That's what "Triple X" did in the second movie - he fired his grenade launcher at the water while diving a couple hundred feet (it had previously been established in the movie that he had the highest Navy SEAL dive - 200-some-odd feet). Plus he had a train falling down right behind him, which he managed to swim away from before it fell over and almost crushed him!
Fun scene, but utterly unbelievable, like most "Triple X" stunts.
At least he wasn't deliberately following a plane off a cliff on a motorcyle, then sky-diving down to the plane in the canyon, entering it, then flying it out of the canyon like that Pierce Brosnan Bond movie. I could everything about that - except the decision to do it in the first place! Personally I'd rather be captured by the Russians!
Don't know if it's just Windows. When I've done image backups to a MyBook from Ultimate Boot CD for Windows, I haven't had a problem - but then for UBCD4W you have to have the drive connected when you boot since the stripped down XP environment doesn't detect USB drives inserted afterward.
Haven't tried them with Linux yet, but I'd guess it's some sort of interaction between the drive firmware and the USB drivers, so any change in the drivers between OS might change the outcome. Haven't tried OS X either.
Don't know if Passports are affected. I don't think we have any of them.
Actually, in the case of this client, it is routine to have to ship bigger than 250GB drives. They transfer and digitize sometimes thousands of feet of film onto hard drives, as well as video. Stills are also digitized but they generally fit on a CD or DVD.
We also use the MyBooks for external backups on some machines, which unfortunately need to be pretty big as well, since the idea is to backup the client material until its been processed. Then we archive the client material on an archive machine with 750GB ESATA drives. The production machine backups pretty much have to be a TB.
I'll keep the 2.5" concept in mind. And yeah, I've mentioned UPS to the client - but they ship the drives pretty well packed in foam and bubbles,
In that case, they should do it like the Hamachi VPN - use a mediation server to make the initial connection between the two machines, then drop out of the loop.
The way they're doing it, you have to spend money to use their server. Hamachi can do it for free because their servers aren't hosting the data flow, merely the initial connection protocol.
This is true. I have a client who uses a number of external MyBooks - and their clients send them MyBooks too (they convert film and video to digital and store them on the customers drives). These things are flaky in terms of not initially being seen by Windows when you plug them in. You have to do it a certain way to get them to work initially, then they're OK - until they break. The key to using an external is - never move them. Plop them down and leave them there. They aren't ruggedized enough to be constantly shifted around.
Seagates are generally better, BUT I've seen retail customer reviews of the Free Agent series that indicate the things die within a month to a few months, due to poor heat control.
Bottom line: never mind the noise, get a case with a fan in it, or at least a lot of vents.
That's what I thought from the page describing the "webification" of Microsoft Office - but it doesn't seem to be that way. They really do seem to have set up an alternative office suite that works, allegedly, on Mac, Linux and any version of Windows without having Office installed. I mean, they have to have the full capability, since there is no Office version for Linux and Office 2007 doesn't run on Macs.
I admit that their site isn't terribly clear about that, though. Their press release, however, says "In addition, Live Documents is available as a optional desktop client application that wraps around Microsoft Office and embeds collaborative capabilities into these hitherto standalone software applications..." Note: "in addition", so the "Webification" and "collaboration" aspects are additional.
My guess is, they started out with the collaboration versions, then fleshed them out later.
They need to run some sort of demo on the site itself. I find it hard to believe that they reverse-engineered Office in its entirety with just thirty developers. My guess is that none of the embedded OLE stuff is there, just the basic functionality of each of the main apps. Probably no macro and VBA capability, either.
...that Pakistan's nukes do NOT have PALs installed.
So somebody has got it wrong. Either they had them in 2003 or they didn't - or only some of them have it. The article I read said that Pakistan relied on separating the fissile material and the rest of the weapon components to keep them secure. And that Pakistan has not and will not reveal the location of their weapons to the US, fearing that the US would take them out if the US perceived they were at threat of being seized by Islamic militants in the country, leaving Pakistan defenseless against India's nuclear arsenal.
I suspect the earlier article about PALs was propaganda intended to allay people's fears that Pakistan's nukes are inadequately controlled.
Anybody remember the big deal over the manipulated crime lab results a few years back?
The FBI's function has always been since Day One to put people in jail without regard to guilt or innocence.
Does anybody really believe that J. Edgar Hoover ever gave a damn about "evidence"?
