Slashdot Mirror

http://www.neowin.net/news/main/09/07/09/possible-chrome-os-shots-leak-out

Huh? Vista Ultimate supports RAID.

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=612319

Oh, you mean like InPrivate Filtering?

No. Not like that. You left out the important part of the sentence "but it allowed ads to be shown on MS sites or through their ad network." Which from what I have heard doesn't seem to favor Microsoft served ads over other advertising networks.

NoScript's AdBlock-blocking trick was kinda dirty, but I don't see them as being hypocritical for allowing their own ads given the tremendous service(which increases safety while speeding up browsing) they provide for free.

You just need to use the Adblock-block-block addon together with NoScript, and also the NoScript-block-block add on

Imagine MS put in ad blocking in a release of IE

Oh, you mean like InPrivate Filtering?

NoScript's AdBlock-blocking trick was kinda dirty, but I don't see them as being hypocritical for allowing their own ads given the tremendous service(which increases safety while speeding up browsing) they provide for free.

Riiiiight. Because when it's other site's ad income you're negating it's about ideals and the rights of the users. But when it's your site's income it's because your service on your web site is automatically so much more beneficial than Google or Slashdot.

Your position is interesting ... you defend NoScript after attacking AdBlock for a lesser crime (merely asking you if you would consider viewing ads after visiting a site many times). What exactly is your angle? I think we may have the first case of Firefox extension fanboism on our hands here, folks.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but did the article imply that the AdBlock guys are asking advertisers to change their code just so AdBlock can allow or disallow ads like NoScript already does? It would be kinda pointless since many AdBlock users also have NoScript installed!

Despite the FUD surrounding NoScript, I'll take it over AdBlock any day (well, at least until they refuse to block ads other than those on their own page).

NoScript's AdBlock-blocking trick was kinda dirty, but I don't see them as being hypocritical for allowing their own ads given the tremendous service(which increases safety while speeding up browsing) they provide for free.

"That's not proof. I can credit anything I like to APK. Is this all that you have to show me?" - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Sunday May 03, @01:12AM (#27803715)

Ok - AGAIN: Ask the guys @ NEOWIN if I wrote that guide of mine they used, for starters!

(AND, that's only my "first round prototype" of it, from more than a decade++ ago (1997), & even THEN, it can still get a user to 67/100 on CIS Tool test, & my current guide gets you to 85-99.058/100 on it)

Specifically, in regards to here -> http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?s=8c871266023b7d58549d7d4a7fe23f12&showtopic=602537&st=90

First post there, in fact!

(Nobody denied it was me, least of all their mods or owners, & they know it is I (APK) - it's the 2nd time I've made a "good guide" status there, in 7++ yrs. time)...

Fact is?

That very post "shut them up", the 'naysayers' there, easily... just like the definitions of "security hardening" a system did here that I put up, to you earlier... TOO easy!

(Who are you trying to fool @ this point? Yourself?? Must be, because the proof's there - & your WEAK little "argument" of "Prove it's YOU who wrote that" is in little question by the people who's forums it on!)

APK

P.S.=> Ion.SIMIAN.c = "Capt. Carnage" from "The Watchmen"... gotta be! You LIKE "getting punished", & lol, MAINLY by your own blatant mistakes here (the biggest one being trying to get the better of ME, in debate)...

"That's not proof. I can credit anything I like to APK. Is this all that you have to show me?" - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Sunday May 03, @01:12AM (#27803715)

Well, lol, there WAS this post here (lol, part of my "Ozymnndias" series here vs. yourself (showing my accomplishments in noted respected publications in this art & science (of which you have NONE like them apparently, Mr. "wannabe programmer"))):

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1219095&cid=27803005

AND THIS one from here also (lol, ALSO part of my "Ozymnndias" series here vs. yourself) :

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1219095&cid=27803307

(And, the day you can do more OR BETTER YET, better? Then, you can talk as you have to myself... but, try not to make so many damned errors and be so arrogant as to only admit to a couple, and then try to WEAKLY "amend your statements" afterwards... give us a break!)... apk

"That's not proof of anything. I don't have proof of your identity" - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Sunday May 03, @01:03AM (#27803693)

Ok - ask the guys @ NEOWIN if I wrote that guide of mine they used, for starters!

