Did you bother to read the SANS report?
Windows 2000 Sp3+ and Windows Server 2003 DNS servers are NOT affected by this attack.
YOu ain't running a 4 year old version of Linux, Unix or MacOS X are you?
This was said in the early 90's, the mid 90's, the late 90's, the early 2000's and now again.
Till Apple has 5% of the market it's rather pointless.
Never the less, till they open the OS to the rest of the planet, it's going to be just where it is. And by open the OS, I mean the WHOLE OS, not something I can get from FreeBSD...
Not really true. On application servers, it's best to set a static pagefile.
Heck on SQL boxes its sometimes best to not even have a pagefile...
Letting Windows manage your pagefile decreases performance, as it leaves something else for the CPU to do and something else for the disks to do.
Put a page file on another disk (or other partition if you don't have another disk). Make the pagefile 1.5x the amount of RAM you have (up to 4 GB anyways). I've found this works well and gives the best performance for most systems (with the exception of SQL and ORacle servers)
Hey but it wouldn't be cool if Slashdot posted something like:
Flaw in Sun JVM puts other applications at risk.
Nah, it's just cool to bash Microsoft.
Funny thing is I'm willing to bet more than 75% of Slashdot posters are still using Windows...
I have Mozilla and Microsoft Antispyware BETA running on my system.
This is simply NOT true.
Re:Imagine if this was Microsoft...
on
Apple to Buy TiVo?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Microsoft supports some open source as well. They simply have a different business model than most OSS projects do. If Apple supported OSS why is MacOS X still a closed OS?
Just because Apple is a unix based OS, why does that make them better cross-compatibility? Microsoft's OS's work well in Apple, Unix & Linux based environments. I've had no problem working with all three in a Windows environment at all. No recoding needed.
How is it better? VM's under linux don't carry over all my hardware. It's not going to do me any good if my modem chassis don't work, or if my video adapter doesn't work, or if my DVD burner doesn't work...
So this isn't really a good solution...
Again bugs happen in ALL software.
You are not still using SUSE 5 right?
or if you are a Mac user you still are not using 10.0?
ALL OS's give us headaches, every single one of them. What needs to be done, isn't just for Microsoft to do, it's for ALL OS's to do, and guess what we are ALL guinea pigs every time Apple, some Linux distro or Microsoft releases a new OS.
Tell that same thing to any Linux software, any Apple software... hell just about any software.
Heck if all was good we would all still be using Linux Kernel 1.0, and MacOS X 10.0 (or even System 6) right?
Software, by nature, is buggy, like it or not.
It was tested THROUGHLY before release, but it's not like MS can actually test EVERY piece of 3rd party software on the market. Vendors gotta have something do do right?
You seem to fail to realize that SP2 also includes ALL hot-fixes released previous to it as well. So it too is a roll-up of all the other hotfixes previous to it, including those in SP1.
SP's are no different that Apple's Major Updates. They do the SAME EXACT THING.
Actually I more liken SP's to what Apple did with 10.0 to 10.1 to 10.2 to 10.3, except MS didn't charge ya $129 to make the move.
Yet you will willingly go out and get the latest Linux kernel, or the latest update of MacOS X without hesitation right?
Heavy handed? MS has given MONTHS (try almost 6 months) for people to do what needs to be done.
If other vendors are to slow or just too damn lazy, STOP USING those vendors.
SP2 is needed, simply because there are a lot of stupid people using computers. End of story.
That nearly all the programs on that list are very old, or already have updates for SP2.
Hey what the hell, it's Microsof so lets bash them anyways.
Sp2 does a LOT of good things for the average Joe in protecting him from his own stupidity.
This has been a well known work around for Napster, or just about any DRM recording, for a LONG time.
Copy the protected song with a modified version of WinAMP to a WMA file, then convert the WMA file to a WAV file, then do whatever you want with the WAV file, make it a MP3, stick it in your nose... whatever.
Newsflash... not....
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft moved most of there servers to HP DL585 systems which are Opteron based.
They had a big press release about it not too long ago.
Because Microsoft is changing the distribution method for WindowsUpdate very shortly. Microsoft Update. Google it.
Did you bother to read the SANS report? Windows 2000 Sp3+ and Windows Server 2003 DNS servers are NOT affected by this attack. YOu ain't running a 4 year old version of Linux, Unix or MacOS X are you?
