Vista I will not be buying

  • Thread starter Thread starter GregRo
  • Start date Start date
Of course he doesn't, his antivirus does that. It called quarrantine.

And he is absolutely correct that its a serious security issue.

--
Manny Borges
MCSE NT4-2003 (+ Security)
MCT, Certified Cheese Master

The pen is mightier than the sword, and considerably easier to write with.
-- Marty Feldman
 
Well as a Linux, Unix, and Windows admin I think I might know what I am
talking about and at this time I would say that Linux is too much of a pain
in the AZZ to deal with as a desktop OS.

I am not going to debate technicals. My argument is purely focused on the
users and support.

Using a linux based system is just too difficult for the majority of the
users out there.

Linux makes a great server. I love it for some of the apps we run. But
generally speaking the support infrastructure and cross compatibility that
MS has in place far outshines anything the linux distro vendors or the open
source community can provide.

And personally, I am a commandline monster, but even I get a little sick of
it with linux sometimes.

--
Manny Borges
MCSE NT4-2003 (+ Security)
MCT, Certified Cheese Master

The pen is mightier than the sword, and considerably easier to write with.
-- Marty Feldman
 
David said:
It is already difficult to delete some viruses and malware. Being
unable to copy them (so that they can be analyzed on a clean machine
or sent to an expert) could definitely make things much harder.

Shenan said:
Do you actually do that often?

Manny said:
Of course he doesn't, his antivirus does that. It called quarrantine.

And he is absolutely correct that its a serious security issue.

There was no mention of antivirus software - only "copying" of the virus so
it could be "analyzed on a clean machine or sent to an expert."

I suspect that "quarantine" in an antivirus software will continue to be
able to do its job - just like it is now.. given there are exceptions
already - since the AV software of today cannot get into your System Restore
files to clean up infections.. Your only choice is to clear the infected
restore points (usually all your restore points.)

When did "David Schwartz" say that ("security issue") in this thread?
 
I suspect that "quarantine" in an antivirus software will continue to be
able to do its job - just like it is now.. given there are exceptions
already - since the AV software of today cannot get into your System
Restore files to clean up infections.. Your only choice is to clear the
infected restore points (usually all your restore points.)

I think it's disingenous to compare missing features in antivirus
software with "features" that will be made impossible by intentional design.

DS
 
In message <[email protected]>
Leythos said:
So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
in any way?

That is largely correct. I have a legal right to make copies of media
which I own, as long as I do not distribute those copies.

Vista appears to prevent that from happening.
 
David Schwartz wrote:
Shenan Stanley wrote
I think it's disingenous to compare missing features in antivirus
software with "features" that will be made impossible by intentional
design.


First - the word is "disingenuous".

Secondly - I did not compare missing features with features that would be
made impossible..
I gave a impossibility now that will likely continue to be an impossibility.

It's not a missing feature - it is blocked.
 
Secondly - I did not compare missing features with features that would be
made impossible..
I gave a impossibility now that will likely continue to be an
impossibility.

It's not a missing feature - it is blocked.

What I'm concerned about is what people can legally do with their own
computers. If there is an intentional block but that block is not a
copyright enforcement mechanism, a person can legally circumvent that block.
It therefore doesn't affect what a person can legally do with their own
computers. However, blocks that constitute a copyright enforcement scheme
cannot be lawfully circumvented (unless each indvidual does it all by
himself with no help from anyone else) in the United States because of the
DMCA.

DS
 
Bush has always been out of touch with anything that isn't WASPish and Neuvo
O'leans is definatly not WASPish
 
Bush has a communications setup in Crwaford that enables him to chair
meeting with people all over the world. Everyone is on a tv screen and its
really no differnt from talking to them live.

So Bush could have responded as easily from Crawford as from the white
house. He did not respond quickly enough because he is not good at reacting
to new situaions. There is almost always a pause between when something
happens and when he starts to process it. But the problem is not the
communication set up, the problem is the speed of his internal respond time.
 
Baaaaa Baaaa Baaaa you are a sheep

Leythos said:
You guys do understand that he doesn't have to be in the white house to
do his job, right?

