... Some time ago they foisted on one machine of mine IE8 which I had to blow away, change my update preferences, and reinstall my previous system!
[...]
Guess what!
They just sent me another download of IE8!

...!

OK... That sounds a little frustrating...

But also a good example of one of the reasons I first started looking for something 'better'. I was losing too much time troubleshooting unexpected 'side effects' rather than just being able to do what " I " wanted to do with my own computer system.


And just now I've lost yet more time (just over 2 hours) due to IT '(in)security problems' and that was nothing to do with anything from my side. It's a big shame that with all our fancy IT, it still takes someone to phone you up to ask "Is that really you?"!

So much for the "high speed high tech" online "experience"... :-(

There must be a better way.

Cheers,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... So much for the "high speed high tech" online "experience"... :-(

There must be a better way.

Yet more Microsoft 'distraction':

Microsoft Security Bulletin Summary for September 2009


At first glance, you just get the titles to the sections and nothing of the gory details visible. Lot's of other "helpful text". You need to do an extra click or two to get any useful detail.

And for this month, there's what I consider to be a few fundamental surprises!

1: Vulnerability in JScript Scripting Engine, could allow remote code execution if a user opened a specially crafted file or visited a specially crafted Web site. Consistent exploit code likely;

2: Wireless LAN AutoConfig Service vulnerability could allow remote code execution if a client or server with a wireless network interface enabled receives specially crafted wireless frames. Inconsistent exploit code likely;

3: Windows Media Format vulnerability could allow remote code execution if a user opened a specially crafted media file. Consistent exploit code likely;

4: Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) processing vulnerabilities could allow remote code execution if an attacker sent specially crafted TCP/IP packets over the network. Inconsistent exploit code likely, denial of service likely;

5: DHTML Editing Component ActiveX control vulnerability could allow remote code execution when a user views a web page. Inconsistent exploit code likely;

Now... I consider the network stuff to be rather fundamental. It also looks like the steady stream of IE, ActiveX, JScript exploits continue unabated.

How many fingers have you got for patching up ALL the holes in a leaking dyke?

So the next question is how much time do I have to waste yet again for the various 'side effects' for when those updates roll out... Also, the "restart required" is quite an expensive pain...

In my experience, all very silly.

Certainly no hate. Just a very high level of exasperation.

Good luck!
Martin



The full details from the bulletin:

Bulletin Information

Executive Summaries

The following table summarizes the security bulletins for this month in order of severity.

For details on affected software, see the next section, Affected Software and Download Locations.
Bulletin ID Bulletin Title and Executive Summary Maximum Severity Rating and Vulnerability Impact Restart Requirement Affected Software

MS09-045


Vulnerability in JScript Scripting Engine Could Allow Remote Code Execution (971961)

This security update resolves a privately reported vulnerability in the JScript scripting engine that could allow remote code execution if a user opened a specially crafted file or visited a specially crafted Web site and invoked a malformed script. If a user is logged on with administrative user rights, an attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could take complete control of an affected system. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than users who operate with administrative user rights.


Critical
Remote Code Execution


May require restart


Microsoft Windows

MS09-049


Vulnerability in Wireless LAN AutoConfig Service Could Allow Remote Code Execution (970710)

This security update resolves a privately reported vulnerability in Wireless LAN AutoConfig Service. The vulnerability could allow remote code execution if a client or server with a wireless network interface enabled receives specially crafted wireless frames. Systems without a wireless card enabled are not at risk from this vulnerability.


Critical
Remote Code Execution


Requires restart


Microsoft Windows

MS09-047


Vulnerabilities in Windows Media Format Could Allow Remote Code Execution (973812)

This security update resolves two privately reported vulnerabilities in Windows Media Format. Either vulnerability could allow remote code execution if a user opened a specially crafted media file. If a user is logged on with administrative user rights, an attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could take complete control of an affected system. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than users who operate with administrative user rights.


Critical
Remote Code Execution


May require restart


Microsoft Windows

MS09-048


Vulnerabilities in Windows TCP/IP Could Allow Remote Code Execution (967723)

This security update resolves several privately reported vulnerabilities in Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) processing. The vulnerabilities could allow remote code execution if an attacker sent specially crafted TCP/IP packets over the network to a computer with a listening service. Firewall best practices and standard default firewall configurations can help protect networks from attacks that originate outside the enterprise perimeter. Best practices recommend that systems that are connected to the Internet have a minimal number of ports exposed.


