Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Investigates Windows 7 "Black Screen of Death"

duguk writes "Microsoft has confirmed that it is investigating a problem described as the 'black screen of death,' which affects Windows 7 — and reports suggest it affects Vista and XP, too. The firm said it was looking into reports that suggest its latest security update, released on Tuesday 25 November, caused the problem. The error means that users of Windows 7 and earlier operating systems see a totally black screen after logging on to the system." Update: 12/01 22:35 GMT by KD : Microsoft now says that its November Windows updates are not causing the BlackSOD: "The company has found those reports to be inaccurate and our comprehensive investigation has shown that none of the recently released updates are related to the behavior described in the reports."

351 comments

  1. Problem Solved! by bravo_2_0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Turns out it was just affecting a bunch of old people who kept forgetting to turn their monitors on.

    --
    I AM A SEXY SHOELESS GOD OF WAR!!!
    1. Re:Problem Solved! by Cassini2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Turns out it was just affecting a bunch of old people who kept forgetting to turn their monitors on.

      I just put a painting in front of the monitor, and then take it away before my kids come over. They think it is so cool I'm into computers.

    2. Re:Problem Solved! by Anonymous+Monkey · · Score: 2, Funny

      Your UID is way too high for you to be an old person. If you had a two or three digit number you might be old.

      --
      We are the Borg...
    3. Re:Problem Solved! by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Monitor? Us old people don't have monitors. We bang away at our teletypes! What in the hell do you think TTY stands for? You kids and your newfangled 'monitors'. Now get off of my lawn!

    4. Re:Problem Solved! by Taibhsear · · Score: 5, Funny

      Had a secretary at my first job with a similar problem. Reasons for "The computer is broken!":
      1.) forgot to turn monitor on.
      2.) didn't press power button on desktop
      3.) kicked monitor plug near the power strip pulling it out of back of monitor.
      4.) stepping on power strip rocker switch.
      5.) somehow put the entire OS in dutch.

    5. Re:Problem Solved! by cixelsyd · · Score: 5, Funny

      My lawn, get off it, whippersnapper!

      --
      Take a dollar, divide it by 100, take two and call me in the morning.
    6. Re:Problem Solved! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Lawn? In my day, we didn't have lawns. The damned dinosaurs kept ripping them up with their claws. We had to settle for volcanic plains.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    7. Re:Problem Solved! by ae1294 · · Score: 2, Funny

      We had to settle for volcanic plains.

      At least you kept warm.. In my day the temperature never got above -10 Kelvin.

    8. Re:Problem Solved! by Anonymous+Monkey · · Score: 1

      That's more like it!

      --
      We are the Borg...
    9. Re:Problem Solved! by iamapizza · · Score: 1

      Volcanic plains? You were lucky. In my day, we were thankful if we could find floating rocks on the surface of this newly forming planet.

      --
      Always proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
    10. Re:Problem Solved! by ae1294 · · Score: 1

      5.) somehow put the entire OS in dutch.

      Wait... so the secretary was willing to pay for half the OS? That doesn't sound bad at all...

    11. Re:Problem Solved! by Barryke · · Score: 1

      Turns out it was just affecting a bunch of old people who kept forgetting to turn their monitors on.

      Seems like it, i hit my quota early today.

      --
      Hivemind harvest in progress..
    12. Re:Problem Solved! by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Floating rocks? Planet? Luxury! All we had was hydrogen nuclei and electrons. We couldn't shuffle across the room and touch a doorknob without shocking ourselves silly with the static electricity.

    13. Re:Problem Solved! by jbezorg · · Score: 1

      sudo -u lawn umount whippersnapper

      --
      I've lost all my marbles except one & It's fun to test angular & centripetal acceleration in my skull
    14. Re:Problem Solved! by sexconker · · Score: 5, Funny

      At least you kept warm.. In my day the temperature never got above -10 Kelvin.

      My home town nearly went to zero Kevins back in 1978.

      It was a particularly cold winter, and we were already down to 3 Kevins (due to their low popularity at the time).

      Kevin Thomas had flown out to be with his son's family for a wedding and got stuck in Boston for a whole week due to the weather. 2 Kevins left.

      Kevin Lemmer was rushed to the hospital during my shift. I still remember the call from the EMTs as the ambulance was rushing toward us. "It's Lemmer. He's in bad shape. Drove right into the fucking ditch." We called the time of death at 6:15 PM.

      At 6:16, all eyes turned to room 2217. Kevin Spencer was 82 and on his death bed with leukemia. His family being Catholic, he had already been given his last rights. If he couldn't hold out until Kevin Thomas returned, we would be at zero Kevins. Sure, we had 4 perfectly healthy Calvins, but they're just not the same.

      It was 7:15 when Carla Brooks and her husband James burst through the main entrance. "She's not due for 2 weeks!", James exclaimed. As the staff bustled around getting the Brookses settled, they exchanged darting glances with each other. This was their first child, and they wanted to keep the baby's sex a secret. Of course, in a small town, secrets don't get kept. Nearly all of the hospital staff new that the child about to rip open Mrs. Brooks was indeed a boy.

      The delivery was routine, and Kevin Brooks was born healthy, if a tad underweight, at 10:52 PM. Kevin Spencer was pronounced dead at 10:54.

      It was, as they say, a close one. Kevin Thomas arrived two days later, the weather having finally cleared up. To this day, we still rib him about it.

      Cedar Falls is currently at 5 Kevins.

    15. Re:Problem Solved! by ae1294 · · Score: 1

      Well played my arch-nemesis.. well played indeed...

    16. Re:Problem Solved! by Griim · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yay! I'm still young!

    17. Re:Problem Solved! by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      sudo umount /lawn/whipersnapper

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    18. Re:Problem Solved! by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

      Hydrogen nuclei and electrons? Ha, you spoiled youngsters! Back in *my* day, all we had were muons, quarks and neutrinos floating around in what was just barely a space-time continuum! And was it cramped! We had to walk bent over so as not to stick our heads out of the universe and muss our hair.

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    19. Re:Problem Solved! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. I'm glad I'm not the only person that has to go into work for this kind of crap. I do must of my support remotely, but at least once a week I have to drive across town just to plug in a printer. I ask on the phone "is there a green light or amber light lit on the printer?" "Yes, of course there is a green light" they respond. "Are you sure?" I ask. "Of course I am!" They say. I drive 30 minutes over to the building, plug in the printer power cable, show them what a green light looks like and drive home. Repeat weekly.

    20. Re:Problem Solved! by vegiVamp · · Score: 4, Funny

      > 5.) somehow put the entire OS in dutch.

      Perfect leesbaar, toch ?

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
    21. Re:Problem Solved! by johnw · · Score: 1

      Yay! I'm still young!

      Well, youngish...

    22. Re:Problem Solved! by omi5cron · · Score: 1

      i stand in awe!! wish i had some mod (freakin' hilarious) points for you. a tip of the hat!

    23. Re:Problem Solved! by malakai · · Score: 1

      Hey nerd... she's hitting on you.

    24. Re:Problem Solved! by Hucko · · Score: 1

      So I'm actually Popular!?!

      --
      Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
    25. Re:Problem Solved! by kregg · · Score: 4, Funny

      sudo killall whipersnapper

    26. Re:Problem Solved! by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Youngsters... Back in my day, we had NOTHING. And still don't.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    27. Re:Problem Solved! by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

      You had nothing! Ha, we shoulda been so lucky! We had *less* than nothing. We were so deep in debt that light couldn't even escape. Hell, we had to start sucking in light and reselling it to the arabs for souvenirs just to so we wouldn't go into further debt so fast.

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    28. Re:Problem Solved! by slashdotwannabe · · Score: 1

      Puhlease. You don't know how good you had it. MY neighborhood went out with some bigass BANG and nothing's been the same since...

      --
      This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
    29. Re:Problem Solved! by war4peace · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You from Dubai? :)

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    30. Re:Problem Solved! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do have a three digit number! My age~!

    31. Re:Problem Solved! by Taibhsear · · Score: 1

      I was 16, she was over 30. (Twilight wasn't out yet back then so I'm pretty sure she was just dumb.)

    32. Re:Problem Solved! by kriston · · Score: 0

      Oh, it's this old gag again.

      --

      Kriston

    33. Re:Problem Solved! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank god!

      3 Kevins is still pretty cold though. I can only imagine how hard your nipples must have gotten. :\

  2. BSOD by klwood911 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I guess they don't have to change the acronym then. Saves on Apple and Microsoft's marketing budgets next year! First Post!

    1. Re:BSOD by DeskLazer · · Score: 1

      sorry, you missed the first post. you were busy BSOD'ing.

    2. Re:BSOD by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      it's not a bug it's a feature!

      Microsoft heard all the buzz about 'skinning' apps and figured they'd one up them and skin an integral part of windoze ;-)

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    3. Re:BSOD by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      So Windows 8 will have the Beige Screen of Death, Windows 9 the Brown one, and Windows 10... well, Microsoft will change naming standards again, so from there on Windows will have codenames like Bronze, Brass, Burgundy and Bizantine (and more from this list)

    4. Re:BSOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      So Windows 8 will have the Beige Screen of Death, Windows 9 the Brown one, and Windows 10...

      It won't be Windows 10 though. Because Microsoft expects to crush all competition by that time, 'Windows' will become simply 'OS'. And because the number 10 isn't marketable enough, it will be replaced with a Roman numeral.

    5. Re:BSOD by NaughtyNimitz · · Score: 0

      You had me there! I almost fell for it.

    6. Re:BSOD by Icegryphon · · Score: 1

      I find your post humorous and wish to subscribe to your news letter.
      Cheers

    7. Re:BSOD by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Wow, even less coherent than your usual posts - I didn't think it possible.

      Anyway, OS X is much better; it has a very tasteful grey screen of death.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    8. Re:BSOD by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

      Anyway, OS X is much better; it has a very tasteful grey screen of death

      Why are you licking your monitor?
      Just out of curiosity how many calories and is it fat free?

      --
      There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
    9. Re:BSOD by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      What I don't understand is why a SECURITY update would kill my Mac. I think I'd rather have an adbot than a broken machine. The adbot is annoying, but it still lets me use my computer to access the net. Security Update 2009-005 Bricked my computer.

      :-(

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    10. Re:BSOD by linhux · · Score: 1

      Wow, you're angry. But it makes me curious - what troubleshooting options have you tried? Booting from installation media? Reset PRAM? Booting from an external hard disk? Putting the computer in Target Disk Mode and examining the logs from another computer?

    11. Re:BSOD by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      Black is the new blue

    12. Re:BSOD by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      The install disc trick didn't work, and I don't know how to do any of the other things you suggested.

      What pisses ME off is that Apple fans say, "Apple never gets screwed up like Microsoft/PC products," and yet here we are. A Mac should not become frakked-up by a simple security download. Furthermore Apple's refusal to help me (other than offer to sell me ~$200 recovery service) makes them worse than MS in my books.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  3. Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Securing windows is like pushing water uphill with a sharp stick.

    Firewall the bugger & leave it be. Works for me :-) No updates since 2003, system just stays up.

    --
    If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    1. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 3, Funny

      What the hell do you do with an unpatched box from 2003?

      Play Solitaire?

    2. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by InsaneMosquito · · Score: 1

      Not turning it on is probably safer.

    3. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Shagg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He might not do much with it, but the botnet it's on has plenty of uses.

      --
      Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
    4. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by eln · · Score: 4, Funny

      Of course your machine stays up, you have the administrators of at least 3 different botnets making sure of it!

    5. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by ClayJar · · Score: 5, Funny

      Securing windows is like pushing water uphill with a sharp stick.

      So, if I follow what you're saying, securing windows is much easier when it freezes?

    6. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Bourdain · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Mod parent up
      -----

      I only use minimal manual antivirus (mostly just with www.virustotal.com on occasional suspect files) and work behind a firewall

      I've installed the service packs after they've been out for a while, but that's really it

      the most dangerous activity -- web browsing -- is made nearly perfectly safe by using firefox + noscript

    7. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by kdogg73 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Insightful.

      --
      Let's face it, most of us are scoffers. But moments before zero hour, it does not pay to take chances.
    8. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by u38cg · · Score: 1

      Freeze it into a circle with a hole in the middle and use the stick as an axle. Kids these days...

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    9. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 0, Troll

      Glad to see someone else not following the herd..

      I use the machine for browsing th'interweb (I'm on it now) & for a spot of retro gaming, Dungeon Keeper Gold at the moment (surprisingly good)
      As I said before; it's firewalled (hardware firewall, not some soppy software *running on windows* rubbish) so is perfectly safe.

