Slashdot Mirror
Competitors Cry Foul At Windows XP, 2K Service Packs
caudron writes "According to an article at ZDNet, a trade group partly funded, not surprisingly, by Microsoft's competitors is claiming that WinXP SP1 and Win2k SP3 contain 6 separate violations of both the letter and spirit of the proposed DOJ Settlement. Equally unsurprising, Microsoft disagrees with them. And so the Case-That-Wouldn't-Die drags ever onward."
But it's not a settlement yet - Microsoft cannot be held accountable for violating rules that don't yet exist.
Cheers,
Ian
How long do you think this case will last? Honestly, I think that the longer it takes the more solid a position Microsoft is going to wedge itself into, until it's all but impossible to dig them out.
In a world where technology advances at the rate that it does today, drawn out court cases make decisions far after the point at which the subject of the decision is obsolete.
The Register covered it this morning, here.
In Soviet Russia, Jesus asks: "What Would You Do?"
The Registers article gives a bit more information, including links to the ProComp PDF document about the issues (ProComp being the "Sun/Oracle lobby group")
Microsoft has just released the second service pack for Windows XP, and it contains fixes for all the complaints. In effort to address problems about security andstability, the new service pack also installs the Linux kernel in place of the NT kernel. To allow users fix other problems themself, all Windows source code will be placed in C:\Windows\Source Code
I found this charge to be very interesting:
The .Net runtime does not even come included with Windows XP and Windows 2000. Why would they need to include an option to disable the .Net runtime, if it's required that the user of the OS to have downloaded and installed it?
Forget the whales - save the babies.
"Service Pack 1 for Windows XP itself is not readily accessible to consumers, and thus the mechanism purportedly settling the antitrust case is, by definition, not readily accessible," ProComp wrote in the letter.
Whilst the point about non-IE browsers not being able to access the site is valid, the fact it takes 5.5 hours over a modem is not. It's not Microsofts fault people are using a 56k modem or that it's not under 50k! I'm unsure about the $9.99 for a CD point myself - the proposed settlement didn't mention anything about them having to forcibly give it to anyone and this price is no different to their usual practises.
The third violation, ProComp charges, is that the middleware control is not intuitive and comes with no Help file for understanding how to use it.
So? It does what it's supposed to do. Do you really think they're going to spend money on making it all nice and pretty when end users aren't going to even touch it? They provided the tool and it does the job it says it does - so what if there is no help file?
In the fifth alleged violation, ProComp said the updated Windows XP's My Music folder called up Internet Explorer for online shopping, even after the group had selected Netscape as the default browser and had hidden access to IE.
Call me skeptical, but this could just be an oversight. We all know that Microsofts testing is, ahem, a little erratic. It might not be though, but lets not jump to conclusions.
It is still worth pointing out that this is a proposed settlement. Microsoft haven't actually signed anything yet.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
...ok I am as anti MS as the next guy in most cases, but these allegations are just plain whining...
.NET is a set of runtimes, you can't diable it, anything they is compiled with VS.NET will not work if you diabled it, and in the near future of new product releases thats going to be nearly every windows application and game....
First of all the control does just what it should and hides(I don't remember a situlation to disable) those componets...
Second its meant for OEM's to use not really the end user...(Again was the spirt of the request, for OEM s to do the hiding)
Third, when using MS componets they usually need other componets its unfair for this to be changed...However I think MS should be forced to open the APIs to have others products fill those roles...
Finally
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
I'd prefer it if they were to "Cry 'Havoc'! and let slip the dogs of war"
First, they claim that it's hard to get. Jesus Christ, it's in a service pack. That's how MS has *ALWAYS* distributed their software. Now, with automatic update, it'll even come over automatically. And the whole download doesn't have to be done in one sitting either.
Secondly, it doesn't provide Start Menu access? Well, I'm looking at a big icon for it right now, not even in the "Programs" section. They must have blind software testers working for them.
Thirdly, they claim that it's hard to use. I understand usability. Really, I do. But THIS being hard to use? A fucking 10 year old could use it.
