I know... If you accept the choices of a distro maintainer. You see, the neat thing about Windows is that it comes pretty much without features, and you build up on that. Install OpenOffice.org, install K-Lite Video coded pack, install Adobe Reader, etc.... etc...
In essence, I get the system exactly as I want it because I can build it from the bottom up. Not so with Ubuntu (I have it on my laptop, it is a fine system, but not how I want it) because choices have been made for you. So, with Ubuntu, I get a full system and then have to start to break it. Want Thunderbird? Uninstall evolution (with eventual consequences... e.g. Address book is seemingly integrated to other parts of the system) and install Thunderbird. That is just one example. You see, here you destroy then rebuild. In Windows, you only build. That somehow feels cleaner to me.
So, no, I am not going to bash Linux for this. It clearly is a Distro matter and this means I need to choose a distro that allows me to do this and that means going Slackware, Gentoo or Debian. Well, I chose Debian (on my workstation, which I had to decommission because of changes in family... Too bad that my AMD Athlon MP 24000+/4Gig of RAM will end its days in the garage of my parents) and I built up my system from the bottom up. However, not knowing exactly what packages I should install (An iTunes replacement? Eeeuh... Amarok! Of course, how could I not know that! *sigh*), much research has to be put into this. Research I have done for Windows and has thus become knowledge. That said, after a week I did have a Debian how I liked it. Of course, as I said, the machine is now decommissioned and I need to start all over on my (new) laptop.
So, yes, you can blame me for this... The fact that I want to have my machine exactly the way I want is the reason I need time. Time I do not have, and in Windows it's easy, because I've done it so many times over so many years...
Except that I don't call a graphics card upgrade an "easy upgrade". Do not forget: a graphics card upgrade requires you to install new drivers (and preferably not forget to deinstall the current drivers before installing the new graphics card). Compare this to a RAM upgrade, it simply is plug-in and be done. Replacing the graphics card is infinitely harder. I know, I walked someone (a non-tech woman) through on the phone for a RAM upgrade. I wouldn't dare to do that for a graphics card update. Also, laptops are out: upgrading the RAM in a laptop is possible, upgrading the graphics card? I don't think so.
For the end-user Aero *is* Vista. I know there are more features, but they aren't as visible as Areo. If I get Vista, I need Aero to work from the point of view of Joe Blow, of course.
As for missing drivers in the Win2000 vs WinXP switch. Highly unlikely for internal devices (and I don't expect this to happen with WinVista to be fair!), I know some scanners and printers lost support (mainly parallel scanners). Internal devices usually were just fine. Now, I don't expect the P-III 600MHz to run on Vista or even have drivers, but for my new laptop drivers should be available. However, that is to blame on the manufacturer... not on Microsoft. (I know, I know, in Linux we blame it on Linux, but the Windows world is upside down)
Fact is: with a computer bought in the course of last year you have no guarantee that you will be able to run a *full-featured* Windows Vista. In the days of the Win2000 to WinXP migration, you had that guarantee. A mid-range machine bought in 2000, would run Windows XP almost certainly at the release date of XP (meaning, that it didn't have SP2, which upped the requirements....)
If the Intel iBooks (I hate the word "MacBook") would have been available. Yes, I would have bought one the next day. Not for their build quality, since that obviously sucked with my experience, but because OS X was such a fine OS. I never needed the security of dual-booting, I got a G3, remember? The whole point was that I did like the OS, but the hardware broke too fast (a computer should last 4-5 years in my eyes, with minor upgrades). The timing it broke was indeed bad, but they lost a customer in me.
I'll buy an iMac for my wife when her computer breaks... That machine is +/-3 years old: a P-IV 2.6GHz/2Gig RAM (upgraded from 512Meg) running Windows XP Pro, and frankly, with the usage she has from it, it'll still be chugging along in 3 years. So, while I would like to buy an Intel Mac, I cannot reasonably justify one unless a computer breaks. I'm also saving for a house someday, and every 100€ counts. My wife can have a Mac when she needs a computer, but I'm going to step back and do with the low-end.
