If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:05:10 -0500
BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 1:52 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 13:31:05 -0500 BillW50 wrote: I have been running Windows since '93 and I never had a malware infection yet. Ahahahahahhahah I came close once back in 2001 when I installed Windows 2000 and went online without an AV or a firewall. And I did the Windows updates and downloaded an AV. Then I decided to scan for malware before I reboot to install the Windows updates and I'll be dang, one bot slipped me a virus that would have installed on the next boot. Learned an important lesson that day. Before 2007 when I switched to Linux, I tested several AV scanners on set of files with known viruses/trojans. None detected them all... -- Click OK to continue... |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:16:37 -0500
BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 2:03 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:01:08 -0500 BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 1:52 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 13:26:05 -0500 BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 12:55 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 12:30:08 -0500 BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 12:16 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 18:08:18 +0100 Good Guy wrote: On 27/07/2014 17:32, Alias wrote: Safer? LOL! Linux doesn't do malware. Windows does and it does it very well. There is no point in creating malwares for Linux because not many people use it. Malware writers will have a better target rate if they spend time on Windows system knowing that it is where money can be made; Not on Linux users who are not likely to be using Linux for any serious business. It is very difficult to write malware for Linux. Actually it is currently impossible to get malware on Linux without confirmation. Heck they can't even install toolbar for any browser Nonsense. It is so easy to hack into Linux. One easy way is to use a buffer overflow and you are right into root. Provide easy example... And you just leave your rootkit and the user has no idea (and most users doesn't even scan for malware). In fact, rootkit is new to the Windows world and *nix had them for decades now. I didn't seen rootkit on Linux server long ago. You are talking about server program vulnerabilities. Show me buffer overflow exploit on desktop... Sure easy enough. For example, 7 months they were passing out a Linux trojan and nobody caught it. If it was on Windows, AV would have erased it in micro seconds. http://computingondemand.com/linux-i...y-complacency/ This is not what you re talking about. User simply downloaded malware binaries by hand on server and runned it. You can download and run malware no problem but this is not hacking Linux... Show me buffer overrun, show me how it is easy to hack Linux... Really? You want me to expose my black book of hacks to the public? Hahahhahahahhaha. Are you one of those Linux lemmings who believes that Linux is malware proof? Hahahahahaha! Linux is malware proof. It is not proof to hacking but it is almost impossible to install malware without user knowing it. Desktop Linux is malware proof. Period. This is why it is extremely difficult to hack Linux machines. -- Click OK to continue... |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 07/27/2014 12:26 PM, Good Guy wrote:
On 27/07/2014 12:32, Ed Cryer wrote: My answer; You'd get lots and lots of people taking up the Win skeleton and tailoring it. The market would become overflowing with competing versions of it; a bit like we have with gas and electricity suppliers, who scramble their tariffs in order to befuddle the punters, tell outright lies and rule; until eventually the gov would have to step in and bring them to order. It's happened already. Look at Linux distros. Nobody knows which one is legitimate and which isn't. There are thousands of them and people are simply not bothered with them anymore. Best to stick with Windows or Macs knowing that somebody is in charge of them. With Linux nobody is in-charge; It's become a big jungle that people should avoid. you'll be safer in Taliban land!!!!. That's why many cities, businesses(small and large),branches of military, etc are switching to Linux? Also there are less flaws that get corrected faster in Linux than Windows or Apple. http://www.zdnet.com/coverity-finds-...de-7000028514/ This from a Windows/Apple magazine. -- Caver1 |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 07/27/2014 12:40 PM, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 17:01:31 +0200, Alias wrote: Windows is history. I'm glad I know how to use Linux. Do you know every Linux variety? I gave up trying to write software for Linux as nobody wants to pay for it. Steve Do a search it has been proven when a good cross platform pay what you think it's worth program is