He's fully in contact with the proper people no matter where he is in
the world.
 
Bush’s record speaks for itself. His illegal war in Iraq. Wanting to reverse
Roe Vs Wade. Making up words to try to hide the fact that he can’t
articulate. (Although this just shows his inability to speak properly).
Ignoring basic human rights in America. ETC ETC.
 
Well, I was more referring to your actions. However..

..09/17/04 "ICH" -- During a BBC radio interview on Wednesday, UN Secretary
General Kofi Annan created a controversy by reiterating his long-held
position that the Iraq War was illegal because it breached the United
Nations Charter. On Thursday, the imperial leaders of the "Coalition of the
Willing" retaliated by vehemently arguing that their Iraq War was, to the
contrary, legal. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6917.htm

Was Voe v Wade legal in the first place? Is there anything in the
Constitution granting congress the right to kill the unborn in the first
place?

Want to give examples of your other two allegations?
 
Jone Doe said:
Well, I was more referring to your actions. However..

..09/17/04 "ICH" -- During a BBC radio interview on Wednesday, UN Secretary
General Kofi Annan created a controversy by reiterating his long-held
position that the Iraq War was illegal because it breached the United
Nations Charter. On Thursday, the imperial leaders of the "Coalition of the
Willing" retaliated by vehemently arguing that their Iraq War was, to the
contrary, legal. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6917.htm

Was Voe v Wade legal in the first place? Is there anything in the
Constitution granting congress the right to kill the unborn in the first
place?

With a statement like that I can tell that you would not see the truth if it
hit in the face.
 
Jone said:
Well, I was more referring to your actions. However..

.09/17/04 "ICH" -- During a BBC radio interview on Wednesday, UN
Secretary General Kofi Annan created a controversy by reiterating his
long-held position that the Iraq War was illegal because it breached
the United Nations Charter. On Thursday, the imperial leaders of the
"Coalition of the Willing" retaliated by vehemently arguing that
their Iraq War was, to the contrary, legal.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6917.htm

Who cares? Iraq is the stupidest move by a President, since "Read My
Lips." It's even dumber than the stained blue dress since the only
person really hurt that didn't deserve it was Hillary.

The moment our troops leave Iraq, the Iraqi Civil War ratchets up into
high gear. The last helicopters to leave from the US embassy will be
under fire, just like Vietnam. The only difference between Vietnam and
Iraq will be that we won't be able to blame the French for getting
involved with Iraq.

Was Voe v Wade legal in the first place?

Yes. It is still legal precedent. It is a peculiar part of our gov't,
but when 5 or more members of the Supreme Court agree on something, that
something is legal, in every sense of the word.
Is there anything in the
Constitution granting congress the right to kill the unborn in the
first place? <snip>

Wrong way to look at it. Does the Constitution specifically grant a
bundle of stem cells growing in a woman's womb any rights at all?
Obviously not.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
 
kurttrail said:
Who cares? Iraq is the stupidest move by a President, since "Read My
Lips." It's even dumber than the stained blue dress since the only
person really hurt that didn't deserve it was Hillary.

While the President can order a small military action at will, he is
limited by the Budget for the Department of Offense [misnamed the DOD or
dept of defense].

Any long term involvement HAS to be financed by the us congress, ie the
body that controls spending. If congress did not approve the last
several 100 billion dollars to invade iraq, the invasion would not have
occured.
 
Plato said:
kurttrail said:
Who cares? Iraq is the stupidest move by a President, since "Read My
Lips." It's even dumber than the stained blue dress since the only
person really hurt that didn't deserve it was Hillary.

While the President can order a small military action at will, he is
limited by the Budget for the Department of Offense [misnamed the DOD or
dept of defense].

Any long term involvement HAS to be financed by the us congress, ie the
body that controls spending. If congress did not approve the last
several 100 billion dollars to invade iraq, the invasion would not have
occured.

And had Bush told congress the truth, the funds would have never been
approved. The so called "coallition" went to war based on a pack of lies.

Alias
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Back
Top