I'm sure there were some Windows 98/NT4 PCs that could handle Windows 2000, but not XP.
Yes, and just adding a RAM stick made them immediately capable of running XP fine. A minor upgrade....
My PC well exceeds the specs for the 'Vista Premium Ready' logo listed on the Microsoft website, but the logo on it says 'Vista Capable'.
So does mine.... (I think) Especially since I upped the RAM to 2Gig. The ATI X1100 can run some games, but I doubt that it will run Aero at all. Beryl doesn't... I know that when I read the fine print on the "Vista Capable" sticker on the box of my machine it stated as much as "Sure, put Vista on it, but you ain't gonna get you're money's worth". I mean, a 6 month old machine and you get stuff like that? You have to compare Win2000 vs WinXP at the time.... A brand new computer just before the release of Windows XP could run Windows XP *full featured*, even if it came with Win2000.
Actually, that's not true. My Windows machines are extremely low maintenance. Why? Simple: I install a basic set of applications, all my users run Limited User, I have an antivirus, Internet Explorer and Outlook (Express) are explicitly banned for all users. My family knows I know better, and they simply accept my software choices. So, sure, I pass a weekend in pain setting up Windows that way, adapting programs so that they run in Limited User (so, you have to know quite a deal about ACLs for that) and then... ehm, then, it's over.
Turn on Automatic update, and that's it... Never any problem and my users can report any problem at any time.
Oh, and there is the tiny little fact that all the machines I manage are behind an OpenBSD firewall. Don't think I can't handle Linux because I can handle OpenBSD just fine.
The thing is with Linux: if you really want your Linux as you wish and not some choices some distro manager made, then it becomes hard. That's exactly what I want: I do not accept Ubuntus choice of Evolution as an email client for example. So, I have to remove it and install Thunderbird instead. Sure, not hard, but I prefer to start from base, and build from there on. That's why I use Debian, but I lack the knowledge of which package is required for what. That's a whole lot of research, reseach I already have done for Windows and is "knowledge" by now. I know, I know, you're going to blame my familiarity with Windows. I accept that, but if I want Linux "my way", I need to invest time in it. Time that my wife is going to complain about because I don't spend it with her.
I was one of the people ranting that Win2000 was better than WinXP. The only thing I have found in a home environment that makes WinXP better than Win2000 is the welcome screen and that multiple users can be logged in at once. That was the reason I went to WinXP. There are some other nifty things like remote desktop and so, but they hardly matter for Joe Home User. The difference between Win2000 vs. WinXP and WinXP vs. WinVista is that a machine that ran Win2000 just fine, usually had no problems with WinXP. WinXP didn't need a fancy graphics card, nor did it require a very strong CPU, it just required memory, lots of it, especially after SP2.
Case in point: my former laptop was a P-III 600MHz/512Meg. When I bought it (second hand) it only featured 256Meg RAM and ran Windows 2000 without a hitch. I have run WinXP without service pack on similar machines without a problem. SP2 upped the requirements a bit and was slow (but still acceptable with 256Meg), so I added another 256Meg which made it run like a champ for anything I had to do at the time. Do you even imaging running Vista on it? I doubt it, yet, it runs WinXP SP2 just fine!
Heck, the laptop that replaced it is an AMD Turion X2 TL-50/1Gig laptop and it rated a mere "Vista Capable". That laptop was bought in January (on sale, I admit) You can't tell me that it isn't a modern machine. It is, but it lacks the graphics oompha to be Vista Approved (or whatever they call it)
That's the difference.... WinXP ran on Win2000 hardware with minor upgrades. WinVista versus WinXP is a whole other tale.
Switchers pose a problem for Microsoft, because most anecdotal evidence and many studies show that switchers don't switch back to Windows. Now before you bash me as an Apple fanboi, consider this: most people who leave Windows are looking for an out due to frustration.
