Hi,

A couple weeks ago my little brother stayed the weekend. He brought his 
computer along with him, because he's as much a digital junkie as I am. 
I thought I would install Phun for him, since he's really into mechanics 
and physics-based mayhem in general. But every time I tried to navigate 
through directories, Vista would pop up with a message telling me that 
his computer may be infected with spyware or a virus. I got to looking, 
and sure enough, there's like twenty icons in the system tray, and a 
bunch of unusual tasks running behind the curtain. Toolbar this, agent 
that. It was ridiculous. My little brother had no idea what half of that 
stuff was. So I headed to the control panel, to see what I could 
uninstall. It was like a battlefield, with the computer side losing. I 
did the best I could, deleting every potentially malignant piece of 
worthless software I could find.

My question is how does does this happen? And why does it happen to some 
people more than others? How can a person be downloading and installing 
software without even knowing it? All I can guess is that it must be 
like what I experienced a few weeks back, when I accidentally clicked 
"yes" to a pop-up dialog. (my one and only incident in over ten years of 
computing [yes, I'm proud])

Do any of you out there know people who always seem to have infested 
computers? Can you spot a pattern of (mis)use which may be valuable to 
help these people keep their computers healthy?

Sam

Post a reply to this message

Our tech guy is always groaning about home users- that is users who work 
from home using company owned laptops, whose computers are always infested 
with malware. The worst cases are usually people who let their children 
occaisionally use the equipment to surf the internet. Another one who always 
has alot of trouble is the 82 year old founder of our company who doesn't 
actually actively work at the company anymore but is always calling saying 
he constantly gets unrelenting popups advertising sex websites. I wonder 
what he may have been up to?
I think most of the time these people aren't paying attention to the things 
they click on including reading the license agreements, etc.
The company I work for is in far from having a fascist attitude toward what 
people are using the equipment for, but we recently had to block some 
websites including youtube, myspace and facebook and the that has really 
improved our network utilization.

-- 
H²

Post a reply to this message

Halbert wrote:
> Our tech guy is always groaning about home users- that is users who work 
> from home using company owned laptops, whose computers are always infested 
> with malware. The worst cases are usually people who let their children 
> occaisionally use the equipment to surf the internet.

My brother not only uses MySpace, but also downloads a bunch of demo 
games. Having high speed probably doesn't help at all.

Sam

Post a reply to this message

stbenge wrote:
> Do any of you out there know people who always seem to have infested 
> computers? Can you spot a pattern of (mis)use which may be valuable to 
> help these people keep their computers healthy?
> 
> Sam

I help one cousin keep a computer. The pattern was her kids and husband. 
She used it for ebay and banking, nothing else. They had to play every 
game they saw an advertisement for. "Free Demo" meant the game had to be 
downloaded, the EULA ignored, and everything clicked through.

The kids also wanted free music. Some P2P programs exist to just share 
stuff, others want to make some money and install all sorts of ad-ware 
pop-ups and other junk. Pointed the kids to the Wikipedia page that 
lists which ones are malware free, and threatened to make an mp3 
deleting script that would run on startup. Didn't work, but they are in 
college now, so someone else's computer problem.

Another one was the 'must click' syndrome. You know the type, who use 
MySpace or Facebook and have to install every application or icon pack 
they see. "New emoticons, I have to have those" or "It's free, why 
shouldn't I install it?" The basic economic speech of "Free just means 
you are paying for it in ways you aren't looking for." is sometimes 
enough, other times it's not.

Last one I can think of was running the computer without a firewall. 
This was during the middle of Blaster's outbreak. They had turned off 
the router because it had blocked some installed game, and the computer 
wouldn't quit restarting. I put the router back on, ran the network 
through it, and waited an hour drinking tea. To prove a point, I put it 
back on the modem without a firewall, and only had to wait 2 to 5 
minutes before it restarted. I think they still keep the router in the 
loop. Public wifi is also on this list, though I hope Windows has gotten 
better default firewall settings since Blaster.

