Reasons why not to use M$...

[jtpenrod]

quote:
He found that Microsoft's developers had failed to remove or "strip" the debugging symbols used to test this software before they released it. Inside the code were the labels for the two keys. One was called "KEY". The other was called "NSAKEY".

Now here's an interesting thought: suppose this wasn't an accident. Is it possible that those M$ programmers deliberately left that in there in the hope that it would be discovered?    It would be a good way to screw the NSA    don't you think?

[Calum]

quote:Originally posted by Gooseberry Clock:


Then run http://www.setiathome.com/ who do I care?

i didn't say you cared! i wasn't talking to you at all!

 

quote:Originally posted by muchis:
a whole bunch of inflammatory crap that i can't be arsed quoting properly.

muchis, is your brain running Windows XP? you need to reboot before you post again  

[gerry]

Re-Post
 

quote:Computer security specialists have been aware for two years that unusual features are contained inside a standard Windows software "driver" used for security and encryption functions. The driver, called ADVAPI.DLL, enables and controls a range of security functions. If you use Windows, you will find it in the C:\Windows\system directory of your computer. ADVAPI.DLL works closely with Microsoft Internet Explorer, but will only run crypographic functions that the US governments allows Microsoft to export. That information is bad enough news, from a European point of view. Now, it turns out that ADVAPI will run special programmes inserted and controlled by NSA. As yet, no-one knows what these
programmes are, or what they do.

Okay, being the noob that I am, what happens if I delete this driver? The whole thing makes you sick dosen't it? Hope I didn't double post (again).  

Still waiting for that elusive answer.

[lu666s]

Due to the integration of IE in OS, you can't  remove the file (advapi32.dll in v.'s above 95).

However, although loaded dynamically with windoze startup, the file is available for IE and M$ applications that connect to internet.

Thus, the only solution (bare direct modifications of the file) is not to run M$ programs that connect to internet -- IE, M$ Media Player, etc.

The only true solution that is known to have absolutely positive results -- a sensible security measure -- would be not to run windoze at all.    

Re VoidMain point that something of this sort may be in 'inserted' in linux: The answer is, it might, but for how long it would stay in there? You can look at the kernel source any time, so if someone tries to hide something in there, it would not last a day without being spotted and eradicated.  This is one of the most appealing features that open source offers, without a doubt.

[ March 02, 2002: Message edited by: lu666s ]

[TB]

quote:Originally posted by psyjax:
At least in the beginning of the Apple resurection, Jobs worked for basically free. And I belive he still does today, his sallary is like nil, and his stock is also like nil. (Like I said, at least when he started as iCEO).

You're almost right there.....according to Guinness World Records Jobs' annual salary is $1 a year......but he does have something like 10 million shares to his name.

[gerry]

lu666s.......ok thanx

[voidmain]

quote:Originally posted by lu666s:
Re VoidMain point that something of this sort may be in 'inserted' in linux: The answer is, it might, but for how long it would stay in there? You can look at the kernel source any time, so if someone tries to hide something in there, it would not last a day without being spotted and eradicated.  This is one of the most appealing features that open source offers, without a doubt.

First off as you know I am totally pro open source and totally against M$.  But the using the technique in that article I referenced there would be no trace of the back door in any source code.  You could recompile said source code and the back door would continue to be in the binary (because the back door is built in to the compiler binary to propogate itself to the new compiler binary even though it's not in the compiler source code.  Being open source would not prevent it.  The only way you could be sure that you have a good freshly compiled binary is to be sure that the compiler you used did not have the back door generator.  The only way you could be sure about that is if you disassembled the original compiler binary and studied it carefully.  Something that is less likely to happen than studying the source of said compiler.

Now, I have never had an open source eXPerience that would cause me to be suspicious that something like this were likely.  But it is possible if a company like RedHat were to be persuaded by a government or some other motivation it appears they could be just as evil as M$ if they wanted.  I'm not in to conspiracy theories so I will continue to "trust" them and continue to have a better open source eXPerience than I could possibly have with any M$ product.

[Master of Reality]

is there any win2000 specific reasons not to use win2000?
or just the obvious issues, as with any microshit product?

[voidmain]

quote:Originally posted by Druaga:
is there any win2000 specific reasons not to use win2000?
or just the obvious issues, as with any microshit product?

Aren't the obvious issues enough?

[gump420]

quote:Originally posted by muchis:
Well, you sound like you're dumb as hell.  Going with the bandwagon, are we?

Please explain to me why NOT using the most prolific operating system out there is "going with the bandwagon" . . .

 

quote: Face it, Microsoft has it's advantages and disadvantages like any other product out there.

Microsoft is a product? Shut up and go home, dumbass.

 

quote:But you sound like you don't have a clue to what you're talking about because it seems like you're trying to act like a hardcore "linux" guy.

This is supposed to be a sentence? What the hell is it supposed to mean?

