Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: theregus.com

Stories and comments across the archive that link to theregus.com.

Comments · 143

  1. WinXP Shows where MS is Going by poopbot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic · on Quake For the Blind
    Windows XP Shows the Direction Microsoft is Going.

    "I've heard WinXP removed the cmd/command prompt."

    No, Microsoft didn't remove the CMD.EXE or COMMAND.COM prompt from Windows XP. But Windows XP has reduced functionality, in many ways, not just in the command line. The command line is a big embarrassment because of its limited capabilities, but at least in Win 95 it worked. With every version since then it has worked less well. (There are two kinds of command prompt, and, according to Microsoft employees, the differences between them are not documented.)

    The command line prompt sometimes begins to display short file names. Microsoft employees say that Microsoft has no fix, although someone not connected with Microsoft did make a work-around.

    Cutting and pasting into a command line program often puts successive extra spaces before each line. Microsoft employees say that there is no plan to fix this.

    The fast paste mode that is in Windows 98 is gone in Windows XP. Microsoft employees say there is no plan to fix this.

    When using the command line interface, Windows XP doesn't always update the time. After several hours, the time reported to command line programs can be several hours in error.

    There is a DOS program called START.EXE that can be used to start other programs. But it does operate the same way as in other versions of Windows. It starts a program, but cannot be made to return control to the command line program as previous versions did. There is no technical reason for this; it is just one of the shortcomings that are allowed to exist.

    People often say that DOS has gone away. But Microsoft still calls the command line interface DOS, and in Windows XP Microsoft has added new programs for configuring the OS that work only under DOS.

    Sometimes when you press a key while using Windows XP, it is seconds until there is any response. Apparently there is something wrong with the CPU scheduler in XP, because there are a lot of complaints about this in the forums and MS people have said that they are working on it. On one particular fresh installation of XP, on an Intel motherboard with either a Matrox G550 or an ATI Radeon video adapter, it requires 18 seconds to display a directory listing of 94 items. This is apparently related to a bug in the video software, not the adapter drivers.

    Something is wrong with the Alt-Tab display of running programs under Windows XP. If there are a lot of programs, not all of them are displayed. The order jumps around in a seemingly random way.

    Although articles often say negative things about Microsoft, I've never seen an article that fully documents how bad the situation really is. Microsoft's management is so bad that the company has become self-destructive. For example, Windows XP is spyware. Here is a list of ways Windows XP connects to Microsoft's servers:
    1. Application Layer Gateway Service (Requires server rights.)
    2. Fax Service
    3. File Signature Verification
    4. Generic Host Process for Win32 Services (Requires server rights.)
    5. Microsoft Application Error Reporting
    6. Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer
    7. Microsoft Direct Play Voice Test
    8. Microsoft Help and Support Center
    9. Microsoft Help Center Hosting Server (Wants server rights.)
    10. Microsoft Management Console
    11. Microsoft Media Player (tells Microsoft the music you like)
    12. Microsoft Network Availability Test
    13. Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Service
    14. MS DTC Console program
    15. Run DLL as an app
    16. Services and Controller app
    17. Time Service, sets the time on your computer from Microsoft's computer.
    18. Microsoft Office keeps a number in each file you create that identifies your computer. Microsoft has never said why.
    19. Microsoft mouse software has reduced functionality until you let it connect to Microsoft computers.
    These are just the ones I know. There may be others.

    So, if you use Windows XP, your computer is dependent on Microsoft computers. That's bad, not only because you lose control over your possession, but because Microsoft produces buggy software and doesn't patch bugs quickly. For example, as of July 7, 2002, there are 18 unpatched security holes in Microsoft Internet Explorer. This is a terrible record for a company that has $40 billion in the bank. Obviously, with that kind of money, Microsoft could fix the bugs if it wanted to fix them. Since the bugs are very public and Microsoft has the money, it seems reasonable to suppose that top management at Microsoft has deliberately decided that the bugs should remain, at least for now.

    It seems possible that there is a connection between all the bugs and the U.S. government's friendly treatment of Microsoft's law-breaking. The U.S. government's CIA and FBI and NSA departments spy on the entire world, and unpatched vulnerabilities in Microsoft software help spies.

    Windows XP, and all current Windows operating systems, have a file called the registry in which configuration information is written. If this one (large, often fragmented) file becomes corrupted, the only way of recovering may be to re-format the hard drive, re-install the operating system, and then re-install and re-configure all the applications. The registry file is a single, very vulnerable, point of failure. Microsoft apparently designed it this way to provide copy protection. Since most entries in the registry are poorly documented or not documented, the registry effectively prevents control by the user.

    Note that Microsoft does not support making functional complete backups under Windows XP. Look at Microsoft's policy about this: Q314828 Microsoft Policy on Disk Duplication of Windows XP Installation. Only those who work with Microsoft software will understand the true meaning of Microsoft's policy. Since almost all programs use the registry operating system file, if you cannot make a functional copy of the operating system you cannot make a functional copy of all your application installations and configurations. There are other software companies that try to fix this, but they don't work well, and Microsoft can, of course, break their implementations, as they have often done with other kinds of competitors.

    Because the configuration information for the motherboard and the configuration information for the are mixed together in the registry file, the registry tends to prevent you from moving a hard drive to a computer with a different motherboard. That's another implication of the above Microsoft policy. So, if you have a motherboard failure, and a good complete backup, you may not be able to recover unless you have a spare computer with the same motherboard.

    Note that Windows XP Professional can support only ten simultaneous incoming network connections. If you want more than that, you must use Windows 2000 server, and pay much, much more. (There is no Windows XP server yet.) Many businesses have very light network traffic; they just move files from staff member to staff member; they really don't need a dedicated server computer. The staff computers could easily handle the load except for this artificial limitation.

    Apparently because the Windows XP GUI comes from Windows 98, Windows XP has the same problem with desktop icons that Windows 98 has. The icons sometimes flicker. Sometimes they move themselves around, particularly after the user switches monitor resolutions. Also, sometimes the taskbar settings un-configure themselves, as they do in Windows 98.