Post a reply to this message

Sabrina Kilian wrote:
> stbenge wrote:
>> Do any of you out there know people who always seem to have infested 
>> computers? Can you spot a pattern of (mis)use which may be valuable to 
>> help these people keep their computers healthy?
>>
>> Sam
> 
> I help one cousin keep a computer. The pattern was her kids and husband. 
> She used it for ebay and banking, nothing else. They had to play every 
> game they saw an advertisement for. "Free Demo" meant the game had to be 
> downloaded, the EULA ignored, and everything clicked through.

Some EULAs I ignore. I'm pretty confident with most well-known and 
trusted programs (eg. POV-Ray).

> deleting script that would run on startup. Didn't work, but they are in 
> college now, so someone else's computer problem.

Good news for your cousin!

> Another one was the 'must click' syndrome. You know the type, who use 
> MySpace or Facebook and have to install every application or icon pack 
> they see. "New emoticons, I have to have those" or "It's free, why 
> shouldn't I install it?" The basic economic speech of "Free just means 
> you are paying for it in ways you aren't looking for." is sometimes 
> enough, other times it's not.

Yes, I think I'm starting to see how this happens. Now to convince my 
little brother not to do these things...

> Last one I can think of was running the computer without a firewall.

My little bro's firewall was off as well. He didn't even realize that he 
had one, let alone that he should always keep the thing on! Oh well, if 
his dad wants to buy him a new computer every two years, it's not my 
problem :/

At least I can prevent people like my dad misusing his computer when he 
finally gets online :)

Sam

Post a reply to this message

"Sabrina Kilian" <"ykgp at vtSPAM.edu"> wrote:
> [...]downloaded, the EULA ignored, and everything clicked through.

There was some thing I'd gotten (I think a piece of hardware) where its 
instruction sheet explicitly tells you to 'just keep clicking next until the 
dialogues go away' on installing.  It was a reputable product, too, just 
instilling poor behaviour processes in users.

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net

Post a reply to this message

> Do any of you out there know people who always seem to have infested 
> computers? Can you spot a pattern of (mis)use which may be valuable to 
> help these people keep their computers healthy?

I have a friend who is exactly like this, I had fixed some software issues 
on his computer a number of times, then finally a stick of RAM went bad and 
I built him a new PC with a fresh installation of XP.  Within a few weeks he 
called me up to go and take a look because it wasn't working.  What he had 
done was incredible, not only had he downloaded and installed almost every 
piece of anti-virus/spyware/malware software in existence, he had installed 
all sorts of dodgy software when prompted with "Your computer seems to have 
a virus, install XXXXX to fix it".  The result was a huge mess, I have no 
idea whether he actually had a virus or not, but it wouldn't have made any 
difference.  I fixed it for him by just reinstalling XP, installed ONE AV 
software and told him that it would catch absolutely everything so no need 
to install any other anti-whatever software.  Haven't heard from him since!

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> I have a friend who is exactly like this, I had fixed some software issues 
> on his computer a number of times, then finally a stick of RAM went bad and 
> I built him a new PC with a fresh installation of XP.  Within a few weeks he 
> called me up to go and take a look because it wasn't working.  What he had 
> done was incredible, not only had he downloaded and installed almost every 
> piece of anti-virus/spyware/malware software in existence, he had installed 
> all sorts of dodgy software when prompted with "Your computer seems to have 
> a virus, install XXXXX to fix it".  The result was a huge mess, I have no 
> idea whether he actually had a virus or not, but it wouldn't have made any 
> difference.  I fixed it for him by just reinstalling XP, installed ONE AV 
> software and told him that it would catch absolutely everything so no need 
> to install any other anti-whatever software.  Haven't heard from him since!

  I once knew a person who told me that he wanted to "try linux", and that
he downloaded it and ran it, and that it broke his IE because its home page
would always go to a porn site even if he tried to change it.

  Given that linux is not something you simply "download and run" in Windows,
I don't have the faintest idea what exactly is it that he downloaded and ran.
Clearly whatever he did, whether it was that thing he downloaded, or
something else along the way, he got a IE homepage hijacker. But the way he
described it made it clear that he thought that "linux" was something which
breaks your IE.

