I talked to a person who was wanting to intern as a web developer and the school she went to only tought IIS, a little javascript, a little Visual basic and no real server side language or database skills.
I told her in an industry where Apache is dominant, they set her up to fail by only teaching her IIS. I told her to go back to her school and demand some server side scripting language in a cross platform compatible language, demand database administrator/developer courses and demand they start teaching apache.
She did and they actually listened but could do nothing about it because they were so invested in Microsoft.
My friend, do you find those who read their news online illiterate or are you just that ignorant as to think information cannot possibly be delivered in any other format besides a dead tree? By your logic, cavemen moving from rock carving to papyrus leaves to record their hitory would have somehow inexplicably gotten more stupid.
God, I think you're right. I can feel myself getting more stupid just from exchanging information with you via this electronic format.
Dammit! Flash was one of those apps that has kept me from switching to Linux completely. But thanks to this kind of FUD, I'm dropping them completely. I'll build crap using Inkscape or something until they can play nice with others.
Why invest large amounts of money into a medium that is slowly shrinking. Children don't read anymore and more and more people are moving their periodicals to an electronic format. E-ink makes it so paper is no longer needed and OLED's promise an even cheaper alternative. I remember when Jeff Bezos at a company meeting (Amazon, duh) said 'Books aren't going anywhere because people like the feel of a dead tree in their heands". But this is slowly changing. Magazine and newspapers sales continue to shrink, book sales are constantly going down. Libraries are getting less and less funding every year (thanks Bush) and fewer people are reading things that aren't on the internet.
I remember a time when we all got the paper for our news. Now we just logon to Slashdot, newsforge, Salon and others to get our daily fix. Why do I need paper at all?
I give it another 10 years til paper books and periodicals becomes a niche market... at best.
Well it's a strategic move to get people interested in their stock. The stock has hardly moved at all over the last 4 years, they had to cut employee benefits to show a profit this quarter and now they are rewarding stockholders and promising large payouts before December in order to get their stock price moving again.
Doesn't take a stock analyst to figure out the ulterior motive behind this one. Though I would say to sell within the next 2 years unless you can actually wait til 2008 when Longhorn comes out. Just pray it's not another Edsel.
Well techincally, you don't even have to use IE for Windows update; this is a fallacy. I have edited my registry so it doesn't use IE at all.
But yes, Microsoft does force people by taking away the choice for them. Outlook Express, Windows Media Player and IE are all installed by default and just as IE cannot be removed, neither can these other two.
You are taking away their choice by default. These people do not know how to install a new media player and don't realize that there are options as a result of this methodology. Only experienced users are aware of this.
However, in their defense, Joe User needs to have these things by default but NOT BUILT INTO THE OS so that they can never remove them!! The reason I say they need to have them by default is because Joe User could never FTP to a location to get the latest version of Firefox (much less do a build). Joe user could never user PINE.
This basic functionallity should be opened up to resellers to put in whatever they want and have system defaults work with other products.
In this sense, Microsoft is to blame and is being very stupid because by opening this up, they have a greater influence over industry standards in how the OS calls applications and works with them. If they act now, they could get a jumpostart.
Scripts... yes (because they are scripts. not programs unless you want to nitpick). Make... yes (as it HAS to have that functionality when doing builds). Graphical file systems and Apache do NOT. They CAN be set up that way but can be changed. In Windows you have no choice. Next time try reading what I stated before responding. Makes you sound more intelligent when you can actually respond to my point rather than babbling.
Several huh? Let's hear these several that have this insecure setup by default in their systems that cannot be turned off. Hmmm? Oh my all silent now. Is it nap time for you already?
I'm sorry? But you must have been in a coma to have missed this latest exploit. You know, the one that Microsoft built into EVERY DAMN APPLICATION THEY HAVE EVER MADE!! The one that allows programs to call other programs from a shell command?? Did you miss that. You see, it's not the program you have to worry about but the underlying OS.
So block the program all you want but the OS has a built in way of bypassing those blocks.