    Only technically knowledgeable people know how to avoid signing up for a Microsoft Passport account during initial use of Windows XP. The name Passport gives an indication of Microsoft's thinking. A passport is a document issued by a sovereign nation. Without it, the nation's citizens cannot travel, and, if they leave, won't be allowed back in their own country. In Microsoft's corporate thinking, the company seems to be moving in the direction of believing that they own the user's computer. Most people are both honest and intimidated. Apparently about 95% do whatever they are asked on the screen. They give their personal information to Microsoft. They don't realize that, if they feel forced to get a Passport account, they should enter almost completely fictitious information, since the real question is not "What is your name and address", but "Can we invade your privacy". The honest answer to this is "No, you cannot invade my privacy", and the only effective way to communicate that is to give completely fictitious information. Since it is the educated people who have computers, Microsoft is building a database of the personal lives of educated people. Microsoft knows when they connect and from what IP address (which tends to show the area), what kind of help they ask, and information about what they are doing with their computers, including what music they like. It is not known, and there is no way to know, how much Microsoft or other organizations make use of this information, or their plans for future use.

    Not only has Windows XP definitely gone further in the direction of allowing the user less control over his or her own machine, but with Palladium, Microsoft apparently intends to finish the job: Microsoft will have ultimate control over the user's computer and therefore all his or her data. Even now, under Windows XP, a recent security patch requires that the user agree to a contract that gives Microsoft administrator privileges over the user's computer. The contract says that if a user wants to patch his or her system against a bug which would allow an attack over the Internet, he or she must give Microsoft legal control over the computer. See this article also: Microsoft's Digital Rights Management-- A Little Deeper. You may need to be a lawyer to take apart the crucial sentence. "These security related updates may disable your ability to copy and/or play Secure Content and [my emphasis] use other software on your computer" legally includes this meaning: "These updates may disable your ability to use other software on your computer." Note that the term "security related updates" is meaningless to the user because the updates have no relation to user security. So, the sentence effectively means that Microsoft can control the user's computer without notice and whenever it wants. That kind of sentence is known in psychology as "testing the limits". If there is no strong public complaint about this, expect to see more and stronger language like this.

    This Register article shows the direction Microsoft is going: MS Palladium protects IT vendors, not you. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and Microsoft is well down that road. See this ZDNet article, also: MS: Why we can't trust your 'trustworthy' OS.

    Microsoft's self-destructiveness does not mean that the user should be self-destructive. There is no need to apologize for using Microsoft software. The correct solution to abuse is persuading the abuser to stop being abusive. Once I posted to a Slashdot story a link to an article on a web site of mine. By far the majority of visitors from the Slashdot story used Microsoft operating systems. Rather than feel embarrassed because Microsoft is abusive, action needs to be taken to prevent the abuse. If you are against Microsoft abuse, you are not against Microsoft; you are more pro-Microsoft than Bill Gates.

    These Microsoft policies mean that any government which wants to be independent of the United States government, and any government which represents itself as controlled by the people, cannot use Microsoft operating systems, or other Microsoft proprietary systems.




    - poopbot: beautiful snot, lovely snot
  2. WinXP Shows where MS is Going by poopbot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic · on Quake For the Blind
    Windows XP Shows the Direction Microsoft is Going.

    "I've heard WinXP removed the cmd/command prompt."

    No, Microsoft didn't remove the CMD.EXE or COMMAND.COM prompt from Windows XP. But Windows XP has reduced functionality, in many ways, not just in the command line. The command line is a big embarrassment because of its limited capabilities, but at least in Win 95 it worked. With every version since then it has worked less well. (There are two kinds of command prompt, and, according to Microsoft employees, the differences between them are not documented.)

    The command line prompt sometimes begins to display short file names. Microsoft employees say that Microsoft has no fix, although someone not connected with Microsoft did make a work-around.

    Cutting and pasting into a command line program often puts successive extra spaces before each line. Microsoft employees say that there is no plan to fix this.

    The fast paste mode that is in Windows 98 is gone in Windows XP. Microsoft employees say there is no plan to fix this.

    When using the command line interface, Windows XP doesn't always update the time. After several hours, the time reported to command line programs can be several hours in error.

    There is a DOS program called START.EXE that can be used to start other programs. But it does operate the same way as in other versions of Windows. It starts a program, but cannot be made to return control to the command line program as previous versions did. There is no technical reason for this; it is just one of the shortcomings that are allowed to exist.

    People often say that DOS has gone away. But Microsoft still calls the command line interface DOS, and in Windows XP Microsoft has added new programs for configuring the OS that work only under DOS.

    Sometimes when you press a key while using Windows XP, it is seconds until there is any response. Apparently there is something wrong with the CPU scheduler in XP, because there are a lot of complaints about this in the forums and MS people have said that they are working on it. On one particular fresh installation of XP, on an Intel motherboard with either a Matrox G550 or an ATI Radeon video adapter, it requires 18 seconds to display a directory listing of 94 items. This is apparently related to a bug in the video software, not the adapter drivers.

    Something is wrong with the Alt-Tab display of running programs under Windows XP. If there are a lot of programs, not all of them are displayed. The order jumps around in a seemingly random way.

    Although articles often say negative things about Microsoft, I've never seen an article that fully documents how bad the situation really is. Microsoft's management is so bad that the company has become self-destructive. For example, Windows XP is spyware. Here is a list of ways Windows XP connects to Microsoft's servers:
    1. Application Layer Gateway Service (Requires server rights.)
    2. Fax Service
    3. File Signature Verification
    4. Generic Host Process for Win32 Services (Requires server rights.)
    5. Microsoft Application Error Reporting
    6. Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer
    7. Microsoft Direct Play Voice Test
    8. Microsoft Help and Support Center
    9. Microsoft Help Center Hosting Server (Wants server rights.)
    10. Microsoft Management Console
    11. Microsoft Media Player (tells Microsoft the music you like)
    12. Microsoft Network Availability Test
    13. Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Service
    14. MS DTC Console program
    15. Run DLL as an app
    16. Services and Controller app
    17. Time Service, sets the time on your computer from Microsoft's computer.
    18. Microsoft Office keeps a number in each file you create that identifies your computer. Microsoft has never said why.
    19. Microsoft mouse software has reduced functionality until you let it connect to Microsoft computers.
    These are just the ones I know. There may be others.

