Slashdot Mirror

http://betanews.com/2012/01/25/the-top-10-web-security-threats-you-should-avoid/

Pertinent quote/excerpt:

---

"The compromised website is still the most effective attack vector for hackers to install malware on your computer with 47.6 percent of all malware installs occurring in that manner, says security firm AVG.

Another 10.6 percent are tricked into downloading exploit code -- many times, without their knowledge -- by clicking on links on pages to sites hosting malware...

It also found that faked pharmacy sites are a popular attack method, seen in about 10.4 percent of all attacks.

Fake antivirus scanners remain a popular malware injection method at 8.4 percent"

---

* Fact is, what I noted, in compromised sites, comprises 77% of malware installations - not what users download & install themselves (ala shareware/freeware sites like download.com etc./et al)...

APK

P.S.=> That's the TOUGH part - the 'driveby download attack' in maliciously scripted sites, bad links to sites, etc.-et al, & why I built this app:

---

APK Hosts File Engine 5.0++ 32/64-bit:

http://start64.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5851:apk-hosts-file-engine-64bit-version&catid=26:64bit-security-software&Itemid=74

---

It speeds you up, makes you surf more reliably, but mostly more SAFELY (you can't get burned by what you can't touch)...

It works, to STOP USERS from 'hitting' or rather, being HIT, on known maliciously scripted hosts-domains/servers/sites... & it's updated every 15 minutes here in a 'special build' I use, but users can do it every 12 hours on THEIR end using it.

The rest of what I do?

"Std. layered security/defense-in-depth" ala these guides I've done online since 1997-2008 for Windows users -> http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

HOWEVER: What I personally find VERY EFFECTIVE vs. the 'driveby attack' on sites with malicious code or bogus bad links? In COMBINATION with blocking I do in custom hosts files noted above??

Opera & it's "By Site Preferences"... how so?? Ok:

By ONLY allowing scripting, cookies, plugins, frames/iframes, javascript, java, etc. on SOME sites only that REQUIRE THEM FOR FULL FUNCTION!

The rest are in global policy, disallowing their usage (lessening the chance of attack since those items are OFTEN exploited, massively)...

... apk

Versus malicious executables (as in virus/trojans, etc.).

I've seen a lot of material on this online, that whitelisting IS the future of computer security as far as applications go... & yes, I believe it - as it makes sense!

* E.G.-> It'd be a LOT simpler for say, a home user all the way up to a network administrator on a HUGE corporate WAN to setup a list of PROVEN & fully vetted/code reviewed allowed apps to run (& all the rest would be disallowed...)

This would also put less stress on antivirus/antispyware programs in security, if not invalidate their use altogether!

(Since they ARE playing a "catchup ball" game, constantly, & never really "on top" of the game, doing false positives based on heuristics "best guess" work, & signatures based detections... yes, they DO help, currently - but can be circumvented easily enough, since the malware maker change their wares, or make them mutate, etc.).

Yes - imo @ least?

This would also put a HUGE DENT in the malware problem out there (as far as malicious executables they utilize @ times as well!).

So, in a sense?

What MS is doing is a 'whitelisting' of sorts, allowing ONLY their apps &/or OS.

I do think this IS the future of secured computing.

It's going to hurt freeware/shareware markets though (which I've been involved in as well as commmercially sold wares bearing my code too over time - however: I still WON'T say that this isn't a possibly helpful measure in security too, as that would be lying to protect business interests only on my end).

APK

P.S.=> So, in short - MS' is attempting a sort of "walled garden" that *MIGHT* just work as I noted above!

However - the only problem I see?

Well... driveby downloads (in both malicious executables downloaded like fake antivirus, as well as maliciously scripted code on websites themselves) ARE the largest contributor to the malware issue according to AVG here:

---

http://betanews.com/2012/01/25/the-top-10-web-security-threats-you-should-avoid/

Pertinent quote/excerpt:

"The compromised website is still the most effective attack vector for hackers to install malware on your computer with 47.6 percent of all malware installs occurring in that manner, says security firm AVG. Another 10.6 percent are tricked into downloading exploit code -- many times, without their knowledge -- by clicking on links on pages to sites hosting malware... It also found that faked pharmacy sites are a popular attack method, seen in about 10.4 percent of all attacks. Fake antivirus scanners remain a popular malware injection method at 8.4 percent. "

---

* Fact is, what I noted, in compromised sites, comprises 77% of malware installations - not what users download & install themselves (ala shareware/freeware sites like download.com etc./et al)...