  He ended up reinstalling the whole XP because of a homepage hijacker.
(He clearly didn't know what malware and homepage hijackers are, nor ever
heard of malware removal tools.)

  I'm pretty sure that to this day he is still convinced that "linux" is
something which breaks your IE.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Halbert <hal### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I think most of the time these people aren't paying attention to the things 
> they click on including reading the license agreements, etc.

  I suppose that it wouldn't help to install a good firewall and resident
malware scanners in their computers because they would nevertheless pay
zero attention to what the software is telling them and allow everything.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

>   I once knew a person who told me that he wanted to "try linux", and that
> he downloaded it and ran it, and that it broke his IE because its home page
> would always go to a porn site even if he tried to change it.

>   I'm pretty sure that to this day he is still convinced that "linux" is
> something which breaks your IE.

Heh. I needed a laugh... :-D

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:49391861$1@news.povray.org...
> Heh. I needed a laugh... :-D

Well then try this on for size. I get a call from my sister-in-law .... 
don't know why but my computer is running real slow! OK .... going into town 
anyway so I stopped by. 78 Mahjong games running. I asked .... How did you 
manage that!!! Turns out she thought she WAS quitting the game when she was 
done. She was clicking on the (-) instead of the (x). Doesn't the (-) mean 
take away she asked. Lord help my aching head! Now my wife wants to get her 
a digital camera for Christmas.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

>   I'm pretty sure that to this day he is still convinced that "linux" is
> something which breaks your IE.

...still, in a way, I guess it does. You can't run IE under Linux, 
right? ;-)

Post a reply to this message

Jim Holsenback wrote:

> Well then try this on for size. I get a call from my sister-in-law .... 
> don't know why but my computer is running real slow! OK .... going into town 
> anyway so I stopped by. 78 Mahjong games running. I asked .... How did you 
> manage that!!! Turns out she thought she WAS quitting the game when she was 
> done. She was clicking on the (-) instead of the (x). Doesn't the (-) mean 
> take away she asked. Lord help my aching head! Now my wife wants to get her 
> a digital camera for Christmas.

1. Why would having unused programs running make the computer slow? 
Surely mahjong doesn't consume any CPU time if it isn't "doing" anything...?

2. Didn't notice the taskbar then? Heh. I've noticed more non-experts 
seem to think that the myriad of status indicators on the screen are 
"just decoration". They don't comprehend that these things *tell* you stuff.

3. Digital camera? Oh, enjoy supporting it... ;-)

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>  Given that linux is not something you simply "download and run" in 
> Windows,

With the new Ubuntu, it kind of is.  >:3

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:49392211$1@news.povray.org...
> 1. Why would having unused programs running make the computer slow? Surely 
> mahjong doesn't consume any CPU time if it isn't "doing" anything...?

consumes memory even if it's idle .... right?

> 2. Didn't notice the taskbar then? Heh. I've noticed more non-experts seem 
> to think that the myriad of status indicators on the screen are "just 
> decoration". They don't comprehend that these things *tell* you stuff.

Nope she didn't. I tried to give her the quick tour and gave up when I 
noticed she had that glazed over look in her eye's as I was trying to 
explain "auto hide"

> 3. Digital camera? Oh, enjoy supporting it... ;-)

haha .... i'm hoping my wife settles on the Fisher Price camera. It has the 
fewest buttons and settings!

Post a reply to this message

>> 1. Why would having unused programs running make the computer slow? Surely 
>> mahjong doesn't consume any CPU time if it isn't "doing" anything...?
> 
> consumes memory even if it's idle .... right?

Right. And the virtual memory system will swap that out to disk since it 
isn't being used. And, unless the program tries to "do" something, it 
will never be swapped back in again. Should have no impact on anything.

>> 2. Didn't notice the taskbar then? Heh. I've noticed more non-experts seem 
>> to think that the myriad of status indicators on the screen are "just 
>> decoration". They don't comprehend that these things *tell* you stuff.
> 
> Nope she didn't. I tried to give her the quick tour and gave up when I 
> noticed she had that glazed over look in her eye's as I was trying to 
> explain "auto hide"

...you have AUTO HIDE on???!? o_O

No wonder she's confused...