    So, if you use Windows XP, your computer is dependent on Microsoft computers. That's bad, not only because you lose control over your possession, but because Microsoft produces buggy software and doesn't patch bugs quickly. For example, as of July 7, 2002, there are 18 unpatched security holes in Microsoft Internet Explorer. This is a terrible record for a company that has $40 billion in the bank. Obviously, with that kind of money, Microsoft could fix the bugs if it wanted to fix them. Since the bugs are very public and Microsoft has the money, it seems reasonable to suppose that top management at Microsoft has deliberately decided that the bugs should remain, at least for now.

    It seems possible that there is a connection between all the bugs and the U.S. government's friendly treatment of Microsoft's law-breaking. The U.S. government's CIA and FBI and NSA departments spy on the entire world, and unpatched vulnerabilities in Microsoft software help spies.

    Windows XP, and all current Windows operating systems, have a file called the registry in which configuration information is written. If this one (large, often fragmented) file becomes corrupted, the only way of recovering may be to re-format the hard drive, re-install the operating system, and then re-install and re-configure all the applications. The registry file is a single, very vulnerable, point of failure. Microsoft apparently designed it this way to provide copy protection. Since most entries in the registry are poorly documented or not documented, the registry effectively prevents control by the user.

    Note that Microsoft does not support making functional complete backups under Windows XP. Look at Microsoft's policy about this: Q314828 Microsoft Policy on Disk Duplication of Windows XP Installation. Only those who work with Microsoft software will understand the true meaning of Microsoft's policy. Since almost all programs use the registry operating system file, if you cannot make a functional copy of the operating system you cannot make a functional copy of all your application installations and configurations. There are other software companies that try to fix this, but they don't work well, and Microsoft can, of course, break their implementations, as they have often done with other kinds of competitors.

    Because the configuration information for the motherboard and the configuration information for the are mixed together in the registry file, the registry tends to prevent you from moving a hard drive to a computer with a different motherboard. That's another implication of the above Microsoft policy. So, if you have a motherboard failure, and a good complete backup, you may not be able to recover unless you have a spare computer with the same motherboard.

    Note that Windows XP Professional can support only ten simultaneous incoming network connections. If you want more than that, you must use Windows 2000 server, and pay much, much more. (There is no Windows XP server yet.) Many businesses have very light network traffic; they just move files from staff member to staff member; they really don't need a dedicated server computer. The staff computers could easily handle the load except for this artificial limitation.

    Apparently because the Windows XP GUI comes from Windows 98, Windows XP has the same problem with desktop icons that Windows 98 has. The icons sometimes flicker. Sometimes they move themselves around, particularly after the user switches monitor resolutions. Also, sometimes the taskbar settings un-configure themselves, as they do in Windows 98.

    Only technically knowledgeable people know how to avoid signing up for a Microsoft Passport account during initial use of Windows XP. The name Passport gives an indication of Microsoft's thinking. A passport is a document issued by a sovereign nation. Without it, the nation's citizens cannot travel, and, if they leave, won't be allowed back in their own country. In Microsoft's corporate thinking, the company seems to be moving in the direction of believing that they own the user's computer. Most people are both honest and intimidated. Apparently about 95% do whatever they are asked on the screen. They give their personal information to Microsoft. They don't realize that, if they feel forced to get a Passport account, they should enter almost completely fictitious information, since the real question is not "What is your name and address", but "Can we invade your privacy". The honest answer to this is "No, you cannot invade my privacy", and the only effective way to communicate that is to give completely fictitious information. Since it is the educated people who have computers, Microsoft is building a database of the personal lives of educated people. Microsoft knows when they connect and from what IP address (which tends to show the area), what kind of help they ask, and information about what they are doing with their computers, including what music they like. It is not known, and there is no way to know, how much Microsoft or other organizations make use of this information, or their plans for future use.

    Not only has Windows XP definitely gone further in the direction of allowing the user less control over his or her own machine, but with Palladium, Microsoft apparently intends to finish the job: Microsoft will have ultimate control over the user's computer and therefore all his or her data. Even now, under Windows XP, a recent security patch requires that the user agree to a contract that gives Microsoft administrator privileges over the user's computer. The contract says that if a user wants to patch his or her system against a bug which would allow an attack over the Internet, he or she must give Microsoft legal control over the computer. See this article also: Microsoft's Digital Rights Management-- A Little Deeper. You may need to be a lawyer to take apart the crucial sentence. "These security related updates may disable your ability to copy and/or play Secure Content and [my emphasis] use other software on your computer" legally includes this meaning: "These updates may disable your ability to use other software on your computer." Note that the term "security related updates" is meaningless to the user because the updates have no relation to user security. So, the sentence effectively means that Microsoft can control the user's computer without notice and whenever it wants. That kind of sentence is known in psychology as "testing the limits". If there is no strong public complaint about this, expect to see more and stronger language like this.

    This Register article shows the direction Microsoft is going: MS Palladium protects IT vendors, not you. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and Microsoft is well down that road. See this ZDNet article, also: MS: Why we can't trust your 'trustworthy' OS.

    Microsoft's self-destructiveness does not mean that the user should be self-destructive. There is no need to apologize for using Microsoft software. The correct solution to abuse is persuading the abuser to stop being abusive. Once I posted to a Slashdot story a link to an article on a web site of mine. By far the majority of visitors from the Slashdot story used Microsoft operating systems. Rather than feel embarrassed because Microsoft is abusive, action needs to be taken to prevent the abuse. If you are against Microsoft abuse, you are not against Microsoft; you are more pro-Microsoft than Bill Gates.

    These Microsoft policies mean that any government which wants to be independent of the United States government, and any government which represents itself as controlled by the people, cannot use Microsoft operating systems, or other Microsoft proprietary systems.




    - poopbot: beautiful snot, lovely snot
  3. Microsoft may be worse than you know: by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Interesting · on MS Palladium Patent

    "I've heard WinXP removed the cmd/command prompt."