I'll give you evidence for the contrary. In 1999 I was fully Linux, I switched from Windows because my laptop was too low spec and Windows ran bad, and Linux ran well. In december 2001, I switched from Linux to a fancy new iBook G3 running OS X and was very very happy. Alas, this was an iBook that presented the dreaded logic board failure and after a mere 3 years, it manifested. Just right after the extended warranty (because of the known problem) had expired. This of course, happened just after the announcement that Apple was switching to Intel. So buying a new iBook was not an option.
I bought a second hand P-III 600MHz/512Meg RAM for 100€ and used it until it physically started to fall apart. This machine ran Win XP Pro and ran it well. Beginning this year, I replaced it (I mentioned that it physcially started to fall apart) and I didn't even consider an iBook since they were over 1100€ and I could get a (lower, but still fine) specced laptop for 800€ with Win XP Media Center. Now, the idea is to run Linux on it eventually, but I'm married and haven't got the same kind of spare time as I did back in 2000....
So, there you go: a back-switcher. That said, I know how to secure and harden Windows machines. My machines never have problems, bar of course hardware problems... but even Apple isn't immune to that.
Whoa, there.... Get back to the real world. Just last monday, I was talking to a guy that was going to demo some software in a VM that I was worried about the licenses and that I'd rather run the DB part on Linux so that at least that part would be licensed properly. His reply: Are you crazy? Customers want to see Windows, it's all they know.
Ooookay..... was my reaction. I've become too old to be a fanboi. Five years ago, I probably would have started an argument.
Give it to me for free... As many licenses as I need. The best machine I have can't run it fully anyway: a laptop on sale in January is mere "Vista Capable". Sure, it's the graphic chipset, but under XP or Ubuntu it works perfectly fine.
This just shows that it is hard to sell an upgrade to a mature product....
You do realise that you can use a credit card as if it were a debit card? I do, works perfectly fine. At the end of the month, I pay what I owe them and it's all done. Just don't use credit cards for loans, as you say yourself. Us it as a convenience.
Second, if that rusty lump in Paris defines what a kilogram is, in no way is this sphere gonna change that.
That's wrong. The lump is not rusty, because the lump is platinum-iridium which is quite unreactive so that corrosion ("rust") won't affect the material. Corrosion alters the weight, you know.
Second, it can change the definition. The metre used to be a platinum rod in Paris, now it is defined in how much distance light does in a certain (very short) time. Here it will be that the kilogram will be defined as N silicium atoms. (Where N is a very large number) Scientists do not like definitions based on objects, they prefer definitions based on universal constants. All this could of course be read in the article....
Hmmmm.... Buget in about 170$ per month over 10 years and you can do it. Even on a "poor" salary. It's the whole power of budgetting your income. If you calculate your spendings correctly, you can set aside stuff in the long term without suffering. 170$ is less than a car payment (if you did a complete loan on your car). I won't say that the poor can, but this way it is in the range of the middle class of the western world. Learn about making a budget here.
The name Joe-Jobbing comes from a guy actually named "Joe". I suppose that if that guy would have been named "Henry" it would have been "Henry-Jobbing".
That said: the original poster uses a multi-level system. I don't exactly agree with him using a challeng-response, but at least it is at a very high level instead of the only level. Using a challenge/response system is an additional hurdle that is painful for legitimate users. If the person sending you an email is a potential customer and you want him to hop through these hoops, I can guarantee you that the customer will go to the competition that has an easier way to communicate.
Okay, I take back my critisism then... It's just that people that read your post might think it's a good idea to do what you do without all the additional safeguards. *Only* using a auto-reply system is really crappy and I don't want newbies to get a wrong impression.
You are essentially greylisting manually and you may still be pissing off innoncent bystander. Why do all the work when you can the server do the work?
As an added bonus, you can slow down spammers. (spamd(8) - see fourth paragraph of description)
Ehm, I understand your sentiment.... But, you are being a major pain in the butt for people getting joe-jobbed. As if the bounce messages from inexistent email addresses weren't enough, your messages are filling up mailboxes of innocent bystanders. Or do you really think that the reply-to of those mails are the addresses of the spammers? Let alone the machines of the spammers? Of course not!