This "ProComp" group, whoever they are, certainly are fucking clueless. ZDNet even reporting this garbage is really, really irresponsible. Crackpots send letters to the gov't all of the time. Even worse, this isn't just some random crackpot, this is a fake group created by some of MS competitors.
This article is complete garbage.
No user should be without the handy-dandy Linux boot disk for Administrator Password recovery: http://home.eunet.no/~pnordahl/ntpasswd
Sig? What's a Sig?
The group's allegation regarding a sixth violation rapped Microsoft for failing to include in the middleware control an option to disable Microsoft's .Net Framework Common Language Runtime, an alternative to Sun's Java Virtual Machine.
ka-BOOOOM!! There's goes the group's credibility (if they ever had any). First of all, .NET is NOT an alternative to Sun's JVM. .NET is an application environment, period. It's a different product. Second, what the hell does .NET have to do with ANY of these issues? Answer: Nothing.
Yes, clearly there should be options to disable the standard Windows GUI APIs as well.
Sun is so f'ing stupid. Everytime they try and pull bullshit like this, they just increase the sympathy for Microsoft. I can't wait until Sun goes under and that smirk is finally wiped off McNealy's face.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
If *you* can do *your* work *without* Microsoft Windows, then none of this stupidity about their service packs, EULAs, etc, etc, needs to bother you.
On the other hand, if Microsoft continues to expand its monopolies into new parts of the computer industry, that may jeopardize *my* ability to do *my* work *without* Microsoft Windows. For instance, if the CBDTPA (or whatever Hollings is calling it this week) passes, requiring all computers to have a digital restrictions management operating system (which, incidentally, M$ has a patent on), M$ will have a federally sponsored monopoly on computer operating systems. Moving out of the United States has its own drawbacks.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I am sure M$ will do whatever they can to make this obscure, but the features added are being added more for the OEM's than for the home user.
So erm, weren't you upset about not being able to use three of those four CPUs in OpenBSD, being as it doesn't yet support SMP, except in an under-development CVS branch?
Hate implies ignorance. Most of the people and companies (not to mention consumer groups, state legislatures, etc.) complaining about Microsoft's predatory and illegal business practices are VERY well informed as to the legality of Microsoft's actions and the degree to which these actions affect the public.
I'd say this is just another case of the chickens coming home to roost, and not a blind case of bashing.
-- lk t lv ll th vwls t f wrds. T svs lts f tm t wrt bt ts pn n th ss t rd nd mks m lk lk cmplt dpsht.
microsoft will just defend their actions saying it is "vital to the core operation of
the operating system" or some such nonsense.
So, strong local security is a problem how?
Your post was made especially funny by the fact that SÉVICE as you wrote it is a French word that the HarperCollins dictionary translates as (physical) cruelty, ill treatment .
Sounds about right...
...My impression of the Service Pack's "Set Program Access and Defaults" was that it offered an easy, centralized way for users to make MS products their defaults. Your choices for each item (Browser, email, ect) are something like
... A single place to change to ALL MS. The "Non MS" button would only work if you have 3rd party programs already installed, right? So if you choose it and things get fucked-up, you'd probably want to revert to "MS." The "Custom" option is the Advanced one, and it includes a check box "Enable Access to this Program " which seems to mean that even though you're disabling IE, you have to take an additional, criptic step to really disable it.
Use Internet Explorer
or
Use Your Current 3rd Party browser
The easy, inviting option is the MS ones. The use of "Your Current 3rd Party Brower" instead of "Mozilla" or "Opera" or whatever is detected, lends an air of complexity. The 3rd Party choices aren't laid out, but the MS choice always is.
But before you can choose your specific programs, you need to first choose whether you want to use "MS Windows" "Non MS" or "Custom"
Compared to the process of, say, the "File Types" config, where you choose a program for any file-type, this interface privilages the MS products. But of course, setting a File Type no longer means that a certain program becomes the default...
Microsoft for YEARS now has made a habit of misleading business practices and ignoring the concerns of consumers (and even industry groups). They're forced competitors out of the market, they try to make everyone adapt to their standards, and we're supposed to be SURPRISED that they're already violating the proposed settlement???