---

Whitelisting COULD help stop that too, per what I stated above, along with other "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth" measures commonly used today already.

Even "walled gardens" do, albeit imo @ least? Not as much due to the above statistics from AVG & imo, lastly, in malscripted sites (only doing what I do in Opera which is in & of itself, a 'whitelisting' approach too, via its "by site preferences" - ONLY allowing scripting, cookies, plugins, frames/iframes, javascript, java, etc. on SOME sites only that REQUIRE THEM FOR FULL FUNCTION - the rest are in global policy, disallowing their usage (lessening the chance of attack))

... apk

sorry, mis-read. Windows 8 i wouldnt say is a flop, its a flop in waiting, or a success in waiting. its too early to tell as of yet if it will or will not be a flop as its market share is still increasing. http://betanews.com/2012/12/03/like-it-or-not-windows-8-usage-rises/, its also increasing pretty quickly.

Fair enough. Here's some data on Microsoft's income by business line: http://betanews.com/2012/10/18/microsoft-q1-2013-by-the-numbers-16-1b-revenue-53-cents-eps/ As a SWAG, consumer PC sales is about a quarter of Microsoft's profit, with the two parts of business sales constituting the other 3/4. So you have a solid argument.

However, the BYOD movement and further losses on desktops will put price and technology pressure on Microsoft. Most of those tools are part-and-parcel of the Microsoft monoculture. They don't work very well with other vendor's products. The growth of cloud services that are workstation/end user device neutral pose a substantial risk to the company.

If Win 8 is a success, consumers and businesses will continue Microsoft dominance. If it's a failure, at best it's a major crack in the foundation.

The bulk of Microsoft's revenue comes from Windows and Office on the desktop. PC sales have slowed and begun shrinking - people just don't need to upgrade as often and the market is saturated.

Q4 2012 Revenue by Division
Windows & Windows Live: $4.15 billion, down from $4.74 billion a year earlier.
Server & Tools: $5.09 billion, up from $4.64 billion a year earlier.
Business: $6.3 billion, up from $5.87 billion a year earlier.
Online Services Business: $735 million, up from $680 million a year earlier.
Entertainment & Devices: $1.78 billion, up from $1.49 billion a year earlier.

Um, what? iPad marketshare actually went up during the past year.

Have you even looked at your source...Its Apple spin from an Apple slide no less. Bless it. http://betanews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/iPad-vs.-Android-Tablet-Market-Share.png. Apples market share has been dropping over time. Right now post Q2. I'm going to say with Google, and Amazon both making great launches. I'd say Apple is taking a beating in the the Post Nexus 7 world. The picture is from http://betanews.com/2012/07/24/nexus-7-will-lead-android-tablets-to-overtake-ipad/ which shows that Android is eroding Apples market share faster than it did with phones.

Um, what? iPad marketshare actually went up during the past year.

Have you even looked at your source...Its Apple spin from an Apple slide no less. Bless it. http://betanews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/iPad-vs.-Android-Tablet-Market-Share.png. Apples market share has been dropping over time. Right now post Q2. I'm going to say with Google, and Amazon both making great launches. I'd say Apple is taking a beating in the the Post Nexus 7 world. The picture is from http://betanews.com/2012/07/24/nexus-7-will-lead-android-tablets-to-overtake-ipad/ which shows that Android is eroding Apples market share faster than it did with phones.

Certainly there's a market for a reasonably priced larger format e-reader.

There is, but just not in the US (which is as behind on high-end e-ink readers as it is on high-end tablets and smartphones). For example, Asian consumers have had *colour* e-ink readers for a couple of years now, but US companies keep pushing the antiquated monochrome screens into what is effectively a quite protectionist and patent-encumbered marketplace that retards development. You can import the Hanvon colour e-ink reader through something like Alibaba. Here's a list of some DX-size alternatives.

I've had 10,000-20,000 and mine's not vapor ware. These are indirect downloads: http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/LoseThos/1183618683/1 http://majorgeeks.com/LoseThos_d6176.html the CIA, my mental health doctor, the FBI or somebody is fooling me cause my emails are FBI. Win8 is the nail in the coffin. They deprived me of my chance. God will do justice, rest assured. God is just. Yer fucked.