Every time you send back a message to an address that seems to spam you, you are actually punishing an innocent bystander. My father was joe-jobbed because he hunted spammers online and reported them. I know what kind of mess it is to clean this up.
My own mailserver has three levels: authorized machines (= whitelist of IP addresses), blocked machines (= blacklist of IP addresses) and finally greylisting. Very efficient and easy to set up. Sure, your mail isn't realtime anymore. (Mail wasn't supposed to be realtime) That's the downside. Well it is realtime for whitelisted machines;-)
Most ISPs I've dealt with don't offer the most robust mail clients, anyway.
What exactly are you trying to say? That their service isn't robust, or that their webmail interface isn't robust? Because, frankly, if you say "mail client" we are talking stuff like Eudora, Thunderbird, Outlook (Express), Pegasus Mail, etc, etc, etc.... You can't really call "webmail" a "mail client".
All ISPs worth their salt provide POP3 and some even provide IMAP (which is distinctly superior).
Besides, there are many good open source webmail applications around... Most are very robust, and an ISP could easily use those and make a custom theme. Any ISP developing their own webmail application is throwing money out of their window.
No.... Nobody forced me to buy Norton or McAffee. You can live without an anti virus and be safe. Especially, if you know what you do. I do use AVG Free (just to be on the safe side), but it has never given me a "you have a virus" message. This means that AVG is either crap, or that I really don't need it because I have common sense enough to operate my computer without an anti virus.
Now, if Norton, McAfee and the like would send some thugs to me to bust my kneecaps when I don't buy their product, then it would be the same business model.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, you could just buy a Mac.... It's more expensive, but so are wives... *sigh* (My motives for not buying a Mac were explained already)
Is there anyone that made a TCO study on wives versus girlfriends?
I know... If you accept the choices of a distro maintainer. You see, the neat thing about Windows is that it comes pretty much without features, and you build up on that. Install OpenOffice.org, install K-Lite Video coded pack, install Adobe Reader, etc.... etc...
In essence, I get the system exactly as I want it because I can build it from the bottom up. Not so with Ubuntu (I have it on my laptop, it is a fine system, but not how I want it) because choices have been made for you. So, with Ubuntu, I get a full system and then have to start to break it. Want Thunderbird? Uninstall evolution (with eventual consequences... e.g. Address book is seemingly integrated to other parts of the system) and install Thunderbird. That is just one example. You see, here you destroy then rebuild. In Windows, you only build. That somehow feels cleaner to me.
So, no, I am not going to bash Linux for this. It clearly is a Distro matter and this means I need to choose a distro that allows me to do this and that means going Slackware, Gentoo or Debian. Well, I chose Debian (on my workstation, which I had to decommission because of changes in family... Too bad that my AMD Athlon MP 24000+/4Gig of RAM will end its days in the garage of my parents) and I built up my system from the bottom up. However, not knowing exactly what packages I should install (An iTunes replacement? Eeeuh... Amarok! Of course, how could I not know that! *sigh*), much research has to be put into this. Research I have done for Windows and has thus become knowledge. That said, after a week I did have a Debian how I liked it. Of course, as I said, the machine is now decommissioned and I need to start all over on my (new) laptop.
So, yes, you can blame me for this... The fact that I want to have my machine exactly the way I want is the reason I need time. Time I do not have, and in Windows it's easy, because I've done it so many times over so many years...
I use Notepad++. Much "cheaper" than UltraEdit and suits my needs....
Except that I don't call a graphics card upgrade an "easy upgrade". Do not forget: a graphics card upgrade requires you to install new drivers (and preferably not forget to deinstall the current drivers before installing the new graphics card). Compare this to a RAM upgrade, it simply is plug-in and be done. Replacing the graphics card is infinitely harder. I know, I walked someone (a non-tech woman) through on the phone for a RAM upgrade. I wouldn't dare to do that for a graphics card update. Also, laptops are out: upgrading the RAM in a laptop is possible, upgrading the graphics card? I don't think so.