>> 3. Digital camera? Oh, enjoy supporting it... ;-)
> 
> haha .... i'm hoping my wife settles on the Fisher Price camera. It has the 
> fewest buttons and settings! 

Fewest buttons doesn't necessarily mean it's simple. ;-)

Fewest settings, though... that shouldn't be too bad.

Post a reply to this message

stbenge wrote:

> 
> My question is how does does this happen? And why does it happen to some 
> people more than others? How can a person be downloading and installing 
> software without even knowing it? All I can guess is that it must be 
> like what I experienced a few weeks back, when I accidentally clicked 
> "yes" to a pop-up dialog. (my one and only incident in over ten years of 
> computing [yes, I'm proud])
> 

This happened to me once. I downloaded an application that allowed my 
Razor phone to connect to the computer and manage files on the phone 
(seeing as I couldn't get pictures without paying for a special service) 
It was a bit fidgety, so I clicked the link in the program to check for 
updates. It was hardcoded to I.E., and the download site it was pointing 
to was hosting malicious "ad banners" Suddenly an installer popped up 
for an imitation anti-spyware program (Windows anti-spyware, it was 
similarly named to what Windows Defender used to be). I clicked cancel, 
and it proceeded to install itself, even though I clicked cancel.

The rest, as they say, was history. I managed to carefully pick apart 
the dozens of adware, spyware, junkware, and shovelware that installer 
forced onto my system and delete and/or uninstall it. Windows defender 
helped some. I thought I had cleaned it all up, but there were still 
remnants in my registry and filesystem, which were discovered by 
Defender when it got the latest updates. Norton Antivirus sat happily 
aside and watched the whole thing without uttering even a peep.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> 
> Right. And the virtual memory system will swap that out to disk since it 
> isn't being used. And, unless the program tries to "do" something, it 
> will never be swapped back in again. Should have no impact on anything.
> 

Just because the application is minimized doesn't necessarily mean it's 
doing nothing. Every windows program has a window loop. Messages about 
system status and the like are broadcast to all windows in the system 
occasionally. So, even if the program is idle, it will still have some 
minimal working set that must be loaded into memory, get a few dozen of 
these running in the background, and you'll eventually bring a computer 
to its knees.



-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:45:52 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I clicked cancel, 
>and it proceeded to install itself, even though I clicked cancel.

I always do Ctrl + W or click the "close" X
Some popup have two install buttons called Install and Cancel :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

>  I suppose that it wouldn't help to install a good firewall and resident
> malware scanners in their computers because they would nevertheless pay
> zero attention to what the software is telling them and allow everything.


I believe they are being sent out with Windows Defender and Symantec 
Antivirus. The firewall is activated when the machines go out, but if people 
are being indescriminate about the software they install then they are still 
going to have problems. I don't have those problems and I tend to use my 
work laptop for all manner of things that are not work related- I'm using it 
now in just such a manner.
In the office, we have a well-designed efficient network with Cisco 
firewalls and VPN. We haven't had any bandwidth problems since they sarted 
filtering certain types of traffic and all our french interns went back to 
school.

-- 
H²

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Halbert <hal### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> I think most of the time these people aren't paying attention to the things 
>> they click on including reading the license agreements, etc.
> 
>   I suppose that it wouldn't help to install a good firewall and resident
> malware scanners in their computers because they would nevertheless pay
> zero attention to what the software is telling them and allow everything.

Yeah. Part of the problem is that companies get paid *big* bucks (relatively 
speaking) to put thngs like Google's toolbar and Yahoo's toolbar and AOL's 
tool bar and every other piece of crapware out there that they can. You can 
(or at least could) get something like $5 every time some customer agrees to 
install Yahoo's toolbar, which is a *lot* of money when you're distributing 
ad-supported software with a $0.05 click-thru payment on the ads.

