Evaluating Windows XP Service Pack 2 RC2 448
dncsky1530 writes "Information Week has a good evaluation of Windows XP SP2, excerpt: "The code for release candidate 2 finally looks like a real release candidate. And sure enough, it will help you big-time with security. But what sorts of headaches will the eventual final version mean for IT shops? We'll take it piece by piece... Remember when Microsoft said service packs wouldn't deliver any new functionality? That lasted for about six months back in 1997. Windows XP Service Pack 2 is jammed-packed with both invisible and visible improvements to Windows XP. The biggest boon is that the free update, which will probably ship some time in September, does in fact make Windows XP far more secure""
New features, yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:New features, yes. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:New features, yes. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:New features, yes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:New features, yes. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:New features, yes. (Score:5, Interesting)
This happens quite often with Windows. Not just in this case, or with dialogue boxes, but just generally with windows containing an error message. I'm not that excited about a task completing or a page not being found that I'm interested in stopping writing my email or entering a URL or whatever to click on an OK on a box with no other options. Is there a registry setting anywhere for Windows as a whole - something to the effect of a `Take focus away from user to report an error` boolean or something? Do other operating systems handle this problem another way?
Re:New features, yes. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:New features, yes. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:New features, yes. (Score:5, Informative)
In this case it's:
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Control Panel\desktop\ForegroundLockTimeout
The value, in milliseconds, is the amount of time after any user input which programs will not be allowed to steal focus for.
In fact with Windows 2000 and later it's set to 20000, which means that programs cannot steal the focus while you are using the computer.
XP SP2 is still annoying. The reboot reminders don't actually pop up in front, so hitting enter at the wrong time won't cause you to accidentally reboot. However since they keep popping up in the background, sooner or later you will see the message and click the default button before even realising that it's "reboot" and not "bugger off".
Re:New features, yes. (Score:4, Insightful)
You're busy reading a webpage, and another web window open in the background decides it wants attention. BAM! It's there, right in your face.
Any sorta dialog box any program launches, and BAM! It's right there in your face.
Why can't it just simply blink in the tray? That's what the fucking tray is there for, isn't it?
Re:New features, yes. (Score:3, Informative)
YES was the highlighted box, of course, so a space bar would bring up the new message instead of the email I was typing. The time I remember, though, was when I was typing, and I saw it flash on the screen for a split second and disappear. I looked at where I had just been typing and it had st
Re:New features, yes. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:New features, yes. (Score:5, Interesting)
When a unasked for popup comes up the first reaction of the average user is to get rid of it. There are statistics which proove that 75% of all users will hit enter to any dialog box without reading it in your average run the mill office.
Don't take this lightly. This is the very reason for most of the problems we have in the internet today. Norton antivirus used to default to "read anyways" when it detected a email virus.
This was realized by microsoft a while ago and now all dialog boxes default to the secure option instead of the least intrusive. Since windows only wants you to restart if it couldn't apply the patch to the machine during installation ( e.g. applications which were to be patched were running / files were in use ) it makes perfect sense to default to reboot. If there is a big exploit in IE it needs to be fixed as fast as possible. Who really tourns off their pc nowadays ? Even after receiving the patch you might run your unpatched ie for a week.
Re:New features, yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:New features, yes. (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you never get any important documetns you have to look over handed to you in the office ?
Yes, I do. And if that co-worker shoves it in front of my face while I'm busy, I yell at them and toss it in the trash. Considerate co-workers often try to get your attention, rather than hijack your current activity.
Re:New features, yes. (Score:3, Informative)
Are you kidding!!!!
XP SP2 ELIMINATES drive-by downloads. IE is set, by default, NOT to prompt to install ActiveX controls (e.g. Gator). Instead, it pops up a little bar at the top of the screen. It now takes three clicks and a much improved security dialog to install spyware.
"This last reminder is particularly annoying as it pops up from the system tray approximately every 10 minutes, with the default dialog option set to reboot."
Of
Cleaning? (Score:5, Interesting)
1) It's easier to do (even if it takes longer there's no guesswork/trudging through the registery)
2) It tends to be such a big deal for the relative (backing up etc) that I tend to get asked less
Then again, doesn't Adaware [lavasoftusa.com] do a good enough job as it is?
