With DaaS Windows Coming, Say Goodbye To Your PC As You Know It

On 08/02/2018 08:26 AM, Mayayana wrote:
"Carlos E.R." wrote

| That being said, for the firewall side, I believe they've made headway
| in graphical utilities (although, I don't really pay attention there -
| iptables on the commandline is good enough for me).
|
|
| I have seen no need to block "outgoing" connections in my own machine,
| though. I see the need to block rogue programs you don't trust, which
| may be common with closed source software typical in Windows :-p
|
Yes, that's exactly the response I got: You
don't need that. I consider it a good way to
protect against possible malware. There are millions
of people running spambots who wouldn't if they
had a good firewall. I also use it, increasingly, as
a way to block ill-behaved software. Far too much
of it now wants to call home, or elsewhere.

You don't need to use an outgoing firewall. That's
fine if that's what you like. But that's not a reason
why I shouldn't want one. As long as Linux requires
people to partake of a philosophy it won't be popular.

| [...] Example: RAW photo work.
| Aftershot Pro is very reasonably priced. On Linux?
| Last I saw there was only UFRaw, which wasn't much
| good. Even for basic graphics I have lots of choices.
| GIMP isn't one of them. Or rather, GIMP is a choice
| on Windows but not one worth using.
|
| Darktable.
|
Ah! And they even have a Windows version! Great
find. Oh, wait. After some looking around it turns out
the Windows version is "pre-alpha development
snapshot for 64 bit Windows". But they're delighted to
offer such great progress. How Gnu OSS of them.

https://www.darktable.org/2017/08/da...e-for-windows/

And if they ever finish the product they'll want to
copy all my RAWs into their database to work on them?
Que? I know I'm in for problems when every second
sentence contains the word "workflow". This is for Linux,
yet they're designing it for people who don't know how
to use a filesystem?

| Yeah, a bit of a downside when the software is provided 100%
| free-of-charge, and is subsequently only supported in someone's free
| time and/or by donation.
|
| A quick check shows that there are about a dozen potential alternatives
| that support Linux. However, that's as far as I looked (I don't know
| enough about the former to provide a proper comparison).
|
| Nothing stops them from also providing a Linux pay version of software.
|
No. But the lack of market will stop most people.
Linux has a very small user base for productivity
software. And if someone offers a commercial
product there's a good chance someone else will
copy it to offer a free version. Not to mention
all the people who will be angry that a "turncoat"
is trying to charge for software on Linux.

|
| It has always been so. Windows NTFS is as "intrusive" as Linux
| filesystems are, since about two decades ago. But Windows users do not
| notice that because they are always doing things as the Administrator.
| It would be similar to using Linux as root: no restrictions.
|
Windows is going more toward the Linux model.
Or rather, Windows is going more toward offering
only the corporate workstation product. Admin
is no longer really Admin, just as root is no longer
really root. Last I saw, I had to dig and find sudo
before I could be free on Linux. Similarly, if you
want to be real Admin on Win7+ you have to sign
on with the pre-set Administrator account. Both
make people jump through hoops to control the
system. Windows is used by hundreds of millions
of people, yet basic tasks often require finding
"secret tweaks". In Microsoft's defense, setting up
slight obstacles does provide a way to give IT people
control without causing problems for non-tech people.

But, there are mitigations. On XP, security has to
be set up if desired, rather than being imposed. On
Win7 one can turn down "user account control" to
achieve a fairly reasonable control over the
system without ninny wanings. ("Alert! Alert! Do you
really want to do what you just did! ID please!")

| The restrictions make a system safe.
|
| I never use Windows as Administrator.

Again, that's fine if it's what you prefer. I don't
like any kiddie gates. I don't care what your
opinion is of that. Why is it that I have more
choice on Windows than on a free, OSS product?



You have much less choice with Windows along with MS collecting your
data which you don't have with Linux. The distros that do collect data
let you opt out which Windows doesn't.

--
Caver1

In article
Dan Purgert wrote:

Mayayana wrote:
"Dan Purgert" wrote
| Indeed, I did. In that case, download the *deb (or *rpm) file for the
| package yourself, and install it (and its dependencies, if any) by hand.
|
| Although, that being said, I recall more than a few MSIs that depended
| on various .NET versions going out and downloading whatever version was
| necessary if the system didn't already have it.
|
[...]
Not so long ago it would have been considered very
bad manners to pull a stunt like that. These days it's

How long was "not so long ago"? I mean, I remember this kind of "oh, I
need the new directx / .NET / etc. thing" from as far back as WinXP.

| So then you only install software that's obtained via physical media
| that doesn't touch the Windows registry? No downloaded software
| whatsoever then?
|

I have no problem with downloading but I
don't want web installs. In other words, I want to
manage the system and know what I'm changing.
I don't want auto-updates, web installs, or anything
that requires going online. The software is installed.
Unless it's something like a browser there's no
excuse for it going online.

That's kind of how most Linux software operates. Sure, you grab the
binary from the repository ("download, then install"), but after that,
the software won't "phone home" on its own and nag you about needing an
update (or send telemetry to the developer).

The system update manager is what keeps tabs on "currently installed
versions" vs. "available in the repositories version". Effectively the
same as Windows Update.