offered Linux users donate larger sums than Windows/Apple users. -- Caver1 |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 7/27/2014 2:23 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 07/27/2014 12:00 PM, BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 10:08 AM, Ron wrote: On 7/27/2014 10:41 AM, BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 9:34 AM, BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 9:06 AM, Roderick Stewart wrote: I don't think I'm too old to learn new stuff, but why should I have to, just to do what I could do before? Computers are supposed to serve our needs, not the other way around. It isn't that hard at all and the more you use it, the more it makes a lot of sense. Doing it otherwise would have been more counterproductive. Lots of things are better under 8 compared to 7. The Task Manager, file transfers, SSD support, Performance Monitor, On Screen Keyboard, Hybrid Sleep, faster booting, etc. are all better. Faster booting before the 8.1 update. I used to be able to push the power button and be typing in the Google Chrome search bar in 45 seconds (same as my Windows 7 machine with a hybrid HDD) now it takes anywhere from 1:30 to 1:45+ depending on the weather. Reboots are 3 minutes plus! Wow, really? Why? I just checked mine and 20 seconds to shutdown and 10 seconds to boot. And this one has all of the updates. Is yours truly shutting down all the way or are you using the fast startup feature? The fast startup is default for 8/8.1, it sends the computer into a S4 power state which is not a complete shut down but a hibernate condition. No I turned that stuff off to reduce SSD writing. Although maybe an updated turned it back on again. Knowing Microsoft, I wouldn't be surprised. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Kingston 120GB SSD - Thunderbird v24.4.0 Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 8.1 Pro w/Media Center |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 7/27/2014 2:24 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:05:10 -0500 BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 1:52 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 13:31:05 -0500 BillW50 wrote: I have been running Windows since '93 and I never had a malware infection yet. Ahahahahahhahah I came close once back in 2001 when I installed Windows 2000 and went online without an AV or a firewall. And I did the Windows updates and downloaded an AV. Then I decided to scan for malware before I reboot to install the Windows updates and I'll be dang, one bot slipped me a virus that would have installed on the next boot. Learned an important lesson that day. Before 2007 when I switched to Linux, I tested several AV scanners on set of files with known viruses/trojans. None detected them all... That is why you have to be careful and do your research. Of course Microsoft's and Norton's are the worst ones out there. They don't even catch 50% of the malware. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Kingston 120GB SSD - Thunderbird v24.4.0 Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 8.1 Pro w/Media Center |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 7/27/2014 2:28 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:16:37 -0500 BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 2:03 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:01:08 -0500 BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 1:52 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 13:26:05 -0500 BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 12:55 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 12:30:08 -0500 BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 12:16 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 18:08:18 +0100 Good Guy wrote: On 27/07/2014 17:32, Alias wrote: Safer? LOL! Linux doesn't do malware. Windows does and it does it very well. There is no point in creating malwares for Linux because not many people use it. Malware writers will have a better target rate if they spend time on Windows system knowing that it is where money can be made; Not on Linux users who are not likely to be using Linux for any serious business. It is very difficult to write malware for Linux. Actually it is currently impossible to get malware on Linux without confirmation. Heck they can't even install toolbar for any browser Nonsense. It is so easy to hack into Linux. One easy way is to use a buffer overflow and you are right into root. Provide easy example... And you just leave your rootkit and the user has no idea (and most users doesn't even scan for malware). In fact, rootkit is new to the Windows world and *nix had them for decades now. I didn't seen rootkit on Linux server long ago. You are talking about server program vulnerabilities. Show me buffer overflow exploit on desktop... Sure easy enough. For example, 7 months they were passing out a Linux trojan and nobody caught it. If it was on Windows, AV