Critical
Remote Code Execution


Requires restart


Microsoft Windows

MS09-046


Vulnerability in DHTML Editing Component ActiveX Control Could Allow Remote Code Execution (956844)

This security update resolves a privately reported vulnerability in the DHTML Editing Component ActiveX control. An attacker could exploit the vulnerability by constructing a specially crafted Web page. When a user views the Web page, the vulnerability could allow remote code execution. An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could gain the same user rights as the logged-on user. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than users who operate with administrative user rights.


Critical
Remote Code Execution


May require restart


Microsoft Windows
Top of sectionTop of section

Exploitability Index

The following table provides an exploitability assessment of each of the vulnerabilities addressed this month. The vulnerabilities are listed in order of bulletin ID and CVE ID.

How do I use this table?

Use this table to learn about the likelihood of functioning exploit code being released within 30 days of security bulletin release, for each of the security updates that you may need to install. You should review each of the assessments below, in accordance with your specific configuration, in order to prioritize your deployment. For more information about what these ratings mean, and how they are determined, please see Microsoft Exploitability Index.
Bulletin ID Bulletin Title CVE ID Exploitability Index Assessment Key Notes

MS09-045


Vulnerability in JScript Scripting Engine Could Allow Remote Code Execution (971961)


CVE-2009-1920


1 - Consistent exploit code likely


(None)

MS09-046


Vulnerability in DHTML Editing Component ActiveX Control Could Allow Remote Code Execution (956844)


CVE-2009-2519


2 - Inconsistent exploit code likely


(None)

MS09-047


Vulnerabilities in Windows Media Format Could Allow Remote Code Execution (973812)


CVE-2009-2498


1 - Consistent exploit code likely


(None)

MS09-047


Vulnerabilities in Windows Media Format Could Allow Remote Code Execution (973812)


CVE-2009-2499


1 - Consistent exploit code likely


(None)

MS09-048


Vulnerabilities in Windows TCP/IP Could Allow Remote Code Execution (967723)


CVE-2008-4609


3 - Functioning exploit code unlikely


This is a memory consumption type of denial of service.

MS09-048


Vulnerabilities in Windows TCP/IP Could Allow Remote Code Execution (967723)


CVE-2009-1925


2 - Inconsistent exploit code likely


Functioning exploit code is possible but not likely to be reliable. Denial of service is a more likely result.

MS09-048


Vulnerabilities in Windows TCP/IP Could Allow Remote Code Execution (967723)


CVE-2009-1926


3 - Functioning exploit code unlikely


This is a memory consumption type of denial of service.

MS09-049


Vulnerability in Wireless LAN AutoConfig Service Could Allow Remote Code Execution (970710)


CVE-2009-1132


2 - Inconsistent exploit code likely


Heap protections make this vulnerability difficult to exploit reliably.
Top of sectionTop of section

Affected Software and Download Locations

The following tables list the bulletins in order of major software category and severity.

How do I use these tables?

Use these tables to learn about the security updates that you may need to install. You should review each software program or component listed to see whether any security updates pertain to your installation. If a software program or component is listed, then the available software update is hyperlinked and the severity rating of the software update is also listed.

Note You may have to install several security updates for a single vulnerability. Review the whole column for each bulletin identifier that is listed to verify the updates that you have to install, based on the programs or components that you have installed on your system.

Windows Operating System and Components


Microsoft Windows 2000

Bulletin Identifier


MS09-045


MS09-049


MS09-047


MS09-048


MS09-046

Aggregate Severity Rating


Critical


None


Critical


Important


Critical

Microsoft Windows 2000 Service Pack 4


JScript 5.1 and JScript 5.6
(Critical)


Not applicable


Windows Media Format Runtime 9.0
(KB968816)
(Critical)


Microsoft Windows 2000 Service Pack 4[3]
(Important)