Apple is making record profits ($35 billion last quarter) and only 14.2% of those profits ($1.287 billion) came from sales of Mac hardware last quarter (all desktops and laptops). (source) The percentage of money Apple makes from desktops and laptops is getting progressively smaller each quarter. And the number of 'professionals' in those numbers is smaller still. The bottom line is that there is FAR more money to be made from consumers. To the point that professionals really don't matter to Apple's bottom line at all. Consumers, consumers, consumers. Consumers consuming music/video ($1.571 billion, up 29 percent from $1.571 billion a year earlier.) and apps ($891 million, up 28 percent from $696 million a year earlier.) on their iPads ($9.17 billion, up 52 percent from $6.046 billion a year earlier.), iPod Touches ($1.06 billion, down 20 percent from $1.325 billion a year earlier.) and iPhones ($16.425 billion, up 22 percent from $13.31 billion a year earlier.). That's where the money is. That's where nearly ALL the money is. Microsoft is seeing the same light. That's why Windows 8 is what it is. It is a 100% consumer operating system, corporations be damned. It's about setting up an ecosystem of apps, music and video across your desktop, laptop, tablet and phone. So, no, it doesn't matter if you can't install Eclipse, Mac Ports or various command-line tools on your Mac. The Mac App Store is about consumers, just like the iOS App Store. Not creators or 'professionals'. Even if you estimate that 10% of Mac's desktop/laptop hardware sales were 'professionals' (an extremely high estimate) and every single one of them abandoned Mac as a result of these changes (unlikely), that's still only $493 million. 1.4% of Apple's revenue. And that will be more than offset by another platform where Apple for all intents and purposes controls the keys to the kingdom (Mac App Store will be 95%+ of all Mac software sales in the next couple years) and makes a 30% cut of all software sales. They can ditch professionals and make a killing on consumers.

I don't believe that this is the real reason Microsoft is changing the branding. If they thought it was valuable enough to keep, they would fight for it. But among tech-savvy users, Metro has become a punchline and a negative brand, just like Vista. I smell another Mojave coming up.

You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.

The difference here is that with VIsta they actually had a few technical glitches early on (namely how they changed the product between RC2 to RTM without telling anyone or giving anyone time to test) that caused a lot of problems. Vista was generally a very good OS. So Vista vs Mojave wasn't unexpected.

However, with Win8, there's a design and functional problem that users are going to take issue with no matter what you call it. So changing the name won't solve the issue.

I don't believe that this is the real reason Microsoft is changing the branding. If they thought it was valuable enough to keep, they would fight for it. But among tech-savvy users, Metro has become a punchline and a negative brand, just like Vista. I smell another Mojave coming up.

That so few computers are sold with Office installed.

This might be one of the dumber things I've read on slashdot.

Office is Microsoft's single biggest revenue & income generator:
http://betanews.com/2012/04/19/microsoft-q3-2012-by-the-numbers-17b-revenue-60-cents-eps/

Yes, sorry, it appears your original figure was right, the article I had read didn't make it clear, this article is more informative. Still, missing the analysts prediction is rare for Apple.

This prediction wasn't one from "financial analysts" - this was Apple's own sales forecast.

This was wrong. Apple Q3 2012 by the Numbers: $35B revenue, $9.32 EPS: Apple predicted revenue of $34 billion and made $35 billion. The reason this is news is that they undershot the analysts average by about $2 billion, and because they have revised down sales forecast for the next quarter to $34 billion again (ie. flat, no xmas jump). Analysts were expecting continuous growth from Apple, 10 months ago some analysts were predicting Apple revenue growth to $164 billion in 2013, so if growth stalls it will suggest that the share price was being massively overvalued.

Don't know how you got to "insightful" on what is clearly a TROLL and really erroneous.

During first quarter, Samsung sold 38 million smartphones, compared to 33.1 million iPhones, decisively snatching back the top spot, according to Gartner. Meanwhile Samsung represented more than 40 percent of all Android smartphone sales, with no competitor topping 10 percent. Meanwhile, Samsung stole Nokia's crown, by becoming overall global handset sales leader.

Samsung sold more Smartphones (Androids) than Apple, and is only 40% of Android sales. Link to article below.

http://betanews.com/2012/05/16/smartphone-market-consolidates-around-apple-and-samsung/

Yep, it's a refusal to accept MB/GB getting co-opted to not refer to 2^20/2^30 bytes. I was *mad* the when I got burned by that change in the late 00's, and I feel that companies can't change the old term to GiB to rip people off. (yes, I know there was IEEE backing, but you can't suddenly change "a dozen apples" to mean 11) There were even lawsuits about it which were pretty justified...