    No, they didn't remove the CMD.EXE or COMMAND.COM prompt from Windows XP. But Windows XP has reduced functionality, in many ways, not just in the command line. The command line is a big embarrassment because of its limited capabilities, but at least in Win 95 it worked. With every version since then it has worked less well. (There are two kinds of command prompt, and, according to Microsoft employees, the differences between them are not documented.)

    The command line prompt sometimes begins to display short file names. Microsoft employees say that Microsoft has no fix, although someone not connected with Microsoft did make a work-around.

    Cutting and pasting into a command line program often puts successive extra spaces before each line. Microsoft employees say that there is no plan to fix this.

    The fast paste mode that is in Windows 98 is gone in Windows XP. Microsoft employees say there is no plan to fix this.

    When using the command line interface, Windows XP doesn't always update the time. After several hours, the time reported to command line programs can be several hours in error.

    People often say that DOS has gone away. But Microsoft still calls the command line interface DOS, and in Windows XP has added new programs for configuring the OS that work only under DOS.

    Sometimes when you press a key while using Windows XP, it is seconds until there is any response. Apparently there is something wrong with the CPU scheduler in XP, because there are a lot of complaints about this in the forums and MS people have said that they are working on it. On one particular fresh installation of XP, on an Intel motherboard with either a Matrox G550 or an ATI Radeon video adapter, it requires 18 seconds to display a directory listing of 94 items. This is apparently related to a bug in the video software, not the adapter drivers.

    Something is wrong with the Alt-Tab display of running programs under Windows XP. If there are a lot of programs, not all of them are displayed. The order jumps around in a seemingly random way.

    Although articles often say negative things about Microsoft, I've never seen an article that fully documents how bad the situation really is. Microsoft's management is so bad that the company has become self-destructive. For example, Windows XP is spyware. Here is a list of ways Windows XP connects to Microsoft's servers:
    1. Application Layer Gateway Service (Requires server rights.)
    2. Fax Service
    3. File Signature Verification
    4. Generic Host Process for Win32 Services (Requires server rights.)
    5. Microsoft Application Error Reporting
    6. Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer
    7. Microsoft Direct Play Voice Test
    8. Microsoft Help and Support Center
    9. Microsoft Help Center Hosting Server (Wants server rights.)
    10. Microsoft Management Console
    11. Microsoft Media Player (tells Microsoft the music you like)
    12. Microsoft Network Availability Test
    13. Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Service
    14. MS DTC Console program
    15. Run DLL as an app
    16. Services and Controller app
    17. Time Service, sets the time on your computer from Microsoft's computer.
    18. Microsoft Office keeps a number in each file you create that identifies your computer. Microsoft has never said why.
    19. Microsoft mouse software has reduced functionality until you let it connect to Microsoft computers.
    These are just the ones I know. There may be others.

    So, if you use Windows XP, your computer is dependent on Microsoft computers. That's bad, not only because you lose control over your possession, but because Microsoft produces buggy software and doesn't patch bugs quickly. For example, as of July 7, 2002, there are 18 unpatched security holes in Microsoft Internet Explorer. This is a terrible record for a company that has $40 billion in the bank. Obviously, with that kind of money, Microsoft could fix the bugs if it wanted to fix them. Since the bugs are very public and Microsoft has the money, it seems reasonable to suppose that top management at Microsoft has deliberately decided that the bugs should remain, at least for now.

    It seems possible that there is a connection between all the bugs and the U.S. government's friendly treatment of Microsoft's law-breaking. The U.S. government's CIA and FBI and NSA departments spy on the entire world, and unpatched vulnerabilities in Microsoft software help spies.

    Windows XP, and all current Windows operating systems, have a file called the registry in which configuration information is written. If this one (large, often fragmented) file becomes corrupted, the only way of recovering may be to re-format the hard drive, re-install the operating system, and then re-install and re-configure all the applications. The registry file is a single, very vulnerable, point of failure. Microsoft apparently designed it this way to provide copy protection. Since most entries in the registry are poorly documented or not documented, the registry effectively prevents control by the user.

    Note that Microsoft does not support making functional complete backups under Windows XP: Q314828 Microsoft Policy on Disk Duplication of Windows XP Installation. Only those who work with Microsoft software will understand the true meaning of Microsoft's policy. Since almost all programs use the registry operating system file, if you cannot make a functional copy of the operating system you cannot make a functional copy of all your application installations and configurations. There are other software companies that try to fix this, but Microsoft can, of course, break their implementations, as they have often done with other kinds of competitors.

    Note that the registry tends to prevent you from moving a hard drive to a computer with a different motherboard. That's another implication of the above Microsoft article. So, if you have a failure, you may not be able to recover unless you have a spare computer with the same motherboard.

    Note that Windows XP Professional can support only ten simultaneous incoming network connections. If you want more than that, you must use Windows 2000 server, and pay much, much more. (There is no Windows XP server yet.)

    Apparently because the Windows XP GUI comes from Windows 98, Windows XP has the same problem with desktop icons that Windows 98 has. The icons sometimes flicker. Sometimes they move themselves around, particularly after the user switches monitor resolutions. Also, sometimes the taskbar settings un-configure themselves, as they do in Windows 98.

    Only technically knowledgeable people know how to avoid signing up for a Microsoft Passport account during initial use of Windows XP. The name Passport gives an indication of Microsoft's thinking. A passport is a document issued by a sovereign nation. Without it, the nation's citizens cannot travel, and, if they leave, won't be allowed back in their own country. In Microsoft's corporate thinking, the company seems to be moving in the direction of believing that they own the user's computer.

    Not only has Windows XP definitely gone further in the direction of allowing the user less control over his or her own machine, but with Palladium, Microsoft apparently intends to finish the job: Microsoft will have ultimate control over the user's computer and therefore all his or her data. Even now, under Windows XP, a recent security patch gave Microsoft administrator privileges over user's computers. If users want to patch their system against a bug which would allow an attack over the Internet, they must give Microsoft legal control over their machines. See this article also: Microsoft's Digital Rights Management-- A Little Deeper. You may need to be a lawyer to take apart the crucial sentence. "These security related updates may disable your ability to copy and/or play Secure Content and [my emphasis] use other software on your computer" legally includes this meaning: "These updates may disable your ability to use other software on your computer." Note that the term "security related updates" is meaningless to the user because the updates have no relation to user security. So, the sentence effectively means that Microsoft can control the user's computer without notice and whenever it wants. That kind of sentence is known in psychology as "testing the limits". If there is no strong public complaint about this, expect to see more and stronger language like this.