(AND, that's only my "first round prototype" of it, from more than a decade++ ago (1997), & even THEN, it can still get a user to 67/100 on CIS Tool test, & my current guide gets you to 85-99.058/100 on it)

Specifically, in regards to here -> http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?s=8c871266023b7d58549d7d4a7fe23f12&showtopic=602537&st=90

First post there, in fact (nobody denied it was me, they know it is - it's the 2nd time I've made a "good guide" status there, in 7++ yrs. time)...

Fact is?

That very post "shut them up", the 'naysayers' there, easily... just like the definitions of "security hardening" a system did here that I put up, to you earlier... TOO easy!

----

- by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Sunday May 03, @01:03AM (#27803693)

Funny - you've made SO many screwups here, I am finding enough "amateurs" (wannabe in your case, especially about the 'programmer' part on YOUR end stating that), easily enough, here on /. ... lol!

(After all - Nobody in publication's ever noted YOU, apparently, because I posted 10 of those for ME, but you can't even put up 1... sad! AND, you have the nerve to try to give me crap? Unbelieveable!)

AND:

Why are you trying to make it seem as if it is NOT worth kicking your butt in for all you have said to me, that I have shown has been not only ERRONEOUS technically on your part, but also that in your "attempts to school me", you have made a TON of errors & had to 'correct yourself'?

(What a crock THAT 'little trick' is, & it doesn't work, lol... you STILL end up being wrong, everytime!)

APK

P.S.=> You're not very skilled in this art & science imo, & based on your obvious lack of visible accomplishments in this field? I can only say that, & also based upon your NUMEROUS screwups here (lol, which you try to 'correct' for, after I CORRECT YOU on where you are wrong - give up already!)... you're not even good @ debate & proving points! apk

"You don't understand what the phrase "securing access controls" implies" - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Saturday May 02, @11:26PM (#27803103)

YOU had best learn what MAC (mandatory access control) is on Linux, for 1 thing (& how it is just like NT-based ACL's (access control lists))...

SeLinux was built in part, for example, to addon ACL's (THE VERY THING WE WERE DISCUSSING NO LESS) TO LINUX & you said nothing like that existed on NT-based OS' & I proved you wrong there easily... @ both the registry AND filesystems levels this exists on NT-based OS since their inception & part of how they obtain an "Orange Book" C2 level of security!

PROOF?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selinux [wikipedia.org]

(Look up "Mandatory Access Control" there, because they are the analog on Linux (SeLinux to be SPECIFIC) to NT-based OS' "ACL's")

AND, again - That NT-based OS' have had NATIVELY @ the filesystem &/or registry level, for years since its inception in beta in 1992 & Linux had to have "grafted on" by the NSA, because they knew the value of that level of control, for purposes of security on an Operating System...

----

"My challenge to you to prove that you've done any of that is here:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1219095&cid=27803057 " - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Saturday May 02, @11:26PM (#27803103)

Yes, and I don't think you will LIKE the answer too much, as it is shown where I wrote that, when, & it is credited to ME (APK)... from nearly 13 yrs. ago in fact, on securing AND SPEEDING UP NT-based OS!

Here it is, again, as PROOF (& my initials are there as usual):

----

http://www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text [neowin.net]

"This is quite a read, so print yourself a copy or download to your PDA, and be amazed at what you'll learn from this collection of information that APK has gathered and put in one place"

----

(Man - you just skim, shoot your mouth off, & keep SHOOTING YOURSELF IN THE FOOT, lol, while sticking your foot IN YOUR MOUTH (picture that)):

So - How's your foot (and the "bitter taste of defeat"), taste? Because that is around the 5th or 6th screwup you've made here by now...

APK

P.S.=>

"Ah. You are correct." - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Saturday May 02, @11:26PM (#27803103)

Yes, & on every point I quote + CORRECT you on... every time - again, keep it up... it's YOUR rep here, not mine, that you're ruining man... apk

"Prove it. Don't just quote from or link to some web page. Prove that you wrote it." - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Saturday May 02, @11:17PM (#27803057)

WoW... you are BLIND, DYSLEXIC, or just stupid (or, trying to 'save face' here after all your blatant screwups anyone can read which I quoted, & CORRECTED YOU ON, all thru this exchange in my posts (since I quote points you were in error on)).

A quote from that page will do it (you just skim, shoot your mouth off, & keep SHOOTING YOURSELF IN THE FOOT, lol, while sticking your foot IN YOUR MOUTH):

----

http://www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

"This is quite a read, so print yourself a copy or download to your PDA, and be amazed at what you'll learn from this collection of information that APK has gathered and put in one place

"You have never looked at the way SeLinux or grsecurity actually function, have you?" - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Saturday May 02, @11:17PM (#27803057)

Question is, have YOU?

