Wouldn't argue if for example spyware and viruses would be security flaws only.
Most (or at least a lot) of the infections come when people install software downloaded from some other source (for example as a bonus pack when installing one software you get some Gator or alikes on many occasions). How could MS protect against that? Pray? Wish? If they don't do something, they're screwed, if they try to do something, they're fucked (somehow it even makes me happy that it is so).
Again I'm pointing that I'm using Linux only and I personally MS. And the fact that I have a lot to do with security. But at least I try to have a realistic viewpoint and I almost feel sorry for MS in this case.
But me being pro-Linux put asside, I somehow agree with MS in this case. While Media Player, Browser and other functionalities that are bundled with OS can be argued with some facts, Antivirus and AntiSpyware software provide basic security.
On one side you can watch people laughing and pointing on every security bug, but on the other people agree with the option that MS is not allowed to bundle software against security and malware problems. Well, it is not a nice time to be at MS position.
Not only that. If they would succed in HD-DVD push (that is if studios would move to HD-DVD), PS3 wouldn't be able to play movies. That would be a major boost for XBox.
Same generic unreachable context as internet, one can produce electricity, but one CAN'T own electricity (meaning having control over which country can use it or produce it).
Same goes for internet. One can own his own region of internet, not whole. Or what, will you OWN space to (One can own part of space, but space is too infinite)?
Did I ever mentioned inventing electricity? I thought I was specific enough when I was naming inventions that make usage of electricity (as in generating, storage, and currents AC,DC) as we do use it now, besides I even thrown out the fool getting struck by lightning trough kite. If you missed that part read my first answer in this thread.
The Internet was INVENTED.
And Internet is what? What actualy do you call Internet? Cables (As I said US didn't set up all cables), Basic protocols (TCP...), or higher protocols (HTTP,...)? Internet can't be defined as such. In basics:
1.It wouldn't work without cables 2.Cables wouldn't serve anything if there is no basic protocol to run no them. 3.Basic protocols are way to basic to make any sense without higher protocols, but they can't work without previous two.
So, how do you draw the line? Will the inventor be the one who invented cables, tcp or http?
Or better, define Internet and draw the line where some country own that part (after you do that try to make a usable implementation in any coutry, but to tell you, it is impossible).
There's a fundamental difference between the two. They're not synonyms.
I know, read my first post in this thread. But obviously you don't understand the basics of the internet, Internet is way too undefined to be INVENTED.
Second thing is, do you actualy know what would happen if there would be two internets (and even I would not like to see that case too become reality), one that is US and one that is used by the rest of the world? And if as you say implementation in the rest of the world would have to be different than US? Let me give you pointers on that: 1. You better rename it to USnet, because it isn't "International net" anymore 2. You would have a little bit of trouble to communicate with the other "Internet", remeber you demand new protocols. 3. By having communication troubles your export bussines would probably suffer a lot (US was always better reseller than buyer, actualy they suck as buyer). Meaning you would get the second prize besides "USnet", the "bigger recession" 4. Would the rest of the world suffer anything? No. They would just continue doing bussines, but elsewhere.
p.s. One must be really stupid not to understand this worst case scenario
Fact is, less and less people believe US. Me included. And if you would want to have "USnet", well you can keep it. But I do agree that control should go out of the hands of any coutry, being it EU, US, or Mars Colony Nr. 1. And since it is "Internet - as in International net" it should be controlled internationally.
Read what I said: One could say, based on the history... Well, screw history, conflicts happen in no time and that is when history doesn't matter.
Now read your words The U.S. government is at war with many countries all the time, and they haven't pulled the plug YET
I know in US have "inocent until prooven guilty", but in cases like root dns servers I wouldn't like to live in a country which would be a case for US guilt. Secondary "Internet" word is standing for "International network" (please spare me how TCP was invented in America (you do use a lot of EU inventions don't you, err... like electricity which runs those DNS servers, www that is used on same internet you demand..., or will you stop using them?), and no you haven't built Internet, you just built US part of the internet) and not for "US network". World economy depends too much to be left in hands of one country.
Or do you have any counter argument (as I said leave TCP and no you haven't built internet) why root servers should be exactly US property (I said history is not valid, history changes every day, like US put Saddam to rule, US went to war with Iraq against Saddam?)? Any constructive reason?
btw. No, world does not believe you, if you read public opinion you probably know that
Nah, why bother? EU and rest of the world should just set up their DNS servers and do bussines as usual (yes, this is one of the proposed measures, make their own and leave US to have its own). Since US is now problematic to work with, you know, e-mail is a little problematic when two sets of dns servers do their job, they should concentrate their trading to those who are internet accessible.
