Except in inetd they aren't hidden processes which is what my point was. And system services is a broad term if your latest adware app happens to think it is one.
interesting!
I'll have to remember that one. Course the fact that it's not common knowledge still makes it hard for the average guy to find out that information. So my point still stands. Thanks for the tip though.
Didn't say they were servers. But they do host things. They load DLL's and applications hide behind them. I know cause I've seen it. Certain applications load through the svchost. You don't see the application though you just see svchost.exe. Its really annoying when your hunting that elusive piece of adware or virus.
Re:Why isn't this already out?
on
Next Generation X11
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
look at your average winXP installation with applications and count the processes. hrmmm... quite a few there eh? Now tell me what each of those svchost processes is actually hosting? Not easy is it. There are benefits to the way it's set up on Gnome and X. If the clock on your windows taskbar should for some hypothetical reason lock up how would you kill it? Kill Explorer? that just killed your whole window manager. Sure you can restart it with a handy little ctrl-alt-delete but you just lost all that stuff you were working on.
Me I far prefer having all those apps launching in nice easy to see processes. You don't like how much space it takes in memory? use a different one. Admittedly Gnome makes this harder than say FluxBox but the choices are there.
Explorer on my WinXP box at work takes up 20 megs in memory and has who knows how many threads. X and whatever desktop/window manager you use just make it easier to see what's doing what and change what you don't like.
MS doesn't control an industry. They just have more customers. Nothing prevents those customers from switching. In fact they are "switching" even as we speak. Linux, Apple, *BSD's. All of them exist and have no enormous barriers to entry. Just let the Market do it's work. It works slower perhaps than legislation but it also works in a more stable fashion with less headaches. Legislating this kind of thing is like using a sledgehammer to to nail a board. You'll probably break the board instead.
Or perhaps he objects to there being such a distinction, legal or otherwise. Personally I would have to agree with him. The government has no place telling me whether or not my private property is a public place or not. As for smoking in "public" restaurants let the market decide. I vote with my wallet. I dislike smelling cig smoke when I eat so I don't patronize places that have it. Simple.
The real question is why are people still writing stuff in ActiveX? Sure lots of people are still using IE but the number is dwindling. Wouldn't it be better to start shifting so you don't get left behind? For that matter why are people still programming in XPCOM and Java? What's wrong with some good old XML-RPC X-HTML? Honestly I could do without all those silly downloadable embedded applications. All they ever did was make my life difficult when I was a windows user.
If it needs ActiveX then it doesn't belong as part of a website. Make a downloadable application that runs seperately. I even dislike Java's WebStart technology.
Exactly What they did is catch a proposed mechanism of evolution in the act. A mechanism that has never been disputed. Species adaptation happens. Species change? Still not observed. Waiting..... Waiting....
Aint that the truth. They just automatically assume it's too complicated to understand so they don't even make the effort. Drives me nuts. I'd rather they break the machine trying to figure it out than act totally helpless all the time. At least then the problem might actually be challenging to fix. It's not that the subject matter is actually that difficult to understand. They just refuse to try.
I think your referring to XCom: UFO Defense as it was called in the US. And yes that game rocked. One of the best turn based squad combat games ever created. And they did an excellent job of immersing you in the game. I used to spend hours playing that game.
"I can throw myself at the ground and miss."
Cool I've been trying to manage flight for a few years now and still keep remembering to hit the ground at the last second. I'm confident I'll hit on the correct combination of falling/distraction soon though.
That's exactly what I was looking for thanks. We already run dansguardian and it works well in cutting down the spyware/malware counts. Its too easy to bypass in our current setup right now though So I have been looking at some alternate methods. And a good AV mail proxy will work wonders for us.
I'm also slowly weaning people off of IE/Outlook. We are contractors for these networks so I can't do a blanket replacement of the software.
I'm not worried about the setup. I can handle that in my sleep probably. I was wondering if they were effective enough to use. I'm very familiar with debian run it exclusively at home. So yes I can probably handle that.