SeLinux was built in part, for example, to addon ACL's (THE VERY THING WE WERE DISCUSSING NO LESS) TO LINUX & you said nothing like that existed on NT-based OS' & I proved you wrong there easily... @ both the registry AND filesystems levels!

PROOF?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selinux

(Look up "Mandatory Access Control" there, it is the analog to NT-based OS' "ACL's")

AND, again - That NT-based OS' have had NATIVELY @ the filesystem &/or registry level, for years since its inception in beta in 1992 & Linux had to have "grafted on" by the NSA, because they knew the value of that level of control...

----

"I'm a programmer" - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Saturday May 02, @11:17PM (#27803057)

Again, apparently?

YOU'RE NOT A VERY GOOD ONE!

(that... OR, you just THINK you're a programmer)

E.G.-> You try to "put me down" for the list of accomplishments I posted here again for you, when you try this... & yet YOU HAVE NONE LIKE THEM?

Thus?

I.E.-> Who are YOU, to put me down then?

(You're clearly NOT my "superior" in this art & science by any means, because others would have noticed your skills &/or accomplishments by now, after 22+ yrs. on YOUR PART around these systems. Nobody has apparently, done this for you... gee, I "wonder why"? NOT)...

Give me a break, give us ALL a break - if you're "SO GOOD" that you can put me down, one would think YOU HAVE DONE BETTER & COULD EVIDENCE IT!

(Clearly you cannot, because YOU HAVE NOT, & thus? Aren't one to put me down!)

APK

P.S.=> KEEP IT UP, Ion.SIMIAN.c: You're ruining your own reputation here no doubt, by all the mistakes you are making... it's almost funny, but now that I realize I am NOT talking to a "seasoned pro" here (especially after all of your screwups here)? I am not even laughing anymore, @/by this point! apk

"Mmmhmm. You're not patching security holes or removing vulnerable services in your "guide"" - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Saturday May 02, @05:52PM (#27801155)

On services trimming? First of all, I wrote THE OLDEST/FIRST guides for NT-based OS online, back as far as 1998 & for NTCompatible.com as "ARTICLE #1" there (& entire sites sprung up from THAT idea, "Black Viper" anyone? Proof of that alone is from NEOWIN (Who also took my guide to their site in 2001, FROM NTCompatible.com, verbatim, here -> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text )

Secondly - My guide DOES tell people how to "cut off" vulnerable services (by patching)

YOU obviously haven't read it... &, are clearly talking out your behind.

----

"Also, you can't *secure* access controls in a Windows system. Access controls are an operating system level function" - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Saturday May 02, @05:52PM (#27801155)

Man, you really DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, do you?

The registry &/or filesystem have a very "fine-grained" native & built in "ACL" (access control lists) for both, by groups &/or users, & you can exploit/access/use them in regedit.exe + explorer.exe, quite easily (& my guide goes thru it, + how simple it is).

"The only way that you can secure them is to harden the OS itself. Projects like grsecurity and SELinux do just that. There are no such projects in the Windows world." - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Saturday May 02, @05:52PM (#27801155)

Ugh, You've GOT to be kidding me w/ that statement above!

AGAIN:

NT ACL's COMES NATIVE TO NT-BASED OS', & beats the hell out of chmod *NIX normal permissions alone (& ACL's on NT-based OS & controlling them? Heh, also isn't "grafted on" as a "kernel hooking" system as is SeLinux or AppArmor for Linux by the by)...

----

"Your definitions suck." - by ion.simon.c (1183967) on Saturday May 02, @05:52PM (#27801155)

They seemed to shut you up on what "security hardening" is defined as though, & this is the best you have vs. them... & they weren't even mine, another mistake on YOUR part!

APK

P.S.=> Keep it up Ion.SIMIAN.c - you're failing on each point you make, post by post, all the more... how much more can you take (lol, how much more CAN I, before I die laughing!)... apk

Isn't he dreamy?

They could decide to do it by other means, but...

...they certainly didn't in the case of Atsiv

The entire idea of requiring code signing as a security measure is horseshit. Signing is supposed to be a method which allows the user to determine if what he has is the real thing. He downloaded or otherwise obtained program A, and wants to know if it actualy came from program source B (because he trusts B.)