Microsoft Windows 2000 Service Pack 4
(Critical)
Windows XP

Bulletin Identifier


MS09-045


MS09-049


MS09-047


MS09-048


MS09-046

Aggregate Severity Rating


Critical


None


Critical


None


Critical

Windows XP Service Pack 2 and Windows XP Service Pack 3


JScript 5.6 on Windows XP Service Pack 2
(Critical)

JScript 5.7 on Windows XP Service Pack 2[1]
(Critical)

JScript 5.7 on Windows XP Service Pack 3
(Critical)

JScript 5.8[2]
(Critical)


Not applicable


Windows Media Format Runtime 9.0, Windows Media Format Runtime 9.5, and Windows Media Format Runtime 11
(KB968816)
(Critical)
(Windows XP Service Pack 2 only)

Windows Media Format Runtime 9.0, Windows Media Format Runtime 9.5, and Windows Media Format Runtime 11
(KB968816)
(Critical)
(Windows XP Service Pack 3 only)


Not applicable


Windows XP Service Pack 2 and Windows XP Service Pack 3
(Critical)

Windows XP Professional x64 Edition Service Pack 2


JScript 5.6
(Critical)

JScript 5.7[1]
(Critical)

JScript 5.8[2]
(Critical)


Not applicable


Windows Media Format Runtime 9.5
(KB968816)
(Critical)

Windows Media Format Runtime 9.5 x64 Edition
(KB968816)
(Critical)

Windows Media Format Runtime 11
(KB968816)
(Critical)


Not applicable


Windows XP Professional x64 Edition Service Pack 2
(Critical)
Windows Server 2003

Bulletin Identifier


MS09-045


MS09-049


MS09-047


MS09-048


MS09-046

Aggregate Severity Rating


Critical


None


Critical


Important


Moderate

Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2


JScript 5.6
(Critical)

JScript 5.7[1]
(Critical)

JScript 5.8[2]
(Critical)


Not applicable


Windows Media Format Runtime 9.5
(KB968816)
(Critical)

Windows Media Services 9.1
(KB972554)
(Critical)


Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2
(Important)


Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2
(Moderate)

Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition Service Pack 2


JScript 5.6
(Critical)

JScript 5.7[1]
(Critical)

JScript 5.8[2]
(Critical)


Not applicable


Windows Media Format Runtime 9.5
(KB968816)
(Critical)

Windows Media Format Runtime 9.5 x64 Edition
(KB968816)
(Critical)

Windows Media Services 9.1
(KB972554)
(Critical)


Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition Service Pack 2
(Important)


Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition Service Pack 2
(Moderate)

Windows Server 2003 with SP2 for Itanium-based Systems


JScript 5.6
(Critical)

JScript 5.7[1]
(Critical)


Not applicable


Not applicable


Windows Server 2003 with SP2 for Itanium-based Systems
(Important)


Windows Server 2003 with SP2 for Itanium-based Systems
(Moderate)
Windows Vista

Bulletin Identifier


MS09-045


MS09-049


MS09-047


MS09-048


MS09-046

Aggregate Severity Rating


Critical


Critical


Critical


Critical


None

Windows Vista, Windows Vista Service Pack 1, and Windows Vista Service Pack 2


JScript 5.7
(Critical)

JScript 5.8[2]
(Critical)


Windows Vista, Windows Vista Service Pack 1, and Windows Vista Service Pack 2
(Critical)


Windows Media Format Runtime 11 and Microsoft Media Foundation
(KB968816)
(Critical)


Windows Vista, Windows Vista Service Pack 1, and Windows Vista Service Pack 2
(Critical)


Not applicable

Windows Vista x64 Edition, Windows Vista x64 Edition Service Pack 1, and Windows Vista x64 Edition Service Pack 2


JScript 5.7
(Critical)

JScript 5.8[2]
(Critical)


Windows Vista x64 Edition, Windows Vista x64 Edition Service Pack 1, and Windows Vista x64 Edition Service Pack 2
(Critical)


Windows Media Format Runtime 11 and Microsoft Media Foundation
(KB968816)
(Critical)


Windows Vista x64 Edition, Windows Vista x64 Edition Service Pack 1, and Windows Vista x64 Edition Service Pack 2
(Critical)