      To all of the morons mentioning botnets & stuff, your milk is warm & there's a special cookie for you if you spit out your comforter....

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    10. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by HockeyPuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let me just start by saying... You are soooo cool. You're running an Operating System from 2003. I hope you're not in IT. I can imagine you telling your management, "we're running Solaris 8/9 and have never applied any patches." I also hope you're not a developer that has made updates/fixes to your products so you can say to your customers, "How come you've never applied any of my updates? I've slaved over this code for the past seven years!"

      And since this is /., where everyone brags about their personal machine in their basement, I hope you've never run apt-get update and still run firefox 1.x/2.x (or whatever version was around in 2003).

      Or do you think that all fixes in linux/firefox are better than even service packs in winXP...

      I also hope you've never fixed your car or a leaky faucet..

      Because that would make you a hypocrite.

    11. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 1

      For you maybe. Fortunately I know what I'm doing, and have been since before you were born....

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    12. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 3, Funny

      Heh, you couldn't be more wrong if you stood on your head & farted to the tune of "When Johnny comes marching home again"

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    13. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Unless noscript has an exploit, or you run into an infected PDF, or one of those malicious jpegs that can infect you from several years ago...

    14. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 0, Troll

      You, my boy, need to examine your logic. Loop; see loop.

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    15. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by DuChamp+Fitz · · Score: 3, Funny

      Heh, you couldn't be more wrong if you stood on your head & farted to the tune of "When Johnny comes marching home again"

      Hey, don't knock it. That's how I welcomed my family on Thanksgiving.

    16. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by rainmaestro · · Score: 1

      Install Office 97 and load up the flight sim?
      Disconnect all the fans and use it as a space heater on cold nights?

      By now, though, I suspect this is the only possible outcome:
      http://xkcd.com/350/

    17. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by rainmaestro · · Score: 1

      No, no, you're looking at it all wrong. What he really means is that securing windows is much easier when you use a blunt stick. Like, say, a sledgehammer.

    18. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Bourdain · · Score: 1

      (1) If noscript has an exploit (which is unlikely to be exploited anyway given the limited target population), do you really think a windows update or real time antivirus is really going to be able to catch it faster/better?

      (2) Malicious jpegs (AFAIK) were patched 5 years ago (i.e. covered in service packs since)

    19. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by ruemere · · Score: 1

      Who knows... maybe he is not using your typical windows.

      Regards,
      Ruemere

    20. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You my lad need to understand what logic even is. You've failed to demonstrate any.

    21. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 1

      Spot on :-)

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    22. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Properly fire walling any MS OS will prevent all the external security problems in MS OS's.
      That's not a problem.

      Corporate security updates are in place to protect the system from it's USERS.

      "I also hope you've never fixed your car or a leaky faucet..

      Because that would make you a hypocrite."

      No it doesn't, however the example shows you aren't very capable of logical thinking.

      Name me on outside exploit that can't be stopped with a properly implemented firewall.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    23. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by DiegoBravo · · Score: 1

      I have a client running an invoicing application in an SCO Unix from a time where there was no Internet here (around 1990.) The server and terminals (about 20, updated some years ago to recycled Pentium I/IIs) never were connected to Internet. The application sometimes gets patched (for new functionality); the hardware gets replaced (hard disks die), but the OS is the same from the old times.

      Of course they simply don't understand why their brand new Windows PCs need all those patches, Antivirus, but eventually crash.

      Some years ago they considered their application upgrading to a new (GUI/WEB) platform... no more!

    24. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Hyppy · · Score: 1

      I hope you're not in IT. I can imagine you telling your management, "we're running Solaris 8/9 and have never applied any patches."

      I'm in IT. We run Solaris 8 and Solaris 9, both with _no_ patches. Not even the daylight savings ones, which means we have to, twice a year, reset all the clocks at 2 AM.

      Of course, that's a risk-averse PHB declaring that from on high, not the other way around.

    25. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by omgwtfroflbbqwasd · · Score: 1

      yeah, cause, you know, there aren't any client-side vulnerabilities for any Windows apps. All Windows attacks only target 135/139/445.

    26. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by causality · · Score: 1

      Glad to see someone else not following the herd.. I use the machine for browsing th'interweb (I'm on it now) & for a spot of retro gaming, Dungeon Keeper Gold at the moment (surprisingly good) As I said before; it's firewalled (hardware firewall, not some soppy software *running on windows* rubbish) so is perfectly safe. To all of the morons mentioning botnets & stuff, your milk is warm & there's a special cookie for you if you spit out your comforter....

      A modern Linux distro has several Web browsers available. I enjoy Dungeon Keeper myself (it's old but good); I run it via WINE along with a few other games like Fallout 3, Mass Effect, and Bioshock.

      There may be some debate about the merits of a modern Windows system versus those of a modern Linux system. However, I think I can safely say there is no such debate concerning a six-year-old Windows system and a modern Linux system. Considering that, the fact that Linux can be obtained as a free download (if that's not good enough, some distros will send you a free CD/DVD), and you sound like you can handle the installation of an operating system, I have this to say: the burden of proof is not on the people who wonder why you would do this. I doubt that your patronizing tone is compatible with this reality, though it's somewhat understandable since participation in a botnet is a rather severe charge that was levelled against you.

      At any rate, if there was something of value that your 2003 OS could provide that cannot be had elsewhere, your action and your defense of that action would make a lot more sense. To the rest of us it looks like you are deliberately seeking an inferior experience and actively resisting anyone who points this out. If that's your thing, that's cool, but it's a bit hard to understand.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    27. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 1


      "Failed to demonstrate any" Porquois why? I have a PC that's been up (apart from 2 utility power cuts) since 2003, it does exactly what I want it to, is definitively not part of any sodding botnet (I'd know, because I regularly tcpdump the interface it's connected to) has had no issues whatsoever with crap "patching" & probably (it's an AMD 64 with half a gig of RAM, forget the processor speed) runs better than your new, expensive, computer. It is certainly faster & more responsive than my work Dell T3400 with 4 gig of RAM & a multi-core processor.
      Now, who's demonstrating logic here then, and who is the prawn?

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    28. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by NervousWreck · · Score: 1

      I have an unpatched box from '01. It has never been on line and I use it exclusively for writing code and teaching the command line. (OK so it's free BSD not Windows) but even so... I bet I'm the only geek who can live without internet and like it.

      --
      I do not have a sig. You are hallucinating.
    29. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That'd be Windows XP. And a properly firewalled system, used thoughtfully, is pretty much as safe as anything. The problem usually isn't the software, but the user these days. Clicking on bad email attachments, surfing to the wrong sites, all while using Administrator rights...that's the problem. I haven't seen a virus be able to automatically jump from computer to computer since about 2001.

      That being said, the reason we have updates is so we can make mistakes and not pay for them with our data.

    30. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be so such an asshole. Have you ever heard of not fixing what's not broken?

      The post is to just saying his system works perfectly well for his needs without any patches.

      Almost a pointless post in this discussion, except for saying that some fixes can also break things. Just like if you change a light bulb in your house that's not broken in an annoying way, you take a slight risk of burning down the house for no benefits. That's how it is for him because the computer is secured with firewalls and stuff.

    31. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      You think a firewall is the only layer of security you need??? I hope you don't work in IT! Viruses commonly come in via email, IM, usb drive, file-sharing, and web use. Firewalls do nothing to protect from these common vectors.

      If you use Windows to do anything other than play Minesweeper, patch your shit, run a firewall, run AV, and think before you click!!

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    32. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by SomeJoel · · Score: 1

      For you maybe. Fortunately I know what I'm doing, and have been since before you were born....

      -- If I had an Ass (equus asinus), I'd call it Fanny Bottom. Then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.

      You know what they say about assumptions? What am I saying, of COURSE you know.

      --
      <Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
    33. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Tarlus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Cue the characteristic Slashdot flavor of older-than-you elitism! Oh wait, I'm too late...

      But seriously, completely irrelevant age differences aside: There's a reason why Microsoft catches flak for security holes, and also a very good reason for why they so adamantly encourage people to update their OS as often as possible. Microsoft (and certainly your full comprehension of the vulnerability of the OS) are far from infallible; their software is extremely complicated and will always present new bugs and design flaws, and this is why they take so many measures to patch their security holes. This is true of any major software developer.

      So unless your machine is not exposed to any sort of network, or unless you're running an old version of Windows that has (since 2003) had it support discontinued by Microsoft, then I argue that you don't know what you're doing.

      --
      /* No Comment */
    34. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't use apt-get, use aptitude.

    35. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 0
      Umm, I do work in "IT", have done for over 30 years, currently as a security "technician", strangely enough. Odd that my unpatched, 2003 vintage XP box, which doesn't have any AV or "Internet Security" gobshite installed, has remained completely unaffected & uninfected since it was first switched on.

      My mail server scans my mail, IM is for losers, I don't file share (if I want it I buy it) & and web use (pretty much only /. as it happens) is using Opera. Firefox can suck a fat sack!.

      patch your shit

      Seems to be the hive mind around here.
      Remember number 6: I AM NOT A NUMBER!!

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    36. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Recipe for successful Windows use:

      Take one Windows XP Professional Corporate Edition RTM SP0 ISO. Use nLite to remove Windows Update, System Restore, Windows Tour, Themes, device drivers, and anything else you won't need. Now install the resulting ISO into a VirtualBox VM with all networking disabled. Use the key that begins "FCKGW." Install VirtualBox guest additions and use VirtualBox shares only for sharing files with the host OS. Observe how it runs faster than a native install of Windows, even on a machine without hardware virtualization. In the unlikely event that you become infected by a virus, laugh as it totally fails to contact the outside world - then roll back to a known good snapshot.

    37. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 1

      Some good points, I have a number of machines on my network, mostly running Centos, I also have an FC & a Ubuntu box. I have one PC running windows, yes I can & do run WINE, I also bought Crossover & I have a VM XP installation, on my main machine, that also works for me.

      Having said all that, my 2003 windows xp box, which I use for playing old games (I am rather old!) & browsing /. is perfectly fine, and as I've mentioned elsewhere, actually more responsive than a 2009 vintage office PC. :-)

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    38. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to the botnet. Lots of malware pushes its way into the computer with no interaction whatever (unfirewalled or open ports, malware injected into websites without the webmaster's knowledge, cross-site scripting attacks, infections through chat programs, etc.) I've had kids' computers infected with malware (like Conficker) through thumbdrives. Get a real-time antivirus, keep it updated, install a free software firewall (like Comodo or ZoneAlarm), or better yet a hardware firewall, and install anti-spyware like Ad-Aware or Spybot S&D, and do a complete scan on occasion with another on-demand scanner like ClamWin. Spammers and botnets are making most of their money by infecting clowns that don't think "viruses won't get me, I don't surf warez sites."

    39. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Although I agree with your post,

      I also hope you've never fixed your car or a leaky faucet..

      That's a terrible analogy. Physical things wear out, digital things just go out of style. Your roof doesn't leak because it was defective, it leaks because of physical laws covering the materials it's made of. You have to patch an OS or program because it was poorly designed. Cars have moving parts, and not only does corrosion never sleep, friction wears things out.

    40. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, it isn't the "outside" exploits. It's all the unpatched programs and OS components that interact with data received from the net...

    41. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't want to argue with you, but I have got a windows box up, running, connected (OK by a severely restricted connection) to th'interweb, I use it daily, it genuinely hasn't been updated by mickeysoft since it was installed (It's not a knock-off copy, it was a shrink-wrap) & runs continuously, 24 hours a day.

      Your machine, by contrast, is probably as stable as a two legged cow. However it's most likely fully patched

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    42. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      People like you give IT a really, really bad name.

      Securing windows is actually not that hard since XP/SP2, but I suppose you haven't left your mother's basement since then.

    43. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Lord+Ender · · Score: 4, Funny

      Lookeee here, guys! Someone who claims to be a senior IT security "technician" who has never heard of defense in depth!

      He even thinks server-side virus-scan can catch as much malware as the client-side stuff does. Guess he's never heard of behavior-based virus detection, either? And his grand security architecture posture is simply "don't use much of the internet." There's sophistication for you.

      But then, he's extrapolated his advice based on a single poorly-measured datapoint. Who are we to question him?

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    44. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Tarlus · · Score: 1

      Your machine, by contrast, is probably as stable as a two legged cow. However it's most likely fully patched

      This statement is confusing. Care to explain?

      --
      /* No Comment */
    45. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 0, Troll

      Lookeee here guys!, a twat. And a clueless twat at that!
      Oh wait.
      I know, it's slashdot, I should just wait until kindergarten is called back in.....