    This Register article shows the direction Microsoft is going: MS Palladium protects IT vendors, not you. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and Microsoft is well down that road. See this ZDNet article, also: MS: Why we can't trust your 'trustworthy' OS.

    Microsoft's self-destructiveness does not mean that the user should be self-destructive. There is no need to apologize for using Microsoft software. The correct solution to abuse is persuading the abuser to stop being abusive. Once I posted to a Slashdot story a link to an article on a web site of mine. By far the majority of visitors from the Slashdot story used Microsoft operating systems. Rather than feel embarrassed because Microsoft is abusive, action needs to be taken to prevent the abuse. If you are against Microsoft abuse, you are not against Microsoft; you are more pro-Microsoft than Bill Gates.

    These Microsoft policies mean that any government which wants to be independent of the United States government, and any government which represents itself as controlled by the people, cannot use Microsoft operating systems, or other Microsoft proprietary systems.

    Corrections and additions to this comment will be posted at http://hevanet.com/peace/microsoft.htm
  4. Microsoft may be worse than you know: by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Interesting · on MS Palladium Patent

    "I've heard WinXP removed the cmd/command prompt."

    No, they didn't remove the CMD.EXE or COMMAND.COM prompt from Windows XP. But Windows XP has reduced functionality, in many ways, not just in the command line. The command line is a big embarrassment because of its limited capabilities, but at least in Win 95 it worked. With every version since then it has worked less well. (There are two kinds of command prompt, and, according to Microsoft employees, the differences between them are not documented.)

    The command line prompt sometimes begins to display short file names. Microsoft employees say that Microsoft has no fix, although someone not connected with Microsoft did make a work-around.

    Cutting and pasting into a command line program often puts successive extra spaces before each line. Microsoft employees say that there is no plan to fix this.

    The fast paste mode that is in Windows 98 is gone in Windows XP. Microsoft employees say there is no plan to fix this.

    When using the command line interface, Windows XP doesn't always update the time. After several hours, the time reported to command line programs can be several hours in error.

    People often say that DOS has gone away. But Microsoft still calls the command line interface DOS, and in Windows XP has added new programs for configuring the OS that work only under DOS.

    Sometimes when you press a key while using Windows XP, it is seconds until there is any response. Apparently there is something wrong with the CPU scheduler in XP, because there are a lot of complaints about this in the forums and MS people have said that they are working on it. On one particular fresh installation of XP, on an Intel motherboard with either a Matrox G550 or an ATI Radeon video adapter, it requires 18 seconds to display a directory listing of 94 items. This is apparently related to a bug in the video software, not the adapter drivers.

    Something is wrong with the Alt-Tab display of running programs under Windows XP. If there are a lot of programs, not all of them are displayed. The order jumps around in a seemingly random way.

    Although articles often say negative things about Microsoft, I've never seen an article that fully documents how bad the situation really is. Microsoft's management is so bad that the company has become self-destructive. For example, Windows XP is spyware. Here is a list of ways Windows XP connects to Microsoft's servers:
    1. Application Layer Gateway Service (Requires server rights.)
    2. Fax Service
    3. File Signature Verification
    4. Generic Host Process for Win32 Services (Requires server rights.)
    5. Microsoft Application Error Reporting
    6. Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer
    7. Microsoft Direct Play Voice Test
    8. Microsoft Help and Support Center
    9. Microsoft Help Center Hosting Server (Wants server rights.)
    10. Microsoft Management Console
    11. Microsoft Media Player (tells Microsoft the music you like)
    12. Microsoft Network Availability Test
    13. Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Service
    14. MS DTC Console program
    15. Run DLL as an app
    16. Services and Controller app
    17. Time Service, sets the time on your computer from Microsoft's computer.
    18. Microsoft Office keeps a number in each file you create that identifies your computer. Microsoft has never said why.
    19. Microsoft mouse software has reduced functionality until you let it connect to Microsoft computers.
    These are just the ones I know. There may be others.

    So, if you use Windows XP, your computer is dependent on Microsoft computers. That's bad, not only because you lose control over your possession, but because Microsoft produces buggy software and doesn't patch bugs quickly. For example, as of July 7, 2002, there are 18 unpatched security holes in Microsoft Internet Explorer. This is a terrible record for a company that has $40 billion in the bank. Obviously, with that kind of money, Microsoft could fix the bugs if it wanted to fix them. Since the bugs are very public and Microsoft has the money, it seems reasonable to suppose that top management at Microsoft has deliberately decided that the bugs should remain, at least for now.

    It seems possible that there is a connection between all the bugs and the U.S. government's friendly treatment of Microsoft's law-breaking. The U.S. government's CIA and FBI and NSA departments spy on the entire world, and unpatched vulnerabilities in Microsoft software help spies.

    Windows XP, and all current Windows operating systems, have a file called the registry in which configuration information is written. If this one (large, often fragmented) file becomes corrupted, the only way of recovering may be to re-format the hard drive, re-install the operating system, and then re-install and re-configure all the applications. The registry file is a single, very vulnerable, point of failure. Microsoft apparently designed it this way to provide copy protection. Since most entries in the registry are poorly documented or not documented, the registry effectively prevents control by the user.

    Note that Microsoft does not support making functional complete backups under Windows XP: Q314828 Microsoft Policy on Disk Duplication of Windows XP Installation. Only those who work with Microsoft software will understand the true meaning of Microsoft's policy. Since almost all programs use the registry operating system file, if you cannot make a functional copy of the operating system you cannot make a functional copy of all your application installations and configurations. There are other software companies that try to fix this, but Microsoft can, of course, break their implementations, as they have often done with other kinds of competitors.