Frankly I think the new term should have received the new name, but I'm terrible at coming up with such names. Maybe in this case, 256GlB? (GiLoBytes, or Lower Gigabytes) It almost looks like a typo of GiB. Heh.

No, it's actually a refusal by everyone else to allow CS people to co-opt well defined terms with over 200 years of history. The SI prefixes were first created in 1795 and have been around since then so they get priority since everyone else outside of the CE/CS people use them to refer to power of 10 based multipliers.

Yep, it's a refusal to accept MB/GB getting co-opted to not refer to 2^20/2^30 bytes. I was *mad* the when I got burned by that change in the early 00's, and I feel that companies can't change the old term to GiB to rip people off. (yes, I know there was IEEE backing, but you can't suddenly change "a dozen apples" to mean 11) There were even lawsuits about it which were pretty justified...

Frankly I think the new term should have received the new name, but I'm terrible at coming up with such names. Maybe in this case, 256GlB? (GiLoBytes, or Lower Gigabytes) It almost looks like a typo of GiB. Heh.

Love the new edit function.

Yep, it's a refusal to accept MB/GB getting co-opted to not refer to 2^20/2^30 bytes. I was *mad* the when I got burned by that change in the late 00's, and I feel that companies can't change the old term to GiB to rip people off. (yes, I know there was IEEE backing, but you can't suddenly change "a dozen apples" to mean 11) There were even lawsuits about it which were pretty justified...

Frankly I think the new term should have received the new name, but I'm terrible at coming up with such names. Maybe in this case, 256GlB? (GiLoBytes, or Lower Gigabytes) It almost looks like a typo of GiB. Heh.

It might help if you actually used some current data: http://betanews.com/2012/01/19/microsoft-q2-2012-by-the-numbers-windows-revenue-falls-6/

I do respond and I was asked once and I responded NPD which computes sales figures.

http://betanews.com/2009/07/22/apple-has-91-of-market-for-1-000-pcs-says-npd/

Using that logic, all ISPs would be responsible for the actions of their users.

If they didn't have billions of dollars and in-house legal teams at their disposal, I have no doubt that they would be...

The MAFIAA argued that Limewire owed them more money than the GDP of every country in the world combined. There is no doubt in my mind that they would sue every manufacturer of consumer level networking equipment and even the makers of basic ethernet cables for "facilitating piracy" if they thought they could get away with it and come out even one dollar ahead for their troubles. They shake down grandmothers for fuck's sake, even after death.

The MPAA Lawyers have never played this nice..

Indeed, I am quite confused too.

They didn't mind the bad press over suing a 12 year old child OR a 80 year old grandfather for only 'several' movies, so we know it's not the age part that did it.
(source)

They also don't mind sending threatening letters to the military asking them to crack down on their own troops for them, so it isn't the American troops away from home part that did it either.
(source)

They didn't mind suing people for downloading movies for personal use and no profits involved, so we know that isn't what did it either.
(source)

This is a complete reversal of past policy on all counts!

My personal guess is that the lawsuit is already in the works, and they requested the court seal the details so the press doesn't get word of it. Then they release this announcement to try and look like they are being good guys. There can't be any other possibility. The Grinchs heart growing 3 sizes only happens in the movies.

I hope you're joking, but "display in there [sic] offices" suggests you're not, so I'll give you a link: Apple computer sales grow faster than PC sales for five years - but why?" and a number: Q4 2010 Unit Shipments by Product
Desktops: 1.24 million units, up 58 percent from 787,000 units a year earlier. That's five million computers a year.

I'd buy a mac if I could afford one.

Only according to Apple apologists, fanbois, and spin doctors.

Well given that i am none of those that disproves your theory...

Wrong, your words "suing over use of patents isn't 'patent trolling', so Apple isn't a patent troll" qualify you nicely under both "apologist" and "spin doctor". Never mind the blatant logical fallacy.

Here are some links.

Message to Apple astrofurfers: the world will stop calling your company a dispicable troll when it stops being one. Trolling Slashdot just makes you appear more dispicable.

This site has good freeware in addition to software under different licenses:

http://fileforum.betanews.com/

"repository system of free software"

Agreed, with all of the money Microsoft squirts towards R&D, with how much money is under their belt, you'd think they would offer a repo with signed freeware software for their customers.

