Microsoft just announce that a XP emulator will be in Windows 7!

@BillRM,

You're a losser.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Lord you do not remember how many bugs was in dos 4 and that people refuse for that reason to "upgrade"?

Perhaps it is your memory that is failing. They did not go from version 3.1 to 4.0. Versions 3.2 and 3.3 were in between. Sure DOS 4.0 has some bugs, but they were corrected with 4.1. Things really got better with DOS 5.0.

As I said before. Why don't you just go to Linux and quit yer bellyaching.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

SO you support moving people to a cripple version of window 7 for netbooks that will only run 4 programs when netbooks have more the enough power to run full versions of XP?

I think the 4-program restriction is wrong-headed of Microsoft, but I agree with the eventual end of life for the 8-year-old XP operating system. You can't expect them to keep selling it forever. All major OS developers end of life their old products.

Quote:

For that matter you support the forcing down the throat of users any OS they would not willing buy freely or forcing customers to buy Vista and then pay extra to downgrade to the OS they wish to have in the first place!!!!!!!!!!

No I don't, and no amount of exclamation points is going to make your claim any less stupid. All OS vendors cease to sell their old versions at some point. This does not constitute "forcing down the throat of users".

I happen to prefer open-source software to Microsoft whenever possible and am responsible for Linux implementations in several companies now, but I'm just not stupid enough to agree with your irrational complaints. This does not make me a Microsoft shill, just someone who thinks your complaints are stupid.

1 Reply

Below is parts of an article from Computerwold stating the same things I been stating concerning Microsoft XP Vista/Window 7 and Linux.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=Windows&articleId=337564&taxonomyId=125&pageNumber=1

First, Microsoft has reluctantly -- oh how reluctantly -- brought back Windows XP. Officially, Microsoft has cut XP support. Unofficially, hardware vendors such as Hewlett-Packard aren't going to let XP die anytime soon. You'll still be getting new PCs with XP on them well into 2010, and I wouldn't be surprised to see fresh copies of XP appearing in 2011.

Microsoft finally got it. No one with two brain cells wants Vista.

Mind you, I've been running Windows 7 for quite some time now on a variety of test boxes, and it's not all that great. It's better than Vista, but that's really not saying much. For my money, XP SP3 is still the best of the Windows family.)

Finally, Microsoft has also come up with a winning set of TV ads. The ones with the cute kids are, well, cute, and the Mac attack ads do make the point that PCs really are cheaper than Apple's proprietary hardware. However, if you're a thinking user, you'll realize that you get what you pay for and that Macs really are better than low-cost PCs. And if you're a thinking user who wants a really low-cost PC, you don't want Windows anyway -- you want desktop Linux.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

You are not wise to removed an OS your customers desire for one they do not period no matter how old it might be. The age is to me completely beside the point.

If they wish to go replace one OS with another then they should come out with a better OS not just a newer OS. An OS that their customers are eager to upgrade to not one that you try to force them kicking and screaming all the way!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please tell us all how Vista/window 7 is better to any degree at all! We know it take one hell of a lot more resources and have very slight security improvements but that is all that.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

If you don't improve your product, then eventually someone else will overtake you.

Happened to IBM.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

You are not wise to removed an OS your customers desire for one they do not period no matter how old it might be. The age is to me completely beside the point.

Which is why Microsoft won't do so till it's no longer in such demand.

Quote:

An OS that their customers are eager to upgrade to not one that you try to force them kicking and screaming all the way!!!!!!!!!!!!

And nobody is being forced to upgrade, much less kicking and screaming. Do you have nightmares with Bill Gates or something? Where is this nonsense coming from. You can go by a computer with XP right now and don't need to kick or scream.

Quote:

Please tell us all how Vista/window 7 is better to any degree at all! We know it take one hell of a lot more resources and have very slight security improvements but that is all that.

The ones I care about:

- Stability. As long as you don't have an underpowered machine this is the most stable version of windows I have used. Much fewer kernel panics than in any previous Windows version.
-Windows Shell (Windows Explorer) is much more powerful. Offering many more ways to sort and organize data
- File search actually works, unlike XP
- Graphics engine renders windows separately, no longer does one frozen program make a big hole in all the graphics like in XP
- Much more secure. UAC actually lets you use the computer without running as root with fewer problems than in XP. Some fundamental ways programs work have been vastly improved in Vista.
- Windows Firewall actually scans traffic going both directions, unlike in the past.
- ReadyBoost lets you just plug in flash memory to get a cache boost, almost like adding plug and play RAM.
- Windows update is improved with more sensible defaults as well
- Doesn't come with IE 6, which is an abomination to the internet.
- Windows Sidebar is a better way to do gadgets than they used to, and marks the first time I started using desktop gadgets regularly
- Windows Media Player 11 search as you type, and other things that make it easier to navigate a large library.
- Back up and restore improvements. I still don't use the built-in tools for this, but this is much better than they ever did before.
- Bitlocker gives you full volume encryption.
- IPv6 we are running out of IPv4 addresses and must evolve. Vista is the first Microsoft operating system that supports this very important next step in TCP/IP progress.