We manage 5000 computers across 40 different networks of around 200 or more computers. The proxy/AV scanner would be a gateway for at most 300 computers per setup
actually though she was right. You can't claim to be "user centric" and ignore your users. Its a contradiction. On one hand they say they want to be user centric and enterprise ready. On the other they ignore what is necessary to actually be those things. Maybe they don't actually understand what it takes, but refusing to learn it is just plain wrong. Seems like a pride issue to me. "We know what's right and we certainly can't be wrong." No one can learn with that attitude. If you don't want to make the effort to be user centric then don't claim you are. Simple as that.
everything you just said I already knew. I just object to it. Just because a judge said it was this way in the past doesn't automatically mean the judge was right when he said so. Precedent/caselaw is a terrible way to run a court system. Just because it works that way now doesn't mean it's the right way. I still haven't seen anyone point me to a peice of legislation or law that says this a court has the power to create law or even to bend a law to apply where it doesn't. Every case should be decided on the basis of the law and nothing else. Any other basis of deciding is stepping outside of their boudaries as set by law. Laws should be created by elected officials in the legislature. Anywhere else and citizens begin to lose their ability to control the laws that affect them. Some judges aren't even elected. They are appointed.
Jeremy Wall
I'd be interested in seeing the legal basis of this practice. A document to the effect somewhere in our legislation is all we need. You show me the law that gives them this power and I'll lay all my complaints to rest.
It has always annoys me when people say a ruling makes something illegal. Rulings don't make something illegal. Laws make things illegal. Rulings just enforce those laws. So either it was already illegal in the law or the court overstepped their bounds.
Happens all the time here in the states. The courts say something is illegal and we just blithely go on about our business never once questioning whether they have the right to create law or not.
You show me how I can get a free debugger, with more features than gdb, on windows. Then we'll talk about how linux doesn't have any good development tools. There are plenty of great editors, debuggers, and compilers for the linux platform out there. And with projects like blender and soon K-3D out there, even graphics development isn't a hinderance. The tools are there.
If there weren't annoying flash ads there would be something else- people can write terrible and annoying HTML (should we ban javascript from our machines because of how marketers take advantage of it?)
There is one big difference in your analogy. I can selectively turn off the annoying elements of javascript in my browser. I can't do that in flash. When flash supplies the ability to block popups, stop automatic installs and generally turn off the annoying features then get back with me on your analogy. There is only one provider of the Flash Player. No competition there. There are many providers of javascript enabled browsers. Lots of competition there. Maybe if there were third party players and authoring tools out there available then we could get the same feature abilities. There aren't though. That is why many people have a distaste for Flash. It takes away control of their browser. Monopolies tend to do that. The good news is that eventually a competitor will show up. SVG and SMIL maybe or perhaps something else. I'm just waiting for that.
The real difference between the two groups is this. One group thinks there is such a thing as the "right" thing to do. An absolute truth of what is right and what is wrong. If you believe "right and wrong" are determined by societal consensus, then it was OK when slavery occured. It was ok for the Nazi practice of Genocide. All of those things were done with societal agreement. If that's your criteria then I hope your never on the wrong end of Society's beliefs. You'll have no recourse then.
If fact those events in human history were battled by people who believed they were wrong not because society did so but because they believed right and wrong were absolute.
I understand perfectly where your coming from. And it makes sense if you think life begins later in gestation. Your right I disagree with you. What bugs me are the people who write laws and they don't know what they believe on this issue. I once conducted an informal poll of illinois lawmakers. Only three had a defined belief of when life begins. Yet they were all voting on related laws making decisions when they weren't sure. That is irresponsible no matter when you personally believe life begins. I just want more people to pay attention to the real issue. It's not womens rights or Patients rights its when does Life begin. Settle that question and all the other objects evaporate. It's that simple. Everything else is just a sidetrack to nowhere. No one wants to deny research into promising treatments. We just want to guarantee that the unborn child's rights are protected in the process.
