http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7205059.stm

'Nuff said

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

Doctor John escribió:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7205059.stm
> 
> 'Nuff said
> 
> John
> 

Microsoft releases list of programs that won't work with Vista SP1

http://reddevnews.com/news/print.aspx?editorialsid=9566

[Nothing too urgent, just a bunch of antivirus and firewall applications...]

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:08:33 -0000, Nicolas Alvarez  
<nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> did spake, saying:

> Doctor John escribió:
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7205059.stm
>>  'Nuff said
>>  John
>>
>
> Microsoft releases list of programs that won't work with Vista SP1
>
> http://reddevnews.com/news/print.aspx?editorialsid=9566
>
> [Nothing too urgent, just a bunch of antivirus and firewall  
> applications...]

"Microsoft Corp. today released a list of known programs"

Wow cos you know I was expecting a list of unknown programs that might  
cause a problem. Heh so of the 12 programs they checked 11 don't work? I  
know cheap shot at least I didn't ask if it would be quicker just to list  
the programs that functioned properly with Vista... oh wait, damn!

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> [Nothing too urgent, just a bunch of antivirus and firewall 
> applications...]

Which means that, in theory, they fixed security holes that AV and 
firewalls use to do low-level system calls, thereby also blocking off a 
lot of viruses/malware in the process.

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.digitalartsuk.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

"Nicolas Alvarez" <nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> wrote in message
news:47bef389@news.povray.org...
>
> [Nothing too urgent, just a bunch of antivirus and firewall
applications...]

On that point, can anyone recommed a firewall that does work with Vista? (on
a laptop using a 3G card)
Other than the built-in piece of uselessness, that it...

Post a reply to this message

"Tim Cook" <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote in message
news:47bf2aeb$1@news.povray.org...

> Which means that, in theory, they fixed security holes that AV and
> firewalls use to do low-level system calls, thereby also blocking off a
> lot of viruses/malware in the process.

Antivirus, anti-malware and firewall should be an integral and irreplacable
part of the OS, for any modern OS.

Post a reply to this message

"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. :)

Post a reply to this message

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.

  OTOH, IMO you should have a choice of those software instead of the OS
forcing something on you.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

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.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

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. :)

Post a reply to this message

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

Warp wrote:
> in the case of Linux it's really part of the OS because device drivers
> are compiled into the kernel,

Is that still true, tho? I thought the "modules" stuff took care of 
that? Like loading the encryption loopback device makes something new in 
/dev (/dev/loop0) yes?

Or am I just confused?

>   Also, is a firewall an integral part of the OS, or is it just a app
> in the distro?

Clearly the ability to examine connections has to be part of the OS if 
the TCP stack is part of the OS. How you decide to permit or refuse a 
connection is probably in user-space if you can afford the inefficiency.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > in the case of Linux it's really part of the OS because device drivers
> > are compiled into the kernel,

> Is that still true, tho? I thought the "modules" stuff took care of 
> that? Like loading the encryption loopback device makes something new in 
> /dev (/dev/loop0) yes?

> Or am I just confused?

  Driver modules can be dynamically linked to the kernel at runtime.
They are still part of the kernel, though. Once linked they are part
of the kernel code, have all the same rights and all the same access.
Moreover, there's no standard stable binary interface between the modules
and the rest of the kernel. A module compiled for one version of the
kernel may well not work with the next version. In other words, all the
device driver modules must always be provided with each new version of
the kernel. Closed source binary-only driver modules are not feasible
(because they would only work for a very limited range of kernels).

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>> Or am I just confused?
>   Driver modules can be dynamically linked to the kernel at runtime.

Thanks for the explanation!

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

somebody wrote:
> "Tim Cook" <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote in message
> news:47bf2aeb$1@news.povray.org...
> 
>> Which means that, in theory, they fixed security holes that AV and
>> firewalls use to do low-level system calls, thereby also blocking off a
>> lot of viruses/malware in the process.
> 
> Antivirus, anti-malware and firewall should be an integral and irreplacable
> part of the OS, for any modern OS.
> 
> 


It is - you can use the ultra useful and secure MS security programs.

Post a reply to this message