Reality time folks: either it's going to take a forcible settlement that makes MS a non-issue or we're going to just have to learn to live with them as they already are. They have way too many people who do nothing but sit around to find loopholes. Then they have a large number of marketing/PR types that make using those loopholes look like desireable features (or at least like they weren't INTENTIONAL slights of law or agreements...).
Not to mention that XP Professional only supports two processors.
But THIS being hard to use? A fucking 10 year old could use it.
Usually, the ten-year-olds are the only ones in the family who can use it.
I'm crying foul too. My warez copy won't install the service pack. Note to Microsoft lawyers: this is a joke. I run Linux.
Conversion Rate Optimisation French / English consultant
I couldn't resist.
But complaining about download times? Christ, that's low.
The service pack is large. Live with it. It's no different than downloading 20-30 megs of RPMs for a system-wide update.
I strongly dislike M$ practices, but I find that these accusations are nitpicking that makes these "ProComp" people look like whiners. Throughout this case people have focused on the smaller aspects of the case (The stupid browser war) while barely touching on more major aspects (The M$ tax on PCs even if I don't *WANT* Windows on them.)
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
I don't see how including runtime libraries for something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from Java (i.e. what is stopping you from using Java?!?) is extending your monopoly.
This is without any service pack installed.
The tool that Microsoft are distributing is very similar to what OS X includes, where you can choose your default browser, email client etc from a menu. It doesn't pick up every possible option automatically either (I imagine those apps have to register themselves with the system to say they are web browsers). It's hardly a big deal. I thought it was pretty straightforward too, so they're really just moaning for the sake of moaning.
Frankly I just wish these companies would just stop bitching all the time and just produce something better for us all to use. If they spent half as much time and effort on revolutionising computer software and hardware as they did writing reports to get at MS, I figure I'd be coding Perl by telekinesis by now.
"As for the desktop, heck, XP didn't even come with IE on the desktop."
I seem to recall an Internet icon that was tied to IE6 and alot of bragging about IE6 during the install process..maybe my machine is different.
McDonalds' employee: Welcome to McDonalds, may I take your order you please?
Bill Gates: A big mac please.
McDonalds' employee: A big mac, a coke. $2.99.
Bill Gates: Sorry, I ordered just a big mac.
McDonalds' employee: The coke is part of the meal.
Bill Gates: I don't want the coke, just the Big Mac please.
McDonalds' employee: The coke is free and is part of the meal.
Bill Gates: Until recently the Big Mac was priced at $1.99?
McDonalds' employee: But now the Big Mac has new features. It is bundled with a coke.
Bill Gates: But I already have something to drink so I don't want the coke.
McDonalds' employee: Then you won't get a Big Mac.
Bill Gates: I will take just the Big Mac and pay $1.99, ok?
McDonalds' employee: You can't separate the parts of the meal. They are seamlessly integrated and it would destroy the Big Mac if we seperated them.
Why does Microsoft need a separate control panel to do the same thing? Why can't they just put shortcuts (aliases/soft links) to the programs on the desktop so you can just delete them?
Also, it's too bad they can't make the fix smaller than 30,000,000 bytes, too ... I thought all those DLL's allowed you to not rewrite the whole OS every time you wanted to put up a couple radio buttons, but I guess not.
--- Jason Olshefsky
Karma: Poser (mostly affected by adding this line long after everyone else did)
You mixed up your facist dictators... An honest mistake. You should have previewed first!
Aside from this... most of Procomp's complaints are complete and utter BS. They whine that Microsoft wants to charge you 10 bucks to get the service pack on the CD, yet they also want to whine about how long it takes to download the minimum install of 30 megs. Then they complain that Microsoft may potentially make tens of millions of dollars on the CD distribution yet neglect to mention that you can legally download it from their own site for FREE.