If he doesnt trust B, then the fact that A is signed is not material to "security." On the other hand, If he trusts B who has handed him A, then the fact that A is not signed is also not material to "security."

The windows x64 requirement of code signing isn't about trust at all, since it automatically trusts all signed drivers and automatically (and unavoidably) distrusts all unsigned drivers. There are plenty of trustworthy unsigned x64 drivers (developed for XP/64), and you sure as hell can't trust all signed ones (ex: your favorite intrusive copy protection rootkit such as TAGES or SecuROM will be signed)

Nothing about this says "security."

This screams "control" as well as propping up a few specific players in the emerging industry of "signing."

Everyone get's to be their own Microsoft. Instead of "GO!" you would have "START!", instead of "Jail" you would have "Court" and you would actually get to use goto's. Instead of Money you would have 'Bills' and instead of a dice you would throw little chairs.

The person with the most money get's paid by every other player. When you land on someone else's property, you get to sue them if you have more money or visa-versa. To win the game you are involved in the most lawsuits and have all the money.

I know exactly what photos would be on the front.

You could always hang out at http://www.neowin.net/ if you don't like it. ;)

It's already been cracked. When will people learn?

http://www.neowin.net/news/main/09/04/01/hulu-tried-to-encrypt-content-already-cracked

zdnet
neowin

"so i'll ask again: what exactly can 2000 do that xp can't?" - by perryizgr8 (1370173) on Friday March 27, @10:03AM (#27356611)

Ok, 2 things:

1.) 2000 cannot protect a user as well vs. bogus or rogue applications as XP, Server 2003, VISTA, Server 2008, or Windows 7 can, via DEP (DEP = Data Execution Prevention)...

&

2.) TcpChimney offloading of work done to the network cards that can handle it, vs. the CPU, for networking communications exists in XP SP#2-3 & beyond (Windows Server 2003, VISTA, Server 2008, & Windows 7 have it: and, Windows 2000 does not... via "EnableTcpChimney" here -> HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters

(How's that?)

----

"then it is stated that in xp "you have the luxury of turning off background applications." so, you can achieve the same performance with xp as you got with 2000" - by perryizgr8 (1370173) on Friday March 27, @10:03AM (#27356611)

Yes, I know - because I already stated that much, so QUIT "SKIMMING": (proof of that exists on your part, via a quote of my own words from earlier, next below, which was from my init. post)

"HOWEVER, based on the above speculation, from the article excerpt above? You could probably "tune/tweak" for that same effect, as in services you don't need running for your particular individual needs & cutting them off/trimming them, in XP or Server 2003 (or VISTA, Server 2008, & doubtless Windows 7 as well) to get the same results, but they probably won't be as good in this capacity, as they are setup "default/oem outta-the-box/stock" - by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 27, @09:41AM (#27356367)

Thus, there's the proof that I already covered that much (& guess who wrote up the first tuning guide for Windows NT-based OS? Yours truly, circa 1997-1998 @ NTCompatible.com as "Article #1", -> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text (there is where it was copied over to NeoWin forums & rated VERY GOOD, & years after I wrote it, circa 2001), & IF you can find one older than that which predates it? You'd be the 1st who has)...

My point was that Windows 2000 does actually outperform XP in terms of SSD performance, in their "outta-the-box/oem stock" configurations, sans having to do any tuning.

----

"by the way, this not running background apps seems to be a truckload of crap to me. i want winamp and search indexer to run in the background. if 2000 can't do that, its just one more thing that it can't do, which every other os does: multitasking. and i don't want to be caught dead with an os that can't multitask." - by perryizgr8 (1370173) on Friday March 27, @10:03AM (#27356611)

OK:

Where did you get the idea that Windows 2000 can't multitask?

It does, & quite well!

APK

P.S.=> Have YOU ever used Windows 2000? It doesn't seem like it, based on your statements... apk

Yeah, this is real "pixie dust." A lot of it is speculative stuff that assumes that somehow NAS drives are magically different from normal HDDs. Also contains references to the "Bathtub Graph" which has been pretty much shown to be a load of bunk: http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=38693

"Sometimes the scope of Windows security stupidity astounds me. And yet they consistently keep finding ways to top themselves." - by v1 (525388) on Saturday March 07, @11:01AM (#27104913) Homepage

Then it appears to be up to end users to help them out, by doing a little bit of work (1-2 hours or so) to secure themselves vs. the threats present today online, thus:

----

HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003, & even VISTA, + make it "fun-to-do" using CIS Tool Guidance (& beyond):

http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=09533d0df9933344bb7e42d05acb5cec&showtopic=2662

----

It works, and has been working for myself since around 1997...