There's a reason that the rule for talking to the FBI is: You say "On advice of attorney I have nothing to say to the FBI." That's it. You never say anything else, because they WILL use it to build a case against you even if you have done nothing.
Ask that guy Jewel from the Atlanta bombing case. Ask the guy suspected in the anthrax case. Ask thousands of people in Federal prison.
The FBI is the equivalent of the Gestapo except they have slicker methods and better PR thanks to the TV shows.
I don't care one way or the other about the Kurds. I'm merely stating the situation as it is.
Not to mention that the Allies were in no position to promise the Kurds anything anyway. And since the Kurds were used to kill the Armenians in the Armenian genocide, they're hardly innocents.
The point is that at this time, from a "foreign policy realist" position, the US can't afford to antagonize the Turks just to help the Kurds.
Of course, the proper position is for the US to take hands off on all this stuff, since it has no direct bearing on the US at all. I have no objection to the US supporting the Kurds from a "moral" standpoint, but if the US weren't in Iraq in the first place and didn't have military bases in Turkey, it wouldn't be our problem and wouldn't cost us anything to support them or not support them.
The state knows that "everybody is guilty of something" - so they just put everybody on a "Watch List".
It doesn't matter that the "Watch List" is useless as an actual "Watch List". It's useful because at any time, for any reason, that some state official wants to mess with you, they can say, "You're on the Watch List."
It's a control mechanism. It has absolutely nothing to do with "terrorism", just like the TSA and the rest of the pointless measures they take will never, ever have any impact whatsoever on real, live terrorists whose job it is and whose training it is to get around such measures in the first place.
Nothing the US has done since 9/11 would necessarily prevent another 9/11 - even assuming terrorists are interested in doing another 9/11. There are probably a lot of reasons an identical 9/11 hasn't occurred - reasons having nothing to do with the security measures put in place since the first one, but more to do with issues of organization, target selection, finances, redirected emphasis on other priorities, or simple disinterest. Even simple competence at pulling one off in the first place - maybe they got lucky with the first one - or more sinisterly, maybe they had help they weren't aware of to allow them to pull off the first one.
By definition, as Rutger Hauer's character said in the movie "Nighthawks", "Remember, there is no security."
Dick Marcinko used to say the same thing with regard to his Red Cell SEAL Team exercises. He pointed out that security organizations operate by checklists. They run down a checklist making sure everything is secure. He said that terrorists don't operate by checklists. They hit targets of opportunity. So his Team would just wait until the security organization went through the motions - then bypassed whatever security they thought they had and made their hit anyway using methods that either hadn't been considered in the first place or which stressed and actually made use of the security measures in place to bypass the security.
Example: an alarm system. Throw rocks at it until the numerous false alarms make the security people turn it off for repair. The very security system you're using is used to bypass it.
Doesn't mean you shouldn't have security systems. It just means you have to remember that they're only there to "keep out the riffraff." As long as your only enemies are "riffraff", they might work.
End users and IT administrators claim they didn't authorize WSUS to apply this update.
Microsoft claims this update could not have been applied unless 1) it WAS authorized as a plain update; or 2) it was authorized back in February and is thus an update to the Search previously installed.
So who's right?
Do we have an unambiguous case where the IT administrator did it RIGHT and it STILL updated, or don't we?
Without that, we don't know what happened.
Without proof that Microsoft DID screw up (which wouldn't surprise me in the least, of course), any further argument is a waste of time.
It does. Right now it's not a good idea. The Turks are really, really sensitive about this stuff.
The US doesn't need any more enemies, and the Turkish population opinion of the US is at its lowest level it's been.
Personally, I don't see the point of "morally bearing witness" to some genocide that happened 80 years ago or whatever. If the US went around condemning every other government that has screwed somebody or other over, we'd have to condemn every country on the planet including ourselves.
I'm an anarchist, so I have no problem condemning any country or state. But it's really pointless to single any out since in my view they're all assholes. The only reason to single one out - such as Israel or the US - is what they're doing right now today to screw things up. What they did at the start of the last century isn't that relevant unless there are direct effects on us still in play today.
Turkey isn't going to form a "Caliphate" any time this century - unless the Turkish military gets taken out. The Islamic government in Turkey now is entirely different from the hardliners you see in Iran. Turkey has a history of being secular and the Turkish military intends to see that it stays that way. They nearly did a coup over the elections this time because of their concerns.
