It doesn't sound like they learned to lie. It sounds like they were preprogrammed to, and the other robots weren't programmed to be able to tell the difference. How is this insightful or even interesting?
Uh? Why is explorer putting an exclusive lock on a file to create a thumbnail in the first place?!?
It's most definitely Windows Explorer's fault. You wouldn't believe the number of times I have had it crash in Windows Vista AND Windows XP. You'd think they could get something so fundamental right, but evidently this is beyond a multi-billion dollar software corporation.
Haven't they made some ridiculously insecure file formats in the past? I seem to recall that the WMF hole happened because the files contain executable code for some ridiculous reason...
Which they patched very quickly - you can still open WMF files with the exploit, it won't do anything now. As the garndparent poster stated, there are no insecure file formats, just insecure implementations.
What I'm hoping is that they release the standard, and everyone becomes reliant on the standard. Then when they release a new standard, there is a great body of work that relies on their standard (flawed as it is) and this prevents them from creating any more proprietary formats.
At the risk of being scored -1 redundant, you are wrong.
"After you install Office 2003 SP3, some Microsoft Office Excel 2003, Microsoft Office PowerPoint 2003, Microsoft Office Word 2003, and Corel Draw (.cdr) file formats are blocked. By default, these file formats are blocked because they are less secure. They may pose a risk to you."
"This article contains information about how to modify the registry. Make sure that you back up the registry before you modify it. Make sure that you know how to restore the registry if a problem occurs."
"Serious problems might occur if you modify the registry incorrectly by using Registry Editor or by using another method. These problems might require that you reinstall the operating system. Microsoft cannot guarantee that these problems can be solved. Modify the registry at your own risk."
Microsoft doesn't even like their own suggestion. Instead of a foolproof "disable this option", they make you edit the registry, which they warn againt doing.
Oh come on off it. That's no excuse, and they should have ways of auditing their code to detect this sort of thing. They are the world's largest software company after all.
The solution, of course, is to install OpenOffice.org to open this sort of document. Best way of getting OOo on the desktop of ordinary users I've ever seen. Thank You Microsoft!
Ultimately, there is nothing wrong with the "file formats". A file format is not insecure. The issue is that Microsoft is shipping insecure code in Office 2007 and 2003 which may break when these files are opened and allow malicious executable code to run in the user's security context. Rather than fix this insecure code in a shipping product, their policy is to turn off the code and tell the user, "if you want to take the risk, turn it back on, but we won't make it easy."
Thank you!!! Sanest comment I've seen in a long time.
Agreed. The poster evidently thought they were being clever, but the truth is that all the things he wants defined are actually defined in law already.
Slashdot Mirror
Quick, breed her to keep her genetic material!
Wikipedia records IP addresses for all anonymous editors. I wonder how this will affect the project?
Wow, parent is flamebait? I don't think so, that's a valid point the parent is making.
Agreed.
It doesn't sound like they learned to lie. It sounds like they were preprogrammed to, and the other robots weren't programmed to be able to tell the difference. How is this insightful or even interesting?
P.S. get in quick - he's retiring. Honestly, what moron expels someone for talking about shooting with a camera?
Good luck! Don't let that moron get you down. I hope you win.
Uh? Why is explorer putting an exclusive lock on a file to create a thumbnail in the first place?!?
It's most definitely Windows Explorer's fault. You wouldn't believe the number of times I have had it crash in Windows Vista AND Windows XP. You'd think they could get something so fundamental right, but evidently this is beyond a multi-billion dollar software corporation.
Noise huh? And you brought something useful to this discussion with that last comment? Oh the irony.
They would need to patent this now, wouldn't they?
I can imagine it. You are doing something and a popup screen appears:
"You would like to copy a file. Would you like to continue? Yes/No."
Then another popup appears.
"You appear to be frustrated. Would you like to continue? Yes/No."
Think about it. With Vista, they'd have pretty much cornered the market.
So, Microsoft, by all means, patent away. This is one monopoly I'm happy to leave strictly to you.
Can't be. The Technoviking doesn't write RoR code. RoR code writes for teh Technoviking!
Well, wait till you see my ta bu shi da yu. It's aaamaaazing!
Which they patched very quickly - you can still open WMF files with the exploit, it won't do anything now. As the garndparent poster stated, there are no insecure file formats, just insecure implementations.
I meant Officer '97.
...and that's assuming that everyone upgraded, which they didn't given the cost of Office '07.
What I'm hoping is that they release the standard, and everyone becomes reliant on the standard. Then when they release a new standard, there is a great body of work that relies on their standard (flawed as it is) and this prevents them from creating any more proprietary formats.
The whole "they deserve what they get" thing you espouse sounds suspiciously like what Microsoft has done...
You could log a bug...
At the risk of being scored -1 redundant, you are wrong.
"After you install Office 2003 SP3, some Microsoft Office Excel 2003, Microsoft Office PowerPoint 2003, Microsoft Office Word 2003, and Corel Draw (.cdr) file formats are blocked. By default, these file formats are blocked because they are less secure. They may pose a risk to you."
"This article contains information about how to modify the registry. Make sure that you back up the registry before you modify it. Make sure that you know how to restore the registry if a problem occurs."
"Serious problems might occur if you modify the registry incorrectly by using Registry Editor or by using another method. These problems might require that you reinstall the operating system. Microsoft cannot guarantee that these problems can be solved. Modify the registry at your own risk."
Microsoft doesn't even like their own suggestion. Instead of a foolproof "disable this option", they make you edit the registry, which they warn againt doing.
Doesn't seem quite right, does it?
Oh come on off it. That's no excuse, and they should have ways of auditing their code to detect this sort of thing. They are the world's largest software company after all.
The solution, of course, is to install OpenOffice.org to open this sort of document. Best way of getting OOo on the desktop of ordinary users I've ever seen. Thank You Microsoft!
Thank you!!! Sanest comment I've seen in a long time.
Pah. Just use OpenOffice.org already.
Agreed. The poster evidently thought they were being clever, but the truth is that all the things he wants defined are actually defined in law already.
As for the "strawman" tag on this article... eh?
P.S. Firefox by default will run in quirks mode, but if you add a strict doctype definition it will follow the standard... strictly.