    Note that the registry tends to prevent you from moving a hard drive to a computer with a different motherboard. That's another implication of the above Microsoft article. So, if you have a failure, you may not be able to recover unless you have a spare computer with the same motherboard.

    Note that Windows XP Professional can support only ten simultaneous incoming network connections. If you want more than that, you must use Windows 2000 server, and pay much, much more. (There is no Windows XP server yet.)

    Apparently because the Windows XP GUI comes from Windows 98, Windows XP has the same problem with desktop icons that Windows 98 has. The icons sometimes flicker. Sometimes they move themselves around, particularly after the user switches monitor resolutions. Also, sometimes the taskbar settings un-configure themselves, as they do in Windows 98.

    Only technically knowledgeable people know how to avoid signing up for a Microsoft Passport account during initial use of Windows XP. The name Passport gives an indication of Microsoft's thinking. A passport is a document issued by a sovereign nation. Without it, the nation's citizens cannot travel, and, if they leave, won't be allowed back in their own country. In Microsoft's corporate thinking, the company seems to be moving in the direction of believing that they own the user's computer.

    Not only has Windows XP definitely gone further in the direction of allowing the user less control over his or her own machine, but with Palladium, Microsoft apparently intends to finish the job: Microsoft will have ultimate control over the user's computer and therefore all his or her data. Even now, under Windows XP, a recent security patch gave Microsoft administrator privileges over user's computers. If users want to patch their system against a bug which would allow an attack over the Internet, they must give Microsoft legal control over their machines. See this article also: Microsoft's Digital Rights Management-- A Little Deeper. You may need to be a lawyer to take apart the crucial sentence. "These security related updates may disable your ability to copy and/or play Secure Content and [my emphasis] use other software on your computer" legally includes this meaning: "These updates may disable your ability to use other software on your computer." Note that the term "security related updates" is meaningless to the user because the updates have no relation to user security. So, the sentence effectively means that Microsoft can control the user's computer without notice and whenever it wants. That kind of sentence is known in psychology as "testing the limits". If there is no strong public complaint about this, expect to see more and stronger language like this.

    This Register article shows the direction Microsoft is going: MS Palladium protects IT vendors, not you. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and Microsoft is well down that road. See this ZDNet article, also: MS: Why we can't trust your 'trustworthy' OS.

    Microsoft's self-destructiveness does not mean that the user should be self-destructive. There is no need to apologize for using Microsoft software. The correct solution to abuse is persuading the abuser to stop being abusive. Once I posted to a Slashdot story a link to an article on a web site of mine. By far the majority of visitors from the Slashdot story used Microsoft operating systems. Rather than feel embarrassed because Microsoft is abusive, action needs to be taken to prevent the abuse. If you are against Microsoft abuse, you are not against Microsoft; you are more pro-Microsoft than Bill Gates.

    These Microsoft policies mean that any government which wants to be independent of the United States government, and any government which represents itself as controlled by the people, cannot use Microsoft operating systems, or other Microsoft proprietary systems.

    Corrections and additions to this comment will be posted at http://hevanet.com/peace/microsoft.htm
  5. Re:Security Patches by codewolf · · Score: 4, Interesting · on MS Palladium Patent

    Actually, take a look at this article. Microsoft is attempting to sneak in as much control of your computer as possible.

  6. overstating performance by g4dget · · Score: 2 · on Xserve Outperforms Sun, SGI, Windows
    The accepted standard for CPU benchmarks are the SPEC benchmarks. They aren't perfect either (no benchmark ever is), but they are well understood, reproducible, and published.

    Apple is notably absent from SPEC's list--they never submitted results.

    However, third parties have run the SPEC benchmarks. A 1GHz G4 seems to perform about as well as a 1GHz Pentium III: decent but not overwhelming. See also this Register article.

    Apple should move to the G5 quickly. Or, perhaps, Apple should even switch to some 64bit Intel or AMD processor--Motorola is likely going to keep remaining behind the curve a bit.

  7. Re:Inability to install linux by buzzdecafe · · Score: 1 · on Coursey on Palladium

    I recommend you read the column on the Reg about this. In short, the point of Palladium is DRM. This means the crypto-chip will scan software to see if it is approved to run on this machine. (Who authorizes? Guess who.) So, it is possible that GPL software could get authorization to run on this platform, but if modifications are made, and then it is recompiled (the whole point of GPL, no?) the new binaries *will not* be authorized. Check the Reg column; they did a better version of explaining the implications then I just did.

  8. Two questions by sam31415 · · Score: 1 · on Microsoft Media Player "Security Patch" Changes EULA Big Time
    1) Is there an easy way to completely uninstall Windows Media Player from XP? I recall there being a simple method to uninstall Messenger through rundll32, would a like method work here?

    2) Is there a decent, free alternative for Windoze that people here would recommend for video files?

  9. Spam to be banned in Europe anyway by Gerald_Hlasgow · · Score: 1 · on UK Parliament to ban DoS Attacks

    A number of people have mused whether this bill could be applied to spam, this would seem to be a moot point as according to the register The European Parliament has voted to ban the sending of unsolicited commercial email.

  10. Bad track record by goldorak_dan · · Score: 1 · on The Ideas Behind Longhorn

    Can't even automate user registration for hotmail. (Reg)

  11. Re:Other IBMers existed too by oPless · · Score: 1 · on IBM Kernel Hackers Respond

    or even Here or Here

    Hint: If you're intent on being a Karma Whore, try harder :-)

  12. Why isn't IE in Software Update? by mactari · · Score: 3, Interesting · on MSIE 5.2 for Mac OS X Released

    Whoa!! I'm pretty sure the IE 5.1 update showed up when I ran the Software Update utility in OS X. Wonder why 5.2 isn't showing up and is a download on the Mactopia website instead. Wonder if it has any connection with the iBrowser rumor that's been going around.

    I didn't believe the rumors at first, and probably still don't, but this is a weird break from tradition here.

  13. Re:is this a suprise? by kontos · · Score: 1 · on LindowsOS Softens Microsoft-Compatibility Claim

    M$ is already trying that, and losing.