I bought a 4-core x64 2.88GHz machine with 6G of RAM and gigabit ethernet. 
And it came with a 56K modem card, so they could put Earthlink and AOL and 
Juno and ..... links on the desktop. They *have* to be getting a kickback on 
those icons big enough to justify putting in a modem card nobody in their 
right mind is going to need. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   Given that linux is not something you simply "download and run" in Windows,

Some are!  That's one of the most cool things about Linux! :-)

(But you knew that, of course.)

>   I'm pretty sure that to this day he is still convinced that "linux" is
> something which breaks your IE.

Well, in some sense.... ;-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Fewest settings, though... that shouldn't be too bad.

I like that after 10 years of digital cameras, they're finally getting 
around to making them "better" than film cameras.  Like, finding and 
recognising faces and focusing on the people automatically, rather than only 
focusing where you're pointing.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> and it proceeded to install itself, even though I clicked cancel.

And people complain about UAC.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Mike Raiford wrote:
>> and it proceeded to install itself, even though I clicked cancel.
> 
> And people complain about UAC.
> 

You know ... I never turned off UAC.. It really doesn't annoy me at 
all.:) In my general day-to-day usage of the computer it never comes up. 
But then, the same situation hasn't presented itself since I upgraded to 
Vista.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:

> I always do Ctrl + W or click the "close" X
> Some popup have two install buttons called Install and Cancel :)

Try that with the window that just won't close. Oh, I know, just kill 
the process in Task Manager ;)

Yeah... stupid me, trusting the "Cancel" button actually did what it said.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> Yeah. Part of the problem is that companies get paid *big* bucks 
> (relatively speaking) to put thngs like Google's toolbar and Yahoo's 
> toolbar and AOL's tool bar and every other piece of crapware out there 
> that they can. You can (or at least could) get something like $5 every 
> time some customer agrees to install Yahoo's toolbar, which is a *lot* 
> of money when you're distributing ad-supported software with a $0.05 
> click-thru payment on the ads.

Grr, Yahoo bar pisses me off. It seems everything includes it in its 
installation, and if you blindly click "Next" it's usually on a page 
somewhere, typically toward the end of the options screens, and already 
helpfully selected for you.

I swear FireFox needs a feature that says "Hey, while you were away from 
the browser, someone else decided to add a plug-in. Did you really want 
to do this?"

> I bought a 4-core x64 2.88GHz machine with 6G of RAM and gigabit 
> ethernet. And it came with a 56K modem card, so they could put Earthlink 
> and AOL and Juno and ..... links on the desktop. They *have* to be 
> getting a kickback on those icons big enough to justify putting in a 
> modem card nobody in their right mind is going to need. :-)
> 

Heh. They still make 56k Modems??!

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:

> Heh. They still make 56k Modems??!

Not only do they make them, but they're *cheap* now!

I can remember when you had to actually pay _money_ for one... o_O

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Mike Raiford wrote:
> 
>> Heh. They still make 56k Modems??!
> 
> Not only do they make them, but they're *cheap* now!
> 
> I can remember when you had to actually pay _money_ for one... o_O
> 

Yeah, I'll bet. Probably be able to pick one up for a quarter from a gum 
ball machine.

I remember paying $300 for a 14.4 modem.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:

> I remember paying $300 for a 14.4 modem.

I have a CD burner sitting less than a foot away from me. My dad bought 
it for about £300.

I have a second optical drive that's slightly closer to me. It reads and 
burns CDs and multiple types of DVDs (including dual-layer). It cost me £24.

I notice, however, that all these devices seem to have a "minimum price" 
that they never fall below. E.g., it is *impossible* to buy a harddrive 
for less than £20. Once they get small enough, they just stop selling 
them. They never decrease the price below £20.

I hypothesize that £20 is how much pig-iron there is an a HD. ;-)

(In a world where everything is made of cheap, flimsy plastic, I've 
always found it comforting that HDs have a lot of good, honest, solid 
*metal* in them...)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 12:51:02 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Stephen wrote:
>
>> I always do Ctrl + W or click the "close" X
>> Some popup have two install buttons called Install and Cancel :)
>
>Try that with the window that just won't close. Oh, I know, just kill 
>the process in Task Manager ;)
>
>Yeah... stupid me, trusting the "Cancel" button actually did what it said.