What about shit like this in Windows Update?

Firefox Add-ons to Support .NET Application Deployment .NET Framework 4

The Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) plug-in for Firefox and the .NET Framework Assistant for Firefox enable XAML browser applications (XBAPs), loose XAML, and ClickOnce applications to work with the Mozilla Firefox browser.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc716877.aspx

Older article but there are probably newer ones on the web:

Microsoft updates its controversial Firefox plug-in for .NET 3.5
http://betanews.com/2009/06/25/microsoft-updates-its-controversial-firefox-plug-in-for-net-3-5/

Another method which (I assume) addresses the problem is running a more full-featured BIOS that could operate the "basic" applications like web browsers and skype without having to load a full-fledged OS.

You have essentially instant-on access to the most basic popular applications, and then boot to a real operating system when you have to edit that film or play that game.

Toshibas(and probably others) had the ability to play audio CDs from within the BIOS way back in 2003 when I was fixing laptops for a living. Smart BIOS's are the next natural step.

Most infestations still come from compromised websites - research by AVG confirms that much, here:

http://betanews.com/2012/01/25/the-top-10-web-security-threats-you-should-avoid/

Pertinent quote/excerpt:

"The compromised website is still the most effective attack vector for hackers to install malware on your computer with 47.6 percent of all malware installs occurring in that manner, says security firm AVG. Another 10.6 percent are tricked into downloading exploit code -- many times, without their knowledge -- by clicking on links on pages to sites hosting malware... It also found that faked pharmacy sites are a popular attack method, seen in about 10.4 percent of all attacks. Fake antivirus scanners remain a popular malware injection method at 8.4 percent. "

---

* Fact is, what I noted, in compromised sites, comprises 77% of malware installations - not what users download & install themselves (ala shareware/freeware sites like download.com etc./et al)...

PC's &/or SmartPhones are NOT ALL THAT DIFFERENT EITHER really (smartphones are just smaller handheld personal computers nowadays in essence really).

APK

P.S.=> So, "all that said & aside" - Is an "appstore/walled garden" a BETTER/SAFER BET? Perhaps, & I'm not saying it's not a good idea to do that, but it's far from a 'permanent cure' vs. malware exploitations online (as long as there are fools making more malwares & bushwhacking users via compromised sites' code, that is)...

... apk

What about email based attacks? What about maliciously scripted site attacks??

Fact is, You're overlooking a hell of a lot of possible other sources that are a LOT MORE PREVALENT FOR ATTACKING OTHERS, MOSTLY, other than app repositories even beginning to "keep end users safe".

Here's some proofs of that based on research:

http://betanews.com/2012/01/25/the-top-10-web-security-threats-you-should-avoid/

Pertinent quote/excerpt:

"The compromised website is still the most effective attack vector for hackers to install malware on your computer with 47.6 percent of all malware installs occurring in that manner, says security firm AVG. Another 10.6 percent are tricked into downloading exploit code -- many times, without their knowledge -- by clicking on links on pages to sites hosting malware... It also found that faked pharmacy sites are a popular attack method, seen in about 10.4 percent of all attacks. Fake antivirus scanners remain a popular malware injection method at 8.4 percent. "

---

* Fact is, what I noted, compromised sites, comprises 77% of malware installations - not what users download & install themselves (ala shareware/freeware sites like download.com etc./et al)...

APK

But there's no malware for iOS.

Keep drinking the Apple Kool-Aid, fanboy.

IE 9 is still the worst browser: http://betanews.com/2011/07/22/browser-blowout-which-is-fastest-most-standards-compliant-benchmarks/

So, there's still no reason to use it unless you're a Microsoft fanboy. I've also found it more buggy (i.e., it likes to crash) than the others but that's not covered in the referenced link.

In 2000 Cisco acquired a company that had used it, and quickly dropped the line. Then Cisco fraudulently tried to resurrect the trademark after Apple came asking about iPhone.

Cisco owns both the iPhone and iOS trademarks, and has licensed both of them [1,2] to Apple. No one is fraudulent or infringing in this case.

[1] http://betanews.com/2007/01/09/cisco-offers-to-license-iphone-name-to-apple/
[2] http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/06/08/cisco_licenses_ios_name_to_apple_screenshot_shows_iwork_on_iphone.html

They were also implicated as the leader of the LCD price fixing scheme in 2007. On the other hand they blew the whistle to gain immunity: http://betanews.com/2010/12/08/eu-fines-lcd-price-fixing-cartel-857m-samsung-given-immunity/

Oh and don't forget the DoJ investigated them in 2007 for price-fixing NAND Flash, although they dropped the case eventually.