This was said in the early 90's, the mid 90's, the late 90's, the early 2000's and now again. Till Apple has 5% of the market it's rather pointless. Never the less, till they open the OS to the rest of the planet, it's going to be just where it is. And by open the OS, I mean the WHOLE OS, not something I can get from FreeBSD...
Where does it say MS invented this?
Not really true. On application servers, it's best to set a static pagefile. Heck on SQL boxes its sometimes best to not even have a pagefile... Letting Windows manage your pagefile decreases performance, as it leaves something else for the CPU to do and something else for the disks to do. Put a page file on another disk (or other partition if you don't have another disk). Make the pagefile 1.5x the amount of RAM you have (up to 4 GB anyways). I've found this works well and gives the best performance for most systems (with the exception of SQL and ORacle servers)
Do we even know that Google has ethics? Wasn't it just the other day they were caught doing a no-no, something they tell others not to do.
Hey but it wouldn't be cool if Slashdot posted something like: Flaw in Sun JVM puts other applications at risk. Nah, it's just cool to bash Microsoft. Funny thing is I'm willing to bet more than 75% of Slashdot posters are still using Windows...
This assumes you are an Enterprise running MacOS X servers on Mac hardware.
98% of the world isn't.
Or else what?
Microsoft cannot make anyone buy anything.
You don't like the way MS is headed with MCE? Don't use it.
I would have figured that was simple...
Thanks for jumping to conclusions. This "story" is based around a lie. But hey, it's anti-Microsoft, so it must be right, right???
I have Mozilla and Microsoft Antispyware BETA running on my system. This is simply NOT true.
Microsoft supports some open source as well. They simply have a different business model than most OSS projects do. If Apple supported OSS why is MacOS X still a closed OS? Just because Apple is a unix based OS, why does that make them better cross-compatibility? Microsoft's OS's work well in Apple, Unix & Linux based environments. I've had no problem working with all three in a Windows environment at all. No recoding needed.
Note that most people are rather positive about this.... Imagine if it was Microsoft purchasing Tivo...
How is it better? VM's under linux don't carry over all my hardware. It's not going to do me any good if my modem chassis don't work, or if my video adapter doesn't work, or if my DVD burner doesn't work... So this isn't really a good solution...
Then you simply turn off AutoUpdate/Windows Update. It's not all that hard.
You can with Microsoft. Just go back and keep using Windows NT 4.0.
Again bugs happen in ALL software. You are not still using SUSE 5 right? or if you are a Mac user you still are not using 10.0? ALL OS's give us headaches, every single one of them. What needs to be done, isn't just for Microsoft to do, it's for ALL OS's to do, and guess what we are ALL guinea pigs every time Apple, some Linux distro or Microsoft releases a new OS.
Tell that same thing to any Linux software, any Apple software... hell just about any software. Heck if all was good we would all still be using Linux Kernel 1.0, and MacOS X 10.0 (or even System 6) right? Software, by nature, is buggy, like it or not. It was tested THROUGHLY before release, but it's not like MS can actually test EVERY piece of 3rd party software on the market. Vendors gotta have something do do right?
So your processor sucks or worse, your entire laptop sucks. But it's OK to blame MS for that right?
You seem to fail to realize that SP2 also includes ALL hot-fixes released previous to it as well. So it too is a roll-up of all the other hotfixes previous to it, including those in SP1. SP's are no different that Apple's Major Updates. They do the SAME EXACT THING. Actually I more liken SP's to what Apple did with 10.0 to 10.1 to 10.2 to 10.3, except MS didn't charge ya $129 to make the move.
Yet you will willingly go out and get the latest Linux kernel, or the latest update of MacOS X without hesitation right? Heavy handed? MS has given MONTHS (try almost 6 months) for people to do what needs to be done. If other vendors are to slow or just too damn lazy, STOP USING those vendors. SP2 is needed, simply because there are a lot of stupid people using computers. End of story.
Um, it was very well tested for almost 3 months by almost 200000 beta testers.
That nearly all the programs on that list are very old, or already have updates for SP2. Hey what the hell, it's Microsof so lets bash them anyways. Sp2 does a LOT of good things for the average Joe in protecting him from his own stupidity.
This has been a well known work around for Napster, or just about any DRM recording, for a LONG time. Copy the protected song with a modified version of WinAMP to a WMA file, then convert the WMA file to a WAV file, then do whatever you want with the WAV file, make it a MP3, stick it in your nose... whatever. Newsflash... not....