Critical = need to improve = Vista = Bussiness!!!

most of the time these problems only exist in a workgroup NOT in a domain. it also helps if ppl don't run as a admin all the time.

what are you talking about? most domains have subnets that rely on the ports and connectivity that are talked about in these posts.

what domain doesn't have IE installed? That is right: 0

What domain blocks off all network access?
That's right:0

For people who don't like their Windows OS better switch over to any other OS instead of arguing here and there

The ones blatantly arguing against Windows have probably already switched for the most part. Those just complaining are just not blind to the fact it isn't perfect...and in general, people just like to b****, it is human nature. If you have nothing to complain about, you must be dead.

people...just update your operating systems and quit arguing back and forth like a couple of second-graders!!!

quit arguing back and forth like a couple of second-graders!!!
No, you! :P

I luv patches!!! At least the ones that work. Every once in a while you get one that does more harm than good. Thankfully those seem rare under all operating systems.

At least Microsoft patches their operating systems. Red Hat even though Linux is open, can't even update their software through up2date without logging in.

And that, folks, is why we have spyware (WGA/WGN) on hundreds of millions of PC's around the world, courtesy of Microsoft.

Yes, because ALL users should be required to sign up to be able to use windows update. We all know that the average home user will certainly do this on purchase of a new pc. Yes, lets make them do something additional in order to have their pc up to date. Good idea!

"At least Microsoft patches their operating systems. Red Hat even though Linux is open, can't even update their software through up2date without logging in."

WTF are you talking about, RHN updates systems in the background if it's inabled and it's enabled by default in all the versions of RHEL I've looked at.

RHN updates systems in the background if it's inabled and it's enabled by default in all the versions of RHEL I've looked at.
Oh noes, spyware...kidding, kidding. :P

I bet it even validates that it's running on a RedHat system, and not a Mandrake system...

*gasp* ;)

"Okay, let's all complain about the patches, or argue about which OS has more. Or we could just be glad that software gets patched and hope that the patches follow soon after the vulnerabilities are exposed."
-----------------------------------------------
Personally, I'm glad for the patches which come in a timely manner.

Okay, let's all complain about the patches, or argue about which OS has more. Or we could just be glad that software gets patched and hope that the patches follow soon after the vulnerabilities are exposed.

nah, I won't just let the world pass by. Maybe its ok for you...

The term Swiss cheese isn't even the word for it now. I mean after 6 years, the os is still as vulnerable as it was the day it came out. The difference is when you install it fresh off of rtm install cd you have to install sp2, then install 54 hotfixes.

I am so confused how a company with a 6 year old product with no refresh or updates except for hotfixes and genuine windows advantage lockdowns can still have the number one operating system product. Where is all the competition, is xp really that great? No its not, however due to Microsoft's ability to suck all profits and money out of the software industry, or at least a great great majority of it makes competing with them almost futile. A competing product will either be bought out, destroyed or some other anti competitive action will be taken by Microsoft against them. They have such a war chest of money the government itself cannot touch Microsoft. Sure they can make a scene, they can say bad microsoft and give them a little hand tap. But in the end, until Linux gets more developed and companies and the i.t. industry as a whole gets tired of this crap will it change even in the least bit.

In other words, Microsoft has no competition, they have no incentive to do better. If they release a new product every few years, what benefit does it do for them not a thing. They could delay vista indefinitely, I bet it would take 15 years before Linux gained 10 percent market share.

When you combine the gaming industry and the hardware industry not to mention driver support and ease of use. Linux does not have a chance.

This is due to the lack of profit. Linux competes by being free. Therefore no money is made to hire bright wonderful minds. Linux is a second thought like a hobby.

I guess my attempt at venting here is not a good thing so I will leave it at that. But point is Microsoft hurts the entire computer industry. Their anti competitive nature and brute strength is too much for any company or even an entire industry to stand up against. In the end we are all stuck with them. What would help? Short of breaking microsoft up into two, os companies and a separate application company with office, media player and everything else we the industry every see one bit of change. From better more innovative products to more competition in general.