  14. Fibre Channel industry by levendis · · Score: 2 · on Technology Sectors that are Hot or Heating Up Now?

    I'm suprised no one mentioned yet... but the Fibre Channel industry is one of the few segments of the computer industry that is actually growing these days. (see here). Storage in general will probably grow (or at least not significantly decline) for a long, long time. A quick search on Monster shows a lot of jobs out there.

  15. iBrowse by Galahad2 · · Score: 1 · on Andreessen on the Browser Wars

    Realistically, the only way Mozilla is going to have a significant impact on the average user is if a major company injects it into an already established user base. For example, AOL shipping a Mozilla browser with their next version instead of Internet Explorer. Or Apple taking Chimera over and making their own browser -- "iBrowse"? It's been speculated before.

  16. Available in January? by The+Rolling+Blackout · · Score: 3, Informative · on 17" and 19" inch iMacs Coming in 3Q
    According to this, [the register US] the idea is to start manufacturing in Q3 so that there's inventory available for a launch around New Year's. Which implies no speed bumps in store for the internals (800 Mhz, the current top speed, is going to sound pretty pokey by then) and very little chance of a significant price drop beforehand.

    This may be extrapolating a bit much from one little tidbit, but whatever. I think Apple is setting themselves up to completely miss the price point for the market, after they came so, so close with the OG iMac.

  17. On the Register they call them "Widscreen iMacs". by thedanceman · · Score: 1 · on 17" and 19" inch iMacs Coming in 3Q

    Widescreen iMacs set for Q3 - report

  18. SonyEricsson P800 is much better by Serff · · Score: 1 · on Nokia 9290 Finally Available in the US
    First off, The Register posted this story yesterday. They have a lot of links to other phones out there as well.

    I would like to point out the SonyEricsson P800 though (look in the products->coming soon). It is another phone running the Symbian OS, but a newer version. It will use the new UIQ interface, so it will have a touch screen and a stylus! It is also smaller than the 9290. It supports GPRS, and bluetooth as well. Oh ya, it has a digital camera built in too...:) It "should" be around $600-700 as well. It is also a world phone. Too bad it isn't coming out till this fall (probably later this year I'm guessing though).

    One thing I would like to know about the 9290: Does it support Mac OS X? I don't know if the P800 will yet either. SonyEricsson said they won't know till later if the P800 will.

    Another phone that has been on slashdot is the HipTop over a Danger This phone should be out really soon. They told me end of May begining of June...but that is now. So we will see...:)

    Hope that is some intresting news for everyone! If anyone has any power at sonyericsson, I would LOVE to test a P800...:)

    serff

  19. Internet is not a paper by mpawlo · · Score: 3, Insightful · on A Libel Suit May Establish E-Jurisdiction

    Liability for publishers is a very hard issue to deal with. The publisher of the leading Swedish daily Aftonbladet was held accountable for hate speech published in one of its forums. I wrote a short comment on the case published by The Register on the caveats in running an online forum: 'If the media companies and their publishers are held accountable for everything published in their web forums we will soon face an Internet where the possibility of a widened debate has been seriously damaged by law. Let us grasp the uniqueness of the Internet before it is gone. The Internet is not a paper.'

    Regards

    Mikael

  20. Register Article is More Interesting by donnacha · · Score: 5, Informative · on XP Service Pack Does the Impossible


    Don't know why /. chose to use the Cnet story to highlight this subject, there's a more interesting article over at The Reg.

  21. Register Article is More Interesting by donnacha · · Score: 5, Informative · on XP Service Pack Does the Impossible


    Don't know why /. chose to use the Cnet story to highlight this subject, there's a more interesting article over at The Reg.

  22. Re:'Merican mirror by yatest5 · · Score: 2, Informative · on Why The X-Box Network Will Fail

    Just in case The Register [register.co.uk] gets slashdotted, there's an american version of the site called The USA Register [theregus.com] with the story here [slashdot.org]

    Or maybe you meant here

  23. 'Merican mirror by hswoolve · · Score: 1 · on Why The X-Box Network Will Fail

    Just in case The Register gets slashdotted, there's an american version of the site called The USA Register with the story here

  24. Asians left out in the cold by alanjstr · · Score: 2, Redundant · on Sometimes, Microsoft is Right...

    Unfortunately, this leaves Asian character set as URLs out in the cold. The Register talks about how RealNames allowed for Internationalized Domain Names, something not currently supported otherwise. The "Internet Engineering Task Force group working on a technical standard for addressing non-ASCII IDNs in the DNS" is doing just that, working. Its not set yet. So don't just slam RealNames for the ASCII keywords.

  25. Document, document, document. by rodionpunk · · Score: 1 · on Disconnecting
    I haven't really had any problems with cancelling Internet service, even with Prodigy. Prodigy allowed me to cancel right through their prodigy.net private net! All handled via email and their web services.


    I even got a local ISP to cancel my service, even though I didn't remember my password, or my credit card number, and my credit card number had changed. Isn't it weird how when your credit card number changes, the billing for the ISP keeps on getting through? Amazing.


    I *have* had similar experiences, though, and can tell you that documentation is your friend. In fact, any time you call customer service, document everything you can. The time, the date, who you talked to, what transpired on the call -- everything, because you may need to send it all back, be it to a supervisor or in a lawsuit (or threat thereof). It's amazing how much more leverage you have when you can say, "Look, I've documented ten different calls here, and gotten this level of support here, here, and here." When you document, they know you mean business. *heh*


    Plus, credit cards are usually your friends here. Credit card companies will do *a lot* of work to ensure that you aren't being fraudulently billed. Good documentation plus a frank phone call with your credit card company if you don't get satisfaction will bring it all together.


    One final thought -- people who liked this are sure to enjoy
    BOFH Episode 26 -- The Bastard Gets Taste Of Own Medicine. Enjoy!

  26. Re:DIE FUCKWAVE SLASH, DIE ! by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1 · on Freaky Flash 6 Fishy Features

    > What part of it defaults to off don't you understand?