As for Iraq, they are going to in fight a terrorist group - listed as terrorists by the US and Iraq and Iran and Syria - that are killing their soldiers. Has nothing to do with anything else going on, although it will screw up Iraq more than it is already. This incursion has the possibility of becoming a full scale war between Turkey and the Kurds. And if the US doesn't go along with it, Turkey can cut off US access to the Incirlik US Air Force base which is vital to supply routes to Iraq. Relations between the US and Turkey are considerably strained at the moment. The US has no argument against Turkey's incursion because Turkey is under attack by a terrorist group harbored across the border in Iraq and supported - or at least not condemned - by the two major Kurdish parties, who happen to be the only two allies the US has in Iraq. So the US can either attack the terrorist group, which will alienate the Kurds from the US, or do nothing, which will irritate the Turks and force them to act. A no-win scenario for the US. Which is also complicated by the fact that a second Kurdish terrorist group which targets Iran is being directly supported by the US in order to destabilize Iran. Which is why Turkey and Iran are thinking of cooperating and both attacking the Kurds, according to the latest news.
The next problem for the US is that the two Kurdish parties intend to either establish a "federated" Kurdistan as part of Iraq with oil-rich Kirkuk as their center, or if Iraq is not partitioned, secede from Iraq and form an independent Kurdistan. That would be a disaster for Turkey, Iran and Syria as Kurdistan would then be in a position to fund and foment secessionist groups in all three countries. Turkey has said it will outright invade northern Iraq if that is allowed to occur, which would be a much wider war than the current incursion intention.
As for oppression of the Kurds, that is correct - but not much different than Turkish oppression of the Armenians, and who knows who else. In fact, the Turks used Kurds to murder the Armenians back around WWI.
"I've seen zombies in Linux, I've seen processes not respond (Boson). It happens"
But not as often as Windows. That's my point.
As for blaming Microsoft for bad apps, as I said, there has to be a reason why so many bad apps on Windows can take down the system. It has to be the software model. Adobe is just an example. Adobe and Matrox - which does involve quite a few drivers - can easily take down Windows. Very few apps can take down Linux completely. They can lock up the X Window system, but you can recover from that easily with a couple keystrokes. Granted, on Windows you can kill Explorer and recover that too. But if you can't get Task Manager up - which is frequently the case - you have to go the command line.
There's just no comparison. Linux is much more stable than Windows XP.
Yeah, well, Compiz I can believe would lock everything up. But that's more on a par with "not ready for prime time" software that should never have been released until it was rock solid.
I don't say it's impossible to do anything on Linux as bad as Windows - just that it's far more rare.
But then, did it really?
Do you know the trick about using the SysReq key to regain control of a machine? Just learned it yesterday myself.
Hold down the Shift and SysReq key, they type REISUB. It does several things including recovery keyboard access, sending hangup and kill signals to processes, and rebooting.
"Over the last 9 years, I've been running Windows NT with a wide variety of third party software from a variety of sources, and have never had the problem you describe."
If you have never had Windows hose itself in 9 years of "professional IT support", you are either incredibly lucky and should go to Vega immediately - or you are fucking liar.
It's that simple.
"These "corrupted TCP/IP stack" recovery tools probably exist simply to remove broken configurations that have been created, probably by user incompetence."
Oh, bull fucking shit. Do a Google, Microsoft shill.
"On windows, I've had buggy and misconfigured drivers, but have never had "corrupted" drivers, whether due to the driver file itself or the registry becoming corrupted. In fact, I've never seen the registry become corrupted at all. Not on my installations of Windows, or on the installations of any of my friends, my work colleagues, or my company's clients."
Again, bull fucking shit. Go to Google groups and look in the Microsoft support forums.
Fucking Microsoft liars come on/. and try to make stupid statements like this. It's amazing.
Slashdot Mirror
That's what "Triple X" did in the second movie - he fired his grenade launcher at the water while diving a couple hundred feet (it had previously been established in the movie that he had the highest Navy SEAL dive - 200-some-odd feet). Plus he had a train falling down right behind him, which he managed to swim away from before it fell over and almost crushed him!
Fun scene, but utterly unbelievable, like most "Triple X" stunts.
At least he wasn't deliberately following a plane off a cliff on a motorcyle, then sky-diving down to the plane in the canyon, entering it, then flying it out of the canyon like that Pierce Brosnan Bond movie. I could everything about that - except the decision to do it in the first place! Personally I'd rather be captured by the Russians!