Re:Cleaning? (Score:5, Interesting)
It misses a lot. It gets a lot. It should be used with other applications, but in the end, only a trained eye can figure out based on the case of letters in a process name, the path to the executable in the registry's run section, and the dates on files, what is spyware and what's a legit process/file. You also gotta know how to kick the butt of those redundant BHO/registry, dual-running-process bastards that replace keys and objects as you try to remove them. No software will ever be good enough, in my opinion, to do that automatically.
Re:Cleaning? (Score:2)
Re:New features, yes. (Score:3, Interesting)
Won't matter, they won't install it. (Score:5, Interesting)
While a lot of people here are going to say, "wow, everyone is going to go to Mozilla/FireFox." I have serious doubts that we will see that. All we are going to see is a bunch of broken websites and people complaining. The solution is going to be to turn off the default security options and go back to browsing like they did before.
Microsoft just isn't that interested in upgrading Internet Explorer's feature set. As a result, it's unlikely we'll see tabbed browsing before Longhorn, and it's not even guaranteed for that release. No wonder so many people are jumping ship for Mozilla Firefox and Opera.
Nah, I really doubt that the single reason people are moving to Mozilla FF and Opera are for tabbed browsing. I surf daily and probably at greater lengths than the average person and I don't find tabbed browsing to be my #1 concern.
I found it particularly interesting that the "Windows Security Center (WSC)" didn't detect NAV or ZA for virus or firewall... While they assured the author that they would be detected by the time that XP SP2 comes out I just have to wonder why MS would force them to rewrite their software to work w/WSC. If MS was so concerned w/third parties being able to protect Windows users you would think that they would work with the companies to get it to work, not the other way around.
Microsoft also is working on the 5.0 version of Windows Update, its Windows-updating Web site, which handles a lot more than just critical updates. It's primarily a user-interface update, but one of the underlying improvements is that you'll no longer be required to restart your computer so often after applying updates.
Honestly, most of my most recent XP updates have been installed without a restart. It's really not a huge deal to *ME* and I am sure it's not a huge deal to most other non-technical users as they probably restart their computer almost daily because of various unknown reasons.
All in all, I look forward to it but I wonder how many will install it. Will it make a difference when it comes out? Will 100% of the XP users out there upgrade and stop the vunerabilities from spreading? I doubt it. We are going to suffer through this same shit because Windows users aren't the smartest bunch out there.
Re:Won't matter, they won't install it. (Score:4, Insightful)
Those non-technical users probably hang out in an office between 9-5 and when the non-non-technical people there have to reboot, it means a call to the missus "I'll be home late tonight, gotta wait till the last person leaves and cheak this thing comes back up".
That's how it is. In my last job we used NetWare and Solaris - it wasn't like that then..*sigh*. 9 years of bliss.
Re:Won't matter, they won't install it. (Score:2)
Oh for Christ's sake, it's a reboot, it doesn't take hours. It takes about two minutes.
Re:Won't matter, they won't install it. (Score:5, Insightful)
What he means is that on a production server you cant just pull the plug to reboot (even if it took 1 second flat) until the last workaholic leaves his beancounting or whatnot at 7pm. IT is an internal service within a company and you dance around others who do earn the actual revenue which you are blowing from the company's gazoo in general direction of Billy Gates.
That is still the part Microsoft doesnt get, insisting that IT is a princeling of corporate departaments which can at its whim bring the company up and down and spend all of its money on bullshit. Apparently you are also under this impression.
Re:Won't matter, they won't install it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Your right about the websites though. If the SP 'breaks' web sites, people will turn the security off. I've also seen people who've tried firefox recently, go back to IE as javascript,PDF and flash either don't work or don't work 'properly'. They liked tabbed browsing, but that wasn't enough to wean them off IE's integrated plugins unfortunatly. Couldn't mozilla offer a complete install with all the plugins as standard?
Re:Won't matter, they won't install it. (Score:2, Informative)
Also, IE and Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox usually detect when a plugin is needed and tell you to click to install it. And, in most cases, the plugin functionality is immediately available, without restarting the browser. What more do you need than that?