Problem for US is that US is not a good buyer, but they are happy to sell or enforce. So deduct EU and rest of the world export trade, and US has all: "zero export", "recession" and "their own internet". Still happy with your proposal?
Now there is a problem for your logic. No invasion where army would be included, but no way of defending against it. Actualy EU and the rest are giving you whole internet (which is used in US as "International Net", and the rest on some UNnet as "united nations net", funny thing is that now "international means america only"), they are not taking something away. Will America attack the world and enforce their internet on them, like first they don't want to give now they would like the rest to use it?
p.s. Reason why UN is taking these steps is to avoid any such future, but world economy is too dependant on Interrnet to be in the hands of one coutry. I just hope that small number of US people is as stupid as you.
Personally, I just don't see how that will work. What if the US govt insists? Are they going to just create their own root servers and start handing out their own IP address segments? That would just fracture the Internet effectively cutting the two nets off from each other. Doesn't seem like a sound tactic to me.
Actualy it would. And it would work very well. US economy depends on internet a lot and if they would like to communicate with other countries they would have to bow down and agree to using different root servers. Imagine busting complete American export to ordinary mail and phone. What would such a blockade cost other world? No Levi's? No McDonalds?
Which country invented it first? Maybe they should control it.
What a moronic proposal. Let's look at the problem a bit deeper. To power DNS servers you have to own electricity. If we can OWN internet, then it should be possible to OWN electricity. So, now lets give electricity to the one who invented it. I vote to give internet to that country also (they will at least have power to plug DNS server).
For internet you need electricity, and how did electricity history really went (only practical examples): - Michael Faraday (English) invented generating electric current on a practical scale - Thomas Edison (US) invented DC current - Nikola Tesla (Serbian) invented AC current - James Watt (Scotish) his steam engine enabled large scale electricity generation became a practical method
So, who does own electricity? We all use AC, DC is something almost never used in public and we wouldn't be anywhere without Faraday, while we owe to Watt mass production of electricity. Whos is electricity? English, Serbian or Scotish? While everybody else will have to adapt and start lighting candles (I know I will have to if your logic prevails).
For a reason I didn't name Benjamin Franklin, getting struck by lightning (even though he was intentionaly strucked (yes, he was using a kite to proove that) just to proove his theory) is not invention, and I think there are many who predate in being struck by lightning
Why nobody shouldn't own internet and why is (controlling ICANN) == (owns Internet) true?
One owning domain names practically owns internet. You can't expect people writing http://66.102.9.104/ instead of http://www.google.com./ btw. How does one access secondary site on the same IP? (btw. Internet yellow pages would become a profitable bussines) Can you trust somebody else, over whom you don't have control. One could say, based on the history... Well, screw history, conflicts happen in no time and that is when history doesn't matter
In case of war there's nothing easier than pulling the plug on some country and their economy and communications which depend on computers are dying.
I'm an indeed an MS guy, is it that obvious.:) I'm a developer on Windows Vista.
Not that it is so obvious, but I always check history of the parent (before) I'm answering to know with whom I talk to. It is a double edge sword, either parent sees that he's been wrong or he prooves you wrong (upside of this is that you learn something new, or learn where your assumptions were wrong). As I said. I'm cynical, but I do not play favourites unless my personal desktop is involved (on my desktop linux is the boss, and basing on my history with windows or osx it is not gonna change. not that I'm a freak for freedom, but I somehow consider completely open much friendlier than closed, nice example is why I choose fpc over delphi or gcc over MS-VS (below)). Any other desktop than mine? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know which OS would be best for some needs, it only takes enough willpower not to enforce your own preference (and it took quite a lot of work in my case). Which means I deploy WindowsXP and OSX without bad karma, and I will deploy Vista if needs will say so (again witout bad karma)
On.Net, I've only done a bit of it. You may find these msdn articles useful:
thanks for these, but... mem optimization Tried unmanaged memory handling and it bit me in the ass, mixing managed and unmanaged is not something one would like to try. Not that it doesn't work, but it is error prone. You have to constantly switch between two principles and you can be sure that code will be far from perfect. auto mem manage 1 and auto mem manage 2 Covers - Finalizing the object Still happens when garbage collector says so. - Direct GC control This one was probably the best I tried. But having a lot (and I mean a lot) of small chunks causes garbage collector to be the biggest consumer of system resources.