Samsung seems to derive inspiration from Microsoft.

So I guess that's why Firefox's marketshare numbers are plummeting, while Chrome's are rapidly rising? According to the stats, pretty soon Chrome will be more popular than FF.

http://betanews.com/2011/10/01/google-chrome-usage-rises-as-firefox-and-internet-explorer-fall/
http://www.drbill.cc/2011/07/02/ie-numbers-falling-but-so-is-firefox/

Your comment reminds me of Obama supporters.

It seems to be not that easy.

Maybe this one. The MPAA is just as sue happy as the RIAA and as sinister.

..Apple is going to great lengths, and why Samsung should bite back harder:
http://betanews.com/2011/09/18/iphone-5-has-a-big-problem
Spoiler: might be to draw attention from it's late iPhone5 release cycle.

Actually I believe that AMD donates to the GCC compiler as well as supporting the AMD x86 Open64 Compiler Suite which I believe is under Apache license so that is two compilers right there that could be used.

You see unlike Intel and their douchebag behavior the AMD compiler only looks for SSE flags and runs the code based on which flags are present. several coders have run tests with the AMD compiler and found it doesn't favor one side or the other, it just looks at SSE.

And I personally would love to see how much of Intel's compiler "performance" is just douchebag jury rigging and how much is actual performance. one thing i've found is when it comes to programmer tools FOSS code is usually better, simply because there are so many programmers on FOSS OSes and using FOSS software.

So I'd love to see Intel VS GCC VS Open64 and see which truly gives the best performance over the widest range of chips. After all, you wouldn't want to limit your customers to only those that have specific Intel CPUs would you? Because it has already come out that the original Intel compiler crippled the Pentium III as well as AMD so they could push the P4, which at the time was scoring nearly 30% LOWER than the P3 on most benches. With that in mind I wouldn't be surprised if the new Intel compiler cripples socket LGA775 or any older chips they aren't pushing anymore. They are real douchbags when it comes to crap like that, it reminds me of the early 90s MSFT in that regard.

Microsoft certainly has that luxury. They only charge OEM manufacturers $50 on a $1000 PC. As of late 2009, 80% of Windows license revenue came from OEM. That's about $2 BILLION in OEM sales alone.

Microsoft is in no danger if they dropped Windows license prices further. Hell, they could afford to give away end-user licenses for free if they wanted to (in reality the OEMs and Microsoft's shareholders would scream bloody murder).

500k a month are 2009 numbers, it is now >5m a month: http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Gartner-Android-smartphone-sales-surged-8888-in-2010/1297309933

You are right that they are not SCO of course. However lawyers getting more important in a company is always a bad sign as they are not about creating wealth but about getting a bigger part of the pie.

Would you have preferred it if I had wrote "Yo Dawg, I be hooking up video and that shit be fat yo! teh pic be all big and shit, and it be fatter than a ho's ass dawg!" is that more preferable? How else are you gonna write that you get great video performance and the ability to transcode without actually saying that?

So excuse me for actually writing down what I have experienced installing and building AMD systems. Perhaps a video of never gonna give you up or a pic of a distended anus would be more to your liking?

Now back to the topic, I have found since switching that the typical 10% performance gain of Intel usually comes at a 300% markup when you figure in the price of the boards, and most people will never be able to notice the difference. I bet if I built identical quads, one Intel and one AMD, and had you do your average everyday tasks you frankly wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Well not until you got the bill that is.

And frankly anyone that supports the free market would have to be nuts to buy Intel ATM, because their behavior frankly should have had their ass dragged into court for antitrust years ago. Bribery? Rigging software? Oh and BTW Intel still rigs their compiler the ONLY difference since the settlement is they document it in the fine print and give you the "choice" of taking a dump over ALL of the software you compile by forcing it all to run in X87 mode, or only have it take a shit on AMD and Via chips. Wow, what a choice!

When you add to this their current campaign to slowly kill Nvidia, whose chipset division they have already strangled, then how anyone here can say that MSFT deserved to be busted but Intel not I will simply not understand. So if you don't want to reward bribery, unfair market manipulation, and outright douchebaggery, try to buy AMD next time okay? And this is from someone that for nearly 15 years was strictly an Intel man, but I can't reward douchebaggery with a clear conscience.

