Microsoft Updates Multiple Sysinternals Tools 179
wiedzmin writes "A couple of very useful updates have just been released by Microsoft for the ever so popular Sysinternals tool set. The most notable one is ProcessMonitor v2.0 which will now include 'real-time TCP and UDP monitoring.' Another one, released earlier this year — Desktops 1.0, provides a very unique multi-thread way to get multiple desktops running on your Windows box."
How about . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
How about making it so ProcessMonitor actually fully unloads when you quit. Nothing is more aggravating then having to reboot because a lot of games consider it a hacking tool and refuse to run.
Re:How about . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How about . . . (Score:1, Insightful)
That sounds to me more like it's a bug in the games than a bug in ProcessMonitor.
I wonder... do you think if you use ProcessMonitor to kill its own process it'll cleanup?
Re:/. and Microsoft articles... (Score:5, Insightful)
Plus, Mark was the one who discovered and publicised the Sony rootkit, when all the professional AV guys were too incompetent or traitorous to say anything. That ought to give him enough karma to go unflamed on Slashdot once or twice.
Re:Finally.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hang on to your old versions... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How about . . . (Score:1, Insightful)
How about boycotting games with Securom and other draconian DRM?
Not that ProcessMonitor should not fully unload, but it's the game developers fault your game won't run afterward.
R U sure that you know what U are talking about? (Score:4, Insightful)
(subject line done in illiterate speak to fit)
I didn't get the impression that this was a DRM issue. I took it more as an anti-cheat measure for on-line play. Given that there are huge numbers of players who think it's neat to win by loading up some warez that gives your game an unfair advantage against other on-line players, it's not too unreasonable to have code that detects some of the more common cheats. Unfortunately, when monitoring software starts hooking itself in places where it's not expected, it can look a lot like the cheating software.
Re:How about . . . (Score:1, Insightful)
This is not an issue with process monitor If you have a game that does this uninstall it, complain to the maker and return it as faulty. If you do not vote with your wallet these people will own your machine not the other way around.
Re:Just wow. (Score:3, Insightful)
If you look around, I think you will find that most people don't care about virtual desktops. And I don't mean just Windows users. Mac users generally don't care, and Linux users generally don't care, either. Perhaps, if more people had been crying to have the feature, Microsoft would have implemented it sooner. Because you are right: it isn't rocket science. Still, I think Microsoft made the right choice in playing catch up in other races, first: stability, support for Internet protocols and standard, security, multi-user support, etc. etc. I'd say these are all more important than virtual desktops.
Re:How about . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Nearly every Linux kernel module manages it.. (rmmod).
Re:Just wow. (Score:3, Insightful)
Windows has always been about multi-monitor support rather than virtual desktops. However, I doubt most users care about or use either.
Re:How about . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:How about . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
I consider this a bug in the custommer. They shouldn't buy games which are deliberately bugy and defective by design ... and now, burn, karma, burn... :)
Re:How about . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
A bug in software most frequently arises due to bad, or insufficient logic being applied.
I'd say that failing to run because somebody happens to have another (and in this case fully supported by Microsoft) program running in the background.
You can see where the suits (and some knee jerk reactions from developers) are looking; If we put that bit in there, we're safe.
However, the cracks that appear ensure that this is not the case. As has been noted many times on /. DRM does not affect the people who grab the cracked versions and have no intention of ever paying. It only affects someone who has already given the company their money.
This results in a bad customer experience, lowering the credibility of the games house.
In my eyes, this makes the logic applied by the developers (include this, and we'll be safe, and the world will be a better place, and no customer could ever object to this) is inherently flawed. This flaw makes its way into the design.
The design is implemented in the software, which causes an issue with various other applications the end user may wish to run.
So, the logic used in the design results in a piece of software not running. Whether the intent was to have this happen or not, the logic is flawed, thus making it a bug.
Welcome to the 1980s, Windows. (Score:1, Insightful)
We've had decent process monitors on virtually all variants of UNIX since the 1970s. We've had X virtual desktops since the late 1980s. It has always baffled me why these essential features were never implemented for Windows, and why it's only recently that they've become available as add-ons.
Re:How about . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Obligatory (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:How about . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is that the ProcessMonitor driver hooks the system call table. The author, Mark Russinovich, states:
"It's never safe to unload a driver that patches the system call table since some thread might be just about to execute the first instruction of a hooked function when the driver unloads; if that happens the thread will jump into invalid memory."
Can Linux avoid this problem?
Re:How about . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd most certainly list it as a bug.
Why does the game publisher think it has any rights at all regarding what I run on my PC?
Re:How about . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
Contracts 101 -1
Conditions raised after purchase are null and void.
Re:How about . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
Mod parent up insightful!
One problem with that, though, is that the game publishers will not tell you that their games are deliberately buggy and defective by design. However, if the game comes with DRM, that is a good sign that the developers of the game distrust you.
Re:How about . . . (Score:4, Insightful)
But what about the feature of the NT kernel where game companies actually produce software for it? When is the Linux kernel going to get that one?
somehow, atheists are even dumber than I thought (Score:1, Insightful)
You're a college sophomore, right? Almost nobody else reads Dawkins's books, and those who do are disappointed. Look up the word 'tautology'. That's what Dawkins's argument is, at 300 circular, rambling pages.
> just ask any Buddhist. He or she will be happy to explain to you that you don't need any god(s)...
Ask a REAL buddhist (not an American buddhist-lite) and he or she will tell you buddhists have nothing in common with atheists.
Re:Mark Russinovic is GOD. (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh contraire mon frere.
It makes the system heap smaller, and flushes out LRU crap from the OS. Something that it should have had in a feature all along. It works increibley well on a Terminal server. Excellent. Increases stability, speed, usability, capacity.
Marks solution? Buy a laptop with 4GB of ram, and get your company give you a superdome to play with.
Mark? Can I have your Superdome?