For the end-user Aero *is* Vista. I know there are more features, but they aren't as visible as Areo. If I get Vista, I need Aero to work from the point of view of Joe Blow, of course.
As for missing drivers in the Win2000 vs WinXP switch. Highly unlikely for internal devices (and I don't expect this to happen with WinVista to be fair!), I know some scanners and printers lost support (mainly parallel scanners). Internal devices usually were just fine. Now, I don't expect the P-III 600MHz to run on Vista or even have drivers, but for my new laptop drivers should be available. However, that is to blame on the manufacturer... not on Microsoft. (I know, I know, in Linux we blame it on Linux, but the Windows world is upside down)
Fact is: with a computer bought in the course of last year you have no guarantee that you will be able to run a *full-featured* Windows Vista. In the days of the Win2000 to WinXP migration, you had that guarantee. A mid-range machine bought in 2000, would run Windows XP almost certainly at the release date of XP (meaning, that it didn't have SP2, which upped the requirements....)
If the Intel iBooks (I hate the word "MacBook") would have been available. Yes, I would have bought one the next day. Not for their build quality, since that obviously sucked with my experience, but because OS X was such a fine OS. I never needed the security of dual-booting, I got a G3, remember? The whole point was that I did like the OS, but the hardware broke too fast (a computer should last 4-5 years in my eyes, with minor upgrades). The timing it broke was indeed bad, but they lost a customer in me.
I'll buy an iMac for my wife when her computer breaks... That machine is +/-3 years old: a P-IV 2.6GHz/2Gig RAM (upgraded from 512Meg) running Windows XP Pro, and frankly, with the usage she has from it, it'll still be chugging along in 3 years. So, while I would like to buy an Intel Mac, I cannot reasonably justify one unless a computer breaks. I'm also saving for a house someday, and every 100€ counts. My wife can have a Mac when she needs a computer, but I'm going to step back and do with the low-end.
I'm sure there were some Windows 98/NT4 PCs that could handle Windows 2000, but not XP.
Yes, and just adding a RAM stick made them immediately capable of running XP fine. A minor upgrade....
My PC well exceeds the specs for the 'Vista Premium Ready' logo listed on the Microsoft website, but the logo on it says 'Vista Capable'.
So does mine.... (I think) Especially since I upped the RAM to 2Gig. The ATI X1100 can run some games, but I doubt that it will run Aero at all. Beryl doesn't... I know that when I read the fine print on the "Vista Capable" sticker on the box of my machine it stated as much as "Sure, put Vista on it, but you ain't gonna get you're money's worth". I mean, a 6 month old machine and you get stuff like that? You have to compare Win2000 vs WinXP at the time.... A brand new computer just before the release of Windows XP could run Windows XP *full featured*, even if it came with Win2000.
With Vista, you plain don't know....
Actually, that's not true. My Windows machines are extremely low maintenance. Why? Simple: I install a basic set of applications, all my users run Limited User, I have an antivirus, Internet Explorer and Outlook (Express) are explicitly banned for all users. My family knows I know better, and they simply accept my software choices. So, sure, I pass a weekend in pain setting up Windows that way, adapting programs so that they run in Limited User (so, you have to know quite a deal about ACLs for that) and then... ehm, then, it's over.
Turn on Automatic update, and that's it... Never any problem and my users can report any problem at any time.
Oh, and there is the tiny little fact that all the machines I manage are behind an OpenBSD firewall. Don't think I can't handle Linux because I can handle OpenBSD just fine.
The thing is with Linux: if you really want your Linux as you wish and not some choices some distro manager made, then it becomes hard. That's exactly what I want: I do not accept Ubuntus choice of Evolution as an email client for example. So, I have to remove it and install Thunderbird instead. Sure, not hard, but I prefer to start from base, and build from there on. That's why I use Debian, but I lack the knowledge of which package is required for what. That's a whole lot of research, reseach I already have done for Windows and is "knowledge" by now. I know, I know, you're going to blame my familiarity with Windows. I accept that, but if I want Linux "my way", I need to invest time in it. Time that my wife is going to complain about because I don't spend it with her.