Nor do they mention how Apple or other MS competitors dont even allow you to download larger OS/APplication updates for free and require that you purchase a CD (for clarification Im reffering to OS 10.1 not 10.2). They also continue to whine about how links to the Middleware control panel are not included on the Start Menu and Desktop. This is beyond stupid. Control panels BELONG IN THE DAMN CONTROL PANEL!
I can't believe the lusers editing
Oh well whatever. Im guessing we will soon see an article lamenting RedHat's decision to make Mozilla the default browser in their upcoming Redhat 8.0 release. Yeah Redhat does linux but since they actually have a head on their shoulders and actually want to make money instead of going out of business - we are supposed to hate them right?
So so so stupid...
J
I love idealists not because I am one, but because they make life bearable for pragmatists such as myself.
Sun as in java.sun.com are one of the members of the group.
.NET with its VM and bid for the enterprise not being a competitor to Java with its VM and establishment in the enterprise. Same as saying Linux isn't a competitor to Windows.
And as to
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
And that Windows Xp doesn't have a server package yet...
If the local administrator password were changed, you could log on as the network administrator without issue.
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
Comment removed based on user account deletion
SP1 for XP does NOT install .NET services. I know, we just rolled it out two days ago after some fairly exhaustive tests.
InThane
Service Pack 1 for Windows XP itself is not readily accessible to consumers, and thus the mechanism purportedly settling the antitrust case is, by definition, not readily accessible, ProComp wrote in the letter.
.Net Framework Common Language Runtime, an alternative to Sun's Java Virtual
.Net technology to carry them well into this decade and into the next. I'm sure MS will fire off a few of their own comments to the court in defense of .Net. Too much money and too much time has gone into this and I don't see Bill backing off.
Consumers have three choices for obtaining the service pack. The first is to use Windows XP's Automatic Update feature to retrieve and install a 30MB file. ProComp noted that the time for retrieval, as stated by Microsoft, would be 1.25 hours over a standard dial-up connection.
Honestly, if you're still using dial-up, then you should expect longer download times. And Microsoft does offer a CD ROM; granted $9.95 does seem a bit high for S&H.
The third violation, ProComp charges, is that the middleware control is not intuitive and comes with no Help file for understanding how to use it.
As a Technical Writer myself this does bother me, but honestly it isn't something with which I would walk into Federal Court.
The fourth violation alleged by ProComp shifts to Windows 2000, which, with the release of Service Pack 3, was updated with a leaner version of the middleware control.
In the letter, ProComp emphasized that the middleware controls installed with the two service packs are substantially different. The trade group contended that the Windows 2000 version is substantially less intuitive than (the one) in Windows XP.
So, the service packs are different for different Operating Systems? That seems fair. I think between this complaint and number 2, Microsoft is guilty of not putting their creative power behind the middleware control.
In the fifth alleged violation, ProComp said the updated Windows XP's My Music folder called up Internet Explorer for online shopping, even after the group had selected Netscape as the default browser and had hidden access to IE.
Now, I am beginning to understand why ProComp included the previous not-so-important violations: To show a trend. If the above is true it is bad for Microsoft. I'm sure MS will try and explain it away as some kind of oversight or better yet a "feature" of XP to improve the user's experience. Better to just release a quick "fix" and remove this "feature" quickly.
The group's allegation regarding a sixth violation rapped Microsoft for failing to include in the middleware control an option to disable Microsoft's
Machine.
I smell a fight here. Microsoft is betting on the
Honestly, the first 4 "violations" are pretty weak. However, when grouped with the 5th there is evidence of a "trend" on the part of Microsoft to not act in good faith.
What will be the outcome? I don't really believe the Justice Department wants to re-open this case, especially with all of the juicy "terrorist" cases just waiting to be tried. And let's be honest, case against Microsoft is not going to get a federal prosecutor TV time, but case against terrorists will get a federal prosecutor a lot of TV face time.
Service packs are special.
No operating system gets such big updates
with so little control by the user.
Try updating just part of Windows?
Impossible...
Windows is special.
No other operating system needs such frequent patches
because of security issues.
I can choose which new packages hit my Linux box.
With Windows it's take it or leave it.
And security issues mean I have to take it.
Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
.Net has no business being in a service pack anyway. It should of been a distinct download to start with. Maybe they should change the name from Service Pack to Install-anything-we-want-on-your-system-and-oh-ya- we-might-fix-a-couple-of-bugs-too Pack. Anything else is complete dribble on the topic.
.NET, they should be bundling a recent Java (1.4) with the service pack as well.
Yet another example of how microsoft use's their bundling power and illegal monopoly to push THEIR software to users. Case in point, if they're bundling
This moves proves two things. One, the agreement is far too weak. Two, Microsoft will do anything to avoid having to compete. Clearly their intent is to maintain their illegal monopoly using any back door and cracked window they can find.
Ya, ya, ya...I'm well aware of the fact that the agreement is currently not binding. That doesn't change the fact that MS has stated they intend to comply with it. Clearly that's not true.
The group's allegation regarding a sixth violation rapped Microsoft for failing to include in the middleware control an option to disable Microsoft's
Most of these issues are rather nitpicky and pointless. The only thing that's going to put microsoft in check is to eliminate the rules they attach to OEM versions of their software. Having the ability to received a Dell pre-installed to dual-boot windows and linux would be a big improvement.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
(* The rest of the partition that this MS Word document is located on has been formated! *)
HallmarkOrnaments.Com
Comment removed based on user account deletion
We have a Dell Poweredge 2450 server including RAID 5 disks, running Win2K & SQL Server. We discovered mysterious anomolies (Control Panel not working and some other wacky stuff). Microsoft support recommends a full restore from tape. OK, we have tapes, let's go. We attempt to boot from CD and we know we need to supply a driver disk for the RAID card. Each time we attempt to boot, things look okay for a while and then BAM! cryptic register dump -- game over. This goes on for THREE DAYS of fumbing & bumbling. My sysadmin is a very knowledgable MCSE, not some newbie who uses the CD-ROM as a cupholder. Microsoft support was puzzled, so was Dell. Eventually, the Dell folks determine that we were given the wrong driver disk for our Dell RAID controller. Evidently our RAID controller had newer firmware than our driver disk (not that Win2K told us anything useful at boot time to suggest this). We download a new driver, and the restore eventually works. This series of events started out as a standard Microsoft response (reinstall the OS) to a standard Microsoft problem (anomolies with no useful clues in the event log). Dell gets some of the blame, but we expect the OS to either boot up or tell us why not.
By the time we had this little crisis under control, I gave the server in question the nickname "Atta" and wrote it on the paper label we stick on the server that shows name & IP address.
In my shop we have Microsoft and Linux boxes running side by side. I am the IT manager, so if some Microsoft salesman wants to talk about how their products can improve our uptime and reduce support costs, they will first have to listen to the story of how one of their products motivated us to name a Microsoft server after a middle east terrorist. Then they will have to explain how our costs will decline by paying for licenses/support/upgrades, and how our uptime will improve as we respond to mysterious anomolies by doing full restores on servers that can't even boot properly from CD/floppy.
Years ago, I worked at a DEC shop. Everything was damn expensive, but it was rock-solid. When things didn't work, we saw messages and error log entries that provided clues. DEC had tech. support that would investigate any crash dump and determine what happened. All of this was very pricey, and DEC got slaughtered by commoditized x86 hardware and Microsoft software. Sure, today's Wintel servers are cheaper and faster, but stability, recoverability, and support are worse now than 20 yrs. ago.
If someone shoots you in the foot, it doesn't always work to just quietly limp away -- even if they've done it half a dozen times before and you've got an injunction against them for it. If nothing else, it's good to make sure that other people know that, despite their claims, they haven't reformed their ways.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
Although Microsoft released the technology long after signing the proposed settlement, the Common Language Runtime meets the standard set by the agreement for determining what future middleware products would be covered by the deal, ProComp said.
.NET is a new middleware component according to the definitions of the proposed settlement. All new middleware components would need to be included in this control. Say Borland creates a better .NET VM and I wanted to use that one instead of MS's?
.NET isn't Java (after all, Java is much more mature), but it is a middleware component.