I am so confused how a company with a 6 year old product with no refresh or updates except for hotfixes and genuine windows advantage lockdowns can still have the number one operating system product...until Linux gets more developed...When you combine the gaming industry and the hardware industry not to mention driver support and ease of use. Linux does not have a chance...Linux is a second thought like a hobby.

What were you asking?

A competing product will either be bought out, destroyed or some other anti competitive action will be taken by Microsoft against them.
Whenever MS competes in any manner people tend to call it anti-competitive. From what I have observed, new and existing companies try something, become successful being the only one doing it, then MS says "hey, that is a good idea, we should try something like that", and it soon becomes apparent that the original company just can't compete. Or, the company has a superior product, rests on its success, lets itself get passed by MS and other companies, and then tries to claim MS was anti-competitive, overlooking the fact they hadn't done anything to seriously improve their product in the past few years. Can anyone say "Real"?

Most of the dangers sffect only to a minority of users, I think. If you are a simple home user you may feel almost sure, no matter the version you are using, and even without any update at all. All running Microsoft products have already reached a high quality standard. There's not such thing as total security. Microsoft tries to go always a step forward. And above all to be a focus of attention and sell, Even when the product is good, they must give the impression that it is faulty so that you improve and buy. Bussines is bussines.

Linux can and is competing. Several large, profitable enterprises use linux exclusively day-to-day for their operations, and they have made a very large profit for doing so. If MS stopped all development today, let's say, the market would have two platforms to realistically jump ship to: Apple and Linux. There is no enterprise considering using apple. They do not have a good enterprise toolset or management tools. Linux is top notch for desktop and server management, the command line is king.

A competing product will either be bought out, destroyed or some other anti competitive action will be taken by Microsoft against them.

Google.

Firefox.

WinAMP.

All of these compete *directly* with MS products and have flourished.

Nice try.

"then MS says "hey, that is a good idea, we should try something like that", and it soon becomes apparent that the original company just can't compete."

Yeah, it might be hard for a small company, that originated an idea, to compete against a multi-billion dollar company who suddenly gives the product away for free.

Hmmmm...giving it away for free? Isn't that usually the complaint we hear about open source software?

And now someone should fall into the trap and list three companies that didn't flourish, so the two of you can waste hours debating whether those companies died due to bad management or predatory business practices?

Old news. Boring!

Nice try.

Or, you could interject and troll a bit first. That would always be helpful.

K, thanks, Bye!

Bad list on at least one account. FireFox exists because MSN destroyed Netscape in the 90s. Oh wait, you were probably still crapping yellow then and wouldn't know about that.

I only listed one ;)

I need a laugh every morning, so I post just to see his inane responses

I think you are very short-sighted. Do you not know how software development works? Do you not realize that these threats did not exist when the OS was made? How do you guard against a threat that not only doesn't exist, but the technology didn't exist to even concieve the idea? We should be thankful that the software makers get these patches out on a regular basis before the threats actually hit the wild.

Your comment about the "number one operating system" doesn't make sense either. All operating systems, regardless of market share, experience the same thing.

All OSes are created by humans. Other humans crate threats (real or theoretical). The first set of humans then attempts to shut doors on threats. Repeat.

Microsoft makes Windows. PC systems can use Linux (Red Hat, Suse (not free), Lindows, etc.)

Quit complaining about Microsoft making windows. let's see you make an OS personally. Until then, stfd and stfu.

(and if losers didnt sue microsoft for "anti-trust" and now this damn EU suing microsoft, don't be surprised that windows products will be more expensive. If it stays $100-$200, i'm fine with it, but more than that for an OS would be the fault of the lawsuits.)

Wow.

Firfox exists because IE stopped exccelling as a superior product. The market needed something better. Mozilla provided.

Netscape died for the same reason. The market needed something better. The idiots at netscape couldn't make a better product.

Do we *really* have to go over this again?

Interesting.

so I post just to see his inane responses

...the very definition of trolling.

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll be sure to keep that in mind.

LOL!...and drew exactly the response you expected. Tool is becoming a little too predictable.

Thanks, that was fun. ;o)

Yeah, if that's all ya got...Bye.

Posting the same sh1t over and over again and expecting a different response?