As I was selecting tool for the current project, fpc was the best option to get the things I needed, It needed a lot of work on compiler (but most of my work went in inline preprocessor which fpc really lacks) to get the things I needed, but now everything is working like a charm. I have complete memory control and instant GC called by the object for the object (with a lot of other features I could only dream of in standard fpc, I even plan to put it out as free project someday when I find time. Now just doesn't seem right, because I could not afford my self to waste time on maintaing that project. It is maintained as my needs say so). This is the reason why I choose free tools over proprietary, if something doesn't work as I need I can tweak it. And by carefull tweaking your patch can be applied on any new version without change (or just few small ones). This is also the reason why I tried Mono over MS.NET as I said in my previous post (I only ended up once without further support and I hope it won't happen' anymore, at least with free and open I can maintain it for my self after the project is gone)
You might say I could use C++:) Yes I could but I find it a lot easier for maintaing small projects (for big??? well... compile speed is terrible in C++, code is not something really clear and readable as C# or pascal for example, etc...). And somehow aesthetics in C++ and my personal opinion have a lot of disagreements:) So every time I start using C++ I need a month or so to get around and fix my brains so they can think without aesthetics:)
One thing that bit me in the ass was the use of Strings. In.Net you have to be careful how you work with them because.Net keeps strings around for re-use. So if you execute aString+="1" ten times (where aString starts as ""), it will allocate and keep around "1", "11", "111", "1111", "11111", "111111", etc... They will eventually be garbage collected, but in a high stress environment this can be real bad real quick. The trick is to use StringBuilder for string management, which will be very efficient with memory use.
btw. forgot to ask you now for the 3rd time:) You're MS guy as it seems.
Are you anyway involved in.NET?
To be honest first, I tested app compiled on Mono not.NET on Windows (but tested it on both). (however as I talked to some people MS.NET is not anything better in this)
If you are, one answer would've been appreciated. Is there any way to avoid sloppy memory handling and get instant free of some desired objects? As I tested GC works fine, but when OS is overloaded all the memory freeing seems to regress to almost 0 (as it would like to optimize performance for the job, which is probably good in some cases, but not in mine). All I got was memory consumption until even swap was overtaken, after that everything went to a crawl and that is a problem because I need constant performance. This was the one and only reason that I dropped C# for current project.
Now I just hope that you won't say again that it is impossible, well... you can say that I don't know what I'm doing. I was more or less exploring.NET for the first time.
btw. (on previous topic) checked on few computers (the only problem is that they use 99% ffox and IE for some sites only, before we agreed on this it was a real hell for me) and found only local MRUs created by Alexa. on both admin and administrator(SM) (not even one logged between the last clean check and now) filed under home dir, but I don't really know if MRU is actualy a file that resides on that location or not. As I remember while I was coding strictly for Windows (it was long ago, since I moved to crossplatform, I had to leave system specific details), MRUs were registry based.. Hopefully I'll go to another company tommorow, that is if I will have the willpower to do my regular checkup.
I mostly use Ad-Aware, Microsoft Windows AntiSpyware and SpyBotS&D. In some drastic cases few others.
P.S. - Power User != Limited User
As I said all users are part of group Users (and only that one). Where did you get intention that I would use Power Users?
I can assume you don't know what you are talking about.
Now, this sounds insulting:) My other part (besides desktop >> win,osx an linux) of the job is server administration. That would be about 50 linux servers and 1 Windows server (had to install that one on windows because of proprietary software that runs on it MSSQL).
Most of the servers have all services either completely built (and all are managed on my own personal scripts) or even coded from me. Now coding for 17 years, out of this last 5 years I develop heavy duty C/S services.
If you go trough my post history you can see that I'm cynical to complete computing industry and not windows only (but OSX is the most hated for the problems it causes, when it causes tham. There are few of them but repairing them is a complete bitch). I don't care which and where, but if there is a bug I can't stand not to start bitchin' (You get completely different point of view when you code heavy duty 365/24). Otherwise to admit, personally I don't use Windows on my personal desktops, except on 2 where I first test things before I start using them (that includes my software as all other like spyware, antivirus, etc...)
Log in as non-administrator, IE will not be able to install active-x, or otherwise affect system files. IE does not automatically have the priviledges to modify the system. The problem is that everyone runs as root, so even when you run notepad you have access to the whole system. This is a different issue altogether.
C'mon, I come from a linux world, where running as root is a scrutiny and I think that there exists even death penalty for that in some countries.
All my users that use XP are non-administrators (and they don't know administrator password either). My only job is constant cleanup of spyware and viruses (if you support advertising agency it can't be avoided, there's just too much mail usage), funny thing, some spyware installs it self even under Administrator (which is never logged, but registry result shows so).
It is true that problems are not so frequent as they were (to my missfortune first 3 machines had to have administrator login, at least until I haven't won my fight with some software company to get some changes done and after that format and reinstall), but still far from not existant. 3 machines are still used by same users as they were as administrator. It took 3 (and another 3 so they implemented it) months arguing from my side to get some software changes done to be able to run as common user.