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    46. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guarantee you my i7, 6GB DDR3 desktop runs MUCH faster than your single core AMD64 from 2003 (Especially for encoding video/audio or gaming). Faster than a Dell with a T4300 and XP/Vista I might believe though.

    47. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 1

      Huh? The old adage "measure twice, cut once" should be updated for the /. era: "read four times before commenting.."

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    48. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      And his grand security architecture posture is simply "don't use much of the internet."

      I learned the lesson when I built a machine to use as a DVR and hadn't patched XP beyond the built-in SP2 and had not yet installed anti-virus. I browsed to a website to check TV listings (to see if what the DVR was getting from its feed was correct) and either I typo'd the domain or else the real one was hacked to host malware, and got hit with a drive-by trojan that I couldn't get rid of, even by booting off a different OS disk.

      If somebody can keep an unpatched Windows box running with no issues, then either they don't ever browse the web or they should funnel all their luck into lottery tickets.

    49. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      What the hell do you do with an unpatched box from 2003?

      In my case: running the same software, that I was running in 2003. Nothing added, nothing removed (apart of Firefox upgrades). The only piece of MS software used there (apart from the OS) is MS Visual Studio and MSDN. No browsing with IE, no Outlook, no crapware, no antivirus just a handful of useful apps. The system is behind good firewall and NAT. Among 15 processes you spot a new one rather quickly. The usual "how do you know if you are virus free without an antivirus?" is answered by "checking the network activity on the firewall".

      As far as I can tell, it is more stable then most systems you can meet today. And it serves the purpose very well. It all comes down to your needs and skills.

    50. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Uh, it isn't the "outside" exploits. It's all the unpatched programs and OS components that interact with data received from the net...

      i.e. USERS.
      If the machine is completely firewalled and left alone, there is no data getting to the OS components (other than the firewall). That leads into the possible issue for the GP: if the firewall is implemented incorrectly such that a specially crafted packet can screw with the firewall, then you could have an issue.

    51. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by FunPika · · Score: 1

      And since this is /., where everyone brags about their personal machine in their basement, I hope you've never run apt-get update and still run firefox 1.x/2.x (or whatever version was around in 2003).

      Firefox!? It was Phoenix/Firebird back then! God I hope nobody still runs 0.x....

      --
      After years of not using a signature, I am going to make one to say the following: Fuck Beta
    52. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Enti · · Score: 1

      And improving Linux is like trying to beat the devil out of an autistic child, right?

      --
      In these days, bleeps and bloops mean something more
    53. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Seekerofknowledge · · Score: 1

      I'm with you. I don't ever update, run anti-virus, or do realtime anything. My box always runs as fast as the day I installed it. All of my anecdotal evidence tells me that 100's of layers of patched windows dll's slows the system down, even without antivirus/firewall running. The registry and file system themselves are permanently thrashed, no way around it.

      If I'm behind 3 layers of hardware firewalls, know better than to click FreePorn.jpg.exe, then I consider it a license to administer my systems however I please.

      I liken running realtime antivirus and installing constant hotfixes to getting a daily colonoscopy "just in case".

    54. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Seekerofknowledge · · Score: 1

      I would argue that original software from 2003 is Security Through Obscurity. Malware will be targeting bugs in current versions of software.

    55. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Tarlus · · Score: 1

      So you're delivering faulty logic and sidestepping the need to explain it.
      That says enough. Moving on...

      --
      /* No Comment */
    56. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I don't know about him, but I've an unpatched MSWind95 box that I use for a proprietary graphics program and a proprietary music score editing program. No new data is generated on that system, but occasionally it's important to get at old data.

      My method of securing it is not to put it on the Internet at all. Not every purpose needs an Internet connection. (When the box MUST be on the Internet, I boot it with a live-CD and plug in the Ethernet cable temporarily.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    57. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by syousef · · Score: 1

      And since this is /., where everyone brags about their personal machine in their basement, I hope you've never run apt-get update and still run firefox 1.x/2.x (or whatever version was around in 2003).

      I don't have a basement, you insensitive clod! THAT is slashdot. Badda bing! ...and firefox was at around 0.8 in Dec 2003

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mozilla_Firefox#Early_history

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    58. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell do you do with an unpatched box from 2003? Play Solitaire?

      Run a nuclear reactor. The rest are controlling the grid.

    59. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I'm in IT. We run Solaris 8 and Solaris 9, both with _no_ patches

      I've got ten Solaris 8 machines like that, the buggy proprietry software on them gets no support if the things have any patches (and they even insist on the ancient motif window manager). If the software breaks they just blame Sun for a few weeks before looking at the real problem so it's not worth patching them. Of course their network is USB key sneakernet.
      I also have a SparcStation 10 that reports "UNIX(r) System V Release 4.0" which runs some useful abandonware locked to the things hostid.

    60. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to be difficult, but I agree with the parent. I've been in IT 10 years, and run my own domain and associated services from my house on a Debian box, and I have never used a virus scanner on my WinXP box. Have you even used Norton lately? No wonder everyone needs quad cores. Talk about bloat.

      And from what I gather, they're not even that effective anyways.

      To address:

      "Viruses commonly come in via..."

      email

      Not through gmail. My mail server uses ClamAV, but Thunderbird doesn't run attachments anyways, so where's the danger? I don't even remember an attachment making its way to Thunderbird in awhile.

      IM

      News to me. Gtalk only sends ASCII to my phone and/or firefox gmail sessions. I know it's possible, but I've never seen it, or would be dumb enough to run files that I wasn't expecting.

      usb drive

      I don't insert usb drives into unknown computers and then plug it into my home computers. Besides, auto run is disabled on all removable media. Does that still stop it? Probably not, but I haven't seen it.

      file-sharing

      Not bloody likely if it has hundreds or thousands of seeders, and its even easier to check for executable content in movies/mp3s.

      and web use

      Never gotten a virus or even seen one through Firefox. Sure it's possible, but I'm not bothered enough to install AVG or Norton.

      Basically, it's entirely possible to be anti-virus free for years and years at a time. I guess if I needed live scanning of every file the hard drive is reading/writing to/from, I'd need a faster HDD and a quad core as well.

    61. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1

      For you maybe. Fortunately I know what I'm doing, and have been since before you were born....

      Says the n00b with the 7-digit UID.

    62. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Pillock.

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    63. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by rdebath · · Score: 1

      I need to check this ... You logged onto an unpatched XP box and started up Microsoft internet explorer.

      Are you a complete fucking idiot or what!

    64. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by rdebath · · Score: 1

      Lookeee here, guys! Someone who understand security tradeoffs.

      • Firewall
      • Mailscanner
      • Safe browser.
      • User who isn't stupid (by nature or edict).

      Yup, that pretty much covers it; except for the chance that some idiot uses your computer one day. Or maybe they forward a zero-day virus that the mailscanner doesn't know yet.

      I would add an AV scanner to that in case some idiot manages to drop me in it somehow. It would have to be a "portable app" of course, eg clamav and f-prot both would work. None of this resource hogging shit the rest of you are talking about. I suppose it should be run about monthly, maybe weekly if you're mailed by a lot of idiots.

    65. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      I was behind a firewall going to what I thought was a safe site.

      The point being, the OP who claimed to be running an unpatched XP for years is either a lying bastard or so lucky that they should be heading straight for Las Vegas.

    66. Re:Heh, simple. Don't update. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see you have your copy of Windoze running very nicely.

      GOOD thing you didn't have to install all that useless software like MickeyFee and Snorton Antivirus.

      While we're at it... I'm running a crappy version of Linnix, developed by Ubuttfoo. It barely does what I need it... That's if I can get Gname to install correctly, ffs.

      But seriously... Did you by any chance post an anon question to Slashdot about how you despise being called an "IT person"? I suspect you did.

      Either way, you're an idiot.

  4. Nice of them to change the color by alen · · Score: 5, Funny

    i was getting tired of the blue screen

    1. Re:Nice of them to change the color by stagg · · Score: 3, Funny

      I believe the change was implemented in order to prevent phosphor burn-in on older CRT monitors.

    2. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Blue+Stone · · Score: 3, Funny

      Microsoft felt guilty about not allowing you to change the desktop picture in Windows Starter Edition, so they realeased this variation of the BSoD to everyone, to make up for it.

      See: they're not totally evil*.

      *may be totally evil

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    3. Re:Nice of them to change the color by snowraver1 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Really? I can't remember the last time I blue screened. Maybe you should check your ram or update your video driver.

      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    4. Re:Nice of them to change the color by ciaohound · · Score: 1

      Black is the new blue?

      --
      Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
    5. Re:Nice of them to change the color by melikamp · · Score: 4, Funny
    6. Re:Nice of them to change the color by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      I updated my video drivers 2 days ago, and since then, I BSOD every time I try to start up Fallout 3.

      I also BSOD after 10 hours or so due to IRQ conflicts, which cannot be resolved until I buy a floppy drive so that windows can install RAID driviers in the most archaic way possible.

      Thanks Windows

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    7. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Icegryphon · · Score: 1

      No sure way to make sure it bluescreen is to install drivers for SATA card or Soundcard on Windows 2003.

    8. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Fatalv · · Score: 1

      Being that I'm color blind, the new black screen allows me to enjoy the horrors of windows in it's original unaltered form! Thanks Microsoft!!

    9. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Since Windows has a boot-up theme song, how about a crash theme song too? I'm thinking Britney's, "Oops, I Did It Again". Or Beatles' "Helter Skelter". Other suggestions?

    10. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      Is this a WHQL certified driver or a bleeding edge driver? Might try a WHQL.

      IRQ conflicts? Are those even possible on modern hardware and OS--what version of Windows are you running? Anyway, you could always slipstream drivers onto a Windows CD, it's really not bad to do.

    11. Re:Nice of them to change the color by srussia · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I believe the change was implemented in order to prevent phosphor burn-in on older CRT monitors.

      Actually, blue was chosen deliberately because zinc sulfide silver (blue phosphor in CRTs) is more resistant to burnout than the other phosphors, thus ensuring more even color rendition over time. It was a feature, not a bug :-). With no burnout problems in LCD panels, they went with black.

      --
      Set your phasers on "funky"!
    12. Re:Nice of them to change the color by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

      What the heck version of Windows are you using? Vista and 7 both support installing RAID drivers from USB in the installer.

    13. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Neil+Hodges · · Score: 1

      Actually, under Vista with the latest drivers for my video card and sound card, it would bluescreen with "IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL" about ten or fifteen seconds after login. Under XP, it got "BAD_POOL_ERROR" randomly.

      Fortunately, both Linux and Windows 7 work just fine on it.

    14. Re:Nice of them to change the color by alen · · Score: 1

      it's a joke

      i can count the number of blue screens and viruses i've had on my windows PC's in the last 10-15 years on one hand.

        and i am counting each finger only once.

    15. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but your hand has a hundred fingers.

    16. Re:Nice of them to change the color by ElSupreme · · Score: 1

      2^5 = 32

      Still not that many though.

      --
      My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
    17. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Binary or decimal?

    18. Re:Nice of them to change the color by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      "Is this a WHQL certified driver or a bleeding edge driver? Might try a WHQL."

      It's a WHQL. It has something to do with their nv4_disp.dll library.

      "IRQ conflicts? Are those even possible on modern hardware and OS--what version of Windows are you running? Anyway, you could always slipstream drivers onto a Windows CD, it's really not bad to do."

      Win XP pro. It's on a DFI Lanparty UT CFX3200 Mobo, so you can determine if that's modern or not.

      I'm still looking into slipstreaming the drivers and how that might affect my install.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    19. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You updated your video drivers (Not Microsoft's problem) and then blame their OS when it crashes because of the new drivers you installed? And further blame them because you don't know what USB->Floppy emulation is? Hand in your geek card and GTFO.

    20. Re:Nice of them to change the color by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      XP Pro

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    21. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ha! that mac's screen has a stuck pixel! oh wait..

    22. Re:Nice of them to change the color by neoform · · Score: 1

      How'd you get the screenshot? Everytime it happens to me I can't seem to input any commands! http://imgur.com/ghTAA.jpg

      --
      MABASPLOOM!
    23. Re:Nice of them to change the color by sproingie · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nvidia's entire 19x series of drivers have consistently been a problem with fallout 3, ranging from stuttering to BSOD's. I recommend installing the WHQL Release 186. I never had bluescreens, but it stuttered like mad til I reverted to 186. Got a few graphical glitches in complex geometry (clipping mostly) but they were minor and the smoothness was worth it. I'll give this to nvidia, at least they do make the earlier drivers easily available.

      Now if someone could tell me which drivers will play nice with both Dragon Age and Anno 1404... Don't tell me, ATI, right?