And as for proof, since teh Google must not work where you are here you Go and you should read the first one especially, since it is a post from right here on /. where a programmer documents the behavior and what happened when he ran programs compiled with an Intel compiler on AMD. Now since most programs on Windows (including most benchmarking suites) and compiled for Windows with the Intel compiler than the results of ALL those programs must now be looked upon as suspect. It is no different than the classic "Quack.exe" where if it detects A you get one result and B gets you another, even though the chips in question have identical abilities to run SSE code. And this programmer had noticed the problem back in 2004 so for at LEAST 7 years they have been rigging.

It really doesn't matter. The only damages the RIAA can reasonably claim for you having pirated music is around $1/song. It's UPLOADING that music that they care about, because then they can pretend that your upload is providing that song illegally to 20,000 people and therefore claim that that single song is worth $20,000 in damages.

They RIAA has NEVER sued ANYONE for merely possessing pirated music. I don't think they've ever sued anyone for downloading music either. It's all about what you upload. If you aren't uploading anything, you should be fine.

You're absolutely correct that the RIAA has never sued mere downloaders or possessors, because how can you prove that someone downloaded it? Unless you're tapping the network at the ISP and deep-scanning all packets, the only way prior to seizing their hard drive to know that a person downloaded a song (which you have to be able to do to file the complaint) is to be the person who uploaded the song to them... And if you're an RIAA distributor, uploading songs so that you can nab anyone who downloads, well, they just downloaded legally since you're the owner and you put it up for free public distribution.

But, it's not just $20k in (claimed) damages... Since they're going after uploaders, they're going after distributors... and the distribution rights can be much, much more. For example, when Michael Jackson bought the distribution rights for the Beatles' discography, he paid about $115k per song. Similarly, Apple paid more in royalties that $20k for Rebecca Black's Friday. That's why the statutory damages for infringement are as high as they are: it's all about the distribution right, not the individual sale price.

These guys are nothing but a disaster. http://www.betanews.com/article/Guilty-Duluth-Woman-Owes-222000-for-Pirating-Songs/1191536175

I had to look it up, it's hard to keep track of who's starting the wars and who's responding. Nokia sued and sued again. Apple counter-sued in the middle there.

Apple? A secure company? I think that Apple is taking lessons from Microsoft in hiring research teams to come up with company lines.

This could not have come out at a worse time for Apple. Why? Because iTunes has been hacked. Credit cards charged and store credit stolen.

http://www.betanews.com/article/I-got-hacked-on-iTunes/1306964962

http://www.betanews.com/article/I-got-hacked-on-iTunes/1306964962

etc.

Even people with no i* devices report all their store credit drained and money charged to their linked credit cards. Even just updating an i* device's software at the store.

When this gets better known and it becomes better known that Apple has known about it for a while without admitting it or responding to direct questions, perhaps people will begin to see Apple for what it is. Apple is evil.

Didn't find credit or hack in the first 200 posts. Slashdot needs to refactor some code so that it is reasonable to load all comments.

Microsoft does offer these vendors Windows Update.

Link or you are spewing BS. Meanwhile here's my counter link.

What MS does do is to include some 3rd party drivers in its own catalog, which is entirely different to my suggestion. Just to clarify, I am not suggesting that MS host the 3rd-part updates, instead, it should provide an API and processes to search for updates from 3rd-party sites then download and install those updates.

The link I meant to post was this: http://www.betanews.com/article/Bluray-Disc-Sales-Surpass-HD-DVD/1172267610

Here is another link:

Blu-ray outsold HD DVD by a nearly 2-to-1 margin for the first nine months of the year, selling 2.6 million units to HD DVD’s 1.4 million.

Again, this story was like 8 months before Warner switched. Sorry, but your post is historical revisionism nonsense.

Vista was pronounced dead in 2009. It's official now. Microsoft concurs.

Do any of these "Do Not Track" buttons in browsers actually do anything useful, like disable third-party cookies

If I understand correctly, the only one that does the feature right is IE (see also here). IE allows blacklisting of tracker sites; the lists can be built and distributed by external groups, like consumer organizations. To access the sites in the list, you have to type its address in the address box explicitly, otherwise IE9 will just not go to any of the tracking sites at all. All other browsers still follow links to tracking sites, but ask them nicely to please please not track them. With IE9 the trackers don't even get the opportunity to dump cookies on your machine or log your IP address.