I'm not sure what your point is here... I can do the same in reverse. Boot into linux and setup all the directory protections I want for my user directories. Then, boot into windows, mount the drive w/ apps that recognize ext2/ext3/reiser/etc... and bingo, I can read all the files!
Maybe my bad for badly pointing it out. Not the same. root under linux can do that anyway. On Windows you can't. What I tried to describe is example of point-click case of false security feeling. Something looking secure more than really is while having huge gaps from non-visible sides. And that is far from being lonely case. This with home folders is not a bug if you ask me, but same problem with IE installing everything (even though it is secured as possible) using gaps like that is unacceptable.
Really? Do you talk about software that interfaces the engine or engine. Software part is running in user mode, while its engine starts during services. Whole Windows VFS is based on Explorer modules. HTTP modules loaded for IE are nothing but extensions to VFS.
real problem is that IE was too trigger happy at installing active-x and other ridiculous security flaws.
Here is a proof that your comment is flawed. If IE would really work as you say, it wouldn't have the privilege to do so.
Another example of the same nature.
Go to safe mode as Administrator. Try to get in any other users home directory, clearly security prevents you doing that. That's what I call a good security:) Well, NOT!!! Now put Knoppix and mount NTFS drive. Go to the same directory. How can Knoppix do that? Well, as most of MS security it is click prevented not prevented in the lower system layer. If you can avoid clicking trough the MS GUI interface or avoid MS API calls in libraries you can get past the security measures anytime (this clearly does not mean everything, but a lot of security settings in Windows is click or API based and not even connected to kernel).
No, since you used too much of rocket science and physical terms in your proposal. Also it would be suggestable to avoid chemical expressions, complex mathematical formulas and alien language loops.
And remember, this is/. where people "LOOK IN" their monitors and have no girlfriends. Where on the world have you seen a geek even "looking out" the window, god forbid he would see a real outside world without virtual interface.
20% is the basic EU tax for goods like computers, etc. 9% (that is if I know it correctly) is the pax accounted on food, etc. 70% tax is connected only to a payment checque.
Apple sounds stupid. Well, that's economics for you
Yes, Apple prices here are stupid. As they are in most of the EU. Didn't you notice many EU people arguing with others about insane Apple prices.
I'd suggest buying an AMD or Intel.
Well, if job demands of you to own Apple? This is why I have G5 and G4. Beside other Intels and one Opteron.
btw. The only job that your (any) country does for you 100% sure, is to try to suck you dry and then search for anything else. And the only job that one can do is finding loopholes. Using a simple loophole and in my case it is a reality not a loophole (minimizing your payment ammount and trasfering other money to non-tax-able reasons where I get lucky because I'm always at the road, one can drop from 70% below 20%, second thing is that buying merchandise for a company is not taxed, again that merchandise has to be company property and again I don't have a problem here because all the merchandise I buy is directly connected with my job beside the fact that company and my address are the same. You pay the tax only if you resell the product. Meaning I still pay 120 in a store, but 20 gets deducted from the other taxes I should pay). It is not so bad, at least for me.
Apple computers Difference when buying Apple here is even bigger. The $499 MiniMac costs here $1010 (20% tax is included, don't know about US price if tax is included), not to talk about Cinema displays where difference is up to 130%
On the other hand I bought my self Dell24"WS-LCD (even though is much better by specs and calibration testing than Apple) for mere $1000 in my coutry also. Some companies have outrageus calculating policy, while some are almost the same price as in US. Meaning taxes and others should not be a problem here. I can easily (and anywhere) buy computer for less than $300 (again tax included) for example.
Taxes...EU Being self employed I can sum taxes to 70% taxes + 100% payment ammount. Half is payed from my company and half by me. Which in my case doesn't mean any difference really. But somebody employed elsewere pays his 35%. (just in case I expressed wrong) Meaning to get 100 worker gets 135 (35 goes down the country drain) and company pays additional 35 (again down the drain)
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't argue if for example spyware and viruses would be security flaws only.
Most (or at least a lot) of the infections come when people install software downloaded from some other source (for example as a bonus pack when installing one software you get some Gator or alikes on many occasions). How could MS protect against that? Pray? Wish? If they don't do something, they're screwed, if they try to do something, they're fucked (somehow it even makes me happy that it is so).
Again I'm pointing that I'm using Linux only and I personally MS. And the fact that I have a lot to do with security. But at least I try to have a realistic viewpoint and I almost feel sorry for MS in this case.
Yeah, agreed. In 100%.
But me being pro-Linux put asside, I somehow agree with MS in this case. While Media Player, Browser and other functionalities that are bundled with OS can be argued with some facts, Antivirus and AntiSpyware software provide basic security.