Looks quite similar to the definition of insanity.

How fitting...

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein.

If I changed my responses or my position on a topic every time someone posted the same old tired arguments, I'd be worse off than you.

RingMaster said:
"Quit complaining about Microsoft making windows. let's see you make an OS personally. Until then, s**d and s**u."
------------------------------------------
It's language like this that is totally uncalled for.

"Posting the same *incorrect, inaccurate, and completely wrong* sh1t over and over again and expecting a different response?

Looks quite similar to the definition of *PC_Tool* insanity.

How fitting...

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein.

If I changed my responses or my position on a topic every time someone posted the same old tired arguments, *I might someday get it right!*"

There, fixed that for you. ;o)

*shakes head*

That's cute.

If I wanted to argue with children, I'd go home and argue with my kids.

Have fun, man.

I am, thanks. I'm doing a really good PC_Tool imitation, directed back at you and you don't like it. Go figure.

LMAO!

ROFL! Someone else noticed, too?!

No...you just sound like a childish idiot with reading comprehension problems. On the other hand, PCTool actually sounds like someone who uses his frontal lobes for something aside from a hat rack.

It's also my eyebrow display area. ;)

You must be the biggest pus$y here. S.P. has left the discussion and suddenly you swoop in with a flamethrower.

You are worse than a troll, you're a parasite.

Yes we do, because it's bad history at best, revisionist history at worst. Netscape died because Microspud forced IE down PC makers throats as part of Windows and refused to sell them licensing agreements if they included Netscape as part of the software shipped with the machines they sold. You really dont think Microspud lost all those antitrust cases because the built a better mouse trap do you? Netscape was an infinitely better browser as demonstrated by the fact, that most people who really knew about the internet installed it on their machines and didn't use IE. Despite Al Gore's claims, if it hadn't been for Netscape, the Internet wouldn't look the way it does.

LOL@XP for having 54 hotfixes EVEN AFTER SP2!

BEST BURN OF THE DAY!

"Oh wait, you were probably still crapping yellow..."

S.P. has left the discussion and suddenly you swoop in with a flamethrower.
How would you know that?

Anyone else think it is kind of odd that after the soft turd stops posting, this guy picks up all his arguments for him? And can't do any better than he has.

You are both kinda right on the Netscape thing. They did fall behind in the browser arena; but they probably didn't have the money to maintain a decent development team after MS's shadier business practices hit them.

most people who really knew about the internet installed it on their machines and didn't use IE
I used IE and I tried Netscape (I could swear it came with the computer, but I could be wrong). I ended up sticking with IE even before Netscape died, I don't necessarily think either was superior in the manners I used them, IE just felt more comfortable to use.

S.P. said - "In an effort to not completely embarrass you, I'm not going to respond to your next refusal to look up simple information."

Then did not return. duh!

Um terribly sorry I don't live my life on forums waiting to pounce on all the idiots that come in here trumpeting. Sorry but apparently unlike you I have other things which occupy my time as well. Good luck inlife loser.

No, he said "I am, thanks. I'm doing a really good PC_Tool imitation, directed back at you and you don't like it. Go figure."

Where the **** did you learn to read asswipe?

IE is *still* the default browser. Firefox is *still* doing quite well.

Dude, I don't really want to targue this. It's been done to death. I had the misfortune of working closely with the folks at Netscape before IE kicked it's ass.

Any browser of decent quality, IE or otherwise, could have come out at that time and had the exact same effect. Netscape needed a kick in the ass. Unfortunately, they also needed an entirely new management team from the top down.

As for the internet... I believe it was NCSA Mosaic that started the whole "web" bit. ;)

(God, that takes me back)

It is also funny how you knew for a fact that was his last post. I had to search through the thread to verify that, I also verified that your posts didn't start until after his ended. Still odd.

wtf? brain fart?

OIC, that's ok then. Knee jerk trolls like you suffer from bran farts rather frequently with their total and complete inability to read whats right in front of them so I guess it's rather obvious why you have problems.

Also odd is how that "last" SP response only indicated he wasn't responding to PC_Tool anymore. He never mentioned he wasn't posting on anything else...yes somehow "dee" has magically came to that conclusion from that single sentance.