3 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Robert are you telling me with a straight face that you would tell anyone depending on you as an expert that they should used bitlocker in the place of truecrypt for example to meet their security needs? Truecrypt that is open soucrce and cross platforms and very very well behave and everything you could wish for in such a program.

You trust Microsoft not to place a backdoor into Bitlocker for at least the US government if not others? You do know the long long history of American companies going along with the government to spy on US citizens to the point of breaking the laws to do so correct? See the current news or even the history of the pre WW2 and western union turning over all their US/foriegn traffic to the government.

Why would you or anyone else who are pretending to be sane trust a close source we have no idea in this world how well it is program/setup less alone the large question of a possible backdoor in bitrlocker available to any government that can place pressure on Microsoft from the EU to the US to China

That you would even bring bitrlocker up as a reason to go to Vista instead of XP seem to said it all about your judgement or lack of same.

When I shut down this computer of mine all anyone else will see on reboot up is my name and cell phone number thank to truecrpyt version 6.1

I can only thank the open source people that spend all that time to created such a program and who keep improving it.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Why would you or anyone else who are pretending to be sane trust a close source we have no idea in this world how well it is program/setup less alone the large question of a possible backdoor in bitrlocker available to any government that can place pressure on Microsoft from the EU to the US to China

Windows XP SP3 is closed source. Windows 98 is closed source.

If you don't trust closed source software or commercial software companies at all, then why are you using closed source software? If you think that Microsoft would put a backdoor into its new operating system or into components of it, why are you running software made by the same company on your computers?

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Now that we took care of bitlocker we will address the two way firewall.

A software firewall in both direction is fairly worthless something you should know as if you get an evil program on your computer somehow a well writen virus/worm can shut off and or disable your two directional firewall in say 2 millseconds. and then talk to it home base.

Ok now we found out that your judegement seem someone lacking on firewalls and disk encrypting programs.

1 Reply

@old europe,

You had read my postings that I am slowly going toward open source linux as my main OS and the Xp will be my last close source OS correct?

We are all up to a point are victims of history and mine go back to the old CPM days and dos 3.1 .

I will sleep better when I am more off any close source OSs then I am now.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Let see oh the issue of running in something less then admin/root user. Yes Vista does it better then XP but not as good as Linux and right now I am using dropmyrights on any program that I access the web with for example.

I could run sandboxie but I am not at the moment depending on other layers of security programs.

Hell I could run XP steady state as I do have it on my harddrive but as in anything else you need to weight security against other factors.

XP in any case can be lock down to any degree you care to do so.

I may be wrong but I am under the impression that steady state is not available for Vista and if so it is a real shortcoming for running a system in a high risk enviroment such as a library.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

You had read my postings that I am slowly going toward open source linux as my main OS and the Xp will be my last close source OS correct?

I have.

BillRM wrote:

We are all up to a point are victims of history and mine go back to the old CPM days and dos 3.1 .

I will sleep better when I am more off any close source OSs then I am now.

I see your point, but if you have your mind set on not upgrading any closed source OS that you currently own and on switching completely to open source anyway, then I don't see why you would care about Microsoft releasing yet another OS that you've already decided you're not going to use.

Sure, there's the concern that Microsoft might eventually stop supporting XP while you're still using it. I guess what I don't understand is how your concern over Microsoft stopping the support of an operating system would outweigh your concern that you cannot trust mentioned operating system because it's closed source.

1 Reply

Dear lord. There is no fanatic like a converted fanatic.

Bill, if security is your primary, over-riding concern, then don't use Windows. In fact, don't use a PC at all.

If your computer is perfectly secure, then it is perfectly unusable as well.

For most of us, useability is the primary concern, with a reasonable amount of security as a secondary issue.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

You trust Microsoft not to place a backdoor into Bitlocker for at least the US government if not others?

We've already gone over this and I don't share your wild paranoia.

Quote:

You do know the long long history of American companies going along with the government to spy on US citizens to the point of breaking the laws to do so correct? See the current news or even the history of the pre WW2 and western union turning over all their US/foriegn traffic to the government.