On one side you can watch people laughing and pointing on every security bug, but on the other people agree with the option that MS is not allowed to bundle software against security and malware problems. Well, it is not a nice time to be at MS position.
XBox 360 is not released yet, and March isn't year away. You should take care about your problem with numbers and dates.
Not only that. If they would succed in HD-DVD push (that is if studios would move to HD-DVD), PS3 wouldn't be able to play movies. That would be a major boost for XBox.
Same generic unreachable context as internet, one can produce electricity, but one CAN'T own electricity (meaning having control over which country can use it or produce it).
Same goes for internet. One can own his own region of internet, not whole. Or what, will you OWN space to (One can own part of space, but space is too infinite)?
Electricity was not invented AT ALL
Did I ever mentioned inventing electricity? I thought I was specific enough when I was naming inventions that make usage of electricity (as in generating, storage, and currents AC,DC) as we do use it now, besides I even thrown out the fool getting struck by lightning trough kite. If you missed that part read my first answer in this thread.
The Internet was INVENTED.
And Internet is what? What actualy do you call Internet? Cables (As I said US didn't set up all cables), Basic protocols (TCP...), or higher protocols (HTTP,...)? Internet can't be defined as such. In basics:
1.It wouldn't work without cables
2.Cables wouldn't serve anything if there is no basic protocol to run no them.
3.Basic protocols are way to basic to make any sense without higher protocols, but they can't work without previous two.
So, how do you draw the line? Will the inventor be the one who invented cables, tcp or http?
Or better, define Internet and draw the line where some country own that part (after you do that try to make a usable implementation in any coutry, but to tell you, it is impossible).
There's a fundamental difference between the two. They're not synonyms.
I know, read my first post in this thread. But obviously you don't understand the basics of the internet, Internet is way too undefined to be INVENTED.
Second thing is, do you actualy know what would happen if there would be two internets (and even I would not like to see that case too become reality), one that is US and one that is used by the rest of the world? And if as you say implementation in the rest of the world would have to be different than US?
Let me give you pointers on that:
1. You better rename it to USnet, because it isn't "International net" anymore
2. You would have a little bit of trouble to communicate with the other "Internet", remeber you demand new protocols.
3. By having communication troubles your export bussines would probably suffer a lot (US was always better reseller than buyer, actualy they suck as buyer). Meaning you would get the second prize besides "USnet", the "bigger recession"
4. Would the rest of the world suffer anything? No. They would just continue doing bussines, but elsewhere.
p.s. One must be really stupid not to understand this worst case scenario
Fact is, less and less people believe US. Me included. And if you would want to have "USnet", well you can keep it. But I do agree that control should go out of the hands of any coutry, being it EU, US, or Mars Colony Nr. 1. And since it is "Internet - as in International net" it should be controlled internationally.
Read what I said:
One could say, based on the history... Well, screw history, conflicts happen in no time and that is when history doesn't matter.
Now read your words
The U.S. government is at war with many countries all the time, and they haven't pulled the plug YET
I know in US have "inocent until prooven guilty", but in cases like root dns servers I wouldn't like to live in a country which would be a case for US guilt. Secondary "Internet" word is standing for "International network" (please spare me how TCP was invented in America (you do use a lot of EU inventions don't you, err... like electricity which runs those DNS servers, www that is used on same internet you demand..., or will you stop using them?), and no you haven't built Internet, you just built US part of the internet) and not for "US network". World economy depends too much to be left in hands of one country.
Or do you have any counter argument (as I said leave TCP and no you haven't built internet) why root servers should be exactly US property (I said history is not valid, history changes every day, like US put Saddam to rule, US went to war with Iraq against Saddam?)? Any constructive reason?
btw. No, world does not believe you, if you read public opinion you probably know that
Nah, why bother? EU and rest of the world should just set up their DNS servers and do bussines as usual (yes, this is one of the proposed measures, make their own and leave US to have its own). Since US is now problematic to work with, you know, e-mail is a little problematic when two sets of dns servers do their job, they should concentrate their trading to those who are internet accessible.
Problem for US is that US is not a good buyer, but they are happy to sell or enforce. So deduct EU and rest of the world export trade, and US has all: "zero export", "recession" and "their own internet". Still happy with your proposal?
Now there is a problem for your logic. No invasion where army would be included, but no way of defending against it. Actualy EU and the rest are giving you whole internet (which is used in US as "International Net", and the rest on some UNnet as "united nations net", funny thing is that now "international means america only"), they are not taking something away. Will America attack the world and enforce their internet on them, like first they don't want to give now they would like the rest to use it?
p.s. Reason why UN is taking these steps is to avoid any such future, but world economy is too dependant on Interrnet to be in the hands of one coutry. I just hope that small number of US people is as stupid as you.