If you really wanted to try to ridicule me, you should have pointed out that even though you have blocked the built in browser, it does no good against this latest exploit cause this can come in a million different forms that it would be impossible to avoid it without completely rebuilding the OS.
I wanted to remove IE and MS tech support said it can't be done; the system requires it. Then I said I wanted to disable it and they said it can't be done. I argued with them and tried to get them to state that it was Microsoft policy not to help me to disable their product. They then refused to say that either.
After a little badgering, they put me on hold for about an hour while I researched and they blew me off. I discovered a DLL called url.dll that seemed to be called every time it wanted to open IE and IE wasn't available. I replaced this with the path to my alternate web browser (Firefox) and now everything works just fine without IE!
When I try to change the desktop to a web view, guess what comes up? FIREFOX! When Windows needs to update, it uses an alternative method by creating a window (like an app window) and any time a Windows app wants to use IE, it nows uses Firefox.
The ONLY bug I have is that sometimes it will open two windows. Only a minor annoyance but I'm hoping to figure out why it does that.
You replace instances of iexplore.exe. Where it has a path pointing to iexplore.exe, point it to your firefox executable.
You are only searching for instances of iexplore.exe and url.dll and replacing them with your firefox path.
Those are just two examples of what you will most commonly see as registry entries and the path that they need to have instead. When searching for iexplore.exe and finding a registry entry with 'open/command', replace the path pointing to iexplore.exe with C:PROGRA~1MOZILL~1FIREFOX.EXE -url "%1", etc etc.
I tested this out on my machine at work and I have to say that it works like a charm. Windows Update doesn't use IE and instead uses it's own window, web view in folders options uses Firefox and all Microsoft apps now pull up Firefox browser windows rather than IE windows.
I'm basically living in an IE-less environment on a Windows machine...heh. Eat that Microsoft Tech support.
Ive noticed some apps (usually those built into windows) will just create a separate window (and won't even use a browser), others will ask for you to point it to the app that you want to use (file associations I assume) and if you edited your registry correctly, those trying to call IE from either shell: or the regular way will now call your other browser.
This takes care of just about every IE problem on Windows.:)
I believe so but have not tested. Basically if the app trys to open Iexplore.exe and it doesn't exist (or it cannot open it due to no permissions), it will try to open the system install of IE, but by editing your registry, this should divert that call to your alternative browser.
I would also like to add as a side note that when the system recreates it, find iexplore.exe, make sure you are logged in as administrator and right-click and go to properties/security. Then remove ALL permissions to this. This will reduce the systems ability to pull it up and I've found (by looking at the registry and experimenting) that when it can't open it, it often will ask for an alternative browser to use.:)
Um, you are sadly mistaken in so many respects I don't even know where to begin. IE is buggy, IE is integrated into the system and when Microsoft apps attempt to open a browser, they use the systems browser not your default browser; this in itself is a potential security nightmare as it does so from shell. Don't believe me? Check your registry sometime by searching for iexplore.exe and url.dll
Aside from those two glaring errors, Firefox has a greater set of default functionality and a HUGE plethora of add-ons that extend it's ability.
"People choose," replied Hachamovitch (IE lead engineer). "Hundreds of millions of people actively use Windows and they get to choose. Nothing in Windows as it ships keeps them from downloading other software that extends their browsing experience (e.g. the Google or Ebay toolbars) or changes it (e.g. an alternative browser)."
What a load of shit. I spent 8 hourts on line with MS tech support trying to disable IE entirely from my system. You see, when you remove it, the system recreates it. And even when it isn't there, it uses a default installed version which is integrated into the system.
Slashdot Mirror
I talked to a person who was wanting to intern as a web developer and the school she went to only tought IIS, a little javascript, a little Visual basic and no real server side language or database skills.
I told her in an industry where Apache is dominant, they set her up to fail by only teaching her IIS. I told her to go back to her school and demand some server side scripting language in a cross platform compatible language, demand database administrator/developer courses and demand they start teaching apache.
She did and they actually listened but could do nothing about it because they were so invested in Microsoft.