Yea I think your right Grazer, I smell an alt.

Yeah, it might be hard for a small company, that originated an idea, to compete against a multi-billion dollar company who suddenly gives the product away for free.
If they had something worth selling, it might be a little less difficult; not saying it wouldn't be difficult, but it might be a little less. The smaller company also does not have as many employees to pay, offices to rent, lawyers to feed. So they don't need as large of profits.

Hmmmm...giving it away for free? Isn't that usually the complaint we hear about open source software?
People complain about OSS being free?

...LOL@the 150+ updates required immediately after installing the latest Ubuntu which only came out a short time ago (6/1/06)...

..yea...

SP2 has been out for about 2 years now.

You are correct about Mosaic, what I was referring to the the GUI browser that Netscape introduced in the 90s.

Yeah, but it is something of a valid point... I've yet to meet anyone that can create a better OS or even know what language to write the OS in.

With that said...

Linus amazed us all with Linux, but what was really ground breaking? He created a better Unix. Windows was a better OS/2, etc etc etc...

Until we let go of the current ideals of what an OS is or should be, we aren't going to get much in the way of innovation or the elusive "better OS".

And lest we forget, build a foolproof trap and you will get a better fool (or something like that, it's late, I'm tired, blah...). My point is for every security hole that gets patched, there are dozens more people out there willing to find more exploits to attack.

~dnc

NCSA Mosaic:

ftp://ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Mosaic/.

It's almost depressing how badly pages today display in it (Or don't display, as the case may be..).

I suppose that's progress though. Worth a look just to see how much things have changed, though.

ubuntu updates includes applications that run on top of it (hundreds of apps, depending on your config.)

Windows updates include updates to integrated functionality that Ubuntu and other Linux distros need those applications to perform.

I've yet to meet anyone that...even know what language to write the OS in.
C and Assembly, of course...maybe C++.

lol... if anyone doesn't know that, they're not a very good programmer.

What? no chatter?

All the PC fanboys were so quick to flame the OSX updates...

I see...

What's there to talk about?

MS fixed some flaws and it's almost certain that several more will be released (or exploited) tomorrow.

While the fixes themselves are new, the issue is an old one (and a dead horse that's been severely punished already).

Anyway, we all know how much more secure a Mac is... unless of course it happens to have a wireless card in it. :P

And you were quick to "flame" the MS ones. Which OSX updates are you talking about, the ones you have to buy a new version of the OS for, or the 26 security holes they patched last Wednesday? The main reason people jump on OSX updates is because of how flawless its users believe it to be. Windows users know and admit their OS is not perfect, why can't mac zealots admit the same?

The Unix kernel itself is not significantly more secure than the Windows NT kernel.

I'm not being biased but I do believe that my OS X system is a LOT more secure and less prone to malware and viruses than Windows. (Note: I didn't say flawless) :-)

And I agree that some people are a little biased... maybe little is an understatement. However, I do believe that Windows users are equally as biased if not more than OS X users and more likely to b**** and flame forums :-p

"And you were quick to "flame" the MS ones."

He hasn't flamed anything. Pointing out a comment disparity is not an attack on Windows.

I own both Mac and PC. In addition I have been a Mac owner, using one version or another, since 1991 and used them for the Internet starting in 1995. I have owned the PC since 2003. I have at least 4 programs running to protect the PC. On the Mac I have none except for the Fire Wall on my wi fi system. I have never acquired any Trojan Horses, viruses or other crap on any Mac I have owned. Being a new PC user and not realizing what was going to happen because I was spoiled by my net experience with the Mac, in the first three after acquiring the PC I had to reformat the hard drive 2 times to get the crap off of it. I don't know how you view that, but it seems to me that the Mac is more secure than the PC. I will now wait for the hackneyed argument about how hackers don't waste their time attacking Macs.

I will now wait for the hackneyed argument about how hackers don't waste their time attacking Macs.

Do they?

It's amazing how much you demonstrate exactly what you complain about. You bias is zealously demonstrated while accusing others of having some greater bias than your own. The only time you're not chasing your tail is when you're trying to bite someone else's.