Not applicable
Windows Server 2008

Bulletin Identifier


MS09-045


MS09-049


MS09-047


MS09-048


MS09-046

Aggregate Severity Rating


Critical


Important


Critical


Critical


None

Windows Server 2008 for 32-bit Systems and Windows Server 2008 for 32-bit Systems Service Pack 2


JScript 5.7*
(Critical)

JScript 5.8*,[2]
(Critical)


Windows Server 2008 for 32-bit Systems and Windows Server 2008 for 32-bit Systems Service Pack 2**
(Important)


Windows Media Format Runtime 11 and Microsoft Media Foundation**
(KB968816)
(Critical)

Windows Media Services 2008*
(KB972554)
(Critical)


Windows Server 2008 for 32-bit Systems and Windows Server 2008 for 32-bit Systems Service Pack 2*
(Critical)


Not applicable

Windows Server 2008 for x64-based Systems and Windows Server 2008 for x64-based Systems Service Pack 2


JScript 5.7*
(Critical)

JScript 5.8*,[2]
(Critical)


Windows Server 2008 for x64-based Systems and Windows Server 2008 for x64-based Systems Service Pack 2**
(Important)


Windows Media Format Runtime 11 and Microsoft Media Foundation**
(KB968816)
(Critical)

Windows Media Services 2008*
(KB972554)
(Critical)


Windows Server 2008 for x64-based Systems and Windows Server 2008 for x64-based Systems Service Pack 2*
(Critical)


Not applicable

Windows Server 2008 for Itanium-based Systems and Windows Server 2008 for Itanium-based Systems Service Pack 2


JScript 5.7
(Critical)


Not applicable


Not applicable


Windows Server 2008 for Itanium-based Systems and Windows Server 2008 for Itanium-based Systems Service Pack 2
(Critical)


Not applicable

Notes for Windows Server 2008

*Windows Server 2008 Server Core installation affected. For supported editions of Windows Server 2008, this update applies, with the same severity rating, whether or not Windows Server 2008 was installed using the Server Core installation option. For more information on this installation option, see Server Core. Note that the Server Core installation option does not apply to certain editions of Windows Server 2008; see Compare Server Core Installation Options.

**Windows Server 2008 Server Core installation not affected. The vulnerabilities addressed by this update do not affect supported editions of Windows Server 2008 if Windows Server 2008 was installed using the Server Core installation option. For more information on this installation option, see Server Core. Note that the Server Core installation option does not apply to certain editions of Windows Server 2008; see Compare Server Core Installation Options.

Notes for MS09-045

[1]On systems with Internet Explorer 7 installed

[2]On systems with Internet Explorer 8 installed

Note for MS09-048

[3] No update available. For more information, see the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Related to This Security Update entry in MS09-048.
Top of sectionTop of section
Top of sectionTop of section

Detection and Deployment Tools and Guidance

(End of Microsoft Bulletin!)

Roll up! Roll up! Get yer updates and upgrades as soon as yer can!!

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

The company I work for (at least for now) averages a "critical patch" installation a week. Definitely not a good thing.

Lets face it. Windows was started for isolated PCs. It was a step backwards in OS'es. Mainframe OS'es had long ago been designed to keep users from killing other users. The Mac OS is IMHO much better than windows as far a OS security goes because it is based more on old time OS'es that had much better built in security features.

I love Microsoft products like Excel and Access (Office in general), but the Windows OS was a step backward and has not even yet reached security levels present in mainframe OS'es 20+ years ago. Things don't always move in straight forward lines.

The company I work for (at least for now) averages a "critical patch" installation a week. Definitely not a good thing.

Lets face it. Windows was started for isolated PCs. It was a step backwards in OS'es. Mainframe OS'es had long ago been designed to keep users from killing other users. The Mac OS is IMHO much better than windows as far a OS security goes because it is based more on old time OS'es that had much better built in security features.

I love Microsoft products like Excel and Access (Office in general), but the Windows OS was a step backward and has not even yet reached security levels present in mainframe OS'es 20+ years ago. Things don't always move in straight forward lines.

I don't disagree. However, Windows did bring computing into the mainstream and accelerated the rates of PC ownership to the point where a computer is now a common household appliance. I'm not opining on whether or not that particular phenomenon is a good or bad thing, just saying that it is, and in regard to that, the OS is successful.