Don't know if it's just Windows. When I've done image backups to a MyBook from Ultimate Boot CD for Windows, I haven't had a problem - but then for UBCD4W you have to have the drive connected when you boot since the stripped down XP environment doesn't detect USB drives inserted afterward.
Haven't tried them with Linux yet, but I'd guess it's some sort of interaction between the drive firmware and the USB drivers, so any change in the drivers between OS might change the outcome. Haven't tried OS X either.
Don't know if Passports are affected. I don't think we have any of them.
Actually, in the case of this client, it is routine to have to ship bigger than 250GB drives. They transfer and digitize sometimes thousands of feet of film onto hard drives, as well as video. Stills are also digitized but they generally fit on a CD or DVD.
We also use the MyBooks for external backups on some machines, which unfortunately need to be pretty big as well, since the idea is to backup the client material until its been processed. Then we archive the client material on an archive machine with 750GB ESATA drives. The production machine backups pretty much have to be a TB.
I'll keep the 2.5" concept in mind. And yeah, I've mentioned UPS to the client - but they ship the drives pretty well packed in foam and bubbles,
It was fast as lightning.
In fact, it was a little bit frightening...
Let's say you and your wife have a music system.
You throw a CD in it and play it while you're both in the same room. Or you watch a DVD movie together.
By Western Digital logic, you've just violated copyright!
This is the same idea - prevent two people from accessing music at the same time - even if they're both on the same local network in their own home.
It's utterly idiotic.
Presumably it's a NAT bypass device.
In that case, they should do it like the Hamachi VPN - use a mediation server to make the initial connection between the two machines, then drop out of the loop.
The way they're doing it, you have to spend money to use their server. Hamachi can do it for free because their servers aren't hosting the data flow, merely the initial connection protocol.
This is true. I have a client who uses a number of external MyBooks - and their clients send them MyBooks too (they convert film and video to digital and store them on the customers drives). These things are flaky in terms of not initially being seen by Windows when you plug them in. You have to do it a certain way to get them to work initially, then they're OK - until they break. The key to using an external is - never move them. Plop them down and leave them there. They aren't ruggedized enough to be constantly shifted around.
Seagates are generally better, BUT I've seen retail customer reviews of the Free Agent series that indicate the things die within a month to a few months, due to poor heat control.
Bottom line: never mind the noise, get a case with a fan in it, or at least a lot of vents.
These US government departments losing "terabytes" worth of data must have some serious upload bandwidth!
Or can you say, "hype"?
"Hacking - it's not just a crime - it's a survival trait!"
a creationist?
Novel concept.
That's what I thought from the page describing the "webification" of Microsoft Office - but it doesn't seem to be that way. They really do seem to have set up an alternative office suite that works, allegedly, on Mac, Linux and any version of Windows without having Office installed. I mean, they have to have the full capability, since there is no Office version for Linux and Office 2007 doesn't run on Macs.
I admit that their site isn't terribly clear about that, though. Their press release, however, says "In addition, Live Documents is available as a optional desktop client application that wraps around Microsoft Office and embeds collaborative capabilities into these hitherto standalone software applications..." Note: "in addition", so the "Webification" and "collaboration" aspects are additional.
My guess is, they started out with the collaboration versions, then fleshed them out later.
They need to run some sort of demo on the site itself. I find it hard to believe that they reverse-engineered Office in its entirety with just thirty developers. My guess is that none of the embedded OLE stuff is there, just the basic functionality of each of the main apps. Probably no macro and VBA capability, either.
...that Pakistan's nukes do NOT have PALs installed.
So somebody has got it wrong. Either they had them in 2003 or they didn't - or only some of them have it. The article I read said that Pakistan relied on separating the fissile material and the rest of the weapon components to keep them secure. And that Pakistan has not and will not reveal the location of their weapons to the US, fearing that the US would take them out if the US perceived they were at threat of being seized by Islamic militants in the country, leaving Pakistan defenseless against India's nuclear arsenal.
I suspect the earlier article about PALs was propaganda intended to allay people's fears that Pakistan's nukes are inadequately controlled.
Anybody remember the big deal over the manipulated crime lab results a few years back?
The FBI's function has always been since Day One to put people in jail without regard to guilt or innocence.
Does anybody really believe that J. Edgar Hoover ever gave a damn about "evidence"?