    24. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      ^-- The above is of course not true.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    25. Re:Nice of them to change the color by sorak · · Score: 1

      I believe the change was implemented in order to prevent phosphor burn-in on older CRT monitors.

      Actually, blue was chosen deliberately because zinc sulfide silver (blue phosphor in CRTs) is more resistant to burnout than the other phosphors, thus ensuring more even color rendition over time. It was a feature, not a bug :-). With no burnout problems in LCD panels, they went with black.

      Do you think there was somebody sitting in a Microsoft headquarters saying "You know, when this thing crashes, we should make it blue. That way, the monitors will not experience burn-in after years of constant crashing"?

      Somebody stab me with a stick...

    26. Re:Nice of them to change the color by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 1

      Well, black makes things look slimmer, sleeker, sexier. Windows needs all the help it can get to resemble any of that.

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    27. Re:Nice of them to change the color by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 1

      It's shooped. I can tell by some of the pixels and from having seen quite a few shops in my time.

    28. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wait, you got that mixed up with a screenshot from Doom 3.

    29. Re:Nice of them to change the color by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't happen to be running that with Portable Address Extensions (PAE) turned on, would you? Because recent versions of the Nvidia Windows drivers don't work with PAE and will blue screen at boot with that particular dll mentioned if it's installed on a box with PAE turned on. HTH. YMMV.

    30. Re:Nice of them to change the color by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Hey! You stole my monitor! Give it back!

    31. Re:Nice of them to change the color by melikamp · · Score: 1

      Easy, mon amie. I run 7 virtualized inside Emacs.

    32. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Actually, they probably did. The blue screen was chosen at a time that frequent computer crashes were just a fact of life. (and yes, that includes mainframes) It isn't the times that the error screen showed for 2 minutes that they would have been worried about. It is the times that the computer crashed at 7PM on Friday, and nobody noticed it until 8 or 9AM the next Monday. No doubt MS knew that the error screen would be sitting on many monitors for days at a time, and would want to delay the inevitable burn in.

      Of course, they may have just thought that blue was a calming color, so chose that instead of a more violent color like red.

    33. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was hoping for a Green Screen of Death, but I guess black will have to do for now.

      I guess the Green Screen of Death could sound kind of bad considering they use it Green Screens for TV >.>

    34. Re:Nice of them to change the color by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 0, Redundant

      windowsPC.count = 0

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    35. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Nicolay77 · · Score: 1

      I've had problems with Descent and other very old games with any driver newer than 182.50.

      182.50 works right.

      --
      We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
    36. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Changing the screen colors equals programmer status for some.

    37. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      black dont burn on CRT. On CRT black pixel are "off".
      On the contrairy, black pixel is 100% "on" on LCD.

      LCD block light from the backlight when they do black.
      CRT dont lit up when they do black.

      Micro-soft changed to black only for marketing reason.
      And had it blue before for the exact same reason.

    38. Re:Nice of them to change the color by indre1 · · Score: 1

      Do Macs have white screen?

    39. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Follis · · Score: 1

      I used to get that a lot with bad ram. You might want to check that.

    40. Re:Nice of them to change the color by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      That's interesting. Once I figure out where I can turn it off, I'll let you know if it's on. :p

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    41. Re:Nice of them to change the color by jim_v2000 · · Score: 1

      It's not a black screen of death. It's black because Explorer.exe isn't loading and thus you get no desktop.

      --
      Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
    42. Re:Nice of them to change the color by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      I explicitly set a /nopae flag in my boot.ini, rebooted, and tried to run Fallout 3.

      I BSOD'ed about a second later than normal (soon as I exited Vault 183 is it?).

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    43. Re:Nice of them to change the color by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, are you seriously suggesting that Microsoft chose blue because they expected Windows computers to spend so much time in "blue screen of death" state as to suffer from phosphor burnout? Or were you joking and the mods took it seriously.

    44. Re:Nice of them to change the color by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      The Nvidia forums are rife with people who are saying that the 180 drivers aren't stable and that, in particular, they have problems with Fallout 3. This thread has more info.

    45. Re:Nice of them to change the color by sergueyz · · Score: 1
    46. Re:Nice of them to change the color by eknagy · · Score: 1

      1000*700 pixels? Dude, you have a weird display...

  5. Henry Gates Ford: by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

    "You can have any screen of death color you want, as long as it's black"

    1. Re:Henry Gates Ford: by Shrike82 · · Score: 1

      Interestingly that phrase (about the Model T Ford) was never accurate. They didn't make black ones at all, except for a specific factory, many years after the Model T came out. And I actually remember messing with some settings to change the colour of the Blue Screen of Death and making it red. That looked much more dramatic.

      --
      You can advertise in this sig from as little as £99.99 a month!
    2. Re:Henry Gates Ford: by FrankSchwab · · Score: 2, Informative

      Interesting that Shrike82 is never accurate, at least according to wikipedia: from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_T "Colors By 1918, half of all cars in America were Model Ts. However, it was a monolithic bloc; as Ford wrote in his autobiography, "Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black".[17] Model Ts in different colors were produced from 1908 to 1914, and then again from 1926 to 1927."

      --
      And the worms ate into his brain.
    3. Re:Henry Gates Ford: by ElSupreme · · Score: 1

      I too had Red Screens of death on my 2k and, XP boxes while attending Georgia Tech.

      --
      My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
    4. Re:Henry Gates Ford: by IAmGarethAdams · · Score: 1

      Interesting that Wikipedia isn't accurate, at least according to the book it sources: from http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/readfile?pageno=72&fk_files=22786 *no occurrences of the word 'black', nor in 10 pages either side*

    5. Re:Henry Gates Ford: by IAmGarethAdams · · Score: 1

      Apologies, Wikipedia must have been sourcing the large-print version, because that appears on page 40 of the Gutenberg version: http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/readfile?fk_files=22786&pageno=40

    6. Re:Henry Gates Ford: by Gavin+Scott · · Score: 1

      With Linux you can have any color screen of death that you want.

      G.

    7. Re:Henry Gates Ford: by PReDiToR · · Score: 1

      And how are you supposed to know if it has actually changed colour?

      --

      Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
    8. Re:Henry Gates Ford: by Shrike82 · · Score: 1
      If you'd bothered to do a little more digging around, instead of relying on Wikipedia (the home of urban myths) you'd have seen that originally Model T fords came in red and green, as well as other colours. It wasn't until later that they were made exclusively in black, before switching back to multiple colour choices. But don't let me stop you taking Wikipedia as the gospel truth. In fact here, from your precious Wikipedia page (empahsis mostly mine):

      The Ford Model T (colloquially known as the Tin Lizzie and Flivver) is an automobile that was produced by Henry Ford's Ford Motor Company from 1908 through 1927

      Model Ts in different colors were produced from 1908 to 1914, and then again from 1926 to 1927.

      Ford's quote from his book is poorly used and quoted out of context. When you apologise make sure to bring cake and whisky.

      --
      You can advertise in this sig from as little as £99.99 a month!
  6. Hmm by WiiVault · · Score: 1

    Did anybody think to check the power cord?

    1. Re:Hmm by JustOK · · Score: 1

      It's too dark because of the power failure to tell if the cord is plugged in

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    2. Re:Hmm by techwrench · · Score: 1

      Try hitting the 'Escape' key....

      --
      It's You and I against the World... When do we attack?
    3. Re:Hmm by JDeane · · Score: 1

      Hahahah one of my personal favorites.

      I also liked the one about the dog being electrocuted by the phone line shorting out and grounding into the dogs chain (The phone would not ring but the lady knew she had a call cause the dog would go berserk)

      Tech support stories are some of my favorites some one should write a book and collect up all the most interesting ones.

      Another good one I was told, people would complain that every time the toilet would flush the PC would crash. As it turned out they had well water and the pump would kick on to fill the gallons the toilet used and cause the PC to crash. Hmmm of course thinking about it now it seems like a shower or any other water use would cause the same problem. (I wish I had asked the person that at the time)

    4. Re:Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tech support stories are some of my favorites some one should write a book and collect up all the most interesting ones.

      OH GOD YES THAT WOULD BE SO FUNNY - I would so buy that book and I would laugh and laugh and oh ho ho would I laugh.

      Loser.

  7. The more things change by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

    It's nice to see they decided to forgo the cryptic error messages and offer the goth crowd a nice abyss to stare into.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    1. Re:The more things change by D+Ninja · · Score: 1, Troll

      Don't stare too long into the abyss. If you do, Steve Ballmer's head appears and starts chanting, "Developers! Developers! Developers!" and occasionally cackling maniacally.

    2. Re:The more things change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't stare too long into the abyss. If you do, Steve Ballmer's head appears and starts chanting, "Developers! Developers! Developers!" and occasionally cackling maniacally.

      And then scream, "Give it up for meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!"

    3. Re:The more things change by Verteiron · · Score: 1

      If you gaze into Windows long enough, Windows gazes also into you...

      *slain by zombie Nietzsche*

      --
      End of lesson. You may press the button.
    4. Re:The more things change by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 1

      It's nice to see they decided to forgo the cryptic error messages and offer the goth crowd a nice abyss to stare into.

      The message is there. However, the preceding line is: COLOR 00

      --
      Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
    5. Re:The more things change by s1lverl0rd · · Score: 1

      I prefer blue screens over goatse, thank you very much.

  8. Had this myself.. not a showstopper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Had this the other day (Win7 Ultmate, Q6600 8GB RAM) it sat for a couple of minutes (there was some disk activity). Afterwards everything was fine; I chalked it up to an update and looks as though I was right.

    1. Re:Had this myself.. not a showstopper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I've been getting a black screen on startup since Vista. I now run 7 and still get it. I run a top of the line machine and it black screens for a couple of minutes every startup as long as my Western Digital external harddrives are connected. I disconnect them and everything's dandy. MS has known about this particular black screen for years, and still no fix. It's like Windows has to power the externals off and on several times before it will let me log in. Some sort of cruel joke.

    2. Re:Had this myself.. not a showstopper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I just unplugged my mass storage device (card reader) and it popped right up. Couldn't use the card reader after that though, but everything else was ok.

    3. Re:Had this myself.. not a showstopper by pwfffff · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Couldn't use the card reader after that though"

      Have you tried plugging it in?

    4. Re:Had this myself.. not a showstopper by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      It's like Windows has to power the externals off and on several times before it will let me log in.

      Yep, Windows USB detection is dumb as rocks. Unplug your USB keyboard or mouse some day and stick it in another USB port. New device detected! Loading drivers!

    5. Re:Had this myself.. not a showstopper by gencha · · Score: 1

      How does it matter how much RAM you got?

  9. Finally... by natehoy · · Score: 4, Funny

    The headline should read "Microsoft finds way to make an Operating System 100% secure".

    Once the Black (screen of) Death Security Pack is installed, the computer locks up after login, meaning the user will not be able to surf to dangerous pages, will not be the victim of even the most clever social engineering hacks, and best of all won't see any spam any more, ever.

    Users protected by the BsoDSP can feel free to emerge from their basements and experience RealWorld 1.0. It's like a MMORPG, but with real sex.

    --
    "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    1. Re:Finally... by neoform · · Score: 1

      Of course, this protection only applies if the computer isn't connected to the internet..

      --
      MABASPLOOM!
    2. Re:Finally... by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Well, true, but I assume the BsoDSP is like the BSOD - the network card isn't operating any more, and therefore by definition the computer is not connected to the Internet.

      However, if this leaves the machine running in the background AFTER login, then reverse that, "Microsoft finds a way to make an Operating System ONLY accessible to hackers!"

      If that's the case, we can pretty much call this Windows 7 Service pack ME.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    3. Re:Finally... by shadwstalkr · · Score: 1

      Sadly, reports of real sex have been greatly exaggerated.

    4. Re:Finally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like a MMORPG, but with real sex.

      Eww you told me you were raiding with your guild spending all this time online after dark!

        - Your ex-wife

    5. Re:Finally... by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

      It's like a MMORPG, but with real sex*.

      Whoa, buddy! Don't forget the disclaimer:
      * WARNING! Real sex may result in:
      Real STDs
      Real Pregnancy
      Real Expectation of Real Commitment
      and, for most of you, will be more difficult to obtain than full Tier 9 gear - especially if that comparison made sense to you.

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    6. Re:Finally... by gbarules2999 · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, the Real Sex may not be applicable to Slashdot readers.

    7. Re:Finally... by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      "...RealWorld 1.0. It's like a MMORPG, but with real sex."

      Liar!

    8. Re:Finally... by Follier · · Score: 1

      I dunno, I've been running in RealWorld 0.8 and the mmo aspects of real sex were severely over-hyped on that one. But to be fair, I've beat it on single player mode like a thousand times and it still hasn't gotten old.