I was one of the people ranting that Win2000 was better than WinXP. The only thing I have found in a home environment that makes WinXP better than Win2000 is the welcome screen and that multiple users can be logged in at once. That was the reason I went to WinXP. There are some other nifty things like remote desktop and so, but they hardly matter for Joe Home User. The difference between Win2000 vs. WinXP and WinXP vs. WinVista is that a machine that ran Win2000 just fine, usually had no problems with WinXP. WinXP didn't need a fancy graphics card, nor did it require a very strong CPU, it just required memory, lots of it, especially after SP2.
Case in point: my former laptop was a P-III 600MHz/512Meg. When I bought it (second hand) it only featured 256Meg RAM and ran Windows 2000 without a hitch. I have run WinXP without service pack on similar machines without a problem. SP2 upped the requirements a bit and was slow (but still acceptable with 256Meg), so I added another 256Meg which made it run like a champ for anything I had to do at the time. Do you even imaging running Vista on it? I doubt it, yet, it runs WinXP SP2 just fine!
Heck, the laptop that replaced it is an AMD Turion X2 TL-50/1Gig laptop and it rated a mere "Vista Capable". That laptop was bought in January (on sale, I admit) You can't tell me that it isn't a modern machine. It is, but it lacks the graphics oompha to be Vista Approved (or whatever they call it)
That's the difference.... WinXP ran on Win2000 hardware with minor upgrades. WinVista versus WinXP is a whole other tale.
Switchers pose a problem for Microsoft, because most anecdotal evidence and many studies show that switchers don't switch back to Windows. Now before you bash me as an Apple fanboi, consider this: most people who leave Windows are looking for an out due to frustration.
I'll give you evidence for the contrary. In 1999 I was fully Linux, I switched from Windows because my laptop was too low spec and Windows ran bad, and Linux ran well. In december 2001, I switched from Linux to a fancy new iBook G3 running OS X and was very very happy. Alas, this was an iBook that presented the dreaded logic board failure and after a mere 3 years, it manifested. Just right after the extended warranty (because of the known problem) had expired. This of course, happened just after the announcement that Apple was switching to Intel. So buying a new iBook was not an option.
I bought a second hand P-III 600MHz/512Meg RAM for 100€ and used it until it physically started to fall apart. This machine ran Win XP Pro and ran it well. Beginning this year, I replaced it (I mentioned that it physcially started to fall apart) and I didn't even consider an iBook since they were over 1100€ and I could get a (lower, but still fine) specced laptop for 800€ with Win XP Media Center. Now, the idea is to run Linux on it eventually, but I'm married and haven't got the same kind of spare time as I did back in 2000....
So, there you go: a back-switcher. That said, I know how to secure and harden Windows machines. My machines never have problems, bar of course hardware problems... but even Apple isn't immune to that.
Whoa, there.... Get back to the real world. Just last monday, I was talking to a guy that was going to demo some software in a VM that I was worried about the licenses and that I'd rather run the DB part on Linux so that at least that part would be licensed properly. His reply: Are you crazy? Customers want to see Windows, it's all they know.
Ooookay..... was my reaction. I've become too old to be a fanboi. Five years ago, I probably would have started an argument.
fill a bathtub with coffee beans to jack off while lying in them is none of their business.
Did I forget to turn off my webcam last time? Damn!
Give it to me for free... As many licenses as I need. The best machine I have can't run it fully anyway: a laptop on sale in January is mere "Vista Capable". Sure, it's the graphic chipset, but under XP or Ubuntu it works perfectly fine.
This just shows that it is hard to sell an upgrade to a mature product....
You do realise that you can use a credit card as if it were a debit card? I do, works perfectly fine. At the end of the month, I pay what I owe them and it's all done. Just don't use credit cards for loans, as you say yourself. Us it as a convenience.
Explained in the article: cubes have edges and due to that they are more prone to get damaged.
Oh, and Silicon != Silicone. I pity the woman with Silicon breast implants...
Of course, you were trying to be funny.... I know, I know, that's the sound of a joke going over my head.