There's a reason that the rule for talking to the FBI is: You say "On advice of attorney I have nothing to say to the FBI." That's it. You never say anything else, because they WILL use it to build a case against you even if you have done nothing.
Ask that guy Jewel from the Atlanta bombing case. Ask the guy suspected in the anthrax case. Ask thousands of people in Federal prison.
The FBI is the equivalent of the Gestapo except they have slicker methods and better PR thanks to the TV shows.
The Nigerians need those Windows machines to keep that Nigerian spam coming!
Yup. Agree one hundred percent.
I don't care one way or the other about the Kurds. I'm merely stating the situation as it is.
Not to mention that the Allies were in no position to promise the Kurds anything anyway. And since the Kurds were used to kill the Armenians in the Armenian genocide, they're hardly innocents.
The point is that at this time, from a "foreign policy realist" position, the US can't afford to antagonize the Turks just to help the Kurds.
Of course, the proper position is for the US to take hands off on all this stuff, since it has no direct bearing on the US at all. I have no objection to the US supporting the Kurds from a "moral" standpoint, but if the US weren't in Iraq in the first place and didn't have military bases in Turkey, it wouldn't be our problem and wouldn't cost us anything to support them or not support them.
The state knows that "everybody is guilty of something" - so they just put everybody on a "Watch List".
It doesn't matter that the "Watch List" is useless as an actual "Watch List". It's useful because at any time, for any reason, that some state official wants to mess with you, they can say, "You're on the Watch List."
It's a control mechanism. It has absolutely nothing to do with "terrorism", just like the TSA and the rest of the pointless measures they take will never, ever have any impact whatsoever on real, live terrorists whose job it is and whose training it is to get around such measures in the first place.
Nothing the US has done since 9/11 would necessarily prevent another 9/11 - even assuming terrorists are interested in doing another 9/11. There are probably a lot of reasons an identical 9/11 hasn't occurred - reasons having nothing to do with the security measures put in place since the first one, but more to do with issues of organization, target selection, finances, redirected emphasis on other priorities, or simple disinterest. Even simple competence at pulling one off in the first place - maybe they got lucky with the first one - or more sinisterly, maybe they had help they weren't aware of to allow them to pull off the first one.
By definition, as Rutger Hauer's character said in the movie "Nighthawks", "Remember, there is no security."
Dick Marcinko used to say the same thing with regard to his Red Cell SEAL Team exercises. He pointed out that security organizations operate by checklists. They run down a checklist making sure everything is secure. He said that terrorists don't operate by checklists. They hit targets of opportunity. So his Team would just wait until the security organization went through the motions - then bypassed whatever security they thought they had and made their hit anyway using methods that either hadn't been considered in the first place or which stressed and actually made use of the security measures in place to bypass the security.
Example: an alarm system. Throw rocks at it until the numerous false alarms make the security people turn it off for repair. The very security system you're using is used to bypass it.
Doesn't mean you shouldn't have security systems. It just means you have to remember that they're only there to "keep out the riffraff." As long as your only enemies are "riffraff", they might work.
End users and IT administrators claim they didn't authorize WSUS to apply this update.
Microsoft claims this update could not have been applied unless 1) it WAS authorized as a plain update; or 2) it was authorized back in February and is thus an update to the Search previously installed.
So who's right?
Do we have an unambiguous case where the IT administrator did it RIGHT and it STILL updated, or don't we?
Without that, we don't know what happened.
Without proof that Microsoft DID screw up (which wouldn't surprise me in the least, of course), any further argument is a waste of time.
It does. Right now it's not a good idea. The Turks are really, really sensitive about this stuff.
The US doesn't need any more enemies, and the Turkish population opinion of the US is at its lowest level it's been.
Personally, I don't see the point of "morally bearing witness" to some genocide that happened 80 years ago or whatever. If the US went around condemning every other government that has screwed somebody or other over, we'd have to condemn every country on the planet including ourselves.
I'm an anarchist, so I have no problem condemning any country or state. But it's really pointless to single any out since in my view they're all assholes. The only reason to single one out - such as Israel or the US - is what they're doing right now today to screw things up. What they did at the start of the last century isn't that relevant unless there are direct effects on us still in play today.