Actualy, answera are "yes" and "yes they are".
Or maybe you like to type http://66.102.9.99/ instead of http://www.google.net/
Personally, I just don't see how that will work. What if the US govt insists? Are they going to just create their own root servers and start handing out their own IP address segments? That would just fracture the Internet effectively cutting the two nets off from each other. Doesn't seem like a sound tactic to me.
Actualy it would. And it would work very well. US economy depends on internet a lot and if they would like to communicate with other countries they would have to bow down and agree to using different root servers. Imagine busting complete American export to ordinary mail and phone. What would such a blockade cost other world? No Levi's? No McDonalds?
Actualy "I" is for "Internet" http://www.icann.org/
And it is a private company
Which country invented it first? Maybe they should control it.
What a moronic proposal. Let's look at the problem a bit deeper. To power DNS servers you have to own electricity. If we can OWN internet, then it should be possible to OWN electricity. So, now lets give electricity to the one who invented it. I vote to give internet to that country also (they will at least have power to plug DNS server).
For internet you need electricity, and how did electricity history really went (only practical examples):
- Michael Faraday (English) invented generating electric current on a practical scale
- Thomas Edison (US) invented DC current
- Nikola Tesla (Serbian) invented AC current
- James Watt (Scotish) his steam engine enabled large scale electricity generation became a practical method
So, who does own electricity? We all use AC, DC is something almost never used in public and we wouldn't be anywhere without Faraday, while we owe to Watt mass production of electricity.
Whos is electricity? English, Serbian or Scotish? While everybody else will have to adapt and start lighting candles (I know I will have to if your logic prevails).
For a reason I didn't name Benjamin Franklin, getting struck by lightning (even though he was intentionaly strucked (yes, he was using a kite to proove that) just to proove his theory) is not invention, and I think there are many who predate in being struck by lightning
Why nobody shouldn't own internet and why is (controlling ICANN) == (owns Internet) true?
One owning domain names practically owns internet. You can't expect people writing http://66.102.9.104/ instead of http://www.google.com./ btw. How does one access secondary site on the same IP? (btw. Internet yellow pages would become a profitable bussines) Can you trust somebody else, over whom you don't have control. One could say, based on the history... Well, screw history, conflicts happen in no time and that is when history doesn't matter
In case of war there's nothing easier than pulling the plug on some country and their economy and communications which depend on computers are dying.
I'm an indeed an MS guy, is it that obvious. :) I'm a developer on Windows Vista.
.Net, I've only done a bit of it. You may find these msdn articles useful:
.Net you have to be careful how you work with them because .Net keeps strings around for re-use. So if you execute aString+="1" ten times (where aString starts as ""), it will allocate and keep around "1", "11", "111", "1111", "11111", "111111", etc... They will eventually be garbage collected, but in a high stress environment this can be real bad real quick. The trick is to use StringBuilder for string management, which will be very efficient with memory use.
Not that it is so obvious, but I always check history of the parent (before) I'm answering to know with whom I talk to. It is a double edge sword, either parent sees that he's been wrong or he prooves you wrong (upside of this is that you learn something new, or learn where your assumptions were wrong). As I said. I'm cynical, but I do not play favourites unless my personal desktop is involved (on my desktop linux is the boss, and basing on my history with windows or osx it is not gonna change. not that I'm a freak for freedom, but I somehow consider completely open much friendlier than closed, nice example is why I choose fpc over delphi or gcc over MS-VS (below)). Any other desktop than mine? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know which OS would be best for some needs, it only takes enough willpower not to enforce your own preference (and it took quite a lot of work in my case). Which means I deploy WindowsXP and OSX without bad karma, and I will deploy Vista if needs will say so (again witout bad karma)
On
thanks for these, but...
mem optimization
Tried unmanaged memory handling and it bit me in the ass, mixing managed and unmanaged is not something one would like to try. Not that it doesn't work, but it is error prone. You have to constantly switch between two principles and you can be sure that code will be far from perfect.
auto mem manage 1 and auto mem manage 2
Covers
- Finalizing the object
Still happens when garbage collector says so.
- Direct GC control
This one was probably the best I tried. But having a lot (and I mean a lot) of small chunks causes garbage collector to be the biggest consumer of system resources.