Re:Won't matter, they won't install it. (Score:4, Informative)
Best way around it? Stop Firefox's plugin infrastructure from handling
Re:Won't matter, they won't install it. (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not so sure they'll just turn off security features. I'd speculate that users would stop going to the website, thinking it's "screwed up" before they would think to turn security features off. Should some of those users start digging through support links at those broken websites (they are broken now, due to laziness or maliciousness), I'll bet that they'd uncover helpful instructions that lay them wide open to attack again. But I suspect most casual computer users will simply avoid "that terrible web s
Corporations will. (Score:5, Insightful)
Corporate users, at the very least, will install it in droves. The article author said it himself: for businesses, the decision of whether or not to install it "should be a no-brainer":
No matter how annoying or substantively lacking in any real advantage other than increased security, there should be no debate in business or home circles about whether this one should be installed. Just do it. We have enough computer security problems without people getting stubborn about whether this upgrade takes away some of their computer liberties. It really doesn't.
Re:Corporations will. (Score:2)
Hell, most Corporate settings went down with the spreading of worms months after patches were released.
Indeed I am. (Score:4, Insightful)
As a matter of fact, I do work in corporate IT--I'm a sysadmin for a large telco. We dislike having to do upgrades, but we will do them, because we would rather disrupt operations for a little while rather than risk a longer disruption later down the road because we were obstinate about installing something.
Re:Won't matter, they won't install it. (Score:2, Informative)
Tabbed browsing was actually one of the main reasons I stuck with mozilla (first used it on Windows pre 1.0 - probably the early 0.9 versions).
Security concerns, standards support and do on only entered the equation later as I learned of them. IE soon found itself blocked at
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Won't matter, they won't install it. (Score:3, Funny)
So you are talking about Mac users?
*Note: This post comes from someone using OS X on his iBook, and has had a g5 on order for about a week(with almost another week till it leaves the factory..grrr why does it take so long?!)
Users do switch MozFF/Opera for tabbed browsing (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:two quick things (Score:3, Informative)
Also, there is a reason for simplifying the screens for users
So... (Score:2, Insightful)
hmm (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:hmm (Score:5, Interesting)
And so they produce garbage like IE zones controlling ActiveX security and weak patches to ADO.Streams for years now.
Roll-Out (Score:5, Insightful)
Am I the only one that has a little series of computers that I roll out updates before I roll them out enterprise-wide? I know some people have a test system... but for my network (and the sake of the hospital's uptime) I have a small testing network.
Best Practices (Score:5, Interesting)
You are not the only one with a test network. I once updated my system and then the enterpriseware suddenly quit working. On all the production systems. Boss was angry. I spent the whole night regressing the software until I realized that the software was incompatible with the ICF in WinXP. I announced that to the company's CS and they updated their website Knowledge Base with that tidbit.
From then on, I ran all upgrades through a three system network with one masquerading as the "server". In addition to software status, all configuration data is recorded as well. I wonder if I'm violating my licensing agreement this way. Oh, well.
Start Testing Now (Score:3, Insightful)
For the vast majority of users, I don't think XP firewall is going to help. These are the same users how have 3000 adware/spyware items (my sister's record) on their machines. If they click yes to spyware/adware pop-ups, they'll probably
Three months to go? (Score:5, Funny)
Will this kill ZoneAlarm? (Score:5, Insightful)
My problem with this is that it didn't ask me to autheticate IE, or other MSFT services. While I agree that this is better for Joe User, and does indeed make the average computer *somewhat* less vulnerable to becoming zombies [grc.com] I actually think that overall it compromises security, because it has the idea of "pre-trusted" programs. So now all a malware has to do to succeed is become trusted, and then it's BEYOND reproof? I'm not sure that that is exactly how this new system works, but more than anything I'm disputing the notion that this is a panacea.
I'm also concerned about companies that make firewall type products. Are they done? Is MSFT going to claim to have all that functionality in the OS? A FALSE sense of security is worse than being unsure. I'd rather people lock down their machines themselves rather than assuming that MSFT has done it for them.
Still, I do think that this is better than nothing.
Re:Will this kill ZoneAlarm? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Will this kill ZoneAlarm? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Will this kill ZoneAlarm? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Will this kill ZoneAlarm? (Score:5, Interesting)
Nothing whatsoever. It's a security problem inherent to ANY software firewall.
I wrote a little trojan a while back, and I knew that the guy I wanted to send it to was using zonealarm. I just grabbed that version of ZA, used Spy++ to find the right hWnds for the "Accept" and "Always repeat this choice" buttons, sent it a WM_CLICK event, and ZA was worthless.