 

quote:I've used different distributions of Linux (Mandrake, Red Hat, SuSe, etc), and yes, they have some bugs, but I admit they are fewer.

Hmm. This "sentence" seems to be slightly easier to understand; however, I don't see how this sentence has anything to do with the rest of your post.

 

quote:Microsoft is a BUSINESS, and most geeks don't know shit about business and I suggest they learn.

First Microsoft is a product; now it is a business. Well, I suppose 1 for 2 isn't too bad, even though you only managed to get your facts straight on this issue 50% of the time . . .

 

quote:Face it, your Linux distributors are in it for the money too, and if given a chance, they would bleed you too.  My point is, know your shit before trying to act like you know.

For your information, Linux distributors simply aren't allowed to bleed the Linux community in the same way that Microsoft can push their customers around. Linux (both the kernel and the operating system in general) is owned by the community, and therefore cannot be leveraged in the same way Microsoft can leverage Windows. Maybe you should learn your shit before acting like you know what you're talking about. Hell, maybe you should start by learning the English language, you fucking idiot.


Sincerely,
-Gump420

[Zombie9920]

quote:Originally posted by muchis:
Face it, your Linux distributors are in it for the money too, and if given a chance, they would bleed you too.

That is very true...take for example...Lindows OS. They expect you to pay $99 to use a Pre-release of Lindows and they even say in the agreement that they can not garantee that Lindows will ever be completed. WTF is up with that? You can have a full version copy of Win9x(Windows 95/98/98SE/ME) for less than that(or you can have an upgrade copy of XP Home for the same price), plus you know that the real thing will run all Win32 apps(With Lindows you can't be so sure of that). Also..Win9x has an ugly GUI, but it definatley looks better than Lindows.

Another example, go into Office Max or Staples and look at thier software shelf. They actually try to sell Redhat Linux for $79. The day Linux can run *EVERY* single app/game that I want it to run I may consider using it again. For the time being I'll stick with Windows because I can play virtually any game on it(because games are always ported to Windows if it wasn't originally a Win32 game) plus I can emulate any system I want to emulate in Windows(with the exception of PS2, X-Box and Gamecue right now). You can't even get a decent N64 emulator for Linux.

[ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: Zombie9920 ]

[voidmain]

Damn Zombie, play your silly games on Windows, who gives a shit.  Lindows ain't going to suck any money out of me because I can download many *much* better distributions for free (and totally legally).   And yes RedHat sells a copy for $79, they also sell a version for $1999.  I can't call RedHat and get support for on their product without paying for a support contract.  But that's alright, I don't need it. I also don't get the pretty printed manuals. Some businesses prefer to have someone's but on the line if something doesn't work.  You're not going to get that for free.  Companies are in business to make money.  They can't put a product on the shelf and put a $0 price tag on it.  But they can offer it for download and put a $0 price tag on it.

RedHat does what I need 1000 times better than any MS operating system.  But I know your just trollin' like usual...

[Zombie9920]

Ehhh, how is pointing out facts trolling?  :rolleyes:

[voidmain]

Some here have pointed out the fact that you are a zipperhead.  And the day Win* can run every single app I need I will buy it.  That'll never happen.

[ March 05, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]

[Zombie9920]

Whoah son, I'm no zipperhead(You may be a zipperhead seeing how your mind is zipped shut). Unlike you, I'm not closed minded. You see, I may prefer using Windows right now because of it's obvious advantages but that doesn't mean that I wouldn't use something else if I felt it was better. I don't go around bashing the creator of Linux and I don't go around bashing every piece of software he has ever written. If I feel something is better then I say so. I give credit where it is due.

You on the other hand....you go around with the attitude that if it is made by MS then it is worthy of bashing even if the product is better. You would never make the switch to a MS OS even if it is better just because you hate MS(truthfully you are probably jealous of Billy and his $$$). You my friend are closed minded and you also find it hard to accept the fact that your OS is not perfect(it has bugs, downfalls, etc). I know Windows isn't perfect and I don't claim it is, but at least it can do everything. *nix on the other hand isn't intended to be a desktop OS hence why it has advantages geared towards server use and not average consumer use.

 Seeing most of the replies made by the open source community leads me to believe that most of you live by the motto "Open source - Closed mind*. Most of the open source community are closed minded just like you and they will not admit when something else can do something better than your beloved OS. The mentality of the open source community is *if he likes what I hate then he should be flamed* or *if he points out bugs and downfalls of my beloved OS he needs to be flamed...heaven forbid that I admit that what he says is true and I actually debate with him...I know! I'll call him a name that a 3rd grader would use*.

It is silly that you people actually hate another human being for liking certain software. Give me a god damn break, software is just data that is stored magnetically to a little disk platter. Grow the fuck up man and quit calling people names and shit like a little child.

[ March 05, 2002: Message edited by: Zombie9920 ]