    9. Re:Finally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like a MMORPG, but with real sex.

      I had this happen to me so I decided to try out this "RealWorld 1.0". And, no it isn't. It's more like a MMORPG, but with restraining orders.

    10. Re:Finally... by jim_v2000 · · Score: 1

      I would be ok with that for most of the users I deal with.

      --
      Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
  10. Optical problem by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 2, Funny

    After hundreds of hours of diagnostics I realized that my eyes were closed.

    1. Re:Optical problem by JustOK · · Score: 4, Funny

      I looked into my suitcase

      And much to my surprise

      I realized I couldn't see a thing

      If I closed my eyes.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
  11. Headline is misleading by ericthughes · · Score: 5, Informative

    The issue is not limited to Win7 but effects most versions of windows. A ACL bug causes the black screen http://www.prevx.com/blog/140/Black-Screen-woes-could-affect-millions-on-Windows--Vista-and-XP.html

    1. Re:Headline is misleading by PincushionMan · · Score: 4, Informative
      From link above: 1) Restart your PC
      2) Logon and wait for the black screen to appear
      3) Make sure your PC should be able to connect to the internet (black screen does not appear to affect this)
      4) Press the CTRL, ALT and DEL keys simultaneously
      5) When prompted, Click Start Task Manager
      6) In Task Manager Click on the Application Tab
      7) Next Click New Task
      8) Now enter the command:
      "C:\Program Files\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe" "http://info.prevx.com/download.asp?GRAB=BLACKSCREENFIX"

      And this my friends, is exactly why Windows is not ready for the desktop in 2009. I mean, you have to type in random junk into the command line to fix a buggy Microsoft patch - Can we expect grandma to be able to do this? More must be done to make Windows user friendly to all!

      ... err, wait, this is Windows? Oops! Nevermind.

    2. Re:Headline is misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      that's actually the really dumb way of doing it. Turns out, you can just run explorer, and continue as if you had booted normally.

      So:
      1) Boot
      2) Login
      3) Get Task Manager (Ctrl+Alt+Del)
      4) File -> New Task (Run...)
      5) Type "explorer" (no quotes) - Windows should now be running normally
      6) Click on ericthughes's link above
      7) Download and run the file they have linked there

      It's even simpler if you just understand that the screen is blank because explorer (desktop process, should always be running) didn't start.

      Or at least, that's how I've experienced the problem. It's not so much a BSoD as a "this process forgot to start."

      Honestly, the only part that scares me is that I have to run their exe. I can function without this fix, and will wait for the official fix next week.

    3. Re:Headline is misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That should be "affects most versions" and "An ACL bug".

    4. Re:Headline is misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It also appears that the vast majority of cases are caused by poorly written security software (hi Prevx!) doing bad things to your computer. Get AVG or MS Security Essentials and stop paying bad guys.

    5. Re:Headline is misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      English might not be his/her first language.

      --
      Meta grammar nazi

    6. Re:Headline is misleading by jim_v2000 · · Score: 1

      Judging by how my XP, Vista, and Windows 7 machines were all fine today, I'm guessing that there's more too this than just a Windows patch.

      --
      Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
    7. Re:Headline is misleading by ScottCooperDotNet · · Score: 1

      Why would I trust their fix if their analysis seems to be wrong?

      Update: In a blog post published shortly after this story was filed, Prevx's Jacques Erasmus confirmed that Microsoft's patch was not to blame and apologized to Microsoft "for any inconvenience our blog may have caused."

      The black screen problem appears to be linked to improper alteration of the Shell value in the Windows registry, as explained in the blog post.

    8. Re:Headline is misleading by IsThisWorking · · Score: 1

      8) Now enter the command:
      "C:\Program Files\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe" "http://info.prevx.com/download.asp?GRAB=BLACKSCREENFIX"

      ...which starts the download of an executable file. Now, I have no idea who that guy (owner of prevx.com) is, and maybe he has nothing but good intentions, but I have this personal rule never to execute files downloaded from some random blog reassuring me they are going to "fix" my computer.

  12. happened to me over a month ago by nxtw · · Score: 3, Interesting

    On my MSI Wind netbook running Windows 7, I once woke the system from sleep and got a black screen. The machine was still working, the mouse cursor was on screen and moved with the touchpad, there was disk activity, it connected to the wireless network, caps lock/num lock were still responsive, but nothing else appeared on the screen and nothing I did made it work. I had to manually power the system off. I was able to wake the system from sleep many times before and after without any problems.

    I didn't notice any updates that the problem could have been correlated with.

  13. How much more black can it be? None more black. by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I guess a bunch of people were sitting around at Microsoft after watching Spinal Tap and decided to do a tribute patch.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  14. Happened to me on a Server 2003 box by gazuga · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I had this happen a year or so ago on a Server 2003 box and never could find the actual cause. I don't know if the fix is the same in this case, but in my case it was simple:

    Check out [HKEY_USERS\.DEFAULT\Control Panel\Colors] - if everything is set to [0 0 0], modify those values to something other than black. The easiest thing to do, actually, is to export that key from another box that's good, then import on the box that's got the problem.

    --
    "I turn away with fright and horror from the lamentable evil of functions which do not have derivatives."
    1. Re:Happened to me on a Server 2003 box by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      how in the living hell were that setting changed though? Did you suffer from a registry crash, messing up the values? No software released by Microsoft do this, I'm pretty sure.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    2. Re:Happened to me on a Server 2003 box by FooHentai · · Score: 1

      This is caused by running out of disk space on C:\ Seen it a few times.

    3. Re:Happened to me on a Server 2003 box by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I ran into that too, but it happened before login. We couldn't see the login screen, but if we typed (carefully) we could login and work normally. Changing the Colors in the registry fixed it.

  15. Been there... by WDancer · · Score: 1

    This happened at my workplace, and I was the one who had to fix it. I think it was a corrupted update for XP, because it happened right after one. I had to perform a repair using the install disk, fun. Not all were affected, just the ones that had auto update turned on, instead of just notification.

  16. Windows Genuine Disadvantage by idontgno · · Score: 1

    Anyone know if some descendant of WGA is part of Win 7? The description of the problem in TFA (and also the corresponding Inq article reminds me of a botched WGA "software self-help" thing.

    Of course, it could just be a garden-variety bug in something besides WGA.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  17. patches may make Win 7 not genuine by svendsen · · Score: 5, Informative

    11/24 my windows machine is working perfectly,. Been up for over a month and fully activated (I bought the $30 Win 7 prof. EDU discount). Turn off my computer the same night (vacation).

    11/28 come back from vacation turn my computer on and it updates itself with the 11/25 patches. As soon as they are installed all of a sudden my copy is no longer genuine and I get all the warnings.

    Spend 2 hours with Microsoft last night. product key is valid. They tell me that windows updater is corrupted and I need to reinstall the entire OS. I was told it is an "issue" when doing a custom upgrade from Vista.

    Now this article is out I am wondering if their patches tried to tighten some DRM and broke a lot more then being reported.

    1. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by SemiSpook · · Score: 1

      Well, took advantage of both 7HP and 7Pro, and I was having the same issue after I went from HP to Pro. Didn't get the "un-" genuine message, but things would slow up and freeze, but I suspect that the Digital River stuff once again is to blame...

      Also helps I spent the extra $26 for both DVDs and doing fresh installs with those after getting pooch screwed by the DR download.

    2. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by jackchance · · Score: 2, Insightful

      11/24 my windows machine is working perfectly,....11/28 come back from vacation turn my computer on and it updates itself with the 11/25 patches. As soon as they are installed all of a sudden my copy is no longer genuine and I get all the warnings....Spend 2 hours with Microsoft last night. product key is valid. They tell me that windows updater is corrupted and I need to reinstall the entire OS. I was told it is an "issue" when doing a custom upgrade from Vista.

      Best argument for mac, linux, freebsd (insert your favorite non-DRMed OS here) ever.

      It angers me to NO END that tech supports answer to all computer problems is "re-format and re-install". It is somewhat understandable since it can be very hard to figure out what kind of mess a machine is in on the end of a phone... but all consumer OSes should be able to boot into a live CD version of the OS that gives tech support access to the machine so they can diagnose the actual problem.

      --
      1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 2584 4181 6765
    3. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by svendsen · · Score: 1

      Ya I did the windows 7 install that way because at the time the DR download could not be made a bootable DVD. Since then the workaround came out and I have my bootable DVD now and will give that a shot to see if this magical problem just happened to come at the exact same time the 11/25 patches came out and caused other issues.

    4. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by alen · · Score: 1

      i visit the Mac forums because i have an iphone and a Mac Mini as well as a bunch of PC's. Apple is just as bad. some of the oldtime Mac users will even tell you never to buy Apple hardware when it's first released and buy a silent revision that comes out a few months later. and they say that most products have problems. the big thing now is DOA quad core iMac's due to crappy packaging

    5. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by jittles · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It also invalidated my install of Office 2007. Reinstalling the OS, patching and then reinstalling Office 2007 worked but what a pain.

    6. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by SemiSpook · · Score: 1

      Well, the Win7 install interface is much better than its predecessors, and besides, it's not like I had anything of real value (data wise) on my box to begin with. I've found that with certain Linux distros that reformat/reinstall also tends to work a lot better than getting your hands into the nuts and bolts (a lot of that occurred with Ubuntu). I think part of my issue there was the network interfaces weren't exactly compatible with Linux to begin with (the damned Broadcom 4318 chipset on my Compaq laptop), so that may have been a contributing factor.

      Methinks MS had a good start with the Beta and RC testing, now they just need to get their acts together with the patching QC.

    7. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by thisnamestoolong · · Score: 1

      Ummm... what? Mac OSX is just as locked down as Windows. As for Linux/BSD tech support... I am pretty sure that if there were tech support for Ubuntu, you would hear the same sorts of things.

      --
      To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    8. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by jackchance · · Score: 1

      Apple is just as bad.

      Yes, Apple customer care will also recommend reformat and reinstall all too often. Although, if you take the time an effort and drag your machine into the genius bar, they will often do better.

      some of the oldtime Mac users will even tell you never to buy Apple hardware when it's first released

      Umm... not some. ALL mac users worth their salt know that you never buy the first version of a new design.

      --
      1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 2584 4181 6765
    9. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by jackchance · · Score: 1

      Ummm... what? Mac OSX is just as locked down as Windows.

      Mac OSX is proprietary, but it isn't DRMed. There is no license-key to enter when installing the OS, and it never "phones home" to check if it is a valid copy.

      --
      1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 2584 4181 6765
    10. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by Zumbs · · Score: 3, Informative

      Excuse me, but ... I thought that pretty much everyone with some technical experience knows that you never, ever use the upgrade option with Windows. Always use the clean install if possible.

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
    11. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by svendsen · · Score: 1

      I did the "clean" upgrade option (which basically puts all existing windows folders into a .OLD folder). At the time the download from digital river could not be made into an ISO and burned to a DVD to do the 100% format and reinstall. The workaround for this came out after I had everything up and going.

      However the fact the issue came up as soon as the 11/25 patches came out is a sign those patches broke a lot more then just the black screen issue.

    12. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by nxtw · · Score: 1

      Mac OSX is proprietary, but it isn't DRMed. There is no license-key to enter when installing the OS, and it never "phones home" to check if it is a valid copy.

      Mac OS X Server requires a license key and from what I've read sends the key to Apple over the Internet.

    13. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by jackchance · · Score: 1

      Mac OS X Server requires a license key and from what I've read sends the key to Apple over the Internet.

      Good to know. But most users are installing the non-server non-phone-home version of the OS.

      --
      1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 2584 4181 6765
    14. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by superslacker87 · · Score: 1

      I am pretty sure that if there were tech support for Ubuntu, you would hear the same sorts of things.

      Funny. There is tech support for Ubuntu.

      --
      I run Ubuntu skinned to look like a Mac on a PC. Go figure.
    15. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I received that as well, but was able to successfully boot after I clicked on the choice that said something about getting genuine now. I assumed it re-authenticated to the MS servers, and all was ok...

    16. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      But most users are installing the non-server non-phone-home version of the OS.

      I recall an annoying registration window popping up in the regular OS X installer that did not offer a 'skip' button. So, I disagree on the 'non-phone-home' non-sense you've come up with.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    17. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by cheros · · Score: 1

      OK, now you've made me curious.

      I don't have a Mac yet, but I was planning to buy an OSX based laptop, basically because I don't have the time to mess around with my work laptop, so I'd stick neo or openoffice on it (no idea which is is better yet) and not fiddle with it other than keeping it up to date.