The days of a blinking cursor awaiting commands within the OS were intimidating to many newbies and as such, computer users were an exclusive, rather than inclusive crowd.

But then of course this spawns an army of consumers that have no clue what they're doing. I remember a commercial for AOL where a guy said, "I can't program a VCR, but I can use AOL!" I thought to myself, "yep, and that's part of the problem".

The way I see it, Windows doesn't have to be all of that innovative or even secure when the biggest customer is someone that knows next to nothing about the other options out there and even if they did; have no capacity to wield the alternatives. As such, these mainstream products are built with the idiot in mind and because the OS is the standard, the rest of us are coerced into playing along for the sake of standardization.

I use Windows simply because it's the most practical for what I do. It's not however, a positive reflection on the product simply because I'm using it.

Actually Apple brought the computer to the public. M$ just moved it along faster than Apple

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

The Apple was not an appliance in just about every household in the West.

M$ holds the crown, unequivocally, for bringing computers into every day life, every day business, and every day recreation. The byproduct of this is exactly why Windows sucks so bad.

That Apple was marketed for home use earlier hardly means they were the most influential. Otherwise, I'm throwing in with the IMSAI analog computer as bringing the computer to the public. "First" is another thread altogether, I wasn't referring to which was first.

M$ holds the crown, unequivocally, for ...

For certain things I'll agree.

However, has Microsoft's success been gained by fair means or foul?...

Note the latest from the Microsoft Marketing:

Microsoft Training: Windows 7 Better than Linux

Many companies across many industries partake in some form of evangelism (though some would call it propaganda) for its products. Some of the best evangelism starts at the retail level, where employees can 'inform' the buying consumer...

... encountered materials from Microsoft that push certain superiorities that Windows 7 possess over Linux. While some points were valid, others were untrue.


Is Microsoft getting to be that 'worried' about Linux? Or is that their normal business practice?

Regards,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... So much for the "high speed high tech" online "experience"... :-(

There must be a better way.

Yet more Microsoft 'distraction':

Microsoft Security Bulletin Summary for September 2009 ...

And here is one that was missed:

Race is On to Patch Critical Windows Flaw

... a new security hole affecting the Windows operating system. The potential exists to create a worm that would allow an attacker to take complete control of vulnerable systems without any user interaction--a jackpot for malware developers.


... So... The "workaround" is to disconnect all PCs from the network. Really?!

To my mind, that ain't the best way to run an OS!


(Wait a moment... So that's why I don't run that stuff at home! I guess it must just be a businesses thing...)

In all exasperation,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

A mini-review:

Well... I've just had a taste of Microsoft Windows Vista SP1 Home Premium... This is on a brand new pre-installed system.

And...

First thing that hits you is that it takes a good minute to boot up, despite this being on a dual-core 2GByte RAM system.

Next is you get the first welcome screen and a few bits of eye-candy flashing on the screen. The most noticeable thing is that the hands of the onscreen clock appear to 'sweep' round to show the time in a cartoon-esq 'cute' way.

And immediately there is "in-yer-face" the "You MUST register within two days" prompt. OK... But... There's no network!

So check the lead is plugged in and all looks ok, LAN leds on. So... How many clicks to find where the IP address is hidden?! Sure enough, the IP address is an autoconf IP address. So why hasn't the DHCP been picked up?... There's a Win2000 server on the network doing it's stuff fine for various other PCs...

A quick look at the control panel "wizards" and by heck, what a confusing mess even if you do know what the various parts are supposed to do. There's various selections for "tasks" but what if one of those tasks doesn't describe what you want to do?... (Or even, that the descriptions are not carefully descriptive enough for what is available?) OK, so switch to the "classic view" but there's still various bits that are "hidden".

Changing the PC name and workgroup name requires a REBOOT! That's another two minutes just for that one operation and to then get back to where I was.

Nope, still no accessible network.

Next guess is that the motherboard drivers haven't been installed... This is where Linux scores one up in that whatever "drivers" are usually already in the kernel or already available as precompiled modules that are automagically loaded.

OK. So I've two days and counting to do a few more clicks-and-prey with the various drivers installation...