(When I began writing up guides (I was doing it on forums like 3dfiles.com before 1998 though) to submit as articles for websites that were Windows NT-based, to improve the security &/or performance of a Windows NT-based OS, such as the one from NTCompatible.com's former 1998-2003 "Article #1", where it was later featured @ Neowin forums, circa 2001 -> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text & rated very well)

Currently?

The guide is featured now on 20++ forums online, & has yielded some very good results (see my p.s. as an example) for people using its points on many levels!

E.G,-> It has crossed 200,000++ views in the relatively short timeframe of the 1 yr. this latest iteration of it has been online, & it was made an "ESSENTIAL GUIDE/Sticky-Pinned Thread" on 15/20 of those forums, as well as being the most viewed in a short timeframe (considering it has only been online in THIS form for a yr. now, & some of those sites it is on have been around a decade++), &/or being rated 5/5 stars, etc. et al... )

HOWEVER, AN IMPORTANT POINT (illustrated by "hard concrete evidence" in test scores):

The tips/tricks/techniques in that older model still shown @ Neowin forums would yield between 60-72/100 on the CIS Tool test - the new model of said guide, by way of comparison? 99/100 possible & doable scores result (examples thereof are shown in said thread URL above in fact)).

It just works, for both superior speed online AND security. From my own usage of it? 3++ yrs. now on this machine, no "bugs" or other hassles, & running as ADMINISTRATOR the entire time (& the system I had before this, 4++ yrs. same result).

APK

P.S.=> And, as to that guide's efficacy? The BEST testimonial I can provide, is the results of folks (others, not just myself) using it, such as those like THRONKA here, who have applied it to not only his own personal systems, but those of his clients, and NO VIRUS/TROJAN/ROOTKIT/SPYWARE/MALWARE-IN-GENERAL INFESTATIONS or other screwups, for more than 1++ yr. now, see here:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=4e5e02a13dff9594f890b9f5c7d4ae75&t=28430&page=3

----

SALIENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"Its 2009 - still trouble free!

I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill. I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get. He said good point. So from 2008 till 2009. No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008.

Great stuff!

My client STILL Hasn't called me back in regards to that one machine to get it locked down for the kid. I am glad it worked and I am sure her wallet is appreciated too now that it works. S

#2: I hope that I can turn this shit off. I use Windows+# for virtual desktop switching with MSVDM under XP. I don't use nView virtual desktops because nView won't LET me use Windows+#. I sure hope that one day we get some decent open video drivers for ATI, because that's all that's keeping me from switching.
#7: Programs COULD install themselves to your gnome-panel. Wouldn't be that hard.
Touch: AFAIK neither multitouch nor mouse/touch gestures are part of any standard Linux distribution. Am willing to be proven wrong.
#15: Have you seen the new GNOME network manager? It doesn't make any sense to me :( I finally read the manpage for interfaces and just use ifupdown without the network manager now. Well, now I don't run Linux on my desktop machine, only on my server, and it doesn't have any wireless interfaces. I do have a dd-wrt system, but it's micro so I don't log into it anyway, and do * through the web interface.
#19: Now this is someplace where Windows is truly way way way behind Linux. And let's face it, many humans place a very high value on aesthetics.
#23 is EVIL!
#24 is WEIRD! You couldn't resume playback after coming back from sleep mode? That seems like a bug fix, not a feature enhancement. P.S. What you use as a player is irrelevant. WinAmp is not a video player; it's a wrapper around Windows Media Player. You could use VLC, at which point this would not matter to you. But if you use winamp you're using the same mechanisms to play video as WiMP.
#28: Linux has nothing like Device Stage. Whether this is a good or bad thing is another issue.
#29 is worse than just a bug fix, it's probably a DRM bug fix.
The rest have to do with Windows Explorer: Yeah, you know, the part of Windows that the user uses?

Well, so far IE8's javasript performance is roughly 4x faster than IE7's (neowin), so...little bit of math...Safari 4's javascript performance should be about 7.5x faster than IE8 (beta)'s.

Like this one?