      The main driver is to protect client information so I'll have to investigate available encryption, and I'm no fan of phone-home facilities. I'm OK with a one-off license check, but it would piss me off if I'm continuously checked like some tagged criminal (the main reason Windows is being replaced where I can with Linux). I am aware I'm changing one control fanatic for another so I'd be interested to hear just what a Mac calls home for, and how I can stop it without pulling the plug.

      Otherwise I'll just buy a laptop and stick Linux on it (Ubuntu, OpenSuSE or Mandriva).

      --
      Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
    18. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by citylivin · · Score: 1

      No offense, but thats not an upgrade. thats a clean install. You might want to revise your terminology a bit because people will just blame you, as I was going to, because you never want to "upgrade" windows between versions.

      If you did a clean install without formatting, then that is much much different than an upgrade!

      As for your DRM experience, I have had that happen to many many windows XP machines too. Some even with stickers on the case, but MS thinks they are not legit. It really shows how flawed the whole software activation protection can be. Easy to crack anyways.

      --
      As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
    19. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by I_have_a_life · · Score: 1

      Best argument for mac, linux, freebsd (insert your favorite non-DRMed OS here) ever.

      It angers me to NO END that tech supports answer to all computer problems is "re-format and re-install".

      The Windows 7 installation disk is also a live CD that allows you to: revert back to a system restore point, run memory and disk checks, and do a complete restore from an backup image. Of course, you have to create a backup image beforehand (shocker) and (surprise surprise) when you create the backup image you have an option to create a system rescue DVD to restore the image (though it's not necessary if you have the Windows 7 installation disk).

      Works pretty much the same as my Macbook and Jaunty Jackalope...

      So no need to be angry, you can still relax... for now.

    20. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've usually had good results from upgrades, but I keep my systems generally free of crapware. Even when I haven't had good results, fixing the problems was way less time than re-installing and reconfiguring all my applications.

      If all someone does with a system is little more than e-mail and office apps, a clean install is probably the way to go. If you've got a dozen tweaked development environments and a jumble of associated libraries, database systems, frameworks, and utilities, then image the system and try an upgrade - it's probably worth your time.

      - T

    21. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by AragornSonOfArathorn · · Score: 1

      But most users are installing the non-server non-phone-home version of the OS.

      I recall an annoying registration window popping up in the regular OS X installer that did not offer a 'skip' button. So, I disagree on the 'non-phone-home' non-sense you've come up with.

      You can hit Command-Q to quit the registration, and then it will ask you if you want to skip it. They should just put the "Skip" button right there in the window, though.

      --
      sudo eat my shorts
    22. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by jackchance · · Score: 1

      I'd be interested to hear just what a Mac calls home for

      Since 10.4.7 the mac phones home a bit I'm sure a deeper google search might come up with a bit more.

      But, using ipfw (the iptables of bsd/mac) rules you can restrict outbound traffic. So for example, you can prevent microsoft office from checking whether other copies are running on the same subnet. Or you could prevent any other service or application from sending information out. Noobproof and waterroof are frontends for ipfw.

      Also the mac does have "FileVault" for disk encryption.

      --
      1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 2584 4181 6765
    23. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by jackchance · · Score: 1

      I admit i am totally naive about win7. (and vista). XPPro is the last windows i'm familiar with. But that windows7 is a liveCD sounds like a HUGE step in the right direction.

      --
      1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 2584 4181 6765
    24. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was the problem- he said he did a custom install which is the fancy name Microsoft gave to "move your stuff aside and then clean install without deleting anything"

    25. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought that pretty much everyone with some technical experience knows that you never, ever use Windows. Always use another operating system if possible.

    26. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by rdebath · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, they've still managed to keep some lovely brainfarts along the way.

      My most recent annoyance. You must have the x64 live CD (winpe environment) to install windows from an x64 cd network share. It's not enough to have an x86 winpe and an x64 cd image.

      All of NT/2k/XP would install from any old version of DOS; even freedos. Now it won't even install from it's cellmate.

    27. Re:patches may make Win 7 not genuine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excuse me, but ... I thought that pretty much everyone with some technical experience knows that you never, ever use the upgrade option with Windows. Always use the clean install if possible.

      I've used the Upgrade option with both Vista and Windows 7, on three different computers, on Windows installs that had been running for well longer than a year. No issues. Most of the avoidance of it these days appears to be superstitious.

  18. Can't we get a Green Screen of Screams? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Screens of Death are *such* a cliche.

  19. All of them? by Jeff+Carr · · Score: 1

    The error means that users of Windows 7 and earlier operating systems...

    Whew! I'm so relieved I'm running Windows 8 on my main pc. My server running Windows 3.11 is probably in trouble though, I'll have to see...

    --
    The television will not be revolutionized.
  20. Happened to me twice ... by cokegen · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's something video related, I've seen this bug in the two machines (Win7, can't speak for Vista) I own and for some reason the monitor get "reset" to 59 Hz instead of 60 Hz and I get the black screen. The funny thing is that is the LCD lamp is not turned on but the screen does, so if you put some light in front of the screen you'll still be able to see something in the screen. This one and a USB bug that prevents the mouse getting detected was sufficient to go back to XP. I can't believe how these bugs pass QC. And sorry for my possibly bad english. Carlos

    1. Re:Happened to me twice ... by malakai · · Score: 1

      I've had something similar happen with my machine. I chalked it up to over-heating my video card or something. But all the thermal logging shows that the GPU and other key areas remain well below the threshold.

      Often this happens playing TF2. The sound will loop, the monitor will go into stand-by mode (no signal). The hard drive light will intermittently flash. I have to reboot to get out of it. I've tried different keyboard combos to try and shutdown or logoff my session. They don't respond.

      This is all on Win XP sp3

      I have a feeling it's trying to blue screen, but the video driver is in some state that the DOS mode video blue screen can't write to the card.

    2. Re:Happened to me twice ... by UltimApe · · Score: 1

      I've had similar issues with my secondary monitor not showing up correctly because it decides to default it to a funny refresh rate... going into screen resolution setttings and it seems to remember that the monitor can run at 85hz and fixes itself.

      Maybe the bug is in the how it does it's plug and play of monitors?

      --
      "Infecting minds with my own memetic virus, one post at a time." Ultimape
    3. Re:Happened to me twice ... by cokegen · · Score: 1

      As you say, it's definitely something video related, possibly on the detection of the monitor. I can confirm (if it's actually the same bug) this isn't triggered neither by updates nor malware (as I really know what I do with my machines). The black screen went away by just selecting any other settings in the video configuration panel with me lighting the screen (LCD) with a lamp and trying to see what was going on in the screen (thankfully I still have a good eyesight). What baffles me is that this is totally random as I use the boxes for very specific tasks and anyway the bug was somehow triggered. Carlos

  21. Solution by Drakin020 · · Score: 1

    Well if you experience this issue from an update, would "Last known good configuration" not resolve this?

    --
    The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
    1. Re:Solution by jpmorgan · · Score: 1

      "Last known good configuration" only rolls back HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet. I imagine if it's truly been borked by an update you'd need to go into the recovery console and roll-back the system to an earlier restore point.

  22. That was my idea. by niew · · Score: 1

    I told Microsoft I wanted a simpler user interface, next thing you know... Windows 7 black screen of death!

    I'm a PC and Windows 7 was my idea...

    1. Re:That was my idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I told Microsoft I wanted a simpler user interface, next thing you know... Windows 7 black screen of death!

      It was just an attempt to preempt the release of next OS X version with new UI.

  23. They need more control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    They need to link it to the color picker. Black and Blue really kind of kick you when you're down. Adding bright friendly colors would help soften the experience. If possible adding a splash screen would be nice. "You're Fucked" in big friendly letters would be more helpful than blue or black.

    1. Re:They need more control by PincushionMan · · Score: 1
      No, no, no.

      What's needed is nice yellow background with a large, grey-black, 3D-ish button that says "DON'T PANIC" in large, friendly letters. When they press the button, it takes them back to right before they 'Allow'ed the 'bad thing' to happen, so they can hit cancel, and all will be well with their systems. We need to pressure virus writers to implement an analogue to The Evil Bit for their binaries.

    2. Re:They need more control by PPH · · Score: 1

      When they press the button, it takes them back to right before they 'Allow'ed the 'bad thing' to happen...

      I can just see it now. A message pops up asking: "Do you still have the box your Windows PC came in?"

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  24. solitaire? by jDeepbeep · · Score: 1

    Play Solitaire?

    It also shipped with Calculator and Pinball. Loads of fun right there.

    --
    Reply to That ||
    1. Re:solitaire? by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 1

      :-) Your sig couldn't be more apposite..

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
  25. Huh by man_the_king · · Score: 1

    Different Color, Same Story.

  26. My bsod experience with vista by hoytak · · Score: 1

    On a dual boot system, hadn't used vista in a while. This is seriously what happened.
    6 PM or so -- start boot up process into vista.
    6:45 -- get login screen, then screen goes black. Hard drive thrashing.
    7:00 -- screen still black.
    8:00 -- screen still black, decided to reboot.
    10 AM -- vista still booting, decided I didn't really need to use vista that bad.

    --
    Does having a witty signature really indicate normality?
  27. MS investigates why its software does not work! by strangeattraction · · Score: 1

    This is news? Nothing new here.

    1. Re:MS investigates why its software does not work! by SemiSpook · · Score: 1

      In other news, water is wet...

  28. Can confirm the issue from personal experience by CdBee · · Score: 3, Informative

    I removed an expired copy of Kaspersky AV from a Vista laptop yesterday, did a wndows-update and installed free AVG. On rebooting it black-screened.

    in that instance another forced reboot brought the system back as normal - I have no explanation

    --
    I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    1. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      A little off-topic, but I've been recommending people stay away from AVG free and check out Microsoft Security Essentials.

      Yes, I know I'm recommending a Micrsoft product. But it has a much lower footprint, and better detection.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    2. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by miknix · · Score: 1, Funny

      I removed an expired copy of Kaspersky AV from a Vista laptop yesterday, did a wndows-update and installed free AVG. On rebooting it black-screened.

      in that instance another forced reboot brought the system back as normal - I have no explanation

      You could have pressed ctrl+alt+f1, login and read ~/.xsession-errors to see what happened. Oh ... wait!

    3. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 1

      Until Linux can do simple things like dim my damn screen, I'll stick with Windows...

      Sure, sticking with Windows makes sense ... if you want it dimmed all the way to black. ;)

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    4. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A little off-topic, but I've been recommending people stay away from AVG free and check out Microsoft Security Essentials.

      Yes, I know I'm recommending a Micrsoft product. But it has a much lower footprint, and better detection.

      When standard, average Windows installations come with a real security system that PREVENTS intrusions and malware infections in the first place, wake me up willya? This after-the-fact cleanup is nothing but damage control and does not constitute real security.

      Windows security: use antispyware tools to make sure that when malicious software is executed, it can't modify your startup entries or change your homepage or perform other annoying actions.
      Real security: prevent spyware from being executed in the first place.

      Windows security: get infected by all sorts of worms and viruses through the mechanism of remotely-exploitable vulnerabilities, then use sophisticated antivirus tools to identify, isolate, and remove those worms and viruses.
      Real security: have few or no remotely-exploitable vulnerabilities and use techniques like least-privilege, chroot(), capabilities, PaX, Grsecurity, and SSP to ensure that any actual vulnerabilities do not lead to a system compromise.

      Windows security: run antispyware, antivirus, and antiadware tools that second- and third-guess every action that has anything to do with opening a file or executing code so you never get to experience the performance your hardware is capable of.
      Real security: run no antispyware, antivirus, or antiadware tools because these are after-the-fact damage-control measures, and you have a system that guards against being infected in the first place. Enjoy the full capability of what your hardware can do.

      Windows security: have a widespread software monoculture so that malware is "write once, infect everywhere".
      Real security: have a diverse range of systems and configurations so that massive infections are much more difficult and system compromises tend to require a great deal of personal effort that cannot easily be automated and cannot be applied on a large scale to many machines.

      Windows security: tell your users that it's not really important to learn anything about how the system works or how it is correctly used. It leaves them wide open to social engineering vectors and other "idiot attacks" but hey, it's so easy to use!
      Real security: read a damned book or two, use Google, and seek to understand the tools you use every day if you do not already. Think for yourself instead of listening to a major vendor's marketing campaign and how it thinks it knows what's best for you.

      Just keep talking about Windows as though it were qualitatively on equal footing with Unix and OSX merely because it is quantitatively superior (i.e. has a greater marketshare). It amuses some of us. You know what I've never seen? A person who was highly skilled with Windows and also highly skilled with at least one other operating system who still preferred Windows. I have certainly seen people who were highly skilled with Windows and knew nothing about Unix who preferred Windows, but as they are incapable of making a true comparison, their opinion is not a valid one.

    5. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by Z34107 · · Score: 1

      Long troll is long, but hear this: Until the year of the Linux on the desktop, all Linux security is "security through obscurity." :P

      --
      DATABASE WOW WOW
    6. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Windows security is light years beyond the typical Linux system. Full ACL protection for virtually every object in the system. Some Linux systems might have a filesystem that allows ACLs.

    7. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by WinterSolstice · · Score: 1

      Funny, Debian dims my laptop screen just fine. What on earth are you doing with it?

      Here's even an article on disabling auto-dim: http://www.brighthub.com/computing/linux/blog/archive/2009/05/01/adjust-or-turn-off-inactivity-screen-dimming-in-ubuntu.aspx

      So - I'm going to go with "have you tried"?

      --
      An operating system should be like a light switch... simple, effective, easy to use, and designed for everyone.
    8. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by dalesc · · Score: 1

      And what a total pain in the arse it all is when you're trying to get actual work done.

    9. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows security is light years beyond the typical Linux system. Full ACL protection for virtually every object in the system. Some Linux systems might have a filesystem that allows ACLs.

      I notice you did not respond to anything actually in the post. That's a neat trick, just ignoring and pretending that you did not read any statements which contradict your position or are otherwise inconvenient for it. I'd use that trick myself except I find it unsatisfying and if I felt a need to do that, it would indicate that maybe my position isn't so solid. If my position is solid, logical, and rooted in truth, then I will be able to answer objections to it instead of plugging my ears and pretending that I didn't hear them. That's if I am going to respond at all.

      So to cut through the bullshit, I'll ask you a simple question: Does that mean you disagree with the idea that cleaning up an infection that has already happened is not an instance of real security, but is only an instance of damage control? If you disagree with it, why do you think the idea is wrong and how would you correct it?

      If you don't answer this at all, that alone will be answer enough.

    10. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was wondering why my XP VMs were acting funky this week. As GP said, a reboot seems to bring it back to normal.

    11. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by ironicsky · · Score: 1

      This is the one thing I wish linux had... Windows style file/directory permissions.

      The 3 bit file permissions of RWX is so... 20 years ago

      Not all the permissions in Windows are useful but here are a couple that I would love to see in *NIX systems
      -List directory contents
      -Create new files/folders
      -Delete

    12. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see the problem. Just reboot, start in runlevel 1 and restore your user profile (gnome, .bash_profile etc) from a snapshot

    13. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by causality · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is the one thing I wish linux had... Windows style file/directory permissions.

      The 3 bit file permissions of RWX is so... 20 years ago

      Not all the permissions in Windows are useful but here are a couple that I would love to see in *NIX systems -List directory contents -Create new files/folders -Delete

      Sorry but after reading that, I have to conclude you are not very knowledgable about Unix and Unix-like systems. All of these apply to *nix:

      A user can list the contents of a directory if he has execute (X) permissions for that directory.
      A user can create new files/folders in a directory if he has write (W) permissions for that directory.
      A user can delete a file if he has write (W) permissions on that file.

      *nix permissions have three categories: owner, group, and all users. It does not matter for any of the above whether the necessary permissions occur because the user owns that file, is in a group that has those group permissions, or if the file has those permissions set for all users.

      Delete may be a special case. For certain items like logfiles you may wish to have them writable but not deletable. For that, *nix can use file attributes to mark files as append-only.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    14. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Happened to me on my Windows 7 Ultimate laptop a couple of days ago. A reboot seemed to have fixed it.

      I thought it was just something to do with the 24 inch LCD plugged into the laptop's vga out.

      Guess it might have been this bug as well.

    15. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 3, Informative

      Or at the very least, just don't use AVG Free.

      Last I tried it (don't know if it's improved) it would tell you about an infection in a file, but wouldn't offer any way to clean the file. To clean infections you had to manually run a full scan. IIRC, this was AVG 7, though it sounds like the behaviour of a v0.7 virus scanner to me.

      When I found out that Avast Home (aka free) would not only allow me to clean infected files when they were found, but would go as far as scanning incoming HTTP replies and cutting connections if it saw an incoming infection attempt, before the data got to the browser, I switched and haven't looked back.

    16. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I note you couldn't think of a need that unix file permissions didn't already fulfill 20 years ago...

    17. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by Brad+Eleven · · Score: 1

      A user can delete a file if he has write (W) permissions on the file's directory.

      Write perms on a file only mean that you can modify the file.

      --
      "Press to test."
      (click)
      "Release to detonate."
    18. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by lgw · · Score: 1

      No general-purpose computer can prevent a user determined to install malware from doing so. An appliance, maybe.

      Windows 7 does a good job of requiring user assistance during a malware install. Vista had the same infrastructure, but the frequency of false-positives was far to high to be useful.

      And of couse cleaning up problems after the fact is part of real security. Because social engineering will always work on some percentage of users, clean-up is simply needed.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    19. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You're a bad man. Suggest Avira instead. It's trivial to prevent the popup from occurring, you do it about how you'd imagine.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    20. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by hb253 · · Score: 1

      I was partial to Netware file system permissions myself. Simple, elegant, and effective. Windows and Unix permissions have always made me cringe in disgust.

      --
      Self awareness - try it!
    21. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by pclminion · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A user can list the contents of a directory if he has execute (X) permissions for that directory.
      A user can create new files/folders in a directory if he has write (W) permissions for that directory.
      A user can delete a file if he has write (W) permissions on that file.

      You actually only got 1 out of 3 correct.

      A user can list the contents of a directory if he has R permissions on that directory. The X bit controls whether that directory can be an element of a pathname which is being accessed. In other words, you can access a file in a directory even if you do not have R, provided you know the filename beforehand -- you just can't LIST the directory contents. It's like being blindfolded in a maze of rooms. The X bit allows you to open the doors -- if you already know where the doors are, you can still navigate. The R bit just takes off the blindfold.

      A user can delete a file if he has W permissions on the directory which contains the file. The permissions of the file itself (indeed, even the ownership) are irrelevant.

    22. Re:Can confirm the issue from personal experience by dbIII · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not much use when there is a huge amount of software that has to run as Administrator is it?
      It takes a lot more than something that is a slightly different way of doing things than the user+group model to get "light years beyond" it - let alone every other feature on the different platforms. Personally I see the ability of people to grant their own permissions to others without authorisation as a major security hole in the entire way it is implemented on the MS platform so consider it a step backwards. You end up with students on work experience with full access to everything because those granting them permission don't have any idea how it works.
      I'll bet you didn't even know that it stands for access control list since you are considering it to be such a wonderful advantage. We're supposed to be above cargo cult worship of things that just look like security in discussions like this.

  29. Hit me twice in 2 days by Sandbags · · Score: 2, Informative

    first was while playing a game online, and I though it was the game that crashed. Black screen, nothing worked, but the background music from the game kept playing. I waited longer than 5 minutes to see if the game would exit. When it did not I got suspicios since protected memory in 7 should not have allowed the gamr to crash the kernel. NOTHIGN was in the error logs related to it (other than the obligitory "you did not shut down properly" errors after I hit the reset button on the tower.

    Next day, I had just turned it on about 20 minutes earlier, and the only thing running was Opera. Same deal, complete lock up.

    7 has been running great on this machine since the day it hit my MAPS dowload queue and I installed it. Not one crash prior except an issue installing HP's printer system first time around (second try, it worked flawlessly).

    --
    There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
    1. Re:Hit me twice in 2 days by jggimi · · Score: 1

      ...since protected memory in 7 should not have allowed the gamr to crash the kernel....

      Do not confuse a userland application requesting kernel services (such as DirectX) which then cause a crash, rather than the userland program itself scribbling in RAM where it should not.

      Tthis is academic. The problem is likely not a crash, rather a failure to deliver video to your monitor in viewable form.

    2. Re:Hit me twice in 2 days by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      My daughter and I have been having the black screen while playing Champions Online on my XP media center machine, which worked fine until a few days ago. First it blew up my video card. I replaced that, it still locks up after playing the game for too long. I bought new DRAM today to see if more memory would help; I should have known the actual problem was caused by Microsoft.

      The problem with Windows Automatic Update is that as soon as M$ wants everybody to move off of XP and/or Vista, they can just issue a patch that breaks the old system. Presto -- new OS revenue!

      Has anybody tried using system restore to a checkpoint before November 25 to see if it fixes the problem?

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    3. Re:Hit me twice in 2 days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      first was while playing a game online, and I though it was the game that crashed. Black screen, nothing worked, but the background music from the game kept playing. I waited longer than 5 minutes to see if the game would exit. When it did not I got suspicios since protected memory in 7 should not have allowed the gamr to crash the kernel. NOTHIGN was in the error logs related to it (other than the obligitory "you did not shut down properly" errors after I hit the reset button on the tower.

      Next day, I had just turned it on about 20 minutes earlier, and the only thing running was Opera. Same deal, complete lock up.

      7 has been running great on this machine since the day it hit my MAPS dowload queue and I installed it. Not one crash prior except an issue installing HP's printer system first time around (second try, it worked flawlessly).

      Same thing happened to me. I rebooted the machine and the screen went black. Then it came back on.
      I was able to replicate the problem by rebooting repeatedly.

  30. BSoD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this what you get when windows fail to start up blue screen of death?

  31. I had it happen on XP by snoig · · Score: 1

    I just had to rebuild our CEO's Lenovo because of this problem. The worst part was that Lenovo absolutely refused to help because the laptop was purchased with Vista and upgraded to XP. Why do they even allow that option if they will not support it?

    1. Re:I had it happen on XP by SemiSpook · · Score: 1

      Because they figured you'd be dumb enough to pay the extra money to downgrade to a semi-functional OS.

  32. This has happened to me before. by whitedsepdivine · · Score: 0

    Just boot to terminal, and restore your xorg.config

  33. I found your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You had windows installed.

  34. A step back ward. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
    I mentioned that Vista has a vastly improved version of Blue Screen of Death. Back then. http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=219390&cid=17803986

    But in an effort to push Windows7 footprint small enough to be used in netbooks, thus eventually killing WinXP, they have sacrificed this improved version, going back even farther than XP's blue screen of death to black screen. It is truly sad, Microsoft is not even able to improve the Screen of Death experience.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  35. blackscreen ? by tohands · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can't wait to get the red screen of life !

  36. Ah Ha! by mugnyte · · Score: 1

      'Ah ha!' said the blind man, as he fell into the hole.

  37. Finally! by DerKlempner · · Score: 1

    Eventually, even Microsoft had to learn that black is the new blue.

    --
    UNIX: Find it, fsck it, forget it.
  38. I can confirm it happens on Vista 32-bit... by Critical_ · · Score: 1

    I had the "Black Screen of Death" happen in the past week on two full-patched (and legal) Windows Vista 32-bit machines after recent patches. Both times the display wouldn't come back up. The system did not display anything when access via Microsoft Remote Desktop, VNC, and Dameware Utilites Mini Remote Control--these are all various ways to access a machine remotely. However, the systems was still allowing access to file and printer shares and I could perform remote administration via various utilities and agents but I couldn't get anything to display. I was able to force a safe shutdown and restart remotely. Since then both machines have been fine. I had initially chalked this up to a random Windows error but today's news has led me to reconsider whether this is in fact a bug.

  39. it happend to me by eargauges · · Score: 1

    I could have sworn this happened to me yesterday, my screen just went all black! wtf Microsoft Ear Gauges

  40. "Last known good configuration" by Jeffrey_Walsh+VA · · Score: 1

    I have tried LKGC dozens of times when it seemed plausible it would help. I think it worked twice. My experience with System Restore is similar.

  41. Freeze-Up After Login by ProzacPatient · · Score: 1

    After logging in yesterday on Windows 7 everything appeared to be going as normally but all I got was the standard blue desktop and Explorer never started, but I fixed it with a reboot.
    I wonder if it had anything to do with this particular bug.

  42. New Name by Cur8or · · Score: 0

    We'll have to find a new name for the day the last Windows pc is shut down.

    --
    Winkey shortcut mapping for 64bit windows. WinKeyPlus
  43. comparatively... by fulldecent · · Score: 1

    >> The error means that users of Windows 7 and earlier operating systems see a totally black screen after logging on to the system ... well at least its better than Vista.

    --

    -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

    1. Re:comparatively... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      well at least its better than Vista. That's real original!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  44. Schadenfreude by physburn · · Score: 1
    Even though this bug probably gets to inconvenience millions of people around the world. I can't help feeling a little happy as linux user each time such a story comes out. Its that warm smug feeling of superiority dispute all I did was choice to download an slightly rarer OS.