Call me cynical, but that's what I'd do if I wanted to do something bad.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:

> Call me cynical, but that's what I'd do if I wanted to do something bad.

Right, or if you wanted to guarantee your garbage software would get 
installed, and you get the money from the spamware it also installed. So 
people will do anything to get more cash.


-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 15:42:42 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Stephen wrote:
>
>> Call me cynical, but that's what I'd do if I wanted to do something bad.
>
>Right, or if you wanted to guarantee your garbage software would get 
>installed, and you get the money from the spamware it also installed. So 
>people will do anything to get more cash.

So I believe. Some people will even vote (your least favourite political party
here) ;)

Some people are scum.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> 1. Why would having unused programs running make the computer slow?
> Surely mahjong doesn't consume any CPU time if it isn't "doing"
> anything...?

Hahahaha.

It's a *game*. Many use 100% CPU no matter what you're doing or how fast
your computer is.

Post a reply to this message

Tim Cook wrote:
> "Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>>  Given that linux is not something you simply "download and run" in
>> Windows,
> 
> With the new Ubuntu, it kind of is.  >:3

Wubi has existed for quite a while.

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> 1. Why would having unused programs running make the computer slow?
>> Surely mahjong doesn't consume any CPU time if it isn't "doing"
>> anything...?
> 
> Hahahaha.
> 
> It's a *game*. Many use 100% CPU no matter what you're doing or how fast
> your computer is.

True. So does Access 97, BTW...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> I notice, however, that all these devices seem to have a "minimum price" 
> that they never fall below. E.g., it is *impossible* to buy a harddrive 
> for less than £20. Once they get small enough, they just stop selling 
> them. They never decrease the price below £20.

  Well, it makes sense: At some point it costs more to produce the device
than its selling value is, it doesn't make any sense to produce it anymore.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
> > Right. And the virtual memory system will swap that out to disk since it 
> > isn't being used. And, unless the program tries to "do" something, it 
> > will never be swapped back in again. Should have no impact on anything.

> Just because the application is minimized doesn't necessarily mean it's 
> doing nothing. Every windows program has a window loop. Messages about 
> system status and the like are broadcast to all windows in the system 
> occasionally.

  Also, if the mahjong program was created with a GC'd language, the GC
might completely nullify the benefit of swapping.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

>   Also, if the mahjong program was created with a GC'd language, the GC
> might completely nullify the benefit of swapping.

Only if the GC actually runs.

If the program isn't "doing anything", it shouldn't need to run the GC 
either. Typically the GC is set to run only when no more objects can be 
allocated. (Altough sometimes they're set to run when idle as well...)

Of course, if the GC doesn't work properly...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> 
>>   Also, if the mahjong program was created with a GC'd language, the GC
>> might completely nullify the benefit of swapping.
> 
> Only if the GC actually runs.

I think Warp might mean that the program might tend to hold onto data longer 
than it really needs to, in the event the GC doesn't run. Since a GC sweep 
by an otherwise mostly-idle program would only bring stuff into core once, 
so it wouldn't nullify the benefits of swapping it out.

However, many GCed languages will take messages like iconification and 
priority lowerings and do a GC before going quiescent. In this case, you 
might even get better behavior than in a language where you can't compress 
used memory because people are holding raw pointers.

Windows already trims your working set and swaps much of your program out if 
you're idle and the window gets iconified, as well.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>>   Also, if the mahjong program was created with a GC'd language, the GC
>>> might completely nullify the benefit of swapping.
>> 
>> Only if the GC actually runs.
> 
> I think Warp might mean that the program might tend to hold onto data
> longer than it really needs to, in the event the GC doesn't run. Since a
> GC sweep by an otherwise mostly-idle program would only bring stuff into
> core once, so it wouldn't nullify the benefits of swapping it out.
> 
> However, many GCed languages will take messages like iconification and
> priority lowerings and do a GC before going quiescent. In this case, you
> might even get better behavior than in a language where you can't compress
> used memory because people are holding raw pointers.
> 
> Windows already trims your working set and swaps much of your program out
> if you're idle and the window gets iconified, as well.