What about research into ways to harvest embryonic cells without killing the fetus? It's theoretically possible. And it solves the problem. I'd rather get at the heart of the issue than sideskirt it like so many do. That's when real solutions can be found.
Slashdot Mirror
Except in inetd they aren't hidden processes which is what my point was. And system services is a broad term if your latest adware app happens to think it is one.
interesting! I'll have to remember that one. Course the fact that it's not common knowledge still makes it hard for the average guy to find out that information. So my point still stands. Thanks for the tip though.
Didn't say they were servers. But they do host things. They load DLL's and applications hide behind them. I know cause I've seen it. Certain applications load through the svchost. You don't see the application though you just see svchost.exe. Its really annoying when your hunting that elusive piece of adware or virus.
look at your average winXP installation with applications and count the processes. hrmmm... quite a few there eh? Now tell me what each of those svchost processes is actually hosting? Not easy is it. There are benefits to the way it's set up on Gnome and X. If the clock on your windows taskbar should for some hypothetical reason lock up how would you kill it? Kill Explorer? that just killed your whole window manager. Sure you can restart it with a handy little ctrl-alt-delete but you just lost all that stuff you were working on.
Me I far prefer having all those apps launching in nice easy to see processes. You don't like how much space it takes in memory? use a different one. Admittedly Gnome makes this harder than say FluxBox but the choices are there.
Explorer on my WinXP box at work takes up 20 megs in memory and has who knows how many threads. X and whatever desktop/window manager you use just make it easier to see what's doing what and change what you don't like.
MS doesn't control an industry. They just have more customers. Nothing prevents those customers from switching. In fact they are "switching" even as we speak. Linux, Apple, *BSD's. All of them exist and have no enormous barriers to entry. Just let the Market do it's work. It works slower perhaps than legislation but it also works in a more stable fashion with less headaches. Legislating this kind of thing is like using a sledgehammer to to nail a board. You'll probably break the board instead.
Or perhaps he objects to there being such a distinction, legal or otherwise. Personally I would have to agree with him. The government has no place telling me whether or not my private property is a public place or not. As for smoking in "public" restaurants let the market decide. I vote with my wallet. I dislike smelling cig smoke when I eat so I don't patronize places that have it. Simple.
The real question is why are people still writing stuff in ActiveX? Sure lots of people are still using IE but the number is dwindling. Wouldn't it be better to start shifting so you don't get left behind? For that matter why are people still programming in XPCOM and Java? What's wrong with some good old XML-RPC X-HTML? Honestly I could do without all those silly downloadable embedded applications. All they ever did was make my life difficult when I was a windows user. If it needs ActiveX then it doesn't belong as part of a website. Make a downloadable application that runs seperately. I even dislike Java's WebStart technology.
Exactly What they did is catch a proposed mechanism of evolution in the act. A mechanism that has never been disputed. Species adaptation happens. Species change? Still not observed. Waiting..... Waiting....
Aint that the truth. They just automatically assume it's too complicated to understand so they don't even make the effort. Drives me nuts. I'd rather they break the machine trying to figure it out than act totally helpless all the time. At least then the problem might actually be challenging to fix. It's not that the subject matter is actually that difficult to understand. They just refuse to try.
I think your referring to XCom: UFO Defense as it was called in the US. And yes that game rocked. One of the best turn based squad combat games ever created. And they did an excellent job of immersing you in the game. I used to spend hours playing that game.
They sure don't make em like they used too.
"I can throw myself at the ground and miss." Cool I've been trying to manage flight for a few years now and still keep remembering to hit the ground at the last second. I'm confident I'll hit on the correct combination of falling/distraction soon though.