As I was selecting tool for the current project, fpc was the best option to get the things I needed, It needed a lot of work on compiler (but most of my work went in inline preprocessor which fpc really lacks) to get the things I needed, but now everything is working like a charm. I have complete memory control and instant GC called by the object for the object (with a lot of other features I could only dream of in standard fpc, I even plan to put it out as free project someday when I find time. Now just doesn't seem right, because I could not afford my self to waste time on maintaing that project. It is maintained as my needs say so). This is the reason why I choose free tools over proprietary, if something doesn't work as I need I can tweak it. And by carefull tweaking your patch can be applied on any new version without change (or just few small ones). This is also the reason why I tried Mono over MS.NET as I said in my previous post (I only ended up once without further support and I hope it won't happen' anymore, at least with free and open I can maintain it for my self after the project is gone)
You might say I could use C++:) Yes I could but I find it a lot easier for maintaing small projects (for big??? well... compile speed is terrible in C++, code is not something really clear and readable as C# or pascal for example, etc...). And somehow aesthetics in C++ and my personal opinion have a lot of disagreements:) So every time I start using C++ I need a month or so to get around and fix my brains so they can think without aesthetics:)
One thing that bit me in the ass was the use of Strings. In
Know th
btw. forgot to ask you now for the 3rd time:) You're MS guy as it seems.
.NET?
.NET on Windows (but tested it on both). (however as I talked to some people MS.NET is not anything better in this)
.NET for the first time.
Are you anyway involved in
To be honest first, I tested app compiled on Mono not
If you are, one answer would've been appreciated. Is there any way to avoid sloppy memory handling and get instant free of some desired objects? As I tested GC works fine, but when OS is overloaded all the memory freeing seems to regress to almost 0 (as it would like to optimize performance for the job, which is probably good in some cases, but not in mine). All I got was memory consumption until even swap was overtaken, after that everything went to a crawl and that is a problem because I need constant performance. This was the one and only reason that I dropped C# for current project.
Now I just hope that you won't say again that it is impossible, well... you can say that I don't know what I'm doing. I was more or less exploring
btw. (on previous topic) checked on few computers (the only problem is that they use 99% ffox and IE for some sites only, before we agreed on this it was a real hell for me) and found only local MRUs created by Alexa. on both admin and administrator(SM) (not even one logged between the last clean check and now) filed under home dir, but I don't really know if MRU is actualy a file that resides on that location or not. As I remember while I was coding strictly for Windows (it was long ago, since I moved to crossplatform, I had to leave system specific details), MRUs were registry based.. Hopefully I'll go to another company tommorow, that is if I will have the willpower to do my regular checkup.
I mostly use Ad-Aware, Microsoft Windows AntiSpyware and SpyBotS&D. In some drastic cases few others.
P.S. - Power User != Limited User
As I said all users are part of group Users (and only that one). Where did you get intention that I would use Power Users?
I can assume you don't know what you are talking about.
Now, this sounds insulting:) My other part (besides desktop >> win,osx an linux) of the job is server administration. That would be about 50 linux servers and 1 Windows server (had to install that one on windows because of proprietary software that runs on it MSSQL).
Most of the servers have all services either completely built (and all are managed on my own personal scripts) or even coded from me. Now coding for 17 years, out of this last 5 years I develop heavy duty C/S services.
If you go trough my post history you can see that I'm cynical to complete computing industry and not windows only (but OSX is the most hated for the problems it causes, when it causes tham. There are few of them but repairing them is a complete bitch). I don't care which and where, but if there is a bug I can't stand not to start bitchin' (You get completely different point of view when you code heavy duty 365/24). Otherwise to admit, personally I don't use Windows on my personal desktops, except on 2 where I first test things before I start using them (that includes my software as all other like spyware, antivirus, etc...)
Do you still assume???
If you are a limited user, spyware *cannot* install itself under other user accounts or affect any system files
Would be nice...
Well, spyware I have to clean from the system doesn't think so. And I know for a fact that only limited users are logged on.
You can try to say anything, reality speaks for it self and I doubt you could proove otherwise by telling "How it should be"
Log in as non-administrator, IE will not be able to install active-x, or otherwise affect system files. IE does not automatically have the priviledges to modify the system. The problem is that everyone runs as root, so even when you run notepad you have access to the whole system. This is a different issue altogether.
C'mon, I come from a linux world, where running as root is a scrutiny and I think that there exists even death penalty for that in some countries.
All my users that use XP are non-administrators (and they don't know administrator password either). My only job is constant cleanup of spyware and viruses (if you support advertising agency it can't be avoided, there's just too much mail usage), funny thing, some spyware installs it self even under Administrator (which is never logged, but registry result shows so).
It is true that problems are not so frequent as they were (to my missfortune first 3 machines had to have administrator login, at least until I haven't won my fight with some software company to get some changes done and after that format and reinstall), but still far from not existant. 3 machines are still used by same users as they were as administrator. It took 3 (and another 3 so they implemented it) months arguing from my side to get some software changes done to be able to run as common user.