    I do understand that a lot of people use Microsoft Windows, where "defaults to off" doesn't mean anything.
    - What about the supposedly safe javascript that allowed NIMDA to download itself and infect IE users who browsed infected webpages ?
    - What about the viruses that auto execute on Outhouse Excuse when you *MERELY OPEN THE EMAIL* ? Remember when "Good Times Virus" was merely a sick joke aimed a clueless AOL-ers ?
    - What about this Register article showing how IE and Outlook can be forced to execute any random program with the appropriate HTML (webpage or HTML-email). And this works *EVEN WITH ACTIVE-X, JAVASCRIPT, AND JAVA TURNED OFF* !!!

    > This means that you have to consciously go in and turn it on.

    It only means that some skript-kiddie has to exploit a security hole in Windows. "Trustworthy Computing"... Trust me... Windows *WILL* get hosed on this eventually.

  27. Re:Dirty Tactics by kawika · · Score: 2 · on States Drop Planned Presentation of Modular Windows

    I agree, dirty tactics--on the part of the states. The Register actually posted some of the record from the trial. The states sprung this on both MS and the judge despite their expert working on it for at least two months. They delivered 67 CD-ROMS and 10 different builds of XP Embedded to MS as part of discovery. Don't you think it will take a few months to go through all that?

    Read the record, you'll see the judge is rightly more pissed with the states than MS about this point.

  28. Lot of vision behind this one... by sphealey · · Score: 2 · on HP/Compaq Merger Official Today
    I actually can't tell if this article from The Register is real or a paraody!

    Keep the synergy flowing! Anyone know any good replacements for HP laser printers?

    sPh

  29. Re:My case by ch-chuck · · Score: 1 · on Explaining the GPL to Non-Lawyers?

    As with most things legal: get it in writing.

    An MCSE's word isn't worth the paper it's written on, just like most everyone else. Have him submit his objections to GPL software in written form, submit a rebuttal quoting GLP terms in writing, have boss review it at leisure, or he can seek professional advice. If there's significant $$$ at stake it behooves them to purchase rationally, esp with taxpayers dollars. Plus there are reports like this finally showing up.

  30. Another Review by margaret · · Score: 5, Informative · on The Ultimate Phone/PDA?

    The register has another review that's a little more in-depth...

  31. Re:DAMN! by pennsol · · Score: 1 · on ATi's New All-In-Wonder Radeon 8500 128MB

    Sorry forgot to put in the LINK for the trade in details..;)

  32. Slashdotted by Rovaani · · Score: 1 · on End Of the Road for Duron

    But just use TheRegUs instead.

  33. Re:Check out this bullshit by elfkicker · · Score: 4, Funny · on Slashback: Deception, Fusion, Membership

    The best part is, that after the mad dash to change from a BSD/Apache setup over to IIS is that they are still running a MySQL backend.

    This is about as embarrassing as the time I accidentally mixed up my boss's 12 year-old son's site with shemalesonline.com

  34. Coverage at the reg by hashhead · · Score: 1 · on Warwick Gets a Few More Wires
    The story is also available in slight more irreverent style here at the The Register.

    In related news, a Candadian cyborg has fallen prey to stricter airline security checks...

  35. Coverage at the reg by hashhead · · Score: 1 · on Warwick Gets a Few More Wires
    The story is also available in slight more irreverent style here at the The Register.

    In related news, a Candadian cyborg has fallen prey to stricter airline security checks...

  36. Coverage at the reg by hashhead · · Score: 1 · on Warwick Gets a Few More Wires
    The story is also available in slight more irreverent style here at the The Register.

    In related news, a Candadian cyborg has fallen prey to stricter airline security checks...

  37. AMD in Xbox 2 by tbreffni · · Score: 5, Informative · on Upside interviews Jerry Sanders of AMD

    According to The Register, Microsoft is designing the new Xbox 2 around an AMD processor. It seems that Microsoft is trying it's best to help AMD against Intel, as the interview with Jerry mentions Microsoft helping AMD out with their 64bit Processor. Any thoughts on this?

  38. Oh, but Hollings will protect him! by One+grumpy+old+UNIX · · Score: 1 · on Greene's Grammy Speech Debunked
    As long as good ol' Fritz the lapdog is around, it doesn't matter what the truth is. The music industry is in a panic as they begin to lose their grip on the creations of others.

    http://www.theregus.com/content/54/24195.html

    Of course, if Hollings gets his way, we'll be forced to pay every time we whistle a tune...

  39. Karma Whoring by Tomcow2000 · · Score: 1 · on Network Associates Gives Up Search for PGP Buyer

    More info at The Register. This one is better, if only for the reference to Ashcroft and a "lucrative surveillance state."

  40. Re:This article is a perfect example... by talks_to_birds · · Score: 2 · on Captain Crunch's New Boxes, Part II
    Yeah. I read this, there, on Wednesday.

    Seriously: check out the Reg® at http://www.theregister.co.uk/

    It's an excellent news source, with a British/European focus, it's extremely well-written, and covers a lot of stuff that most of the people who read *^H (oops: not supposed to do that ;-) this place would probably find interesting.

    If conservation of bandwidth is your gig, check out the USA version at http://www.theregus.com/

    It's a little different in content (less British focus..) so I personally find it a little less interesting..

    t_t_b

  41. Re:Websites? by hether · · Score: 2 · on SSSCA Hearing

    Here are a few:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/01/technology/01DIG I.html?todaysheadlines

    http://www.senate.gov/~commerce/press/107-159.html

    http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/174828.html

    http://news.com.com/2100-1023-847229.html

    http://www.theregus.com/content/54/24195.html

    Hope you weren't being sarcastic.

  42. Another media report on the hearing by otmar · · Score: 1 · on SSSCA Hearing
    The Register gets it right once again. Read their take of the hearing.

    /ol

  43. Re:Whoa there just a second by McSpew · · Score: 3, Informative · on Intel To Drop RAMBUS In Favor of DDR RAM

    As the Register points out in their discussion of the story, this change only applies to the Placer and Granite Bay chipsets being developed for single- or dual-processor Xeon workstations. The existing RDRAM-based chipsets (the 850 and 860) will be refreshed with support for the 533MHz FSB but will otherwise remain unchanged.