My friend, do you find those who read their news online illiterate or are you just that ignorant as to think information cannot possibly be delivered in any other format besides a dead tree? By your logic, cavemen moving from rock carving to papyrus leaves to record their hitory would have somehow inexplicably gotten more stupid.
God, I think you're right. I can feel myself getting more stupid just from exchanging information with you via this electronic format.
Dammit! Flash was one of those apps that has kept me from switching to Linux completely. But thanks to this kind of FUD, I'm dropping them completely. I'll build crap using Inkscape or something until they can play nice with others.
Why invest large amounts of money into a medium that is slowly shrinking. Children don't read anymore and more and more people are moving their periodicals to an electronic format. E-ink makes it so paper is no longer needed and OLED's promise an even cheaper alternative. I remember when Jeff Bezos at a company meeting (Amazon, duh) said 'Books aren't going anywhere because people like the feel of a dead tree in their heands". But this is slowly changing. Magazine and newspapers sales continue to shrink, book sales are constantly going down. Libraries are getting less and less funding every year (thanks Bush) and fewer people are reading things that aren't on the internet.
I remember a time when we all got the paper for our news. Now we just logon to Slashdot, newsforge, Salon and others to get our daily fix. Why do I need paper at all?
I give it another 10 years til paper books and periodicals becomes a niche market... at best.
Well it's a strategic move to get people interested in their stock. The stock has hardly moved at all over the last 4 years, they had to cut employee benefits to show a profit this quarter and now they are rewarding stockholders and promising large payouts before December in order to get their stock price moving again.
Doesn't take a stock analyst to figure out the ulterior motive behind this one. Though I would say to sell within the next 2 years unless you can actually wait til 2008 when Longhorn comes out. Just pray it's not another Edsel.
Make :)
Well techincally, you don't even have to use IE for Windows update; this is a fallacy. I have edited my registry so it doesn't use IE at all.
But yes, Microsoft does force people by taking away the choice for them. Outlook Express, Windows Media Player and IE are all installed by default and just as IE cannot be removed, neither can these other two.
You are taking away their choice by default. These people do not know how to install a new media player and don't realize that there are options as a result of this methodology. Only experienced users are aware of this.
However, in their defense, Joe User needs to have these things by default but NOT BUILT INTO THE OS so that they can never remove them!! The reason I say they need to have them by default is because Joe User could never FTP to a location to get the latest version of Firefox (much less do a build). Joe user could never user PINE.
This basic functionallity should be opened up to resellers to put in whatever they want and have system defaults work with other products.
In this sense, Microsoft is to blame and is being very stupid because by opening this up, they have a greater influence over industry standards in how the OS calls applications and works with them. If they act now, they could get a jumpostart.
Scripts... yes (because they are scripts. not programs unless you want to nitpick). Make... yes (as it HAS to have that functionality when doing builds). Graphical file systems and Apache do NOT. They CAN be set up that way but can be changed. In Windows you have no choice. Next time try reading what I stated before responding. Makes you sound more intelligent when you can actually respond to my point rather than babbling.
Maybe next time you MIGHT want to be silent.
Several huh? Let's hear these several that have this insecure setup by default in their systems that cannot be turned off. Hmmm? Oh my all silent now. Is it nap time for you already?
I'm sorry? But you must have been in a coma to have missed this latest exploit. You know, the one that Microsoft built into EVERY DAMN APPLICATION THEY HAVE EVER MADE!! The one that allows programs to call other programs from a shell command?? Did you miss that. You see, it's not the program you have to worry about but the underlying OS.
:)
So block the program all you want but the OS has a built in way of bypassing those blocks.
If you really wanted to try to ridicule me, you should have pointed out that even though you have blocked the built in browser, it does no good against this latest exploit cause this can come in a million different forms that it would be impossible to avoid it without completely rebuilding the OS.
Now THAT's how you ridicule someone.
I wanted to remove IE and MS tech support said it can't be done; the system requires it. Then I said I wanted to disable it and they said it can't be done. I argued with them and tried to get them to state that it was Microsoft policy not to help me to disable their product. They then refused to say that either.