So when there's a technical improvement you decry it politically. Well that's your right, no matter how stupid it is.

You criticize their software, but if they improve it you criticize using it anyway. You make absolutely no sense as per usual.

Quote:

Why would you or anyone else who are pretending to be sane trust a close source we have no idea in this world how well it is program/setup less alone the large question of a possible backdoor in bitrlocker available to any government that can place pressure on Microsoft from the EU to the US to China

Because they aren't batshit crazy like yourself. You have no evidence whatsoever for your claim but think that the strength of your paranoia is a legitimate argument.

Quote:

That you would even bring bitrlocker up as a reason to go to Vista instead of XP seem to said it all about your judgement or lack of same.

Yeah, I'm not a paranoid fool like you. When I need encryption myself, I use TrueCrypt, but BitLocker has some advantages (like being able to secure your entire volume even with the OS) and the bottom line is that it's an additional bit of security that Vista offers that no other MS operating system did.

Whether or not you trust it, it is an improvement.

Quote:

When I shut down this computer of mine all anyone else will see on reboot up is my name and cell phone number thank to truecrpyt version 6.1

You have a very naive trust for Truecrypt, so?

Quote:

I can only thank the open source people that spend all that time to created such a program and who keep improving it.

What about all that Microsoft software you voluntarily use? Gonna thank them or just keep whining about how you are being forced to use it against your will?

3 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Now that we took care of bitlocker we will address the two way firewall.

Who's "we"? You didn't "take care" of anything. You just espoused more nonsensical paranoia.

If you want to "take care" of it, how about substantiating your stupid claims?

Quote:

A software firewall in both direction is fairly worthless something you should know as if you get an evil program on your computer somehow a well writen virus/worm can shut off and or disable your two directional firewall in say 2 millseconds. and then talk to it home base.

It's still better than a software firewall that only works in one direction. I don't use software firewalls, but this is still an improvement over XP. That is the point and whether or not you want to use it it's still a simple objective improvement of their software.

Quote:

Ok now we found out that your judegement seem someone lacking on firewalls and disk encrypting programs.

"We" again? What did "we" find?

1) That you can make up accusations about Microsoft that you can't substantiate.

2) That their software firewall is improved but that it suffers from the same core weaknesses that any software firewall does.

In other words, you are full of BS. "We" did not take care of anything.

0 Replies

@old europe,

Old Europe we do not live on an island. Right now both my wife and I am moving toward Linux however that leave one hell of a lot of family members that will be running Microsoft software way into the future.

One guess who is the IT guy for my family grouping.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Let see oh the issue of running in something less then admin/root user. Yes Vista does it better then XP but not as good as Linux and right now I am using dropmyrights on any program that I access the web with for example.

You asked for improvements. You yourself concede this is an improvement. Now if your retort when an improvement is brought up is that Linux is better then by all means use Linux. That makes more sense than using what you spend so much time whining about.

Either way, this is still an improvement in Vista like you asked for.

Quote:

Hell I could run XP steady state as I do have it on my harddrive but as in anything else you need to weight security against other factors.

What does this have to do with whether or not this is a Vista improvement?

Quote:

XP in any case can be lock down to any degree you care to do so.

Make up your mind. Microsoft can either not be trusted or it can and you can't have it both ways.

Quote:

I may be wrong but I am under the impression that steady state is not available for Vista and if so it is a real shortcoming for running a system in a high risk enviroment such as a library.

Yes you are wrong. It works in XP and Vista 32-bit versions. Out of the operating systems we are discussing the only one it doesn't work with is Linux so I'm not sure how you think this helps your position.

And why are you suddenly trusting this bit of Microsoft software while espousing crazy fears about other Microsoft software? Do you just flip a coin to decide what is trustworthy?

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

Nothing in the universe is perfect!

We just do our best to weight security with every other concern.

Lord as I do not make the chips/hardware that go into my computers that is a larger security hole then OSs as far as governments scale attacks are concern.

Google how the US government once got a copy machine manufacture to place a camera in a foriegn embassy machine and then was able to have a copy of everything this copier copy.

As I said nothing is perfect but why used security software with a high risk of having a backdoor when other software is available wihtout that risk?

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Hmm what version of truecrpyt are you using as my complete harddrive including the OS is protected and this feature had been in the last two released 6.0 and 6.1.

Sorry bitlock have zero on truecrpyt.

1 Reply

Microsoft just announce that a XP emulator will be in Windows 7!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know