Both operating systems have their problems and weaknesses. Microsoft's problems are magnified because they are the bigger company. Sure they get accused of being non-competitive, they earned that by doing some non-competitive things in the past (confirmed by court ruling after ruling). Apple can be accused of the same things related to handling of iPods and iTunes and proprietary files. In fact, Apple lost major chunks of market share in the computer market because of their insistence on supporting only proprietary hardware for years.

Business is NOT about who makes the better product, instead it is about who markets the best, takes advantage of the competition's weakness best, and who works the system to the greatest advantage. Any thought that successful business is based solely on producing a superior product is purely naive. In the end, all the talk about bias, fanboys, unfair accusations, etc. is nothing more than entertainment in forums like these. If you're going to participate in that, learn to take the flames as well as you fire them.

--yawn--

Yeah, recently, they have.

and my dog's not as ugly as yours.

Oh, *well*.

If *you* say so, it *must* be true...

lmao..

I don't buy your lies. "at least 4 programs" -- give me a break!! "reformat twice" -- puh-leze!

I have XP MCE2005 and besides the built-in firewall, I have an anti-virus program to protect me. I, too, have never been infected. My PC runs constantly, I only reboot on "patch tuesdays."

Yeah, must be time for you to stop typing and catch up on the news. Then you wouldn't have to take my word for it, you would actually know something.

K, thanks, Bye!

...and yet he continues to post nothing of value in support of his claims.

Keep it up, this is fun.

Another standard PC_Tool trick: requesting that others do his homework for him. It's fairly common knowledge, to all but the most uninformed, that Macs have recently been targeted with various security exploits. If you're too lazy to read, or simply don't know how to use a search engine, I'm not going to do it for you.

K, thanks, Bye!

Macs? Really? Name one virus or exploit in the wild that targets macs.

If it's *so* common, it shouldn't be too hard, right?

You made the claim, you get to prove it.

...and yet again he responds without any proof to back up his claims.

Care to do it again? Let's see how many times spongy can dance around the subject by insulting others to cover up his inability to post anything useful.

AS for your repetition of 'K, thanks. Bye!'... I'm blushing. After all, immitation *is* the sincerest form of flattery.

K, thanks. Bye!

You're flailing about a bit too much. Put the coffee down and do your own research, just this one time.

That makes 4.

I wonder if there's a record for how many times one has danced around his own inability to back up his own arguments.

BTW: I can google all I want. I'm not going to find any ITW viruses or exploits directed at MacOSX.

Of course, neither can you.

I'm sure, by now, everyone but you who is reading this thread knows that there is ample evidence that efforts have recently been made, with some success, to create malware directed at Macs.

Mommy isn't going to do your homework for you, little boy, and you've gotten as many clues as you're going to get.

I'm sure, by now, everyone but you who is reading this thread knows that there is ample evidence that efforts have recently been made, with some success, to create malware directed at Macs.

In labs? Sure. In the Wild? Nope, sorry.

As for homework, it's just not necessary. Kinda hard to find proof of things that only exist in your imagination, vivid and childlike as it may be.

Meanwhile, in the real world, we'll keep checking back in case you ever manage to come up with anything more than ravings and insults. Purely out of morbid curiosity, mind...

"In labs? Sure. In the Wild? Nope, sorry."

Sounds like you are trying to qualify your argument now.

Let's clarify: sophist said - "I will now wait for the hackneyed argument about how hackers don't waste their time attacking Macs."

You said - "Do they?"

I said - "Yeah, recently, they have."

Not nearly as specific as you are trying to be now, so you must be getting worried about the depth of the hole you are digging.

I could give you a few clues; maybe dates or names of security firms, but I don't think I will. Actually, that should be all the clues you need. Happy reading.

The word 'hackers' generally implies that they're in the wild.

Thought you'd know that. My bad.

LMAO!!! That is the all-time weakest effort you have ever made. You're killing me, I can't stop laughing.

Dude, seriously, look it up, it's not that hard. Some were wild, some proof of concept, some zero-day. While you're at it, do some reading on the definition of the word "hacker."

You mis-spoke. It's that simple and it's not the end of the world. Get over it already.

You are an idiot.

It is, actually, as it's open source so is subject to greater peer review. You can *read* the code and therefore see where the vulnerabilities lie, then you can contact the person who maintains that code and talk directly to them about it.

So things get fixed far quicker in the OS community.

Microsoft on the other hand frequently sit on problems for months at a time, even when there are exploits in the wild

Up to 6 now? or is it 7?

Starting to feel like the 'Count' from Sesame Street now.

I'll take this long series of dodges in my attempts to pin you down to saying anything useful as admission that you actually have nothing useful to say to back up your claims other than childish rants.

Hasta!

In an effort to not completely embarrass you, I'm not going to respond to your next refusal to look up simple information. I named the types of exploits for you, I let you know that there were specific dates involved, and I even hinted at a security company being a source of the info. You've trapped yourself and I have no wish to blatantly expose the fact that you don't have a clue what you are talking about. I had hoped to allow you the grace of saving face by either ignoring this thread or merely mentioning that you mis-spoke.

Here's a suggestion, however, in the future when you give one of your obnoxious little responses, without actually checking your facts, know that I'm going to call you on it each and every time.

Isn't that what I've been *blatantly* asking you to do since my frist response?

This entire circus is because you *refuse* to "call me on it".

Go for it. I can take it.

You're the one being obnoxious. You're the one who made the claim without any backup. You're the one who gets to provide the proof.

It seems so amazingly simple and yet you just cannot seem to get it.

So go on, man. Call me on it. I've only been giving you every opportunity immaginable to do just that.

Don't try and tell me you're trying to 'save me' embarrasment. You're being a jack-hole and you know it. You are difficult purely for the responses you get. You've said as much. This is just one more example.

I've played along. It's been fun. But let's not kid anyone here, you're not doing anyone any favors here and you know it.

So call me on it. I've only been waiting all morning for you to bless me with your knowledge.

In an effort to not completely embarrass you, I'm not going to respond to your next refusal to look up simple information.
In the world of adults, people are expected to provide evidence for their own claims, not expect people disagreeing with them to do their homework for them.

I let [PC_Tool] know that there were specific dates involved
Really? I checked your posts and didn't see any dates at all mentioned.

I even hinted at a security company being a source of the info.
...and couldn't give their name. Besides that, what is the likelihood of a security company not being the source?

You've trapped yourself and I have no wish to blatantly expose the fact that you don't have a clue what you are talking about
Sounds like almost every post I've seen you make.

I had hoped to allow you the grace of saving face by either ignoring this thread or merely mentioning that you mis-spoke.
I wonder why that sounds so familiar? Maybe cause I said something to the same effect to you recently?

Here's a suggestion, however, in the future when you give one of your obnoxious little responses, without actually checking your facts, know that I'm going to call you on it each and every time.
I'd say I would do the same to you, but I have tired of your incessant nonsense.

You do realize all you would have to do to win the argument is actually post the source of your information, don't you? But instead, you hint at it like a child would, making it apparent to all but the most dense that you really don't have anything to back up your claims.

It is, actually, as it's open source so is subject to greater peer review
That does not necessarily mean it is more secure. You have to remember, of those reviewing, some are looking for vulnerabilities to exploit and many others really do not have the skill required, even though they might like to think otherwise. Most of the best and brightest work in high-paying positions, and open source doesn't pay all that well. I am not saying open source is more or less secure, just that the theory of peer review does not guarantee more secure code.

Is UNIX open source anyway?

Your a freakin moron. YOUR the one made the claim, YOUR the one who should be backing it up, not spouting off from the hip with nothing to back it up and telling everyone else to prove it for you...your starting to sound like that "MasterTech" idiot.

Are you REALLY that ****ing thick or are you just a troll?

Oh geez, I understand why spongy wouldn’t give you anything. You act like an a**hole all the time and it serves you right to eat some of your own $hit for once. You bet there have been efforts to attack Macs. Earlier this year there was OSX/Leap.A. Leap. It did not work because of a bug in the code but it was an effort.