See?
So, yes,
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
I believe the issue came up when MS filed their "compliance update" with the court. At that point MS came forward with a document trying to claim that the Service Packs in question met requirements for their compliance with the proposed settlement.
This is what triggers the counterclaim/complaint from the ProComp group. The beta process for the Service Pack is to determine if there are any technical problems with it. It certainly isn't the forum for seeing if it complies with legal issues related to a proposed settlement.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
All local security should be overrideable with suitable physical access to the equipment. Period.
If the administrator password is lost, somebody with the right physical item should be able to recover it without having to pay money to the software author, or wait for somebody you don't have control over.
Don't confuse strong security with stupid security. The security doesn't do anybody any good if nobody has access.
Where do they recommend that? Must be a joke. :)
A more reasonable recommendation would be "Windows 2000 Server".
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Does windows have a reliable scripting language? I had to do a simmilar process for someone who had switched from AOL to another dial-up service on their mac. THe problem was easily solved by opening Apple Script and having it record the events nessesary to launch and activate the connection and browser. It was then a simple matter of setting the script to run when doubleclicked and replacing the script icon with the web browser icon. Deavtivation was another script except with a modfed icon (I love ResEdit). Is a simmilar feat possible under windows? If so where, I would love to have a scripting program on this sucker.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
What the hell is Palladium, if not a mandatory DRM mechanism? Do you seriously believe that MSFT and Intel care one bit about privacy? Palladium was designed with the ??AA in mind. I think M$ wants a slice of the licence fees every private citizen will have to pay, for every piece of data which flows through the Palladium chip.
Everything about 'Set Program Access and Defaults' says consumers are unwelcome here," the developer said. "It's a barren place, compared to the rest of Windows XP, bereft of simple instructions or extended Help......
.....The trade group contended that the Windows 2000 version "is substantially less intuitive than (the one) in Windows XP
i have sp3 on win2k and i just took a look at the "set program access and defaults" which is so conveniently located on my start menu. (almost annoyingly convenient since i won't use it very often- if ever) Well, it was so easy to use that I can't even imagine what the help doc might say, perhaps something like this: if you want to use you current web browser instead of internet explorer, then select the choice for "use your current web browser", or if you would prefer to use internet explorer as your web browser, then select "use internet explorer". IMAO, if you need a help file to use this tool, then you have no business ever logging in to your machine as Administrator, which is what you need to be in order to use it (and rightly so).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Why did this get modded up? It's an obvious troll.
First of all, Sun is not an illegal monopoly. Second of all, you're an idiot if you think glibc somehow relates to microsoft bundling a completely unrelated framework and programming language runtime into what is supposed to be a serious of updates for minor application features and mostly bug fixes. You're example is the same thing as saying, no one should be allowed to ever run any application on their OS. Which of course, makes no sense. Which, of course, means people wasted tons of mod points on your post.
Your post is not only illogical, but a troll plain and simple.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Actually, the 'online shopping' is in Music Tasks. There's no pop-up...there easily COULD be, but right now, there isn't.
Second: of course it loads up in IE! You're already in it. Type a URL into address bar of the folder and you'll see what I mean.
Whether or not that should be the case is, of course, another story entirely. But right now, it is.
I mod down anyone who uses M$ in their posts. I like to live on the edge.
I know, IHBT, but:
Then I think Solaris shouldn't ship with Java and Linux shouldn't ship with glibc.
The CLR and JAVA are nothing like glibc, if my understanding is right..
glibc is more analogous to \%SystemRoot%\system32\msvc*.dll
S
>> They have purposely made it so IE Icon keeps reappearing when you change some of the lower level >> settings.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."
I mod down anyone who uses M$ in their posts. I like to live on the edge.
It's their product. If McDonalds decides to bundle a big Mac with a coke, they should have to right to do it. If you don't like it, go somewhere else. The same applies to Microsoft.
Remember, you don't have the right to buy any product in any configuration you want. Does McDonalds must offer a half-big Mac for $1.30 ? Or a big Mac with only 1 bun for lesser price ?