Interestingly, Mozilla Firefox has been pre-installed also. Also annoyingly, setting the network proxy settings in the control panel those settings are not passed on or picked up by Firefox. Also, IE had it's tickbox ticked to force itself to be the "default browser"...

I'll see how the experiment proceeds.

Remember now... I've got just two days and counting to get the Windows Vista to successfully talk to the network...


Cheers,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

First as to the thread title
M$ is a corporation, hatred of it comes with the territory.

Boot the XP install disk. Select the default install. Tells me it will take about 75 minutes and may restart a few times. So far so good.

Thirty minutes later a DOS style prompt
The installer does not have all required components and please hit enter to crash.

WTF. It is a retail box CD! WTF is it missing?!!

Hit enter

Now we have a boot screen asking us if we want to cancel the install or boot.

The timer is ticking but wtf do the choices mean. The crash message didn't say which one to pick!!

Maybe I better pick, oh crap the timer is at zero!

Is my disk hosed?!!

It restarted the install. This time it is happy and finishes. I didn't give it any components. So how come it didn't have them the first time? They had to be on the CD all along!

Microcrap. You can depend on errors!

---

I'm thinking that the Linux advocates that are also Microsoft haters will have a collective heart attack when/if MS ever puts out a distro of Linux.
If MS dos, I suspect it will be the best distro ever released, or at least the most user friendly.

---

And after the spanking comes...



Ni !

I'm thinking that the Linux advocates that are also Microsoft haters will have a collective heart attack when/if MS ever puts out a distro of Linux.
If MS dos, I suspect it will be the best distro ever released, or at least the most user friendly.

Really, MS is going to buy Apple?

---

I'm thinking that the Linux advocates that are also Microsoft haters will have a collective heart attack when/if MS ever puts out a distro of Linux.
If MS dos, I suspect it will be the best distro ever released, or at least the most user friendly.

Really, MS is going to buy Apple?

I'd hardly call Apple the most user friendly.

---

I'm thinking that the Linux advocates that are also Microsoft haters will have a collective heart attack when/if MS ever puts out a distro of Linux.
If MS dos, I suspect it will be the best distro ever released, or at least the most user friendly.

Really, MS is going to buy Apple?

I'd hardly call Apple the most user friendly.

Who pray tell is? Red Hat? Solaris? Play Station?

---

I'm thinking that the Linux advocates that are also Microsoft haters will have a collective heart attack when/if MS ever puts out a distro of Linux.
If MS dos, I suspect it will be the best distro ever released, or at least the most user friendly.

Really, MS is going to buy Apple?

I'd hardly call Apple the most user friendly.

Who pray tell is? Red Hat? Solaris? Play Station?

I'm sure you know who *I* think is, but of course we have disagreed in the past on this point, haven't we? ;)

---

I'm thinking that the Linux advocates that are also Microsoft haters will have a collective heart attack when/if MS ever puts out a distro of Linux.
If MS dos, I suspect it will be the best distro ever released, or at least the most user friendly.

After a rather irritating 5 hours with Windows Vista... I'm not so sure...

There's some really confusing obfuscation in the user interface there that to my mind makes no sense for any of making it 'easy' for those non-technical nor 'easy' even if you do know what you're doing. There's a lot of 'task orientation' that doesn't let you work on any one tangible hardware or network aspect at a time.

And the number of time wasting reboots required is just silly. Also, why does it take nearly a minute to display a new user's desktop?!

I've very quickly grown tired of the comical clock hands random cutie sweep around to show the time.

Oh, and I got the registration time limit wrong... It was actually showing 28 days and not 2. It does help to reset the TFT display to show the entire screen. The registration message was rather euphemistic in claiming that it might take a minute or two... Why are the Microsoft "WGA" servers so hideously slow?

... And there's still some more updates to go on there. The antivirus took long enough at over a 100MBytes!


Also note that Microsoft at least indirectly appears to be bankrolling/selling Linux already... Despite various other moves that appear to be to inflict FUD and destruction...

Regards,
Martin

All just my own views as ever!

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

I'm thinking that the Linux advocates that are also Microsoft haters will have a collective heart attack when/if MS ever puts out a distro of Linux.
If MS dos, I suspect it will be the best distro ever released, or at least the most user friendly.

Really, MS is going to buy Apple?