Oh come on, don't start yet another pro-GC flamewar.

(just today I had the pleasure of reading the old thread "the POV-ray
SDL--similar to Java and/or Python?" in p.advanced-users)

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Oh come on, don't start yet another pro-GC flamewar.

Honestly, I think I'm flamed out. :-) It wasn't a flamewar. It was a lively 
discussion. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Warp wrote:

> >   Also, if the mahjong program was created with a GC'd language, the GC
> > might completely nullify the benefit of swapping.

> Only if the GC actually runs.

> If the program isn't "doing anything", it shouldn't need to run the GC 
> either. Typically the GC is set to run only when no more objects can be 
> allocated. (Altough sometimes they're set to run when idle as well...)

  But as commented in other posts, the program may well be doing things
from time to time, such as updating animations or whatever.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Raiford [mailto:"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com]
> Heh. They still make 56k Modems??!

What do you think people use when there's no Cable or DSL service in a 
particular area?

Although it seems to me that it's a bad idea to target a consumer group 
that is actively dwindling.

...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Raiford [mailto:"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com]
> to was hosting malicious "ad banners" Suddenly an installer popped up
> for an imitation anti-spyware program (Windows anti-spyware, it was
> similarly named to what Windows Defender used to be). I clicked
cancel,
> and it proceeded to install itself, even though I clicked cancel.

For the record, I've seen malware which switches the labels on the "OK"
and "Cancel" buttons, so it installs itself when you click on "Cancel".

This is one case where the Vista UAC comes in handy... I'm at the point
where I click through when I'm expecting it, but if it ever pops up when
I'm not expecting it I get *real* careful about what's running.

...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:

> What do you think people use when there's no Cable or DSL service in a 
> particular area?

Satellite or mobile? ;)

> Although it seems to me that it's a bad idea to target a consumer group 
> that is actively dwindling.

Yup.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mike Raiford [mailto:"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com]
>> Heh. They still make 56k Modems??!
> 
> What do you think people use when there's no Cable or DSL service in a 
> particular area?

My guess? Not a quad-core 3GHz 6GigRam machine? :-)

I'm not surprised the modems are still made. I'm surprised they're still 
standard equipment even when not on the motherboard. If most people wanted 
them, they'd still be on the motherboards, I expect.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> I'm not surprised the modems are still made. I'm surprised they're still 
> standard equipment even when not on the motherboard. If most people 
> wanted them, they'd still be on the motherboards, I expect.

What amuses me is how every motherboard you can possibly buy comes with 
an on-board 350-channel ultra-hyper-surround-sound card built-in. I 
mean, as *if* you'd actually wire that up... :-P

(I wonder how many people think you have to connect a PC to special "PC 
speakers"?)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>
> What amuses me is how every motherboard you can possibly buy comes with
> an on-board 350-channel ultra-hyper-surround-sound card built-in. I
> mean, as *if* you'd actually wire that up... :-P
> 

If it really is ultra-hyper-sound it will also be quality sound and
therefore I could use one. Wiring up is easy, just plug one fiber-cable
in and let the music play.

> (I wonder how many people think you have to connect a PC to special "PC
> speakers"?)

Thanks for that mental image :/.

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> (I wonder how many people think you have to connect a PC to special "PC 
> speakers"?)

Errr, you do.  A "PC speaker" is one with an amplifier built in.

And yes, I use the high-def audio on my computers. One of them is running my 
stereo/TV/etc, so that's a no-brainer.

Amusingly enough, we struggled to hear the audio at work that people had 
phoned in. Pressing the speakers up against your ears trying to hear, and 
all that. Then, when we closed the office, and I was taking apart the 
machines, it was all "Oh gee, there's a USB connector on the speakers, and 
that's for *power*, not for machines that only have USB speakers." Pretty 
amusing all around.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message