Re:Will this kill ZoneAlarm? (Score:5, Interesting)
ZoneAlarm does much more in that it can block outgoing traffic on a program-by-program basis. But ZoneAlarm also asks questions that are impossible for most users to answer without a course in Windows XP internals, like "Do you want to allow SVCHOST.EXE to access the Internet?" I can see why Microsoft decided to leave this functionality out.
The best outcome would be if programs like ZoneAlarm coordinate their work with the built-in firewall and extend its functionality. I don't think they are in danger of becoming obsolete. Similarly, Windows has bundled a defragger since Win95 but that hasn't stopped a half-dozen companies from writing better ones.
Re:Will this kill ZoneAlarm? (Score:5, Insightful)
It does, but you can choose to disable that at install time and enable everything yourself. I think it's a good feature for people who don't know what they're doing, because otherwise they will get used to seeing the authorisation window for every innocent program and will start giving permission without really thinking about it. My brother gave MSBlaster Internet Access this way...if permission popups were a less frequent occurence, he might have been more suspicious.
Yeah, good for those with broadband (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, good for those with broadband (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, good for those with broadband (Score:2)
Small office, 20-30 users. They don't do the "bulk" licensing w/ MS, they just buy off the shelf as they need software. A month after XP SP2 comes out, they get a new employee and pick up Office at CompUSA, and it comes w/ the service pack compulsory. XP SP2 hasn't been installed on the rest of the systems, but now this new person's PC has it, the PC acts a lot different from the rest of the office, and no one, includi
Re:Yeah, good for those with broadband (Score:5, Interesting)
I do wonder though if there might be any money to be made by MSFT shipping RC2 on a disk and charging you say $1.00, postage included....What am I saying...I'm sure if there's money to be made, they'll do it.
The Cost (Score:2)
The AOL CD stays pretty much the same over a few months. The WindowsUpdate CD, as well all know, changes quite frequently. You can't ship out stale CDs, as that would be irresponsible to a point that even MS won't do it.
And they have to press the CDs, too, since CD-Rs just don't last that long. Hmm.... All those pressings, must cost a lot of money. And what about those schmoes who n
Re:The Cost (Score:2)
They're in for a real surprise when they try to install SP2
Re:Yeah, good for those with broadband (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Yeah, good for those with broadband (Score:5, Informative)
Hmm, like this free CD [microsoft.com] available directly from Microsoft? You don't even need to show a proof of purchase.
Re:Yeah, good for those with broadband (Score:2)
Marketshare has meaning in security (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyway is linux or mozilla more secure? YES.
Why is it more secure? Open Source means better peer review.
Are the "margins" of security between windows and linux really so large? I would have to say NO.
Why you say? The machines being hacked and sending out 80% of the spam in the world are home machines, Why? In general the average user fails to keep there machine up to date, opens up email attachments, or does some other stupid action that causes there pc to get infected. This makes home machines open to direct attack. If a majority of the home machines where linux then you would hear more about linux worms and viruses.
Now due to the way linux is they may not be as bad, patches may be releases faster but with the worlds virus and script kiddies focusing on linux instead of windows there would be problems.
Linux users try to place themselves in such high praise, But they can't, You can't praise yourself until you have truly been subject to the same level of attack and focus as windows.
Re:Marketshare has meaning in security (Score:2)
Linux / Mozilla / Evolution is not secure, it's just not a vector of attack. If 90% of the desktops ran one of those pieces of software then the same issue would arise. Windows is insecure primarily because it is the most widespread vector for attack.
Re:Marketshare has meaning in security (Score:2)
Microsoft being hacked, cracked and violated has nothing to do with security it has to do with Marketshare. They are the most widespread used.
I do however think if it was reversed the linux problems while they might be as frequent would be less severe.
Re:Marketshare has meaning in security (Score:2)
That is only half the reason. Microsoft in particular places features above all other concerns, and this results in a marked difference in the way security is dealt with in its software as compared not only to free alternatives, but to other commercial vendors as well.
It isn't just a matter of how well and how quickly you catch the bugs. Security is something you can address by design.
You can't praise yourself until you have truly been sub
Re:yes and no (Score:2)
You mention passwords... What password would the average home user have? I bet you would find a ton of boxes with the following issues.
1. One of the top 10 passwords NOT to use
2. If linux was popular boxes would come from every major mfg as desktop systems.. thousands of systems on the internet with default passwords the home user would never change.
