|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 19:36:20 -0500, nemesis wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:39:11 -0500, nemesis wrote:
>>
>> > "somebody" <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
>> >> Antivirus, anti-malware and firewall should be an integral and
>> >> irreplacable part of the OS, for any modern OS.
>> >
>> > I think much more important is anti-stupid-user protection. :)
>>
>> That's easy. Take the keyboard and mouse away.
>
> or just install Linux and marvel at them fearing touching it. :)
That works right up to the point that they realise it's not so scary
after all....
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> > I think much more important is anti-stupid-user protection. :)
> That's easy. Take the keyboard and mouse away.
I think taking the mouse away is enough.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Doctor John <doc### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
....
> 'Nuff said
And now for the key supplementary
list of software that does not function
properly when using Microsoft Vista:
1.) Microsoft Vista
;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> somebody <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
>> Antivirus, anti-malware and firewall should be an integral and irreplacable
>> part of the OS, for any modern OS.
>
> Firewall yes, but as for antivirus and anti-malware the better solution
> is to design the OS so that they have hard time working at all.
There are those who think that MS windows was designed in such a way
that everybody has a hard time working with it at all, but I guess that
is not what you meant.
> OTOH, IMO you should have a choice of those software instead of the OS
> forcing something on you.
>
And any solution should be open source, so that we can all verify that
there are obviously no bugs*. Aside, one of the problems is that it has
become unclear as to what an OS is. I don't think a text editor is part
of it, nor is a card game, yet there are companies who try to make us
think differently. Device drivers are part of an OS, but is a firewall
part of a device driver? Possibly and perhaps even preferably. Anti
virus and anti malware have to look at the content of the messages, so I
agree, not an integral part of an OS. Yet nowadays you can not afford to
sell one without, but if you can change it afterwards you open the gates
for anything. Unless it is implemented in such a way that it can not go
unnoticed. Like in recompiling and installing a new kernel.
* Two ways to write a program:
(1) Make it so simple that there are obviously no errors.
(2) Make it so complicated that there are no obvious errors.
David Gries
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Aside, one of the problems is that it has
> become unclear as to what an OS is. I don't think a text editor is part
> of it, nor is a card game, yet there are companies who try to make us
> think differently.
There's a difference between an OS and an OS distro. For example the
text editor may be part of the OS distro although it's not a critical
part of the OS itself. (In other words, the computer can be still used
even if the text editor is removed, thus the text editor is clearly not
part of the underlying OS.)
One main difference between an OS and an OS distro is that there can
exist different distros of the same OS, while the OS part is the same
in all of them.
Of course in many cases the distinction becomes very fuzzy. Is, for
example, a device driver part of the OS or part of the distro? I suppose
in the case of Linux it's really part of the OS because device drivers
are compiled into the kernel, while in the case of Windows it's not so
clear, as device drivers can be quite separate from the kernel (and many
of them are even optional).
Also, is a firewall an integral part of the OS, or is it just a app
in the distro?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 19:36:20 -0500, nemesis wrote:
>
>> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:39:11 -0500, nemesis wrote:
>>>
>>>> "somebody" <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
>>>>> Antivirus, anti-malware and firewall should be an integral and
>>>>> irreplacable part of the OS, for any modern OS.
>>>> I think much more important is anti-stupid-user protection. :)
>>> That's easy. Take the keyboard and mouse away.
>> or just install Linux and marvel at them fearing touching it. :)
>
> That works right up to the point that they realise it's not so scary
> after all....
>
> Jim
By which time they might have learned something
John
--
I will be brief but not nearly so brief as Salvador Dali, who gave the
world's shortest speech. He said, "I will be so brief I am already
finished," then he sat down.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike the Elder wrote:
> Doctor John <doc### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> .....
>> 'Nuff said
>
> And now for the key supplementary
> list of software that does not function
> properly when using Microsoft Vista:
>
> 1.) Microsoft Vista
>
> ;-)
>
ROTFLMAO
--
I will be brief but not nearly so brief as Salvador Dali, who gave the
world's shortest speech. He said, "I will be so brief I am already
finished," then he sat down.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp escribió:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>> I think much more important is anti-stupid-user protection. :)
>
>> That's easy. Take the keyboard and mouse away.
>
> I think taking the mouse away is enough.
>
So sadly true.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 14:06:28 +0000, Doctor John wrote:
> By which time they might have learned something
<G>
Heaven forbid. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 04:41:15 -0500, Warp wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> > I think much more important is anti-stupid-user protection. :)
>
>> That's easy. Take the keyboard and mouse away.
>
> I think taking the mouse away is enough.
Fair point. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |