hey pitdingo2 CAN YOU AT LEAST ONCE IN YOUR **** I N G LIFE SHUT THE **** UP?!! CAN YOU STOP WITH YOUR CHILDNESS PLEASE? PLEASE DUDE GODD AMN MAN CAN YOU GIVE IT A **** I N G BREAK??? I THINK THAT BILL GATES **** E D YOUR MOM AND THAT'S WHY YOU MAD AT WHATEVER MICROSOFT DOES BUT HEY... I DONT GIVE A ****
BESIDES I THINK YOU ARE JUST A 15 YEAR-OLD IN HIS BASEMENT AND YOU ARE SO FAT THAT YOU CANT MOVE FOR s***! ARROGANT MOTHERF UCKER... YOU ARE GIVING US, THE LINUX AND MAC COMMUNITY, A BAD LOOK YOU DUMBF UCK..... **** YOU MOTHERFUKER

*laughing*

What? Make yourself look like an a** because someone else is making themselves look like an ass?

Yeah...that'll work.

Sniff glue much?

Gee.. thanks for the cap lock, with my poor eyesight , I couldn't of seen the inane comments you made. I guess this is one of those post that does not violate BO's TOS.

One other thing you might trying cutting back on the coffee or speed:)
Otherwise, Have a nice and calm day:)

dude no hell no i dont do drugs im just tired of pitdingo and his "$" sign and anti-microsoft campaign... that's all and don't assume things you dont know such as "sniff glue much" ok thank you

*laughs*

Re-read your post.

You gave us license to assume anything we want with that baby. :)

Geeze ... sensationalistic article...

I have to hand it to Scott -- he's not really misleading anyone -- it sure does affect XP and Vista ... but as stated, the vulnerability is in IIS 6 and 7 --- it's not in the operating system unless IIS (which does run as administrator and IS supposed to be completely secure) is active.

Most home users don't use IIS, but most servers DO.

And just like apache - a great amount of security is in the hands of the system administrator. The 'workaround' here seems to be reasonable too although I understand that MS did not intend for this to be necessary and yeah, it slows down some things.

So - if anything, this is another tick on the security list comparisons between Apache and IIS in my books...

Def. of Acknowledge- to admit the existence,reality, or truth. Implied in the word is that you are agreeing with a previous statement and , in this case, there is no previous statement. Standard Journalism only uses this word in reference to a statement from another.
By using words in such a way you slant the story to convey a certain viewpoint. BN is very good at that.
One other point, where are the stories that I posted that put Apple in a negative light? Nowhere on BN.

As far as Google, that was just a potshot at Bn..nothing more.

Listen up folks and become edumacated!

This from the same source as:
"Well according to Apple reps the only security software used on their system is Norton.
Second the core code is based on Unix which was used in the 70's. I had to take classes on this code and Maces were developed during this time. The fluff has changed but the core code hasn't."

Thanks BN! ....always good for a laugh!

I believe you meant educated not "edumacated!"

We do agree that BN is good for a laugh and so are you:)

Have a good day:)

Considering your nonsensical information, I indeed meant "edumacated".

Thanks for the history lesson. ROFLMAO.

Next time we can laugh at you trying to find Chicago on a map and trying to figure out what continent Mexico is constituent.

Its nice to finally know just who those dysfunctional high school seniors are!

nice attempt at covering your misspelling. I give you an A for effort. Actually, I do suck at geography:)

Have a nice day:)

Oh, and thank you for promoting me from being 13 (not a senior ) to now a senior in high school:)

On a more serious note- I've only seen kids use ROFLMAO. also, "continent Mexico is constituent."- What does this mean? Is this some secret special language ?

Petty soon I might actually be elevated to college...OH... I hope my college essay flies and I know I can come to you for advice on spelling:)

If you don't understand what edumacated means then you haven't been properly schooled.

My parents used the term when I was a kid 25 years ago, so it's been around a while.

It's slang for not getting a good education.

Thx.

He just needs to watch a few more Simpsons episodes.

Then he'd also know what a saxamaphone is. :p

Well, since I don't tend to use slang and slang was not part of my education, I stand corrected. A good education would seem to not include slang but that's just my opinion.

Have a nice day:)

You're right PC..I'll start watching the Simpsons:)

ok..I'll bite..laughing.. what does saxamaphone mean:)

It was a joke, hope you took it that way.

;-)

no problem..I have developed a thick skin..well...sort of. :)

Mr. Wizard, the word "edumacated" was an intentional misspelling used sarcastically in reference to your nonsensical accounting of computer history and to your conception of various internal UNIX security architectures - none of which are dependent upon Norton anything!

Perhaps you are typing this on your 1970's "Maces" from which you examined the internal UNIX code which was not available for public evaluation between the 1974 and 1978 when you said you did this!

Nor was the original MacOS in Any way dependent upon UNIX. What you have proven is that you haven't a clue about anything that you have posted; nor do you have the capacity to recognizing sarcasm nor the parody implied by your attempt to edumacate us with your expose that is more reminiscent of Fractured Fairy Tales than anything remotely resembling reality.

Don't be dense. Think about it for a second:

edu-ma-cation = edu-cation ("ma" removed)

saxa-ma-phone = (Hint, remove the "ma")

Sheesh....

Educated where, out of curiosity?

Always amused using slang on those educated in only The King's English (applies to most outside the US).

It amazed me as a teen that the kids my age in Germany spoke fluent English and the most I could do in German was order french fries. :p

...ahhh....but they didn't know a lick of slang. ;)

Ahh..thank you and here I thought I might have to get out my secret slang decoder ring:)

and Have a Sheesh evening:) oh wait, that's slang...I get it
Have a good evening:)
I thought that but one can never be sure about slang. or the education level here.

I went to Purdue University...1974-1978. Now what country I came from is my business but I am a U.S. citizen but can't run for President. Me and Arnold. Between his steroid use and Kennedy connection and my ..well...my use of experimental drugs in the early 70's, we would make a pretty good team. I only smoked and I didn't inhale. Oh well.

"Mac OS is the trademarked name for a series of graphical user interface-based operating systems developed by Apple Inc. (formerly Apple Computer, Inc.) for their Macintosh line of computer systems. The Macintosh user experience is credited with popularizing the graphical user interface."

I was wrong and admit it. Maybe that is what Separates myself from others here. MY willingness to acknowledge that I am wrong. But to admit one is wrong requires not having an over-inflated ego.
So Fox, edumacate me on what source code the original Macs used since the original mac os seems to be more of a GUI than a code based OS.

If I am wrong on this than educate me.
Also, the only relation that I made between Norton and a Mac was that a Mac only can use this security software (according to reps) so, if true, this means the OS code won;t allow for better security security software or are you going to argue that Macs don't need security software? If this is the case why then why does reps and sales people mention that you can only use a trash security software like Norton? Or are you going to argue that Norton is a fine piece of security?

Also when I am wrong, I like to do research and try to correct my error. Here's a trip down memory lane which some who used MACs back then might remember:
"One of the Apple ///'s many problems was it's poor ventilation. The heat often caused the logic boards to warp, which resulted in the chips coming loose from the board. It is reported that when one called Apple to report this problem, they actually suggested you pick the computer up and drop it a few inches from the ground. Good old fashioned way of fixing things... nice to hear a story like that when nearly all tech help today is actually no help at all." I would agree that Tech support, in general, is sorely lacking today.

Just to even the playing field over this Os issue , here is 2 links on Apple. Let the flaming begin:

http://www.news.com/8301-13579_3-9922461-37.html

http://www.news.com/8301...7-37.html?tag=cnetfd.mt

And these are found on a site that tends to be any Os but MS friendly.

Who cares. There are not too many web SERVERS running Apple OS.

Just proves my point . Thank you. Can you imagine Apple or Linux providers doing the same thing...?uh no.... they would keep their mouth shut like the backdating of stock options Jobs got and Apple didn't report.

My oh My, when the CEO admits the hype is in the OS pudding, maybe the horses mouth can shed some light on these problems for you//

http://www.channelregist...allmer_vista_incomplete/

I think that Ballmer's comments were pretty well balanced here. I don't think he was "admitting the hype is in the OS pudding" whatever that was supposed to mean.

Ballmer admits that there are good things in Vista and that 5 years didn't go to waste, but that Vista is bigger and that there are unfavorable things associated with it.

Unfortunately, Vista improves on XP, but not always in the right way. My 2c is that the problem is the baggage of backwards compatibility - which is a hallmark of Microsoft and something Apple has been able to shrug off twice in 10 years thanks to a smaller, non-corporate user-base that it was able to convince to buying new versions of software to move forward.

The main thing this article shows is that BO err..BN slants the News:

"It is the type of vulnerability that Microsoft wanted to head off as long as possible, especially since Windows Vista's new kernel was designed to thwart this possibility." Nowhere does the article or any other article quote MS people as saying this only BO.

"Now, as the company acknowledged in a security bulletin yesterday," Using the word "acknowledged" implies that one is agreeing with another statement and this exploit was announced by MS so once again the writers and I using that term loosely has deemed it necessary to try and trash under the guise of "news" a company.

Look at the top and you can see who pays these hack writers salary. Each click sends you god only know where and makes Google money. I especially like the "ads" from Google for Key registration hack sites.

Sounds like a newsworthy article to me. And using the term 'acknowledged' is a standard form of journalism to expand on a subject being reported. Whether the reporter agrees or not isn't important. It's an unbiased report, not an Editorial. Nor do I understand what Google has to do with a Windows exploit.

Looks like this news blogger (reporter?) is looking for a rise in traffic to this site. The report reads as if this is a terrible problem.

When in fact, you have to actually get the code running on the local machine (and that machine has to be running IIS, most aren't.)

Relax everyone!

Heh...

Oh, man...I hope you brought your flame-proof vest.

Lemme jump in front of that bus for ya:

Hey Dingo and sjc001:

Newsflash: IIS != an OS, or even part of the OS. Aren't you the pathetic losers who are always claiming the Linux vulnerabilities are for all of the apps installed with it??? Hmmm???

...and yet you are more than eager to jump all over Vista and XP for the same issue.

Silly little trolls...

Ok.. this post is more than blah blah..

The one piece that is missing from the equation below is critical mass (for some you can call it market share). If Macs or Linuxs ever achieves a market share even approaching MS than they will show the same vulnerabilities maybe more given the # already.
BUT, at the end of the day-

If you like the mac OS then use it and good for you
If you like Linux then use it and good for you
If you like XP or Vista then use it and good for you.

To think that there is any system that is invulnerable is burying your head in the sand. No system will ever be design that does that. At the end of the day, it is all about market share and whether or not people try and break into your system.
I do think that what everyone needs to realize is a simple fact and that is you need good security and good common sense. Macs need to change their code enough to allow more than a trash security software like a striped down version of Norton. MS needs to continue to work on developing their own security software that is better than what they have now. Linux needs to do the same. At the end of the day though, it is the user that determines whether or not a vulnerability is used by what email they open or what sites they go to (common sense). So use whatever OS you want but realize that none are perfect and you have to have common sense.

Just as a side note- some major companies where I lived have had security breaches and they use LInux. The fact that Apple has to issue security fixes shows that even a code based on a 70's old code is still vulnerable.

Use common sense and these vulnerabilities won't affect you.

Yes I use a certain OS but use anyone you like but understand that no OS is without problems that are compounded by lack of common sense.

Have a nice day:)

Applications with wide share don't have to be vulnerable. Look at Apache on Linux, and IIS on Windows, both with very few vulns and very very wide marketshare (IIS now taking over).

"Ok.. this post is more than blah blah.."

Thanks for the warning. It certainly was!

Someone with such a limited notion of what is involved in secure design from the ground up - and not as as an afterthought should do a bit more listening. Of course, with the plethora of fanboys posting here without a clue regarding OS design - what do you expect?

How do you top such an asinine statment as: "Macs need to change their code enough to allow more than a trash security software like a striped down version of Norton. MS needs to continue to work on developing their own security software that is better than what they have now. Linux needs to do the same."

Well according to Apple reps the only security software used on their system is Norton.
Second the core code is based on Unix which was used in the 70's. I had to take classes on this code and Maces were developed during this time. The fluff has changed but the core code hasn't.

And Saying something is asinine just shows you to be nothing more than a Fan boy or girl.

The core of comment is use whatever OS you want but no system is invulnerable.

Oh and O mighty exalted one, if a security watchdog doesn't consider it a Biggie than you must be wrong or do you know something that experts in security don't. Please share with us your insight with Facts not one line statements..
And you have no idea of what my experience may or may not be just as I don't know yours. So, again, if you are in the know, please inform us with Facts.

"the only security software used on their system (Macs) is Norton.
Second the core code is based on Unix which was used in the 70's. I had to take classes on this code and Maces were developed during this time. The fluff has changed but the core code hasn't."

You obviously didn't learn much then!

So "Maces" were developed in the 70's... And as UNIX was developed in the 70's (well, at least one was!) - while the "fluff has changed the core code hasn't"

You must be right. The "core code" of the Mac hasn't changed since the "70's". And neither has UNIX.

I guess neither have changed since the 1970's then. What is interesting is that the Mac did not use the UNIX kernel until the release of OSX.

You might want to take a few more classes regarding OS design and security. And take a history class as well!

I am assuming the "13" applies to your age and our luck to be able to learn from your nonsense.

Just proves my point that Macs use the OS kernel talked about. As for into a one line put-down contest with you, I'm not going to do that because there is enough of that already but, in fact, I have retired and went to college 1974-1978. This, of course was back in the days of having to write programs on a card punch machine and then wait for a printout to tell you that you misspelled a line but not give all the mistakes at once. Truly a mind-numbing experience.
I do give Apple credit for producing the 1st user friendly GUI.

Proves your point? ROFLMAO!

I am glad you studied UNIX code before it was released to the public in the 70's - and one wonders if it would just have been easier to run it on your Mac that was developed in the 70's as well, instead of playing with it on your PDP-7.

One wonders why folks bothered playing with the AppleII's with the Mac just sitting there?

Your revisionist fantasy is fascinating.

I hate to ruin this lively discussion with some boring FACTS, but I thought that some of you may find them interesting:

http://skitza.net/imgs/i.../Secunia_wiecrfC2ZC.jpg

As much as I *hate* to admit it, Vista DOES seem to be more secure than XP (and even slightly more than OS X)
Oh, well ...

You do realize that your image shows Vista being monitored for 1/3 the number of days the rest of the OSs are right?

You know that invalidates the results right?

Times the number of vulnerabilities for Vista by 3.6647 and you get 109.94. Still less than MacOS. So boo yea nigga.

That's EXACTLY why I added the line "Number of days / Total vulnerabilities" and the line "Number of days / (E+H+M)". You *do* see those lines, right? And you *do* see that, not precisely by chance, those are the lines that are in bold, right?
Let me explain further: what I did was a VERY SIMPLE analysis of Secunia's data that shows how often a new vulnerability of any criticality, and how often a new extremely, highly or moderately critical vulnerability, is found for each of the three OS's

The results show that a new vulnerability of any kind is found every 10 days for Windows XP, every 18 days for Windows Vista and every 17 days for Mac OS. And that a new extremely, highly or moderately critical vulnerability is found every 15 days for windows XP, every 31 days for Windows Vista and every 28 days for Mac OS.

I didn't think that the simple arithmetics involved would be so hard for some to get ...

Gotta love M$ employees referencing random pictures on image hosting sites. Why not link to the source?

So you group all OSX versions yet separate XP from Vista. LOL. Gotta love the M$ spin.

You must have missed my comment below about Vista being much better than XP.

Boo yeah nothing.

Thanks.

So you group all OSX versions yet separate XP from Vista

You mean, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, and 10.5? One version, multiple updates.

Would you like us to break Windows versions down by Service Pack as well?

LOL. Gotta love the M$ spin.

No spin, just El Dingo being a complete moron again.

Huh? Those are different versions, not patches. Why do you post if you have no idea of what you are talking about? Let me suggest you learn before you post such clueless statements:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X

10.5.2 is the current version and patch level, or service pack for all the M$ drones, of Leopard.

10.2 is a different version of the OS
10.3 is a different version of the OS
10.4 is a different version of the OS

*laughs*

You didn't get it.

I'd say I'm shocked, but I pretty much knew that'd go right over your head.

C'mon, Dingo... typing "M$" and calling me names isn't the only form of humor in the world, ya know. :)

LOL

If you just knew ...
But, just for the record, I'm clearly NOT a Microsoft employee (nor a supplier, shareholder, or even fanboy, for what it's worth ... :) ) I've been posting on this site for several years and my posts aren't precisely pro-Microsoft

The source of the data is publicly available at www.secunia.com , all I did was consolidate that into one spreadsheet. I invite you to go check my numbers at their website.
The picture is a print screen of the original spreadsheet that is obviously in my PC. Took me 5 minutes to do, plus one minute to upload to the image hosting site, I wasn't going to build a special website for that :)

So go look for yourself at www.secunia.com , and THEN come back to accuse me of some bias

Oh, BTW, it's not ME who groups all OS X versions together, it's Secunia. So you might want to drop them a comment while you're at their website checking numbers.

Oh i got it, and so did everyone else; you have no clue what you are talking about. Not that anyone thought you did anyways.

Where did i call you names?

funny how i do not see that data on that link you sent. Care to put a link up to that data?

It was a joke at your expense, so you still don't get it.

Oh, c'mon, give up already, will you? :D

http://secunia.com/product/22/?task=statistics
http://secunia.com/product/13223/?task=statistics
http://secunia.com/product/96/?task=statistics

Enjoy!

Here is the first sentence from those links...

"PLEASE NOTE: The statistics provided should NOT be used to compare the overall security of products against one another. It is IMPORTANT to understand what the below comments mean when using the statistics, especially when using the statistics to compare the vulnerability aspects of different products."

LOL. So we have a M$ Employee spinning numbers again. These guys never learn.

And once again, when you read further...

"It should also be noted that some operating systems (e.g. certain Linux distributions) bundle together a large number of software packages, and are therefore affected by vulnerabilities, which do not affect other operating systems (e.g. Microsoft Windows) that don't bundle together a similar amount of software packages."

LOL. At least they realize some OS's like the typical GNU/Linux distro include tons of software, which in the closed, proprietary, M$ world would cost into the thousands. These numbers include all the issues with all included software.

So really, you could say your numbers show how poor Windows security is. If the Linux numbers include the OS and all the apps which come with a distro, Windows which comes with no apps, has a swiss cheese OS. Not like anyone who does not work for M$ thinks differently.

oops. forget to log in under the right account PC_Tool? LOL.

"10.2 is a different version of the OS
10.3 is a different version of the OS
10.4 is a different version of the OS"

LoL. Gotta love fanboi.

Well, at least you amuse yourself...

At least you make me laugh.

I know, I know, don't feed the troll ... but it's fun! :D

This is my last cookie for you, so make sure you make it last, ok?

I'm going to treat this as if it still was a serious discussion and reply that:

- I'm not comparing any Linux distributions here, or am I? A comparison with the Linux KERNEL would perhaps be suiting, but I'm not gonna do that. I leave it to you to update the graph with that data ;)
- A comparison between XP and Vista is more than appropriate, given that the 2 OS's come from the same vendor and have a similar amount of bundled software packages. You want to leave Mac OS X outside of this comparison? fine with me, the point still remains. Maybe others find the comparison useful

Again, no more cookies for you, so it's bye, adieu, Lebe wohl, addio, sayonara, chauuuuu ....

thread summary:

1) M$ employee/fanboi makes up a chart and includes random links to a reputable site.

2) M$ drone says Windows is more secure based on data

3) On independent investigation, the numbers are cooked. All OSX versions summed, however different versions of Windows are kept separate giving the illusion that Windows has fewer vulnerabilities.

4) independent investigation games the M$ drone by playing the same game, which the drone fails to recognize. Introduces GNU/Linux into the fray with no meaningful data and leads the M$ drone to invalidate his first post.

Thanks M$ drone. That was all to easy.

Its apparent you see Microsoft and disregard any other coherent thought as you proved by your latest rant that has NOTHING to do with what he said.

He stated it SEEMS (it was capitalized so you wouldn't miss it) that Vista is more secure then XP and possibly OSX, that was the discussion.

You per usual went on this tirade of emotions about fanboys and employees without reading (or would that be comprehending) the source material.

Then he sited his source and again you go off on this tirade again without knowing what words mean, SEEMS is a matter of his opinion and observation.

So by looking at DATA ONLY it would APPEAR Vista is more secure then XP and MOST LIKELY OSX.

Hope that makes sense

Your friend,

$Term$

PS: I think the dollar sign look marvelous, what do you think, do we have a winner?

ok PC_Tool.

Nope.

Sorry, man. I haven't used my alt in months. :)

Turns out there are actually quite a few people here who are smarter than you. Not that that's much of an accomplishment....

too much to digest, huh?

Its ok I'll use smaller words next time.

Ok Dave

You're starting to remind me of my sister and she's a kook. Wish someone had the authority to bash your skull in so that you'll stop wasting our time with baseless attacks and lousy arguments. Too bad BetaNews didn't have the foresight to use something with some sort of ignore filter so that we wouldn't have to see your useless fluff posts.

Been using Vista since Januray, no major problems at ALL ....

too many trolls in here who get off every time Microsoft finds a flaw and works to fix it.

Sorry fanboy, this one is a BIGGIE!

Except MS is the one that found it and it sounds like there have to be a lot of variables for this to work...

I realize you are being instructed to astroturf all the M$ postings here from your cube in Redmond, but sorry a flaw is a flaw.

ok apple employee, or is it nintendo employee, can't tell

You used Vista after they patched hundreds of flaws. How quaint.

I realize you negated to read the rest of my post, in order for said vulnerability to occur there are a lot of variables involved to execute it.

If the company that made it found the flaw and said people that try to exploit the many weaknesses in windows doesn't know where it is to do so, how is that astroturfing, really?

Here you go your fantastic super OS with no problems

to quote you "a flaw is a flaw"

http://it.slashdot.org/a...pl?sid=08/02/10/2011257

a bit older and has been fixed but its been there for quite some time, I know you'll stammer and come up with some witty comment that includes a $ but just so you know no OS is better then the next they all have their uses...

Using Vista since RTM (nov 06).. Still no problems on a fairly low end system. Whats your comeback now?

Another day another M$ vulnerability....zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

How about BetaNews only run a story when we can go an entire week without a new M$ Windows vulnerability? Oh wait...there would not be anything to post about. forget that.

How is your super OS coming along that has zero vulnerabilities?

move along....

If Apple had any where near the pentration that MS does you would see it the other way. Then again that would spoil the trolls day. Apple gains a little ground and guess what, the expoilt list grows, hum go figure.

See, it's easy to make bulls*** claims like this when Windows has never not been a monopoly.

If Linux and MacOS were to gain 33% each it would be interesting.

I'd put my money on them still not having virii. The reason I say that? Microsoft was virus king until they decided to clean up their act.

It really was them..

What ever you say there.

If wanted to exploit an OS I would attack the market leader you know the one that has the most units out there. I guess that is really to much for some people to understand.

They may have been found guilty of being a monopoly in the past but guess what? That is the past.

You'd get more recognition for hitting something that hasn't been hit than you would something that everyone is already attacking.

One virus in a world of 1,000,000,000 viruses isn't even a fly on the wall in the world of recognition.

Sorry, SGD you are just plain wrong. Windows has gotten a whole lot better than it used to be about security, and that's the ONLY reason it's safer to be a Windows user than it used to be.

Think back to a few years ago, before Bill announced that they were going to stop Vista while they cleaned up XP. Think about those key viruses that prompted Microsoft (yeah, that's right Microsoft) to pause and rethink the market share vs bad code concept. They realized it was all about writing better code, and so they did.

http://technet.microsoft...s/library/bb457151.aspx

http://www.news.com/2100-1001-816880.html

http://redmondmag.com/ne...e.asp?EditorialsID=5168

Unfortunately, they haven't gotten good enough to stop all of them (Vista is light years better than XP though)

http://www.avast.com/eng/viruses_in_the_wild.html
http://www.avast.com/eng/summary_of_virus_rep.html

Guess what, they are still a monopoly they just aren't operating an illegal monopoly anymore.

Again, if you wanted to exploit an OS you would attack the target that would give you the most press. Windows is NOT it.

9 out of 10 viruses are variants of other viruses, guess what that means.. it means it's EASY.

Thanks for playing.

What does Apple have to do with my post? This is a story about M$ and their swiss cheese OS's.

and another useless rant by pit$ingo, go watch blues clues

Because you an apple fan boy and hate everything MS. When MS does something good you find a way to attack. That is what I mean.

If apple was a big as MS they would have the same expoite issues. That is a fact. Attack the leader.

No, it's an opinion.

Thanks.

It's not about recognition, fewt. It's about money.

Hmm, you have a valid point but I don't believe that all 1,000,000,000 viruses have dollar signs on them.

That's just my opinion though.

Heh...

Think about it, man...

The one's that aren't? Noobs. The one's that *really* know what they are doing are going to get paid for their work, are they not?

I suppose there may be a few out there doing it for giggles, but I see them as more like the zridlings and El Dingos of the world. They have a grudge, and it ain't against Linux.

Bull shi^

Then substantiate it.

Which kind of Swiss cheese? Emmenthaler, which common US plebs refers to as such or any other of the 450 varieties?

No I believe its fact. It will always be attack the leader.

Its not about being one virus among a million viruses.. Its about which platform will reek the most havoc. Is it a platform that is only 20% of the market or 80% of the market(I know the percentages are wrong), I believe I'll take the 80% platform.

Wow. I've never met a cheese snob before. ;)

Well, then substantiate the claim.

You can "believe" it's fact all you want. Actually, you could in theory believe that the sky is blue because of the reflection off of the oceans, however that would be an opinion which incidentally just like the market share seeds viruses claim it's wrong. The fact would be that the sky being blue is caused by light as it passes through the atmosphere.

Sorry, until the opinion that market share is why Windows has so many viruses is backed by something that substantiates it as a fact it's actually just an opinion.

Too depressing, he can never figure out the clues. :p

(He always thinks it's got something to do with MSFT)

"Its about which platform will reek the most havoc."

AKA easy

lol. asking one of the M$ drones on here for anything resembling a fact is quite comical. If the M$ spin machine put it out, it has to be true.

No, you trying to accuse someone of never having facts to back up their claims is what is comical.

Fewt actually knows what he's talking about. You never do.

Why would someone attack an OS that has 3% penetration when they can attack the leader that has 97%. It would be common sense to attack the biggest one. If you make a virus to damage a PC why not do massive damage to millions of PC's than just a few.

Didn't see any facts there.

No offense, but logic and common sense != fact, not matter how much we'd like for that to be the case.

Don't you mean M$? :D

But no one would bother with Windows if it has 5% of the marketshare, their would be no point to it. No super Zombie PCs

Should get out more ;)

Nah, I'm not 12 years old anymore. ;)

Hmmm, pot and kettle? You can make the same claim for *os drones but it's really irrelevant to the thread.

Heh...

No thanks. I've seen the news. :p

There have been viruses since there has been DOS. There was no substantial "market" then, and the OS was still owned over and over and over and ..

Now that XP is more secure and Vista is out, not so much.

That's enough evidence for me (at least it's enough to support my opinion).

There have been viruses since there has been DOS. There was no substantial "market" then,

???

DOS grabbed the majority of the computer using public the moment it was released.

Sure, there weren't as many computers back then, but DOS by far had the majority of them damn near the moment it was released.

If you want to call it marketshare. I'd guesstimate the number of users then as being less than Linux now by more than 50%.

That would further support my opinion. :-D

Wonder if I could find a real number.

Hmm

Heh...

Best of luck. No internet back then. :p At least, not as we know it.

"It's life, Jim..."

First its very remote possibility. Administrator must allow to install this service first. If you don't trust software publisher - don't install it. Simple as this.

I agree with Secunia - it's LESS CRITICAL.

If you so paranoid about security - use MS-DOS3 - almost no exploits so far :))) Only relict viruses.... heh

No one's forcing anyone, but saying Vista doesn't have better security than WInXP is really BS.
Everything else about exploitability was explained in my last post.

Vista security means jack s*** when it shares vulnerabilities with quicktime and flash. These have remote execution vulns.

The OS should protect the user and their data when software installed is s***e, or it should not allow such software to be run.

The only viruses that seem to sneak onto the network at work are non-Windows related vulnerabilities. I finally convinced higher-ups to update everyone's flash player to the latest versions, and ensure that is kept up to date, but recently it's been Java. Some folks are still running version 5 of their runtime environment and I had a couple of PCs affected from vulnerabilities in the past couple of months.

Guys please stop this mindless bi***ing at each other. I like Linux alot and I use it everyday, I also thought Win XP was good and I hate Vista but everyone has their own thoughts on operating systems.

Its good to have your own opinion as long as you do not try to force it on others.

Good to see PC_Tool shares the same opinion as me.
Imagine there is 2.000.000.000 monkeys wanting to exploit something in Windows. Thats quiet a number? DonGato, would you as security chief in lets say Microsoft have the guts to say your OS is any more secure than older one when that huge number of monkeys can ruin everyhing you do in day or two if they want and properly organize? Not that Vista IS safer than Windows XP, it's also scientifically proved by experts if you like it or not. Exploits are and will be, same goes for absolutelly everything.
OS is so complex there is NO way you can make it hack proof. Impossible. I don't want to turn this into flame war but i call it BS when ppl say MacOS or Linux is safer than Windows.
What i say is, we'd see when user base would be as large as for Windows OS. It's easy to say if there is only limited userbase and most of which consists of geeks and power users that aren't even risk users and they know how to keep system clean and secure. Trust me, it makes all the difference.
Today where malware writers don't create malware just to prove they can do it (there are still such ppl though), today it's all about money. They do it for profit.
And for such, userbase means another few bilion of reasons to do it.
Would you even bother to find exploit if in the end you can affect only few hundred thousand users? It's just not worth the effort if you can on the other end possibly exploit userbase hundred or even thousand times larger?

Also you can see this:

Provided and/or discovered by:
Reported by the vendor.

This means Microsoft found the potential security hole by themself. It's much better when vendor alone finds a bug, not someone else, meaning they do care about OS security.
And i can for sure say Vista is more secure than Windows XP. Especially 64bit version.

Let's see...

"OS is so complex there is NO way you can make it hack proof. Impossible. I don't want to turn this into flame war but i call it BS when ppl say MacOS or Linux is safer than Windows.
What i say is, we'd see when user base would be as large as for Windows OS. It's easy to say if there is only limited userbase and most of which consists of geeks and power users that aren't even risk users and they know how to keep system clean and secure. Trust me, it makes all the difference."

So the installed userbase determines the rigor and completeness in the process of code development and testing?

Well, who says we can't learn things here...

With that kind of logic you might want to stick to debating gaming platform issues and how Frogger is such a demanding game...

I never said Vista isn't better than XP in matters of security. Point me to that reference please. What I said is that this is going the way of DRM where a company says they have a system that can't be broken and the day after it's broken already.

I got the impression that Microsoft markets Vista as a secure OS (maybe I'm wrong in that assumption) while I think is not. Such thing doesn't exist. It's better than XP, maybe. Is secure, IMO, not.

I never said Vista isn't better than XP in matters of security. Point me to that reference please.

...

The problem is that Microsoft markets Vista as an essentially securer OS when at the end of the day is not.

Securer than what? Are you seriously trying to tell us you had L*nux in mind when you made that comparison?

*laughs*

The problem isn't that it has a bug or not. The problem is that Microsoft markets Vista as an essentially securer OS when at the end of the day is not.

So what you get for sure is a set of new features most people don't need, a shiny interface, high hardware needs and a few bucks less in your pocket.

If you like Vista then I have no problem, but don't ask the rest of the world to love it as well. There is so much hate for something and is not just pure Microsoft hatting.

The problem is that Microsoft markets Vista as an essentially securer OS when at the end of the day is not.

You a security expert, then?

You've studied the code?

You have data on the number of total vulnerabilities ranked by criticality for all Windows Operating systems, and Vista falls short?

No?

So...you're just full of it then, right?

So what you get for sure is a set of new features most people don't need, a shiny interface, high hardware needs and a few bucks less in your pocket.

If you like Vista then I have no problem, but don't ask the rest of the world to love it as well. There is so much hate for something and is not just pure Microsoft hatting.

Bull. You've never used it, you've never tested it on decent hardware and yet you feel somehow qualified to call it crap. Just like every other friggin' troll here.

Toolie,
Watch your language, my friend.
Abuse other posters' incessantly as is your want!
But, please! Easy on the language.
We (participants of this board, you mistakenly think you own) are well aware of your diminishing capacity, yet I and others' do concede the reduction if you like.
'Tis time, my friend to bend over for the last time, and take your medicine.
As an aside buddy, you know why your heroes have these silly smirks? It's called copraphilia, perhaps you would understand it better as "a s*** eating grin".
Now, back on your syntax & construction of the repetition (yep, this is a deliberate construct), my friend do you know what wearisome means?
Yep! My little white boy trailer trash skank, time for a spanking!

Zridling you need help, first the website now you are creating fanfare for him, just ask him to marry you already, get it over with. m

Tool, in this case at least SOME of us are!

And this is something that should NEVER happen - in ANY OS!

I agree that the fanboy posturing on ANY side of the fence that precludes an objective analysis of any environment is not only pervasive, but it effectively precludes the potential for intelligent discussion of issues here.

But THIS problem is a fundamental lapse in design. Do we need to examine all of the code? No! As no one should have to! Effective design methodology should have precluded this! It is not that difficult to do!

What would be welcomed would be the ability to objectively evaluate problems and to comment on them. I don't really care about many of the minor glitches that populate an environment (any environment!) - assuming that they are identified and remedied in a reasonable fashion.

But, that having been said, this 'minor' problem should not occur! ...In ANY platform...

The irony is that we faced the EXACT same fatal flaw in the first release of NT with the advent of ActiveX when we were contemplating using the OS for secure environments and we were asked to keep it "under our hat" by MS relative to the business community (after they inquired as to 'how' we discovered this! - hey, they did have priorities!)!

I am not here to trash MS (and no, I am not positing other platforms as being perfect - but several easily available major platforms are MUCH more fundamentally secure!) But, the basic MS architecture has always suffered from serious fundamental issues - especially when compared to other platforms.

It's really time betanews got serious about moderating posts here. It's turned me off from regularly reading having to see a zoo of haters run loose here.
And the people that cant read the button labelled in clear english 'Reply to post'... arg dont get me started :(
And no I dont mean you termin :) I'm just ranting

Who is the Troll?

An INTEL Core 2 Duo 6750 with 4Gb RAM and a GeForce 8660GT isn't enough hardware?

A Tablet PC with 4GB RAM and a mobile T7250 isn't enough for the test?

A SONY notebook with 2GB of RAM and a GeForce isn't enough hardware either?

Stop trolling when you don't know s***! You're more stupid than what I though.

If you don't like my comment don't read it but don't come with baseless assumptions.

*laughs*

An INTEL Core 2 Duo 6750 with 4Gb RAM and a GeForce 8660GT isn't enough hardware?

Don't recall ever saying that. As a matter of fact, I have stated several times that IMO, that is about the optimal config for Vista x64 SP1.

You guys and you imaginary conversations...

Oh, and this part made my day:

don't come with baseless assumptions.

...after you made these, um...baseless accusations:

The problem is that Microsoft markets Vista as an essentially securer OS when at the end of the day is not.

So what you get for sure is a set of new features most people don't need, a shiny interface,

There is so much hate for something and is not just pure Microsoft hatting.

Wow, that was pretty much your entire post. Lessee...

Vista is more secure by design (UAC, protected mode, drivers out of the kernel, server kernel, memory heaps, etc)

Vista is much more than a "shiny new interface". I love that you guys claim to know so much about how Vista sucks, but can't seem to get past the UI. One would think you might be able to dig a bit deeper for all your "expertise"....

...and "Microsoft hatting"? Really? Well, I suppose if you're trying to make an a** out of yourself, spelling and grammar aren't really all that important.

"you've never tested it on decent hardware"

No, you never said that. Let me laugh at yourself.

Of course Vista is much more than a shinny interface, it seems you missed the word before: "...a set of new features most people don't need...". Let me laugh again at yourself.

CU, PC_Troll

"So what you get for sure is a set of new features most people don't need, a shiny interface, high hardware needs and a few bucks less in your pocket"

How do you know have you taken a world opinion on if they need the new features?

I am going to fix that for you...

"So what you get for sure is a set of new features that I don't need, a shiny interface because I am using the typical rant all trolls use, high hardware needs because xp only came out 6 years ago and my dinosaur pc should be fine and a few bucks less in my pocket"

PC_Troll at it again...

As I said in a previous post what I don't lack is hardware. I never said the world don't need the features, just most people.

So you're making wrong assumptions again. You should fix yourself first instead of trying to fix other things.

CU, PC_Troll

EDIT: oh, it was his alias. Sorry x-terminal, you sounded much like PC_Troll that I was confused. Or are you the same person posting with other account. Talking about split personalities. :D

Except you still are not most people you can only speak for yourself...

No, Pc_tool and I are two different people we just tend to agree on the same things,

Haven't you figured it out, term?

Troll=Everyone.

They *are* the majority (in their minds).

..and if you're not one of them...apparently you're me. ;)

But my name is not Dave!

/obscure?
//probably not
///just in case, though :D

Heh...

Dave's not here, man.

just ask him to marry you already

I don't think he could handle the rejection. :p

So defenders are trolls now and the bashers are the good guys.. Ohhhh I see now..

I don't know Pit seems like a strong contender for the Dave name...

I think zridling's closer, he's got his multiple personality thing goin' and all.

Anyone who disagrees with a troll is a troll (creative, aren't they?) regardless of fact, maturity, or consensus.

First of all to Term, I am sorry for my over the top remarks and I do mean that.

Now as to this debate , as I see it boils down to
"blah blah blah blah blah blah,,,"
In other words, use whatever OS or browser you want. You don't have tear down one as a way of defending yours.
My problem is more with BO err.. I mean BN in that they seem to have an agenda to report the "hews" somewhat selectively. They never seem to miss a chance to beat down one company on questionable sources to elevate the ones they like.
Stories on certain OS or Browsers have a very short half-life on their front page and then get buried in their netherworld while stories about companies they do like stay on the front page for a much longer period of time.

So use whatever OS or browser you want. In the end our opinion doesn't mean a thing.

So my feeling is blah blah blah blah.
Have a nice weekend:)

"Stories on certain OS or Browsers have a very short half-life on their front page and then get buried in their netherworld while stories about companies they do like stay on the front page for a much longer period of time."

Well, it certainly is much more stirring a big Company's doing than a small less known one. That also happens in politics, sports or whatever news reports. Is not BN to blame but the entire system.

We are not talking about "news" outlets but only talking about BN. The fact that other outlets slant the news does not justify BN slanting the news or any other tech site say..cnet.

Finally, it doesn't matter what you say here because there will always be someone to be critical. So from now on, if I post it will be just blah blah blah,.... this sums up most of what is said here.:)

LOL it figures! Make a patch for it, you seem to be better at that than making good software....

Hows you OS coming that has no holes and is 100% free from defects coming along?

Yeah, I thought so...

Wow!

Let's b**** about MSFT for something that is common to every piece of software in existence.

The larger the software, the more chances for error, the larger the user base, the larger the payoff for those who want to find and exploit those errors.

Pretty simple logic there, mate. Think you could try it sometime?

Wouldn't want you to hurt yourself or anything...

Do you and the tool want to get a room?

Another OS doesn't have to be perfect to be better than Vista, not by a long shot, SFB.

Vista is a joke, just like you are. You fundies make me laugh.

See the problem is thats YOUR opinion, its a fact that there is no such software that is 100% free of defects.

You bring it up in every conversation of your hate for MS and repeat the same thing ad nauseum, we get it you don't like Vista or MS you are a loyal penguin now, lets move on ok?

No one said another OS had to be perfect to be better than Vista. They said that no software is going to be completely free of bugs or exploits, and that's true. No matter if it's Linux, OS X, Windows, etc. As for Vista being a joke that is a matter of opinion, not fact. I'm using it and it's working just fine for me. Maybe your computer sucks.

I won't even comment on that last part since I fail to see how religion has anything to do with this. Seems like you're just trying to be as stupid as possible.

You're a minority on this. To the majority of Vista users it is nothing but trouble.

As for the last part there are some Vista users on here who defend Vista irrationally like theists who protect their faith.

I never claimed perfection in my OS. When compared to Vista I don't have to, its still better than Vista, even with its problems.

You keep talking and all I hear from you is blah, blah, blah..... But what can I expect from a nobody.

You have to realize that the only people that typically speak up about a product are those that have a problem with it. I'm pretty sure there are slightly more Vista users than those that have complained, and for many of those I would wager that the problems were either their hardware or mistakes they had made.

I will admit Vista had issues at release, file copying performance being one. Since SP1 however I've had no trouble at all with it. My computer isn't exactly new either.

Yet there is article after article pointing out the many, many, many problems with Vista... An OS like this shouldn't be this flaky with hardware. Linux is free and it doesn't have nearly the problems that Vista does and it still manages to be modern and reliable as well.

BTW, SP1 has added some of its own problems to the mix as well.

I don't pay much attention to those, you can find article after article talking about how pretty much anything you can think of sucks, including Linux. All I can say is what I've experienced personally and I've had no trouble with Vista.

As I had said, you are in a minority on that.

As I just pointed out, that isn't necessarily the case at all.

Isn't blah blah blah also what you're doing? You say that they defend Windows religiously, but you seem to be bashing it just as religiously and at the same time praising Linux.

I'm not trying to get into a big thing here, just use the operating system you like and let others do the same. I like Linux, but I like Windows too. What does it matter, it's just software after all.

No bite, jackass. We never compared Vista to any other OS.

Having another imaginary conversation?

Please, no talking to yourself. We're too busy wondering what happens to the files on Macs when someone cancels a copy or move operation. :)

(Typical Flame Warrior style: Kung Fu Master http://redwing.hutman.ne...orshtm/kungfumaster.htm or Eagle Scout http://redwing.hutman.ne...riorshtm/eaglescout.htm or Philosopher http://redwing.hutman.ne...iorshtm/philosopher.htm)

What do you think of http://redwing.hutman.ne...warriorshtm/palooka.htm or http://redwing.hutman.ne...orshtm/artfuldodger.htm or http://redwing.hutman.ne...warriorshtm/grenade.htm or http://redwing.hutman.ne.../warriorshtm/fanboy.htm or http://redwing.hutman.ne...orshtm/ferouscranus.htm ?

you fail to see the bigger picture.

if you try to build an os for the vast majority it will suffer from very similar pitfalls and critisim.

these days negativity rules the net because people content with things usually stay silent and negativity sells. This is why it's hard to find good contrast.

instead of listenign for the noise listen for the silence.

Last I checked, you do not represent the majority. The majority that you refer to are trying to use a 2007 OS with 2003 or earlier hardware. It's like putting an senior at a bungie jump. Sure, some will survive, most will die of heart attack. Then the headline will be something like this "BUNGIE JUMP, A killer"

I can pretty much say there has to be a Vista bash headquarters somewhere. That assign people to each newsite. Your directive today is to seek out and bash any article that praises Vista and bash any commenter that defends Vista on negative articles.

I for one have been using Vista since early 2005 before it was Vista on a fairly old computer and have not had any of the problems this so called majority has had.. This majority is made up of one person having trouble with "old" hardware that was slow when they bought it in 1995 and then it snowballing. Oh I heard vista sucks because it wont work with any hardware. Oh yea I heard the same thing.. And 90% of them having never used Vista picks on one persons opinion. And wala you have your so called majority. Oh and then the MAC/Linux fanboys add to that so called majority.

I bet you werent around when XP came out were you. The XP bashing was 10 times worse than it is for Vista. But now XP is the end all be all of MS OS's? After 6 years maybe.

The problem is the fanboys outnumber the people willing to speak up for Vista(the ones that actually have used it more than once).