> Now, the fact that there is absolutely no way to replace IE with your web browser of choice is evil
Are you talking about using another web browser as a user, or from a program?
The first is no problem, the second depend on several things, one of them is the availability of the other program on the client's computer, the other is 100% similar interface for the program.
That way, you could just change the COM calls, and use the rest.
There is nothing that prevents writing/using such a system.
And, of course, you can always use another HTML rendering COM object if you want, in your own programs, but using IE as the HTML rendering in so many applications was done because of other reasons.
It's common, it's good, and it's easy.
You want to complain, don't complain to MS, complain to the ISV.
Nobody is using IE as a service.
A lot of programs use it to render HTML, because there is *no point* in reinventing the wheel.
You've one of the best HTML rendering engines avilable, will you use it, or write your own?
IE is an application, and like most Windows applications, it can be used as a COM object, which is what a lot of programs are doing.
Are you insane? You think that IE is the only one with bad track record, here is a short list:
http://browserwatch.internet.com/news/story/nets ca pe31.html - Bad encryption in netscape
http://www.linuxsecurity.com/advisories/caldera_ ad visory-649.html & http://slashdot.org/articles/00/08/06/0222241.shtm l - Netscape expose all your files to the web.
http://slashdot.org/articles/99/02/05/101227.sht ml - Netscape expose personal data
> What is the point of that statement? A would have this flaw if A had this flaw? Well.. yeah. But the point is it doesn't. And even if it did. You have the source. Even more important, you have choice. GNOME? KDE? WIN32?
So, in other words, MS has the best browser in the market, and you somehow reached the conclustion that it is MS' fault that all the other browsers aren't as good, right?
You *might* have a point in NS case, although I never heard of good evidence about it. Mozilla's faults are its own, however.
Beside, there are dozens of other browsers for windows that you can try.
I don't think so.
MS always gave the code to OEM, and recently to anyone who buys 1500 2K licenses.
I don't think that giving the code for the NSA to review would be such a big problem.
Unless you suggest that the NSA wanted to use 9x, in which case, I can understand their big electrical bill, they have to keep three computers for each person, because two of them are always rebooting.
Think of this, instead of waiting all night for the compiler to finish, you got to get some coffee (using the super computer, of course), and get back in time to see it finish.
Oh, just what I want, a *manager* who hasn't program in twenty years, who has no real understanding of the way all of it works together (a full time job by itself) to start meddling with Windows using a language remotedly similar to something he had aquired long ago.
It's quite possible to write a cross-platform virus that would spread via mail.
VBS work on both Win32 & Mac.
I fail to see *how* you could infect Unix servers, or any server, for that matter.
No server that I know of run code from the emails that it handle.
Slashdot Mirror
Netscape will execute arbitry code if you are viewing a picture!
e _a dvisory-590.html
http://www.linuxsecurity.com/advisories/mandrak
And more people are running IE5 than IE4.
There are plenty of ways to use another program, the easist would be to write a COM object and use it.
> Now, the fact that there is absolutely no way to replace IE with your web browser of choice is evil
Are you talking about using another web browser as a user, or from a program?
The first is no problem, the second depend on several things, one of them is the availability of the other program on the client's computer, the other is 100% similar interface for the program.
That way, you could just change the COM calls, and use the rest.
There is nothing that prevents writing/using such a system.
And, of course, you can always use another HTML rendering COM object if you want, in your own programs, but using IE as the HTML rendering in so many applications was done because of other reasons.
It's common, it's good, and it's easy.
You want to complain, don't complain to MS, complain to the ISV.
Nobody is using IE as a service.
A lot of programs use it to render HTML, because there is *no point* in reinventing the wheel.
You've one of the best HTML rendering engines avilable, will you use it, or write your own?
IE is an application, and like most Windows applications, it can be used as a COM object, which is what a lot of programs are doing.
http://www.linuxsecurity.com/advisories/mandrake_a dvisory-590.html - Netscape execute arbitry code in JPEG files.
Are you insane? You think that IE is the only one with bad track record, here is a short list:
s ca pe31.html - Bad encryption in netscape
_ ad visory-649.html & http://slashdot.org/articles/00/08/06/0222241.shtm l - Netscape expose all your files to the web.
t ml - Netscape expose personal data
e _a dvisory-590.html - Netscape execute arbitry code in JPEG files.
http://browserwatch.internet.com/news/story/net
http://www.linuxsecurity.com/advisories/caldera
http://slashdot.org/articles/99/02/05/101227.sh
Here is what I was looking for:
http://www.linuxsecurity.com/advisories/mandrak
My Whistler 2296 uptime:
3 Weeks, 5 Days, 20 Hours, 23 Minutes, 53 Seconds.
> What is the point of that statement? A would have this flaw if A had this flaw? Well.. yeah. But the point is it doesn't. And even if it did. You have the source. Even more important, you have choice. GNOME? KDE? WIN32?
Netscape, Mozilla, Opera
Your friend saw a small amount of code, and somehow reached to the conclustion that MS doesn't re-use code, right?
Here is a thought, maybe, in the small amount of code your friend saw, there wasn't a point in reusing code?
Beside, it doesn't take long to see code reuse in windows.
Outlook & OE, frex, use IE as an HTML renderer.
A lot of other applications do the same, FWIW.
Nothing prevents you from using another browser/email/news program in windows.
So, in other words, MS has the best browser in the market, and you somehow reached the conclustion that it is MS' fault that all the other browsers aren't as good, right?
You *might* have a point in NS case, although I never heard of good evidence about it. Mozilla's faults are its own, however.
Beside, there are dozens of other browsers for windows that you can try.
What about IE on NT?
Security is not worth talking about in 9x.
I don't think so.
MS always gave the code to OEM, and recently to anyone who buys 1500 2K licenses.
I don't think that giving the code for the NSA to review would be such a big problem.
Unless you suggest that the NSA wanted to use 9x, in which case, I can understand their big electrical bill, they have to keep three computers for each person, because two of them are always rebooting.
> Navigation is possible by looking at the actual urls for recognizable names --- they have to be in ascii.
Not really, I get non-ascii file names often enough.
Think of this, instead of waiting all night for the compiler to finish, you got to get some coffee (using the super computer, of course), and get back in time to see it finish.
There is for XP Pro (I'm not sure if it's single user or not, though).
Oh, just what I want, a *manager* who hasn't program in twenty years, who has no real understanding of the way all of it works together (a full time job by itself) to start meddling with Windows using a language remotedly similar to something he had aquired long ago.
You can assign permissions to the registry as well.
You need Server CAL & TS CAL/2K CAL.
I'm not sure how much they cost.
Not sure about 2K workstation, I know that XP Pro can serve them.
Can you show me the virus that can affect a well-managed NT/2K/XP system more than it will an equally well-managed *nix system?
It's quite possible to write a cross-platform virus that would spread via mail.
VBS work on both Win32 & Mac.
I fail to see *how* you could infect Unix servers, or any server, for that matter.
No server that I know of run code from the emails that it handle.
Where can I get those drivers?
I would like to try them.
But there isn't anything that stop it from doing real damage for Macs, isn't it?
It's there for a long time.
Install Terminal Services, and you can spawn as many graphical logins as you want.
And, of course:
You have also runas in the GUI, Shift+Right Click.