Keywords:

Did not work.

Thanks anyway.

(BTW: I'm only an a****** to those who ask for it.)

I know I am getting baited again; but...
To quote myself:
The main reason people jump on OSX updates is because of how flawless its users believe it to be. Windows users know and admit their OS is not perfect, why can't mac zealots admit the same?

And to quote the soft turd:
You bias is zealously demonstrated while accusing others of having some greater bias than your own.

Do you even know what zealousness implies? By even mentioning that I accept that Windows has flaws I have demonstrated myself as not a zealot. How exactly does my comment indicate there is no one with more bias than me?

Also by the soft turd:
Both operating systems have their problems and weaknesses.

How exactly does my comment suggest I disagree about all OSes having problems?

Being able to read the code is a two-edged sword.

People can't easily find holes in Windows by reading the code. ;)

I'm not arguing one is more secure than the other, I'm simply stating that being able to read the code does *not* automatically make it more secure and in fact, could make it easier to exploit.

heh.

You don't actually think anyone could be that thick, do you?

*grins*

I'm not sure if anyone can be that thick, especially since I have seen him post intelligently once in a while.

You must be a moron to all. You implied that no one made an "effort" to exploit Macs. I gave you an example and can now see why spongy-poo wouldn't bother. You are worse than the worms we're talking about.

Opener
OSX/Inqtana.A
Mac.Simpsons
Exploit.OSX.Safari.a
Exploit.OSX.ScriptEx.a

The virus-free Macintosh honeymoon is over. In February the first virus ever for Mac OSX was found when Leap.A appeared. The malware was originally posted to the MacRumors discussion forum. The virus, spreading via iChat and by infecting local files, was soon followed by other viruses for the same platform, amongst others a proof-of-concept virus named OSX/Inqtana.A, which uses vulnerability in the Bluetooth OBEX Push functionality to spread from computer to computer.

F-Secure

I run two anti spyware programs because they don't both catch the same problems, I run an additional Firewall because I don't trust the one that came withe SP 2, I run an anti virus program (Avast! by the way) and a registry cleaner to clean up anything the rest of them miss.........oh wait that's 5 programs sorry.

And as for the reformat thing, I admit I was naive, I have owned home computers since 1981 (bought my first the day after my youngest son was born). Gasp!! that was before the IBM PC was even a born and like I said I had never had a virus or invasion of my computer in over 8 years of being on the net with the Macs I owned. Within 3 days of buying the Sony Vaio I own, it crashed because of spyware and adware. I reformatted and bought Norton products because they were "the best there was". About 7 weeks later the computer wouldn't run faster than an 8 bit Apple IIE with 64 megs of RAM because the idiots had figured out a way to get around Norton. Reformatted again and started looking for anything that would protect the machine. The list is above.

It really is time for PC_TOOL to crawl out from under that Microsux rock and get up to speed.

OSX is getting a lot of attention since the 10.4 release.

"I gave you an example and can now see why spongy-poo wouldn't bother. You are worse than the worms we're talking about."

Amen to that!

Ouch!

Would have been less blood with pistols. ;)

Awesome!

Another idiot posts the same sh1t.

And again, does it without anything to back it up.

lmao...

They're coming out of the woodwork guys. Someone knock down a bridge around here and make all these trolls homeless?

Sure would have been faster. ;)

Opener - Requires user intervention
OSX/Inqtana.A - Proof of Concept. Not In the Wild.
Mac.Simpsons - MS OUtlook / Entourage
Exploit.OSX.Safari.a - MacOSX (Hey,we have a winner)
Exploit.OSX.ScriptEx.a - Apple Mail

I'll give you *one*. And one is all I asked for.

As for your trolling and insults, look at my *original* comment:

Do They?

A simple "yes" with a link to 'Exploit.OSX.Safari.a' documentation would have ended it right there.

As you can see above, I am *fully* capable of doing my homewrok, but I will *not* do it for mindless trolls such as spongy.

While you are still an insulting twit without the civility god gave a rock, at least you backed it with some actual information. Too bad you had to make a complete a** of yourself while doing it...

mindless trolls such as spongy.