Turkey isn't going to form a "Caliphate" any time this century - unless the Turkish military gets taken out. The Islamic government in Turkey now is entirely different from the hardliners you see in Iran. Turkey has a history of being secular and the Turkish military intends to see that it stays that way. They nearly did a coup over the elections this time because of their concerns.
As for Iraq, they are going to in fight a terrorist group - listed as terrorists by the US and Iraq and Iran and Syria - that are killing their soldiers. Has nothing to do with anything else going on, although it will screw up Iraq more than it is already. This incursion has the possibility of becoming a full scale war between Turkey and the Kurds. And if the US doesn't go along with it, Turkey can cut off US access to the Incirlik US Air Force base which is vital to supply routes to Iraq. Relations between the US and Turkey are considerably strained at the moment. The US has no argument against Turkey's incursion because Turkey is under attack by a terrorist group harbored across the border in Iraq and supported - or at least not condemned - by the two major Kurdish parties, who happen to be the only two allies the US has in Iraq. So the US can either attack the terrorist group, which will alienate the Kurds from the US, or do nothing, which will irritate the Turks and force them to act. A no-win scenario for the US. Which is also complicated by the fact that a second Kurdish terrorist group which targets Iran is being directly supported by the US in order to destabilize Iran. Which is why Turkey and Iran are thinking of cooperating and both attacking the Kurds, according to the latest news.
The next problem for the US is that the two Kurdish parties intend to either establish a "federated" Kurdistan as part of Iraq with oil-rich Kirkuk as their center, or if Iraq is not partitioned, secede from Iraq and form an independent Kurdistan. That would be a disaster for Turkey, Iran and Syria as Kurdistan would then be in a position to fund and foment secessionist groups in all three countries. Turkey has said it will outright invade northern Iraq if that is allowed to occur, which would be a much wider war than the current incursion intention.
As for oppression of the Kurds, that is correct - but not much different than Turkish oppression of the Armenians, and who knows who else. In fact, the Turks used Kurds to murder the Armenians back around WWI.
Does this mean that if Microsoft asserts patents against US OSS projects that they can relocate to Europe and be home free?
I hear a "giant sucking sound"...
How do you establish whether an OSS project is "here" or "there" anyway, when the developers are all over the place?
Just like his Microsoft handlers.
I've seen enough of his FUD to know what he's about.
He's just trying to recover some "street cred" so he can go at Linux again in the future.
POS.
"I've seen zombies in Linux, I've seen processes not respond (Boson). It happens"
But not as often as Windows. That's my point.
As for blaming Microsoft for bad apps, as I said, there has to be a reason why so many bad apps on Windows can take down the system. It has to be the software model. Adobe is just an example. Adobe and Matrox - which does involve quite a few drivers - can easily take down Windows. Very few apps can take down Linux completely. They can lock up the X Window system, but you can recover from that easily with a couple keystrokes. Granted, on Windows you can kill Explorer and recover that too. But if you can't get Task Manager up - which is frequently the case - you have to go the command line.
There's just no comparison. Linux is much more stable than Windows XP.
Yeah, well, Compiz I can believe would lock everything up. But that's more on a par with "not ready for prime time" software that should never have been released until it was rock solid.
I don't say it's impossible to do anything on Linux as bad as Windows - just that it's far more rare.
But then, did it really?
Do you know the trick about using the SysReq key to regain control of a machine? Just learned it yesterday myself.
Hold down the Shift and SysReq key, they type REISUB. It does several things including recovery keyboard access, sending hangup and kill signals to processes, and rebooting.
Don't need a cold boot with that technique.
"Over the last 9 years, I've been running Windows NT with a wide variety of third party software from a variety of sources, and have never had the problem you describe."
/. and try to make stupid statements like this. It's amazing.
If you have never had Windows hose itself in 9 years of "professional IT support", you are either incredibly lucky and should go to Vega immediately - or you are fucking liar.
It's that simple.
"These "corrupted TCP/IP stack" recovery tools probably exist simply to remove broken configurations that have been created, probably by user incompetence."
Oh, bull fucking shit. Do a Google, Microsoft shill.
"On windows, I've had buggy and misconfigured drivers, but have never had "corrupted" drivers, whether due to the driver file itself or the registry becoming corrupted. In fact, I've never seen the registry become corrupted at all. Not on my installations of Windows, or on the installations of any of my friends, my work colleagues, or my company's clients."
Again, bull fucking shit. Go to Google groups and look in the Microsoft support forums.
Fucking Microsoft liars come on