Will anyone actually try XP SP1 before complaining?
.Net CLR. You have to do that on your own, its not part of SP1.
.Net and then we whine about the opposite.
It does not install the
Funny, they include their JVM, but not
this is not a sig
Lots organizations, many funded by the government, require use of Microsoft software in order to transact with them. Other "competitors" are not substitutable for Microsoft products in these situations since it isn't a matter of individual choice. Whether or not this situation is legal behavior for either Microsoft or, hypothetically, McDonalds, doesn't change the fact that the Microsoft situation is not "OK" for the consumer.
Bill Gates: Althought their food is reasonably priced, they require that you eat it at their fancy restaurant and they charge a fortune just to sit down."
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
That's only the local admin account/password, not the domain password. If someone changes the domain admin password, and removes all admin level users from the Domain Admistrators group, then disappears, good luck getting your network running again. Although you can just build a couple of new domain controllers and use a new domain name (NT Security Domain, not anything to do with DNS-type domains, very confusing use of the word 'domain' by Microsoft), then use the parent post's method to gain access to the local admin account of all member servers, you can then link up the member servers to the new domain and be back in business. A pain in the ass, especially going thru and fixing all the services running that are running under domain accounts from the previous domain, but doable...
Actually no, the utility is the only reason I installed Real Player. In the past I have avoided real like the plague because it keeps rebinding associations to stuff it has no business doing, sticks unpleasant upgrade warning icons in the system tray and generally behaving like a complete and utter prick.
Now I know I can blast the adware and spyware infected puss from my system if I want to I will load it up.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Wrong. When compiling VC programs in VS.NET, IIRC, it does NOT use the msvc*.* dlls; instead it uses the .NET runtime modules. Just like Visual Basic programs can't run without the vbrun*.*, vb6*.* etc runtimes (they change names like every week), .NET apps can't run without the .NET runtimes. The only difference is that the application is now dependent on one set of runtime libraries, instead of individual ones for VC, VB, C#.
I think that everyone on slashdot is confused. The .NET runtimes are NOT the .NET passport. They are two fundamentally different things, unfortunately that have the same name.
This is like saying that "the Visual Basic runtimes are not an essential component of Windows." That is a true statement, but what harm is there in having the runtime libraries already on there?!? None, it's just a conveinence. Do you think Joe Smith is going to fetch the runtime modules just so he can run XYZ app (mind you Joe knows nothing about computers, let along runtime libraries)? No, he just expects it to work.
Something the PHBs should be aware of. /. rabble on the same side?
PHBs and
Seriously, would you people PLEASE just do a little research before shooting your mouth off. YOU DON'T NEED IE TO GET THE SERVICE PACKS!. Open this link: http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/SP /SP1/WXP/EN-US/xpsp1_en_x86.exe in any browser, Mozilla works nicely. It will proceed to send you XP SP 1. Hell, it'll even send it to you if you're on a Linux box, it doesn't care (it doesn't check). What requires IE is Windows Update, because it uses ActiveX controls that only IE supports. But you don't have to use Windows update, if you take 30 seconds to just look at the site and follow the links, you can find the raw file available for download. Same for Windows 2k SP3.
= /library/en-us/shellcc/platform/shell/programmersg uide/shell_adv/registeringapps.asp Again, it is not MS's fault if you are too lazy to look up the documentation they make available to you.
You are also full of crap about the new middleware control tool. It is documented on their site as well. Follow this link: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url
Next time don't be so quick to get all worked up and bach out an anti-MS resonse, and take some time to check your facts.
Didn't Microsoft do exactly that already (around when they first started seriously making an effort in the browser war)?:
-Giving away IE
-Licensing Windows to OEMs at a certain unit price
-Licensing Windows to OEMs at a lower price if they included IE
I stand by what I said.
So what is the "proper" way to register a program? Why is it that you need such a complicated "registry" to begin with? Oh, I see! By adding un needed complexity you can stifle your competitors and rape your users. No thanks, I like things that work better than that and I'm not going to waste my time learning the M$ way d'jour.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.