While you are still an insulting twit without the civility god gave a rock, at least you backed it with some actual information.
Actually, I am pretty sure he is spongy. Spongy probably just didn't want to admit he was wrong for not backing it up and/or felt he needed to buy time while he did some research.

Well, you sure made spongy-poos point. You can't even admit an error with any class. You are still nit-picking after making a grossly general statement and you're trying so hard to twist things to make yourself look good that it's laughable.

Why would anyone try to have a normal conversation with you? You got what you had coming.

Well, you sure made spongy-poos point.
Actually, you did, and PC_Tool conceded that, commending you on doing what spongy could not. Of course, he still thought you were seperate posters.

I got what I had coming???

I asked:

Do They?

I got a load of crap so unbelieveable I'm *still* shaking my head in amazement.

You *finally* gave a decent answer, and you were *still* a complete a** about it.

But whatever. I got the answer. Problem solved. You can go ahead and expound all you want on what a big jerk I am.

Hope it makes ya feel better about yourself.

C'ya.

I wouldn't put it past him, but I'll withold judgement.

Contrary to popular belief, I don't actually make snap judgements all that often. ;)

Boy, I don't really want to jump on the beat up Pc tool thing, but you really should stop while you can salvage something. Every post make it look more like spongy-poo was right. Let it go. :)

SP was right for being an a******? WTF world do you live in?

In what way is "Do They?" a "gross generalization" requiring the bile that SP/dee spewed out? The flat refusal of SP to provide backup for his point and expecting PC_Tool to do his work for him while tossing insults left and right has firmly entrencheed SP/dee as nothing but an ignorant troll in my view. Every post that another idiot makes supporting that alt posting fool just proves how ignorant they can be as well.

I have been using Windows PCs since 3.1. I didn't like 3.1 at all, and usually stayed in dos.

In all those years of using Windows, I have yet to be infected by a virus or taken over by mal/spyware. However, my antivirus has caught them twice. Yes, I do run security software, I realize it is a necessity with a PC connected to the internet, just like a seatbelt is with a car.

I wasn't talking to you was I? Nor was anyone else. Now toddle off and mind your own business.

Just let it be, man.

It's only words on a screen... ;)

Nothing to get bothered about. Idiocy can be frustrating, but just eb thankful they're in cyberspace and not standing behind you.

"just eb thankful they're in cyberspace and not standing behind you"

...shudder...

your right of course, but as I wind up my final days at my current place of employment my mornings are filled with meetings and my afternoons with naught. So baiting stupid trolls has a sort of entertainment value to it.

Nor was anyone talking to you.

Put up or shut up.

Somewhere I found interesting comment, that in iexplorer is actually is found less bugs in same amount of time, than in Firefox, but ie fixed far lesser. And if you think about, ie is commercial product and ff is free.
Conclusion: microsoft programs is not so bad, but support really sucks, it's only for simple users, and they absolutely don't care about bugs, as they should with that return.

That is true....

Why in the world would people complain about security hotfixes? Every OS has them, and MACs while not frequent get them too. We've all concluded that every piece of software has flaws, and XP being a huge piece software has a lot of them. So who gives a s*** of Windows patches a lot of them?

XP is only as secure as you make it. Yeah, I think Linux is more secure than Windows which is a nice bonus, but not just because it's structured differently, but because hackers dont care to exploit it. If you choose to have the most popular OS in the world, take care of it as such and stop b****ing.

Pulease, I haven't gotten a piece of spyware on a Windows machine in two years. I sometimes don't even bother with AS programs because all it takes is Firefox to keep yourself safe on the net these days. And you don't run an 'additional' firewall because you'd have to turn off the Windows firewall or else you'd face compatibility and other issues. And a registry cleaner is necessary, but only really usable unless you spend all day downloading/installing programs and then uninstalling them.

Sure you can be spoiled all you want by a MAC, but the only way you can get access to millions of great pieces of software is to run Windows, and that's a fact. Just learn to stop whining and take a pro-active approach at taking care of your PC.

Ah Hem..lemmeeee tryyy

http://www.zdnet.com.au/...0061744,39164062,00.htm