Re:yes and no (Score:2)
Now effectively banned him from using IE... something he hasn't complained about once since (and he is aware of it)... but we'll see how things improve.
I think it's very positive... (Score:5, Informative)
1. The firewall's on by default. This is a huge shift for Microsoft and I am glad to see it happen. This alone will stop a ton of worm infections.
2. Browser security. From what I can tell, these enhancements are going to go a long way toward stopping the problems that CERT and everyone have been complaining about.
3. Email security. OE is getting hardened in a way similar to IE, and this also is a very much welcomed move.
Between worm propogation and the two most common ways for a user to infect themselves, if they were to even modestly improve in all three of these areas it would make a significant impact on the security posture of people running the update.
I applaud them in advance for even trying.
As with all major SP's (Score:2)
There have been ongoing issues with corporate, XP server users tho, will installing this hose my application?
Blueetooth (Score:2)
I have a Keyspan BT-2A dongle and it would only work with the supplied drivers. Installed SP2 over it and it still uses the original drivers. Remo
Business as usual (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Business as usual (Score:2)
But what else can you do if people just don't understand what patches are for and just see them as unnecessary WOT.
SP2 and Windows update (Score:5, Interesting)
The service pack itself doesn't seem to care, and there will still be other methods like Windows update catalog, but they are closing the big loophole.
Another Firewall Issue (Score:5, Informative)
I have run SP2 since the first release candidate. I don't use the windows firewall since I already have hardware + software firewalls. XP SP2 detects the software firewall correctly (mcafee). But at least once every other day Windows turns on the damn XP SP2 firewall. It's a pain in the ass and the real problem is that you don't know it's on. You only realize it's turned itself back on when it announces that it has blocked a connection.
Re:Another Firewall Issue (Score:3, Interesting)
Even so, Windows Firewall's intrusion prevention and outbound monitoring are not as robust as those of some other firewalls. In RC2, Windows Firewall also has a tendency to turn itself on after system updates, system restores, or in conjunction with the Windows Security Center
(emphasis added)
What kind of bullshit is that? I can't wait tp have to manage thirty users of THAT!
Repeat after me, everyone! (Score:3, Informative)
Repeat after me, "I WILL NOT TRUST MS SOFTWARE FOR SECURITY."
Now go and keep your 3rd party hardware firewall + 3rd party software firewall (on EVERY box, of course) up and running.
HARDWARE:
- Cheap Linksys box: Ugg but better than nothing.
- Cheap Netgear box: Better.
- Expensive Nethear box: Very nice IMO, around $300 USD with 802.11g too.
- *BSD Box you build yourself: Awesome, but too geeky, if you have life+job and want somehting to plug in and forget, buy a firewall appliance.
- Very Expensive Cisco/Bay Networks: The one you stole from the NOC on your last job as any good BOFH would do: Best.
SOFTWARE
-Free Zone Alarm: Ugg but better than nothing.
-Sygate Personal Firewall Pro: VERY VERY nice IMO around $50
- *BSD/*nix s/w: Aso very geeky, better know your shit or else. Stick with vendor stuff to mostly install and forget.
Anyone else see an internal contradiction? (Score:3, Funny)
A non-techie's dream (Score:4, Insightful)
"One of the best new features of SP2's Internet Explorer is the Add-On Manager, available from the Internet Control Panel's Programs tab. It gives you a way to enable, disable, and configure ActiveX controls, browser help objects, and browser extensions. The primary purpose of this tool is to provide a user interface for controlling things that have already been added to your Internet Explorer installation. When, for example, you have already said yes to an ActiveX program Information Bar query and later decide you don't want that program on your computer, the Add-On Manager is the tool that solves that problem."
Yeah... Grandma's gonna be thrilled to keep track of unsigned ActiveX controls, browser help objects, and browser extensions. I can see this being turned into an "ACCEPT ALL" policy real quick.
Just flat out... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's designed to check whether an antivirus program is installed, whether that program is running, and whether it's updated with the latest antivirus definitions. When any of the security checks for antivirus, firewall, or critical Windows updates aren't met, Windows Security Center alerts you with system tray pop-up notifications that open the large WSC Control Panel
How long before proper functionality with a core OS component is leveraged against vendors? From a business standpoint it's pretty shrewd. But from the OS design standpoint it's flat out stupid. The OS provides a platform for userspace apps. The OS is not supposed to wrap around userspace apps.