Since it looks like MP3 may expire in Dec 2012 (since according to Wiki the later patents are questionable) they really don't have long to succeed. I personally don't see anything defeating MP3. There are just too many devices out there that play MP3 that won't play formats like OGG and FLAC. Now in video I could see the possibility of another format taking over, although .avi is still very popular as a container. Perhaps now that DivX is going with .mkv that we will see it end up replacing .avi. But in audio for most folks MP3 is "good enough" and plays with everything they own so I don't really foresee it going away. I think you are right that once the MP3 patents expire that like FLAC it will have a niche but nothing more.

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=707404 Not sure how far they've gotten though

"You can't "break" an MP3 like a scratched CD." Unless you're running an unpatched Windows 7 beta. http://www.neowin.net/news/main/09/01/05/warning-windows-7-beta-could-corrupt-your-mp3s

http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/11/21/blackberrys-innovative-touchscreen-2

The whole point of the GP post is there may not be.

If, in the next 5 years, some alternate format offering real benefits came to be and was widely implemented in digital cameras and other devices that use JPEG, it's likely that as a proportion of the number of images stored, usage of JPEG drops. Sooner or later it'll drop so low that it's not worth maintaining the code to read them - and even if it does get maintained, who knows if bugs have been introduced that can't easily be tested for because not enough people have a large archive of JPEGs to test against.

(To be fair, JPEG's a bit of an extreme example, but I'd be happy to bet against Word .doc files being easy to read in 20 years time).

Word isn't easy to read now! :-).

As for JPEGs, it's not that extreme. HD Photo could take off soon, and likely will. From February, 2008:

"The Joint Photographic Experts Group decided earlier this week to officially endorse the Microsoft HD Photo file format as the eventual heir apparent to the JPEG standard. In order to be adopted, the format has lost its vendor-specific name and other Microsoft proprietary controls to ensure universal compatibility. The new format will hence be known as JPEG XR whereby XR stands for eXtended Range.

Microsoft believes that wide-spread use of this file format could begin in about a year."

full article

So does GTA4

I don't think this was covered on Slashdot and I wish I could find a better citation than this but it's been said that Apple has threatened makers of "docks" for PCs with lawsuits. I can't verify that but I do know that I downloaded and installed a beta program called Y'z Dock which was developed by a now defunct crew.

The Y'z Dock software was really really slick and very comparable to Apple's. You can still find the beta distros on pages like Fileforum and other third party hosters (I won't link because you will have to use those at your own risk).

I don't think anyone in the community ever thought they could get away with mimicking the dock ... but my default response to software patents is that they're broken. Those of you that use Windows will never know the dock because Steve Jobs doesn't want it that way. Also, I'm kind of pissed that "a PC" means Windows ... it means personal computer, does it not? Isn't my Linux machine a personal computer? I hate that. But that's a totally offtopic rant triggered by marketing from all camps.

I believe moderatorrater is refering to this security: http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/08/08/vista39s-security-rendered-completely-useless-by-new-exploit

I think it's a joke. I like the bit about sudo.

e

"It would only work on the sort of Neowin-reading "power users" who turn off security features to gain (perceived) speed and convenience." - by Cid Highwind (9258) on Friday August 08, @08:59AM (#24523449) Homepage

It doesn't appear that all users at Neowin are "security unconscious", per this thread there:

HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 & even VISTA, + make it "fun to do", via CIS Tool Guidance:

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?s=d49a63e9ac18113e67097a38579af5ce&showtopic=602537

You're being far too "general" in your assumption I quoted my friend, as that is one of their "essential guides", and it deals in practicing secure computing.

It's gotten its fair share of views at 16,745 views as of the time and date of this posting after 7 months there, and coming from me (and I also run a fairly popular website myself) that is a more than decent amount of viewership for a single posting on a forums messageboard system typically.

(So again, you're being a bit too general and oversimplifying (as regards all of their userbase)).

Are you not running XP - its tiny on XP.

Vista.. well, read about it on Google:

http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1173190&SiteID=17
http://www.vistaheads.com/forums/microsoft-public-windows-vista-general/30395-what-winsxs-folder.html
http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=590216&view=getnewpost
http://www.vistax64.com/vista-general/53906-what-winsxs-folder.html

Also note that Microsoft provided a special tool (VSP1CLN.exe) to remove the files replaced by SP1, its part of your SP1 install and will clean up about 2 Gb. (yep, 2GB). There are plenty of instructions on its use on the web

I don't pay money for Google. If I'm paying for a game it better not have any ads in it. It would be like paying to see Blade 3 or I, Robot or the new Casino Royale or paying for a copy of NFSU2. I'm not going to pay twice.