would have erased it in micro seconds. http://computingondemand.com/linux-i...y-complacency/ This is not what you re talking about. User simply downloaded malware binaries by hand on server and runned it. You can download and run malware no problem but this is not hacking Linux... Show me buffer overrun, show me how it is easy to hack Linux... Really? You want me to expose my black book of hacks to the public? Hahahhahahahhaha. Are you one of those Linux lemmings who believes that Linux is malware proof? Hahahahahaha! Linux is malware proof. It is not proof to hacking but it is almost impossible to install malware without user knowing it. Desktop Linux is malware proof. Period. This is why it is extremely difficult to hack Linux machines. That is a fallacy. There is no known OS that can't be hacked into. "It's a Trojan Horse," Stone explained. "Do you know what operating systems are immune to Trojan Horses? It's a pretty straightforward answer: None of them are. Ever. There's not an operating system that's ever been written that's immune to a Trojan Horse." http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/78748.html That is why trojans are the favorite attacks against *nix systems. As most *nix users are so dumb that they believe that will never happen while the hacker is in without the users knowledge. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Kingston 120GB SSD - Thunderbird v24.4.0 Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 8.1 Pro w/Media Center |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 07/27/2014 01:30 PM, BillW50 wrote:
On 7/27/2014 12:16 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 18:08:18 +0100 Good Guy wrote: On 27/07/2014 17:32, Alias wrote: Safer? LOL! Linux doesn't do malware. Windows does and it does it very well. There is no point in creating malwares for Linux because not many people use it. Malware writers will have a better target rate if they spend time on Windows system knowing that it is where money can be made; Not on Linux users who are not likely to be using Linux for any serious business. It is very difficult to write malware for Linux. Actually it is currently impossible to get malware on Linux without confirmation. Heck they can't even install toolbar for any browser Nonsense. It is so easy to hack into Linux. One easy way is to use a buffer overflow and you are right into root. And you just leave your rootkit and the user has no idea (and most users doesn't even scan for malware). In fact, rootkit is new to the Windows world and *nix had them for decades now. And how many times has that been tried and succeeded? Plus that is no longer true. Hasn't been for awhile. Windows, pAple and Linux all get rootkited but Windows gets more than the other two. -- Caver1 |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 7/27/2014 2:30 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 07/27/2014 12:26 PM, Good Guy wrote: On 27/07/2014 12:32, Ed Cryer wrote: My answer; You'd get lots and lots of people taking up the Win skeleton and tailoring it. The market would become overflowing with competing versions of it; a bit like we have with gas and electricity suppliers, who scramble their tariffs in order to befuddle the punters, tell outright lies and rule; until eventually the gov would have to step in and bring them to order. It's happened already. Look at Linux distros. Nobody knows which one is legitimate and which isn't. There are thousands of them and people are simply not bothered with them anymore. Best to stick with Windows or Macs knowing that somebody is in charge of them. With Linux nobody is in-charge; It's become a big jungle that people should avoid. you'll be safer in Taliban land!!!!. That's why many cities, businesses(small and large),branches of military, etc are switching to Linux? Also there are less flaws that get corrected faster in Linux than Windows or Apple. http://www.zdnet.com/coverity-finds-...de-7000028514/ This from a Windows/Apple magazine. That is just another fallacy, like if you do good you will be rewarded with 73 virgins. All OS are hackable. It is just a fact of life. The only ones who will be protected are the ones on their toes waiting for them regardless of the OS. And most Linux users don't bother. As they are sound asleep and can't bother. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Kingston 120GB SSD - Thunderbird v24.4.0 Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 8.1 Pro w/Media Center |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 07/27/2014 01:33 PM, Keith Nuttle wrote:
On 7/27/2014 9:59 AM, BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 8:48 AM, Roderick Stewart wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 08:54:42 -0400, Keith Nuttle wrote: I believe Windows 8 was a marketing failure not a failure of the basic operating system. MS concentrated on the tablet interface, and hid the fact that there was the desktop interface. In the desktop interface Windows 8.1 is as good as any thing that MS has released in the past, including Windows 7 and XP. Even once you've found the desktop interface, as supplied it lacks a start button with the functionality to which 500 million Windows users are already accustomed. And guess what - the commonest complaint about Windows 8 seems to be the lack of a start button. you are entitled to your opinion of course, but it doesn't seem to be shared by many. Geez... why do people claim that Windows 8 has no Start button? That isn't true at all! It is still there, but they moved it to the Charms bar. The same place you will find the Control Panel, Shut Down, Search, etc. It isn't any big deal people. Not even to the Charms. Every thing in the Start button is now a right click on the MS icon on the Desktop Task Bar. You can shut down the computer, access the control panel, network properties, printers, and more than you could in the old start button. You have a categorized list of your previously opened files by right clicking on any program pinned to the Desktop Task bar. What did you get in the old Start button that you do not get by right clicking on the Ms Icon or the program on the Task bar? Sure didn't on 8.1. Don't remember what little was in there as my wife is the one that uses it. But did have to add a new toolbar (right click toolbartoolbarsadd new toolbar) pointed to the Program folder. actually had to add two, one also pointing to the Program(x86) folder. Doesn't actually stack up three toolbars but gives you a the name of what it is pointing to button the original toolbar that opens a menu vertically. Then we downloaded Classic Menus and did away with the extra toolbars. If we disable Classic Toolbar and revert to the default MS icon the menu has very little on it. You can set Classic Themes to the Win 7 start menu if you want. -- Caver1 |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 07/27/2014 01:47 PM, Alias wrote:
BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 12:16 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 18:08:18 +0100 Good Guy wrote: On 27/07/2014 17:32, Alias wrote: Safer? LOL! Linux doesn't do malware. Windows does and it does it very well. There is no point in creating malwares for Linux because not many people use it. Malware writers will have a better target rate if they spend time on Windows system knowing that it is where money can be made; Not on Linux users who are not likely to be using Linux for any serious business. It is very difficult to write malware for Linux. Actually it is currently impossible to get malware on Linux without confirmation. Heck they can't even install toolbar for any browser Nonsense. It is so easy to hack into Linux. One easy way is to use a buffer overflow and you are right into root. And you just leave your rootkit and the user has no idea (and most users doesn't even scan for malware). In fact, rootkit is new to the Windows world and *nix had them for decades now. More FUD and bull**** from our resident braggart. He's stated this in the past and referred to an old article which also stated that this had been taken care of. No longer possible. -- Caver1 |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 7/27/2014 2:52 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 07/27/2014 01:30 PM, BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 12:16 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 18:08:18 +0100 Good Guy wrote: On 27/07/2014 17:32, Alias wrote: Safer? LOL! Linux doesn't do malware. Windows does and it does it very well. There is no point in creating malwares for Linux because not many people use it. Malware writers will have a better target rate if they spend time on Windows system knowing that it is where money can be made; Not on Linux users who are not likely to be using Linux for any serious business. It is very difficult to write malware for Linux. Actually it is currently impossible to get malware on Linux without confirmation. Heck they can't even install toolbar for any browser Nonsense. It is so easy to hack into Linux. One easy way is to use a buffer overflow and you are right into root. And you just leave your rootkit and the user has no idea (and most users doesn't even scan for malware). In fact, rootkit is new to the Windows world and *nix had them for decades now. And how many times has that been tried and succeeded? Plus that is no longer true. Hasn't been for awhile. Windows, pAple and Linux all get rootkited but Windows gets more than the other two. Well gee... Windows is on what 90% or more of the machines out there? Go figure. If 90% of the machines were running Commodore 64, most of the rootkits would be infecting them. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Kingston 120GB SSD - Thunderbird v24.4.0 Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 8.1 Pro w/Media Center |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 07/27/2014 02:04 PM, Johnny wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 12:30:08 -0500 BillW50 wrote: Nonsense. It is so easy to hack into Linux. One easy way is to use a buffer overflow and you are right into root. And you just leave your rootkit and the user has no idea (and most users doesn't even scan for malware). In fact, rootkit is new to the Windows world and *nix had them for decades now. That applied to a server running with root privilege. That bug has been fixed. You don't run a desktop Linux operating system with root privilege. When I first started using Linux Mint I was concerned with security. After using it for 8 months, I know I'm more secure running Linux without any malware protection, than running Windows with Avast or any other anti-virus program. Just do a search for rootkit windows/antivirus windows and see the load of programs offered pay and free. Then do the same for Linux and the most that you see is a definition of/what they do and it is mostly for servers. -- Caver1 |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 07/27/2014 02:18 PM, BillW50 wrote:
On 7/27/2014 12:22 PM, Ron wrote: On 7/27/2014 12:00 PM, BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 10:08 AM, Ron wrote: On 7/27/2014 10:41 AM, BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 9:34 AM, BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 9:06 AM, Roderick Stewart wrote: I don't think I'm too old to learn new stuff, but why should I have to, just to do what I could do before? Computers are supposed to serve our needs, not the other way around. It isn't that hard at all and the more you use it, the more it makes a lot of sense. Doing it otherwise would have been more counterproductive. Lots of things are better under 8 compared to 7. The Task Manager, file transfers, SSD support, Performance Monitor, On Screen Keyboard, Hybrid Sleep, faster booting, etc. are all better. Faster booting before the 8.1 update. I used to be able to push the power button and be typing in the Google Chrome search bar in 45 seconds (same as my Windows 7 machine with a hybrid HDD) now it takes anywhere from 1:30 to 1:45+ depending on the weather. Reboots are 3 minutes plus! Wow, really? Why? I just checked mine and 20 seconds to shutdown and 10 seconds to boot. And this one has all of the updates. Google "Windows 8.1 update slow boot". Some people that updated to Windows 8.1 from 8 are getting a black screen and it never boots. Oh no, I believe you and I don't doubt that for a second. Updates are a very serious matter and can toast your OS. Most of the time they don't, but you still should take updates as a serious matter and have backup plans. 10 seconds to push the power button, open Chrome, and start typing? I find that hard to believe, especially if you are using a SATA HDD. I don't use Chrome, but 10 seconds after hitting the power button the desktop is there and I can use the Windows search right away. And no, check the sig, this one doesn't have a hard drive anymore, just a cheapo slowest in its class SSD. Linux x64 will boot in four seconds with a SSD. Without a fast startup feature like Windows has. Also not equal if you are comparing a SSD to his SATA. -- Caver1 |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8 is a Flop, just as I predicted
On 7/27/2014 3:06 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 07/27/2014 01:47 PM, Alias wrote: BillW50 wrote: On 7/27/2014 12:16 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 18:08:18 +0100 Good Guy wrote: On 27/07/2014 17:32, Alias wrote: Safer? LOL! Linux doesn't do malware. Windows does and it does it very well. There is no point in creating malwares for Linux because not many people use it. Malware writers will have a better target rate if they spend time on Windows system knowing that it is where money can be made; Not on Linux users who are not likely to be using Linux for any serious business. It is very difficult to write malware for Linux. Actually it is currently impossible to get malware on Linux without confirmation. Heck they can't even install toolbar for any browser Nonsense. It is so easy to hack into Linux. One easy way is to use a buffer overflow and you are right into root. And you just leave your rootkit and the user has no idea (and most users doesn't even scan for malware). In fact, rootkit is new to the Windows world and *nix had them for decades now. More FUD and bull**** from our resident braggart. He's stated this in the past and referred to an old article which also stated that this had been taken care of. No longer possible. And while you ignore the new "Hand of Thief” trojan which targets Linux, no less. Claiming that Linux is unhackable while hacking into Linux is going on constantly isn't proving anything. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Kingston 120GB SSD - Thunderbird v24.4.0 Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 8.1 Pro w/Media Center |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|