After a little badgering, they put me on hold for about an hour while I researched and they blew me off. I discovered a DLL called url.dll that seemed to be called every time it wanted to open IE and IE wasn't available. I replaced this with the path to my alternate web browser (Firefox) and now everything works just fine without IE!
When I try to change the desktop to a web view, guess what comes up? FIREFOX! When Windows needs to update, it uses an alternative method by creating a window (like an app window) and any time a Windows app wants to use IE, it nows uses Firefox.
The ONLY bug I have is that sometimes it will open two windows. Only a minor annoyance but I'm hoping to figure out why it does that.
I agree completely. However for those who are forced by their employers to run this crap, this is an option.
:)
And yes, you do have to replace the browser DLL's which is why in my tutorial, I explain to also replace url.dll
You do realize that's in my tutorial, don't you? Sorry. Couldn't help but be a little snarky.
You replace instances of iexplore.exe. Where it has a path pointing to iexplore.exe, point it to your firefox executable.
You are only searching for instances of iexplore.exe and url.dll and replacing them with your firefox path.
Those are just two examples of what you will most commonly see as registry entries and the path that they need to have instead. When searching for iexplore.exe and finding a registry entry with 'open/command', replace the path pointing to iexplore.exe with C:PROGRA~1MOZILL~1FIREFOX.EXE -url "%1", etc etc.
Positive. You will notice when you see how it displays it. It's entirely different.
I tested this out on my machine at work and I have to say that it works like a charm. Windows Update doesn't use IE and instead uses it's own window, web view in folders options uses Firefox and all Microsoft apps now pull up Firefox browser windows rather than IE windows.
I'm basically living in an IE-less environment on a Windows machine...heh. Eat that Microsoft Tech support.
Actually let me clarify that a bit better...
:)
Ive noticed some apps (usually those built into windows) will just create a separate window (and won't even use a browser), others will ask for you to point it to the app that you want to use (file associations I assume) and if you edited your registry correctly, those trying to call IE from either shell: or the regular way will now call your other browser.
This takes care of just about every IE problem on Windows.
I believe so but have not tested. Basically if the app trys to open Iexplore.exe and it doesn't exist (or it cannot open it due to no permissions), it will try to open the system install of IE, but by editing your registry, this should divert that call to your alternative browser.
No need. If it can't use Iexplore.exe, it creates it's own window. So even that's ok :)
I would also like to add as a side note that when the system recreates it, find iexplore.exe, make sure you are logged in as administrator and right-click and go to properties/security. Then remove ALL permissions to this. This will reduce the systems ability to pull it up and I've found (by looking at the registry and experimenting) that when it can't open it, it often will ask for an alternative browser to use. :)
Um, you are sadly mistaken in so many respects I don't even know where to begin. IE is buggy, IE is integrated into the system and when Microsoft apps attempt to open a browser, they use the systems browser not your default browser; this in itself is a potential security nightmare as it does so from shell. Don't believe me? Check your registry sometime by searching for iexplore.exe and url.dll
Aside from those two glaring errors, Firefox has a greater set of default functionality and a HUGE plethora of add-ons that extend it's ability.
Plus it doesn't use ActiveX. Need I say more?
"People choose," replied Hachamovitch (IE lead engineer). "Hundreds of millions of people actively use Windows and they get to choose. Nothing in Windows as it ships keeps them from downloading other software that extends their browsing experience (e.g. the Google or Ebay toolbars) or changes it (e.g. an alternative browser)."
What a load of shit. I spent 8 hourts on line with MS tech support trying to disable IE entirely from my system. You see, when you remove it, the system recreates it. And even when it isn't there, it uses a default installed version which is integrated into the system.
Microsoft tech support has NO CLUE on how to remove it so I messaed around and came up with a way to have all Microsoft apps default to using Firefox instead
Blaming user error on the software is yet another user error. Stop the madness.
Oooh a flame from a Windows coward. Did you type that yourself or did you get your GUI to do it for you?
Gee, one billion pages and only 15 results for Linux? Why am I not surprised?
Too true.