You can simply combine Xvfb + a simple environment like blackbox + x11vnc to monitor the screen. Run x11vnc on localhost only, and tunnel in through SSH. Very easy and pretty safe way of running a persistent X11 session. See this forum for the exact commands.

They were also gonna go back and recapture that famous 1983 photo of Gates laying across the desk all sultry-like, but he broke a hip trying to strike his pose...

They've done that too. They've also sued the dead, people who don't even own a computer, and paralyzed stroke victims.

The idea that solid state electronics work for a long time is not a big claim in any way. This is their default state. The only reason flash drives wear out at all is because of the high voltage nature of the rewrite cycle. Meanwhile the idea that a clunky mechanical device with a bunch of moving parts will work for years with no maintenance is a big claim.

MTBF only tells you half the story. It gives you the average. It does not give you the distribution. Many hard drive failures are essentially random. This means that the actual failure of an individual device can happen much earlier, or much later, than the average. Meanwhile SSDs fail almost exclusively by wearing out, on a schedule which is determined by their design, so that the actual failure will happen almost exactly as predicted.

But the real reason that SSDs and enterprise HDs have similar MTBFs is, apparently, because the HD manufacturers lie out their asses. See for example http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=38693. Meanwhile there's no reason to believe the same of SSD manufacturers because the failure modes are well known and their claims are actually reasonable.

Maybe the eye candy was "extra bloat", but I do think it helped attract customers who would've stuck with ME otherwise. And that's a good enough goal in itself: the DOS branch was fundamentally less reliable and less secure than the NT branch. If a little bloat is what it took to get people off of the weaker branch, giving them a more solid OS and making developers' lives easier, then so be it.

...and MacOS is the only commercial OS that has never had a zero day exploit in the wild

Wow... I cannot believe you said that out loud.

To update to SP1, get the following download: http://staff.neowin.net/skyypunk/VistaSP1WU.zip

It simply enabled SP1 to appear in Windows Update, exactly how the Release Candidates were enabled.

Specifically, the code is:

reg delete HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\WindowsUpdate\VistaSp1 /f > NUL 2>&1
reg delete HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\WindowsUpdate\VistaSP1 /f > NUL 2>&1

reg add HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\WindowsUpdate\VistaSp1 /v Beta1 /t REG_SZ /d dcf99ef8-d784-414e-b411-81a910d2761d /f

I think people are just miffed that Vista beats their favourite OS

http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/01/09/market-share-2007-mac-os-gains-315-vista-grabs-1048
Windows XP - 76.91%
Windows Vista - 10.48%
Mac OS - 7.30%
Windows 2000 - 2.66%
Windows 98 - 0.70%
Linux - 0.63%

Faster than XP how?

You know plenty of games (crysis,hellgate, etc use their full DX10 capability on DX9 and DX10 capable hardware and also in windows XP, right? It's not like vista uses up a drastically larger amount of memory or actually adds features you couldn't find in say linux, is it?

All DX10 has done is added small graphic effects for transparency with water and smoke, that although they look beautiful, aren't the real reason DX10 was created. DX10 was created with virtualization in mind so microsoft could twist their patent deals with virtualization.

Sheesh, and you people wonder why Vista is an absolutely failed attempt at an OS from more perspectives than just people who hate microsoft.

I think you're confusing Microsoft with Apple.

You're a douche bag for not linking back to the ORIGINAL story which was Neowin's exclusive. Engadget at least had the dignity to leak to Neowin's story (not just the image). http://www.neowin.net/news/main/07/11/10/suggestions-for-future-versions-of-windows

http://www.neowin.net/images/uploaded/1798_early_feedback.png

An interesting choice for the article since it is a summary of an engadet summary of this article, and here is more of supposedly the leaked list.

Dell's OEM license is still valid. AFAIK, Dell laptops ship with Windows XP install CDs that are pre-activated as long as it detects a Dell BIOS. It's called System Locked Pre-Installation (SLP). If you can't find a Dell OEM CD, there are ways to make one from a generic OEM CD.

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=587659&st=15

"Next it's going to be illegal to take toilet breaks during TV ads?"

Apparently, yes.

Skipping Commercials Is Stealing According To Turner Ceo - Neowin ...