    ---

    Microsoft Windows Feed @ Feed Distiller

    1. Re:Schadenfreude by vcgodinich · · Score: 0

      And I feel smug playing games and using my speakers.

    2. Re:Schadenfreude by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You win the games thing, but honestly few Linux users are having sound problems. I bought an AMD-chipset AM3 motherboard without concern for drivers and was not disappointed (with the exception that I am not getting sensors... but I didn't expect 'em.) I just hope the GT 240 getting here on Wednesday works :)

      In the mean time, I will play my old-ass games, and dream.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  45. My XP SP3 Experience... by tmassa99 · · Score: 1

    I work at a retailer that uses custom POS systems running on XP. These are low-end systems (512-1024 MB RAM). After the latest round of patches, many of these systems either ran out of system resources or would simply blue-screen and reboot. I originally attributed it to a patch + Intel video driver + Symantec, since I could disable either SEP, or the Intel video driver, and all would be fine. We originally had end users hit F8 and roll back to the Last Known Good, and that would fix it...until patches are applied again. Interestingly enough, I've found that reducing the shared video memory in the systems' BIOS to 8 MB (from 32 MB) does the trick for these systems. I can basically re-create the entire problem by re-installing XP SP3 + all patches, latest drivers, then install Symantec, and the problem starts.

  46. You are likely to be eaten by a grue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is all

  47. Need link to solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    white letter pages only please.

  48. Perfectly Safe? by Jeffrey_Walsh+VA · · Score: 1

    I'm not big on updates - especially from some of the big software companies: Microsoft, Adobe, Apple. They seem to consistently slow a system down over time, and occasionally cause serious problems. But if I want to get more mileage out of a Windows box by turning off auto updates, I at least apply service packs. If you are going to go no-updates you should not only be behind a firewall, but have an up-to-date antimalware app. Even then, an unupdated Windows system is significantly further from "perfectly safe" than an updated one.

    1. Re:Perfectly Safe? by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 1

      Yes, you're right, after a fashion. Any computer running a Microsoft operating system is so inherently insecure, that patching, and patching, and patching, just to catch up is a complete waste of time. As I said; firewall the bugger & be done with it.

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
  49. nothing new by strstr · · Score: 1

    This problem has existed in Windows for ages, and it's probably a problem caused by third party software and drivers.

  50. I had this happen on a WinXP Pro PC a few days ago by HouseOfMisterE · · Score: 1

    I had this happen on my personal PC with Windows XP Pro a few days ago. I had been using the PC for a while and needed a break, so I locked the screen saver and stepped away. I came back later and the screen was black like power management had kicked in, but I don't have Windows configured to turn off the display. I moved the mouse but got no response. I run VNC server on this PC, so I used another PC to attempt a connection. The connection was successful, but the display was corrupt and basically unusable. I was able to navigate the PC's "Start" menu via the VNC session and shut the PC down. After a reboot, the PC worked properly and I haven't had this happen again.

    I suppose it could have been some sort of problem with the display driver, but this PC NEVER crashes or locks up and this was definitely an unexpected occurrence.

  51. Is THAT what you do on your machine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is THAT what you do on your machine? Because I notice you haven't otherwise said what you DO do on it. Just "you're wrong".

  52. Was Already Common by pgn674 · · Score: 1

    I've seen this pretty frequently for the past 5 years. After log on (automatic or manual), the screen is powered but black, save for a regular cursor that can be moved around. Ctrl+Alt+Del and other keyboard and special key shortcuts do nothing. It's usually been because some malware or antivirus corrupted some component of Windows. Sometimes removing the malware in safe mode has worked (if the black screen wasn't occurring there), sometimes a repair install was necessary. Rarely has a reformat been needed when it's still doing the black screen thing.

  53. My upgrade is done by hwyhobo · · Score: 1

    Okay, I just changed the background on my Windows XP to black and removed all the icons. Now I can sit and stare at the screen. No need to upgrade anymore.

    --
    End anonymous moderation and posting on /.
  54. Green? by psbrogna · · Score: 1

    MS switching that Windows dialog box we all love so much from blue to black may just be a green thing.

    'cause, you know- a black CRT uses less energy.

  55. Beta drivers became an industry itself by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    With the competition or some other reason, GPU manufacturers started to push beta graphics drivers to users more than ever. If user gets greeted with some beta version of driver on official site and his fellow gamer friends keep telling how great the latest unstable driver is, you can't blame him.

    There are expensive services/sites who just tracks beta/unstable/bleeding edge drivers and provide you updates. 99% of times, you don't need to take such risk but they -of course- sell you that service.

    People expects some sort of magic from those unstable/beta drivers. At least on Windows 7, MS is supposed to be in charge of WHQL driver updates of popular cards. I would stick with them until SP1 at least.

  56. pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Microsoft is not telling anyone which update is doing that?

    What the hell are we supposed to block in WSUS? As much as we want we can't block the entire group of fucking operating systems.

  57. Well, at least they changed thecolor by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

    Blue. It's so pre-economic crash.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  58. MS in denial mode by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    MS hasn't learned from Vista at all. One of the biggest mistakes they did with Vista was not admitting people are actually having problems and treated them (their customers) as bunch of morons not knowing how to use their OS.

    Windows 7 shipped and MS really got some credit from media this time, even from Mac fanatics. This thing happens and if you read MS responses, they are in denial mode just like first days of Vista.

    How many Stanford etc. geniuses it takes to do a basic thing like "We hear you, we will investigate the issue and we aren't going home until we figure it out.". Forget official announcement, what about a fake leak on some easy to find site that will signal that you are aware of the issue?

    Does MS believe in some evil plot against them now? Like, all those comments etc. are written by Steve Jobs&Linus together?

    ps: Could you imagine a Quicktime component could prevent OS X from booting? I saw it, reported, Apple thanked me and fixed it overnight.

    1. Re:MS in denial mode by mjwx · · Score: 1

      MS hasn't learned from Vista at all. One of the biggest mistakes they did with Vista was not admitting people are actually having problems and treated them (their customers) as bunch of morons not knowing how to use their OS.

      Ummm...

      MS has admitted it's looking into the problem. You cant honestly expect them to admit to a problem they dont even know anything about. It's like the police starting a murder investigation and arresting 5 random people just so they have something to tell the press.

      Secondly MS admitted is made huge mistakes in Vista, they admitted UAC was overzealous, they admitted to the poor driver development kits, they admitted to its resource hungriness and they fixed many of these issues in Server 2008 and Windows 7.

      I think you're getting MS confused with another major tech company on the US west coast which will not only refuse to admit to any problems but will actively censor anyone trying to report such issues and will then blame the shipping companies for any DOA units or the user for mistreating the unit even when its obvious to be a QA issue.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  59. this is... by Vo1t · · Score: 1

    racist ! (in a black coffee kind of sense) sue the bastards!

  60. I get these a lot... by straponego · · Score: 1

    On about a third of my boots into the Win7 RC. I figured, eh, that's Windows for ya, and besides, it's an RC. Also, you can't shut down without sitting around for ten minutes to make sure that every program feels like closing, every update is allowed or denied, etc. Also, Java wants to update about ten minutes into each session, grabbing focus, you know, right when you're getting into a game. I can tell it yes, no, don't ask again, whatever: it never, ever gives up.

    1. Re:I get these a lot... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I am running the full-release 90 day trial for IT professionals on my netbook, and it has been unreliable as all get-out. It came with Vista, I will be installing Karmic 64 bit shortly.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  61. I would try recycyling monitor power by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    Since the early days, monitors signal to system you know. Especially if I had that issue and a digitally connected monitor, I would try recycling (power on/off) monitor or carefully replugging it.

    It may cause display to refresh. As people say monitor actually displays things, just the backlight is off. I haven't got a slightest clue how can one manage to do it. Is it in DPMI specs? DVI specs?

  62. Fool Me Once... Fool me 500 Times. Duh by curmudgeon99 · · Score: 1

    Folks, Why on earth are people still bothering with the crap software produced by Microsoft. Their brand-spanking-new Windows7 is turning out to be buggy. To quote Gomer Pyle: "Surprise surprise surprise".

  63. IT by WingedEarth · · Score: 2

    Hello IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again? ... OK, well, the button on the side. Is it glowing? ... Yeah, you need to turn it on. Err, the button turns it on. Yeah, you do know how a button works, don't you? No, not on clothes. No, there you go, I just heard it come on. No, that's the music you hear when it comes on. No, that's the music you hear when... I'm sorry, are you from the past?

  64. Well.. by PirateBlis · · Score: 0

    At least we can look on the bright side. Because it's black, PC was telling the truth in that Mac commercial when he said "It's not gonna have any of the problems Vista had, Trust me.". Cheeky bastards.

  65. Tuesday 25 November by pgn674 · · Score: 1

    November 25 was a Wednesday. You're like my professors. All of them. I swear, they do this every time.

    Anyway, the article says it was November 10, which was a Tuesday.

  66. Innovative by undecim · · Score: 2

    I think this is a great example of creativity. Microsoft managed to completely change up the dated blue screen, while keeping the acronym that we all know and love from becoming obsolete. Though I do suppose that the text should be a different color than the background...

    --
    The Internet has given stupid people the resources of intelligent people.
  67. bleed by mebrahim · · Score: 1

    BLack scrEEn of Death

  68. "Black" Screen of Death Solution by gorba · · Score: 1

    This probably means the user needs to turn on their computer.

  69. KSOD by Vyse+of+Arcadia · · Score: 1

    If we follow the convention set by CMYK (Cyan Magenta Yellow blacK), it should really be KSOD.

  70. Latter-day noob approach to solid uptimes? by zooblethorpe · · Score: 1

    Of course your machine stays up, you have the administrators of at least 3 different botnets making sure of it!

    Silliness aside, I wonder if botnets might not serve a semi-useful function for serious noobs -- a botnetted machine might ultimately be more stable than just a virused-and-malwared machine, inasmuch as the botnet operator has a vested interest in keeping the box up and running. I dimly recall reading here on /. about research showing some botnets aggressively removing malware from newly captured machines.

    So, for the true computing noob, might a botnet infection not actually have a stabilizing effect? Let the botnet operator take care of system security.

    (No, I'm not being silly, nor am I actually espousing this course of action. I am wondering aloud if certain parasitic actors in the internet ecology might not do some incidental benefit to the others in the course of their own nefarious activities.)

    Cheers,

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
    1. Re:Latter-day noob approach to solid uptimes? by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      Silliness aside, I wonder if botnets might not serve a semi-useful function for serious noobs -- a botnetted machine might ultimately be more stable than just a virused-and-malwared machine, inasmuch as the botnet operator has a vested interest in keeping the box up and running. I dimly recall reading here on /. about research showing some botnets aggressively removing malware from newly captured machines.

      Eh... why put the effort into making the box more stable when you could put that effort into breaking into more boxes? Although I guess keeping the machine stable could be seen as "avoiding detection".

      I'm not sure the botnet operator cares much about stability. Their goals are more likely:

      - infect as many machines as possible
      - avoid detection
      - make it difficult to remove
      - eliminate competitors

      Although I'm not sure why you'd want to prioritize the last option. Unless the competitors aren't playing nice and are breaking your botnet. Which may be happening (a bit of a turf war).

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
  71. It's a feature by war4peace · · Score: 2

    It's no bug, it's a feature. Windows saves power by reducing the monitor contrast and brightness to 0. Furthermore, it turns off the Video Card and unplugs the monitor from the power socket. Then blinds you.
    ...I just had a chat with Steve, he said "you're lucky we didn't implement the population control routine; we couldn't figure out whether we should use inherent OS radiation or the hammer summoning algorythm on your testicles".

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  72. about damn time.... by hubdawg · · Score: 1

    I am so through with the blue. Black is a pleasant change, and I welcome it.

  73. Translation of Microsoft's Official Denial by Helldesk+Hound · · Score: 2

    > Microsoft now says that its November Windows updates are not causing
    > the BlackSOD: "The company has found those reports to be inaccurate
    > and our comprehensive investigation has shown that none of the recently
    > released updates are related to the behavior described in the reports."

    "We know those reports are inaccurate because we already knew about this before releasing the November updates and so it couldn't possibly be related to the November updates. It is an issue that we are having considerable difficulties fixing hence not being fixed in the November updates and hoped that nobody would have commented about it so soon."

  74. +1 bsod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yep booted a laptop (vista 32) after the update. Black screened not responsive. Hard boot again and it started working...

    Love the idea of MS "investigation" to say it did not cause the problem.