Second, if that rusty lump in Paris defines what a kilogram is, in no way is this sphere gonna change that.
That's wrong. The lump is not rusty, because the lump is platinum-iridium which is quite unreactive so that corrosion ("rust") won't affect the material. Corrosion alters the weight, you know.
Second, it can change the definition. The metre used to be a platinum rod in Paris, now it is defined in how much distance light does in a certain (very short) time. Here it will be that the kilogram will be defined as N silicium atoms. (Where N is a very large number) Scientists do not like definitions based on objects, they prefer definitions based on universal constants. All this could of course be read in the article....
Not a dupe, but I have seen this at least twice on German TV and that was already quite some time ago.
Oops....Missed a zero in my calculations. I blame the wine I'm having.... Yes, in that case, scrap the middle class.
Hmmmm.... Buget in about 170$ per month over 10 years and you can do it. Even on a "poor" salary. It's the whole power of budgetting your income. If you calculate your spendings correctly, you can set aside stuff in the long term without suffering. 170$ is less than a car payment (if you did a complete loan on your car). I won't say that the poor can, but this way it is in the range of the middle class of the western world. Learn about making a budget here.
The name Joe-Jobbing comes from a guy actually named "Joe". I suppose that if that guy would have been named "Henry" it would have been "Henry-Jobbing".
That said: the original poster uses a multi-level system. I don't exactly agree with him using a challeng-response, but at least it is at a very high level instead of the only level. Using a challenge/response system is an additional hurdle that is painful for legitimate users. If the person sending you an email is a potential customer and you want him to hop through these hoops, I can guarantee you that the customer will go to the competition that has an easier way to communicate.
Why Challenge-Response is a Bad Idea
Okay, I take back my critisism then... It's just that people that read your post might think it's a good idea to do what you do without all the additional safeguards. *Only* using a auto-reply system is really crappy and I don't want newbies to get a wrong impression.
You are essentially greylisting manually and you may still be pissing off innoncent bystander. Why do all the work when you can the server do the work?
As an added bonus, you can slow down spammers. (spamd(8) - see fourth paragraph of description)
Ehm, I understand your sentiment.... But, you are being a major pain in the butt for people getting joe-jobbed. As if the bounce messages from inexistent email addresses weren't enough, your messages are filling up mailboxes of innocent bystanders. Or do you really think that the reply-to of those mails are the addresses of the spammers? Let alone the machines of the spammers? Of course not!
Every time you send back a message to an address that seems to spam you, you are actually punishing an innocent bystander. My father was joe-jobbed because he hunted spammers online and reported them. I know what kind of mess it is to clean this up.
My own mailserver has three levels: authorized machines (= whitelist of IP addresses), blocked machines (= blacklist of IP addresses) and finally greylisting. Very efficient and easy to set up. Sure, your mail isn't realtime anymore. (Mail wasn't supposed to be realtime) That's the downside. Well it is realtime for whitelisted machines ;-)
Most ISPs I've dealt with don't offer the most robust mail clients, anyway.
What exactly are you trying to say? That their service isn't robust, or that their webmail interface isn't robust? Because, frankly, if you say "mail client" we are talking stuff like Eudora, Thunderbird, Outlook (Express), Pegasus Mail, etc, etc, etc.... You can't really call "webmail" a "mail client".
All ISPs worth their salt provide POP3 and some even provide IMAP (which is distinctly superior).
Besides, there are many good open source webmail applications around... Most are very robust, and an ISP could easily use those and make a custom theme. Any ISP developing their own webmail application is throwing money out of their window.
No.... Nobody forced me to buy Norton or McAffee. You can live without an anti virus and be safe. Especially, if you know what you do. I do use AVG Free (just to be on the safe side), but it has never given me a "you have a virus" message. This means that AVG is either crap, or that I really don't need it because I have common sense enough to operate my computer without an anti virus.
Now, if Norton, McAfee and the like would send some thugs to me to bust my kneecaps when I don't buy their product, then it would be the same business model.
Not to mention the videos they posted on youtube.... *sigh*