"You don't have MS approved anti-virus checker installed. Please enter a credit card number for the $129.95 fee, the #39.95 yearly maintenance agreement, or we will disable your Windows update key within 2 days."
Re:Just flat out... (Score:3, Insightful)
How long before proper functionality with a core OS component is leveraged against vendors? From a business standpoint it's pretty shrewd. But from the OS design standpoint it's flat out stupid. The OS provides a platform for userspace apps. The OS is not supposed to wrap around userspace apps.
The line between pure OS-level stuff and userspace stuff in Windows is blurred. Aside from the firewall and security fixes, I doubt this antivirus-checking UI is a core OS component. Rather, it's probably just anot
Personal experience (Score:4, Informative)
I decided to try out SP2 RC2 on my computer, boy... was that a mistake
Here's the hardware i have to give u a heads up... AMD 3200+, DFI NFII Ultra Infinity Motherboard (nForce 2 chipset) nVidia FX 5700, 1GB RAM, DVD+-RW, and 2 hard drives....
Here's what happened...
After removing SP2 RC2... everything works fine....
Re:Personal experience (Score:3, Insightful)
If you run pre-release software; you have the responsibility to report bugs and problems with it.
What sort of 'break in' did you achieve against your machine? Did you manage to access a service that would otherwise have been blocked?
Cisco VPN Client (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Cisco VPN Client (Score:5, Interesting)
"Virus warning!" (Score:3, Funny)
Increased DVD playback restrictions? (Score:4, Interesting)
I rolled back to SP1 and bingo, everything would play fine again.
Check it out for yourself (Score:3, Informative)
M$ Browser Security holes promote Mozilla/Firefox (Score:3, Interesting)
open source products by showing all the preplanned back doors
into the OS that are wide open
Bill meant it to be used for businesses to track customers, etc etc
Motivation being greed, but it has been perverted like alot of
other back doors and has become an anethma
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot
My standard practice is now, to remove all I can with Adaware,
Spybot, and manually removal
reboot, go another round with it
After google searches, registry searches, and looking at active
processes and using a live registry trace tool, I get it all
removed EVENTUALLY
It does take longer on some machines than a reinstall which is sad.
After I do all of this I essentially remove EVERY like to IE and
tie all automatic browsers launches to Mozilla
Then I tell them to never ever use IE again as long as they live
After the hours of weeding thru the muck they respect my wishes
M$ has shot itself on the foot with all these spyware/malware/adware
back door holes and all they are doing is promoting open source
God Bless Them !!! LOL
Peace,
Ex-MislTech
Re:stupid name ! (Score:2)
Nah, MS calls patches/bugfixes 'hotfixes'. Service packs generally contain new features, so the term doesn't apply to them.
Re:XP SP2 question (Score:2)
Re:Honestly.. (Score:3, Insightful)
If you really think that people are like that, I suggest you wander around with a bag full of rubbish until you find a street sweeper and scatter the bag around in fron of them. Then see if they thnk you profusely, or if the next thing you hear is your procto
Re:Honestly.. (Score:2)
Re:SP2 = more of what I don't like about XP (Score:2, Informative)
Et cetera.
If this wasn't an anti-Windows rant it would be modded as an obvious troll by now.
Re:How much do you want to bet... (Score:2)
"There are also some advantages of a firewall onboard. Windows Firewall offers solid basic protection; it's better than ICF (Internet Connection Firewall, the utility it replaces), and it's a lot better than nothing."
Windows. Better than Nothing.
How foresightful. (Score:4, Interesting)
Gosh, you mean that Microsoft's past is no indicator of current or future offerings? You are right about reading the article though. When we do, we see each of your points proved in detail. I'll take the trouble to pick through the five individual advert burdened pages for you. Let's watch!
Looks like more of the same from M$ to me. More heartache with no real result or benefit for the end user.
Re:"Deny" for certificate? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:"Deny" for certificate? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The word on IRC.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The word on IRC.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Except for the 99% of the population who doesn't know what the hell IRC is and has never heard a word of, or about, this "reaction".
Re:The word on IRC.. (Score:3, Interesting)
My point was that this is an abnormal IRC channel, where most of the users know little more than the Average Joe. If THEY don't like the service pack, then Joe User isn't going to either.
Re:Pirated copies? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:MS lock in (Score:3, Informative)