing . . AOL has a nasty habit of pushing IE updates into the software that they send to you in the mail (you know the 700 hours free coasters that any computer geek will get on a weekly basis) . . The thing is, they customize the installation of the IE update so that it has AOL badging ( . . can you tell I'm somewhat of a car geek too . . LOL) all over it . . Not fun to take out once it's in . .

XP update . . Here's one that I got from a faculty member this morning . . very intersting :

This particular faculty member's nephew was installing a full version of Frontpage on a computer that he was running a bootlegged copy of XP on . . He went to register the software (depending on what key you have, the program will ask you to connect to the internet to finalize installation. . corporate keys don't ask for this info, home keys do. .) and the computer connected to microsoft, registered properly, then promptly disabled XP . . Perplexed, he decided to register by calling in and having the key given to him, which he did, but there was still some kind of confirmation that he had to send to microsoft, so he connected to the internet, but set his firewall/proxy to disallow traffic coming in from microsoft . . both frontpage and XP worked fine this time after registration . .

I could only assume, that after the actual registration process, Microsoft attempts to take a catalog of your machine and checks what you have installed, to what is marked as valid in their systems . . This is all that .NET shit rearing it's head again, just you watch. . They (Microsoft) want to build a master information repository on YOU so that they can better deliver "content" to the end user. . I'm sorry, but I'd rather fish for my content using a search engine. . I don't care if you track what I do on your webpage, but STAY THE FUCK OUT OF MY COMPUTER . .

. . all in all, I will agree that IE is more solid at the current time, It just irks me that it has to be soooo integrated . .

[thehacker]

actually dude the registration bullshit in XP is microsoft's shitty ass attempt to prevent software piracy.

EVERY TIME you change ANYTHING in your computer's configuration it reconnects with microsoft next time you're on-line, validates your installation key...

also it has the added 'benefit' of DISABLING your current license if you change your configuration a given number of times - like a small-ass number - 10? which means if you have to reinstall a bunch of drivers to get a particularly tricky piece of hardware up and running be prepared to make a LOT of phone calls to microsoft to be given a new XP license... oh yeah and good luck convincing them multiple times that yes i did buy this operating system and yes this is the store i bought it at and on this date...

[phuturephunk]

. . I understand that It's to prevent piracy . . which they do have a right to do . . but this guy was installing a copy of Frontpage .. XP had already been validated with a corporate key . . It conked the system after the attempt to register frontpage . . so whatever happened, during the reg for Frontpage it they took out XP . . which, in turn, means that they aren't just snooping what software you're currently trying to register, but rather the entire system catalog of software . . and that's what bothers me. .

. . you can call me johnny on the spot for the piece of software I'm trying to register, but DONT try to sneak in and take a catalog of other shit . . grrrr. . . . . I hate that shit

[thehacker]

YUPYUP they gots da peeperz on your whole setup, B.

[dr0ne]

someone must've cracked xp already to email M$ "fuck off" instead every time it wants to send out your info