I'm not sure what your point is here... I can do the same in reverse. Boot into linux and setup all the directory protections I want for my user directories. Then, boot into windows, mount the drive w/ apps that recognize ext2/ext3/reiser/etc... and bingo, I can read all the files!
Maybe my bad for badly pointing it out.
Not the same. root under linux can do that anyway. On Windows you can't. What I tried to describe is example of point-click case of false security feeling. Something looking secure more than really is while having huge gaps from non-visible sides. And that is far from being lonely case. This with home folders is not a bug if you ask me, but same problem with IE installing everything (even though it is secured as possible) using gaps like that is unacceptable.
Really? Do you talk about software that interfaces the engine or engine. Software part is running in user mode, while its engine starts during services. Whole Windows VFS is based on Explorer modules. HTTP modules loaded for IE are nothing but extensions to VFS.
real problem is that IE was too trigger happy at installing active-x and other ridiculous security flaws.
Here is a proof that your comment is flawed. If IE would really work as you say, it wouldn't have the privilege to do so.
Another example of the same nature.
Go to safe mode as Administrator. Try to get in any other users home directory, clearly security prevents you doing that. That's what I call a good security:) Well, NOT!!! Now put Knoppix and mount NTFS drive. Go to the same directory. How can Knoppix do that? Well, as most of MS security it is click prevented not prevented in the lower system layer. If you can avoid clicking trough the MS GUI interface or avoid MS API calls in libraries you can get past the security measures anytime (this clearly does not mean everything, but a lot of security settings in Windows is click or API based and not even connected to kernel).
10 years too late to be possible. Linus already did that by licensing Linux GPL:)
Evolution port for OSX is already in progress according to Novell5 -March/msg00592.htmlt ml
p m ps-along-on-windows-and.html
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/evolution-list/200
working with fink
http://primates.ximian.com/~aaron/doing/evo-osx.h
While Tor Lillqvist and few others works on Windows port
http://evolution-win32.sourceforge.net/newsrss.ph
screenshots
http://tml-blog.blogspot.com/2005/06/evolution-li
No, since you used too much of rocket science and physical terms in your proposal. Also it would be suggestable to avoid chemical expressions, complex mathematical formulas and alien language loops.
/. where people "LOOK IN" their monitors and have no girlfriends. Where on the world have you seen a geek even "looking out" the window, god forbid he would see a real outside world without virtual interface.
And remember, this is
p(){ echo $4;}; echo `p ${*//[!0-9]/ }`
:)
Guess I could compete for the shortest in your nr.1
20% is the basic EU tax for goods like computers, etc. 9% (that is if I know it correctly) is the pax accounted on food, etc.
70% tax is connected only to a payment checque.
Apple sounds stupid. Well, that's economics for you
Yes, Apple prices here are stupid. As they are in most of the EU. Didn't you notice many EU people arguing with others about insane Apple prices.
I'd suggest buying an AMD or Intel.
Well, if job demands of you to own Apple? This is why I have G5 and G4. Beside other Intels and one Opteron.
btw. The only job that your (any) country does for you 100% sure, is to try to suck you dry and then search for anything else. And the only job that one can do is finding loopholes. Using a simple loophole and in my case it is a reality not a loophole (minimizing your payment ammount and trasfering other money to non-tax-able reasons where I get lucky because I'm always at the road, one can drop from 70% below 20%, second thing is that buying merchandise for a company is not taxed, again that merchandise has to be company property and again I don't have a problem here because all the merchandise I buy is directly connected with my job beside the fact that company and my address are the same. You pay the tax only if you resell the product. Meaning I still pay 120 in a store, but 20 gets deducted from the other taxes I should pay). It is not so bad, at least for me.
Well, here it is (odd second#) ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v1.1/v1.1.0. tar.bz2 for you to feel kewl and believe me, that it was still fresh in 94
Apple computers
Difference when buying Apple here is even bigger. The $499 MiniMac costs here $1010 (20% tax is included, don't know about US price if tax is included), not to talk about Cinema displays where difference is up to 130%
On the other hand I bought my self Dell24"WS-LCD (even though is much better by specs and calibration testing than Apple) for mere $1000 in my coutry also. Some companies have outrageus calculating policy, while some are almost the same price as in US. Meaning taxes and others should not be a problem here. I can easily (and anywhere) buy computer for less than $300 (again tax included) for example.
Taxes...EU
Being self employed I can sum taxes to 70% taxes + 100% payment ammount. Half is payed from my company and half by me. Which in my case doesn't mean any difference really. But somebody employed elsewere pays his 35%. (just in case I expressed wrong) Meaning to get 100 worker gets 135 (35 goes down the country drain) and company pays additional 35 (again down the drain)