That's exactly what I was looking for thanks. We already run dansguardian and it works well in cutting down the spyware/malware counts. Its too easy to bypass in our current setup right now though So I have been looking at some alternate methods. And a good AV mail proxy will work wonders for us. I'm also slowly weaning people off of IE/Outlook. We are contractors for these networks so I can't do a blanket replacement of the software.
I'm not worried about the setup. I can handle that in my sleep probably. I was wondering if they were effective enough to use. I'm very familiar with debian run it exclusively at home. So yes I can probably handle that.
We manage 5000 computers across 40 different networks of around 200 or more computers. The proxy/AV scanner would be a gateway for at most 300 computers per setup
actually though she was right. You can't claim to be "user centric" and ignore your users. Its a contradiction. On one hand they say they want to be user centric and enterprise ready. On the other they ignore what is necessary to actually be those things. Maybe they don't actually understand what it takes, but refusing to learn it is just plain wrong. Seems like a pride issue to me. "We know what's right and we certainly can't be wrong." No one can learn with that attitude. If you don't want to make the effort to be user centric then don't claim you are. Simple as that.
everything you just said I already knew. I just object to it. Just because a judge said it was this way in the past doesn't automatically mean the judge was right when he said so. Precedent/caselaw is a terrible way to run a court system. Just because it works that way now doesn't mean it's the right way. I still haven't seen anyone point me to a peice of legislation or law that says this a court has the power to create law or even to bend a law to apply where it doesn't. Every case should be decided on the basis of the law and nothing else. Any other basis of deciding is stepping outside of their boudaries as set by law. Laws should be created by elected officials in the legislature. Anywhere else and citizens begin to lose their ability to control the laws that affect them. Some judges aren't even elected. They are appointed. Jeremy Wall
I'd be interested in seeing the legal basis of this practice. A document to the effect somewhere in our legislation is all we need. You show me the law that gives them this power and I'll lay all my complaints to rest.
The court is supposed to throw the case out. Its a well defined job. If no law applies then the case gets thrown out.
It has always annoys me when people say a ruling makes something illegal. Rulings don't make something illegal. Laws make things illegal. Rulings just enforce those laws. So either it was already illegal in the law or the court overstepped their bounds. Happens all the time here in the states. The courts say something is illegal and we just blithely go on about our business never once questioning whether they have the right to create law or not.
he was speaking in the hypothetical.
You show me how I can get a free debugger, with more features than gdb, on windows. Then we'll talk about how linux doesn't have any good development tools. There are plenty of great editors, debuggers, and compilers for the linux platform out there. And with projects like blender and soon K-3D out there, even graphics development isn't a hinderance. The tools are there.
The real difference between the two groups is this. One group thinks there is such a thing as the "right" thing to do. An absolute truth of what is right and what is wrong. If you believe "right and wrong" are determined by societal consensus, then it was OK when slavery occured. It was ok for the Nazi practice of Genocide. All of those things were done with societal agreement. If that's your criteria then I hope your never on the wrong end of Society's beliefs. You'll have no recourse then. If fact those events in human history were battled by people who believed they were wrong not because society did so but because they believed right and wrong were absolute.
you should use perl instead. :-) sorry I couldn't resist.
I understand perfectly where your coming from. And it makes sense if you think life begins later in gestation. Your right I disagree with you. What bugs me are the people who write laws and they don't know what they believe on this issue. I once conducted an informal poll of illinois lawmakers. Only three had a defined belief of when life begins. Yet they were all voting on related laws making decisions when they weren't sure. That is irresponsible no matter when you personally believe life begins. I just want more people to pay attention to the real issue. It's not womens rights or Patients rights its when does Life begin. Settle that question and all the other objects evaporate. It's that simple. Everything else is just a sidetrack to nowhere. No one wants to deny research into promising treatments. We just want to guarantee that the unborn child's rights are protected in the process. What about research into ways to harvest embryonic cells without killing the fetus? It's theoretically possible. And it solves the problem. I'd rather get at the heart of the issue than sideskirt it like so many do. That's when real solutions can be found.