I'd hardly call Apple the most user friendly.

Who pray tell is? Red Hat? Solaris? Play Station?

I'm sure you know who *I* think is, but of course we have disagreed in the past on this point, haven't we? ;)

I don't think we have butted heads in the past on this but I could be suffering from CRS. In any case the question at hand is about Nix. Tossed the play station on for a laugh.

While Apple isn't Linux, being Unix(r) perhaps you would enlighten as to what Nix distro, Linux or Unix(r) out there is the most user friendly.

Full disclosure, I own shares of Microsoft.

---

I don't think we have butted heads in the past on this but I could be suffering from CRS. In any case the question at hand is about Nix. Tossed the play station on for a laugh.

A while back, in another Microsoft vs. Linux thread I was complaining about the complexity of Linux. You and Martin both tried winning me over, suggesting what distro to use, and even offering helpful hints to get me going. But in doing all that you both had missed the point I was making. In that same thread, I alluded to having downloaded and kept several Linux distros (I still do). During your frustration with me, you told me that I should just get rid of all the *nix distros from my file server and forget about *nix altogether because I [paraphrased] already had my mind made up. Martin then made some point about [again, paraphrased] if you (collectively) were to show me the light, you were going to have to do so through being helpful and friendly instead of getting frustrated with me.

(Though I did think the PlayStation comment was cute.)

While Apple isn't Linux, being Unix(r) perhaps you would enlighten as to what Nix distro, Linux or Unix(r) out there is the most user friendly.

I don't find any of them user friendly, and that's not the comment Snake was intending to make. The original comment:

I'm thinking that the Linux advocates that are also Microsoft haters will have a collective heart attack when/if MS ever puts out a distro of Linux.
If MS dos, I suspect it will be the best distro ever released, or at least the most user friendly.

Suggested that if MS were to put out a Linux distro that it would be the most user friendly, to which I heartily agreed.

Full disclosure, I own shares of Microsoft.

For full disclosure, I do not own shares of MSFT, but I am an MCP and an MCSA while still working toward my MCSE.

---

First thing is to deliberately forsake all names and decide for yourself what you want to do with your computer. What is it that you actually want to do?

Add into that what you are familiar with and whether you are 'interested' enough to look at anything 'new', and then decide from there.


Good luck,

Regards,
Martin


ps: Linux isn't everything to everyone, but it does offer a very good offering. Especially so for the recent work.

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

I don't think we have butted heads in the past on this but I could be suffering from CRS. In any case the question at hand is about Nix. Tossed the play station on for a laugh.

A while back, in another Microsoft vs. Linux thread I was complaining about the complexity of Linux. You and Martin both tried winning me over, suggesting what distro to use, and even offering helpful hints to get me going. But in doing all that you both had missed the point I was making. In that same thread, I alluded to having downloaded and kept several Linux distros (I still do). During your frustration with me, you told me that I should just get rid of all the *nix distros from my file server and forget about *nix altogether because I [paraphrased] already had my mind made up. Martin then made some point about [again, paraphrased] if you (collectively) were to show me the light, you were going to have to do so through being helpful and friendly instead of getting frustrated with me.

I know I wouldn't offer info on which distro of Linux is better, because frankly I don't know what their differences are. I believe you have me confused with another poster.

(Though I did think the PlayStation comment was cute.)

While Apple isn't Linux, being Unix(r) perhaps you would enlighten as to what Nix distro, Linux or Unix(r) out there is the most user friendly.

I don't find any of them user friendly, and that's not the comment Snake was intending to make. The original comment:

I'm thinking that the Linux advocates that are also Microsoft haters will have a collective heart attack when/if MS ever puts out a distro of Linux.
If MS dos, I suspect it will be the best distro ever released, or at least the most user friendly.

Suggested that if MS were to put out a Linux distro that it would be the most user friendly, to which I heartily agreed.

To which I suggested Microsoft might not go Linux and instead go Unix(r). But if the experience with their C/C++ compiler is any guide I doubt they would/could produce a conforming O/S.

Full disclosure, I own shares of Microsoft.

For full disclosure, I do not own shares of MSFT, but I am an MCP and an MCSA while still working toward my MCSE.

Good for you. Hope it opens some doors.

---