Canonical (makers of Ubuntu) found out the hard way how vehemently
against telemetry the Linux community is .

| I don't
| want to have to master Linux in order to remove
| file restrictions. I want a clear control, like the Windows
| UAC control. So I can go online and search for
| "stop file restrictions Windows" and immediately find an
| article somewhere that says, "Piece of cake. Just slide
| the UAC control to the bottom." That's not a complete
| solution, but it's a big help. It stops the nags and
| restrictions on all but some system files.
|
| Which files / directories are we specifically talking about? Linux is
| a bit more "spread out" than Windows, with "system files" being in
| multiple places, as opposed to primarily C:\Windows:
|
It gets complicated. Mostly I just mean that I want
to be free of data file restrictions. But the same restrictions
make it hard to control the system in later Windows versions.
For example, Microsoft categorizes Windows Media Player
as system files. They don't want you to remove it, and
some software might depend on it being there for use in
automation. Each Windows version brings more things
under that umbrella and toward a kiosk system.

There's not much like that in Linux. Individual distros may get a
little funny about it (for example, the "Mayayana Distribution" may mark
VLC as required or something); but overall Linux tends to be very
"Lego-block" in that regard.

| Debates on slashdot often do, although the culture there has gone
| downhill even from 5 years ago. It's not really a great source of
| things.
|

No. Actually I mostly like it because a lot of interesting
science stories show up there.

It was significantly better in the 90s / early 2000s.


--
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

"Dan Purgert" wrote

| Not so long ago it would have been considered very
| bad manners to pull a stunt like that. These days it's
|
| How long was "not so long ago"? I mean, I remember this kind of "oh, I
| need the new directx / .NET / etc. thing" from as far back as WinXP.
|

I meant not so long ago software would have informed
that something was needed and not snuck online to
install it without asking. Especially something so gigantic.

I've used a firewall since Win98. The first time I
remember anything trying to phone home without asking
was Norton System Works. I was installing it for a
friend. (Maybe 2005-ish?) The firewall told me it was
trying to go out. The Norton install never said so. It
just paused for a long time -- a minute or more -- and
then finally gave up and carried on the install.

Today it's typical for software to at least report
the install. Firefox does that if allowed. Most FF
extensions will also do it.

Recently, in a browser discussion, I tried a couple that
are supposed to be privacy respecting.
1) SRWare Iron, which is supposed to be a non-spyware
version of Chrome. They detail all the spyware functions
*not* in Iron. But when I started it up iut tried to go to
start-iron.com. When that failed it tried to call Google!
Again, with no notice to me.
2) Midori, installed on some Linux systems. It tried
to call amazonaws with what seemed to be a hard-coded
IP address: 107.20.240.232. Midori told me it had failed
to make contact but gave no indication of why it was
trying to do so.

"Michael Logies" wrote

| That will probably be coming eventually to Win10
| Pro and Home. Win10 is already halfway there. The main
| difference is that people aren't actually paying rent.
| But if MS doesn't make a lot of money from ads and
| trinket apps they probably will charge rent. And by
| then most people won't be able to say no.
|
| Globally most people have said "no" already and are using Android:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_...rating_systems

That's not going to happen. You're referencing all
devices, which includes phones. There's very little
relationship between a computer phone and a PC.
People using Win10 are using it because they need
to do work on a computer. They have to be, since
Microsoft have failed at selling either a phone
or a tablet. And if they want to use software on a
computer, there's not much choice besides Windows.
They can use a Mac if they want to waste money
and don't need software that's not on a Mac. But
business uses Windows.

As with Linux, Android is not ready for prime time
as a desktop. (Though the talk about forking it
away from Google's control is intriguing.)

"Caver1" wrote

| You are stuck in a rut. Don't want to learn anything new....
| As a software engineer not using the
| commandline is very limiting.
|
And I'm the one stuck in a rut? I write software.
I don't use command line. Maybe writing software *on
Linux* needs command line. But probably not, since that
would be in line with what I'm saying and you've
proclaimed what I'm saying to be wrong.

Yes, what I say is my opinions, analysis and
personal experience. Is that a problem? We've been
discussing the downhill slide of Win10 and whether
Linux is an option. It's not a good option for me.
If I'm eventually faced with choosing between MS
renal spyware and Linux then I might have to bite
the bullet and make do.

I have no impartial surveys to quote saying that
Linux isn't as good as Windows. Nor do I even think
that myself. I just don't find it usable as a desktop
system and doubt it ever will be.

You think that's just my reckless, halfwit opinion?
Maybe. But it also seems to be the opinion of the
vast majority of people, who could have Linux for
free but aren't interested. That's been the case for
20-odd years now. So you're faced with a somewhat
awkard conumndrum: Most of the world is "wrong"
while you're right.

On 02/08/18 20:56, Mayayana wrote:
You think that's just my reckless, halfwit opinion?
Maybe. But it also seems to be the opinion of the
vast majority of people, who could have Linux for
free but aren't interested.


I thionk you have spun the real issue.

When linux comes pre-isntalled so they user doesnt havce to install it,
it outselles the competrion. Android for example

Or chrome books



--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

On 8/2/2018 5:17 AM, Caver1 wrote:
On 08/01/2018 10:41 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"Anonymous" wrote

| This is really a very disappointing explanation of the various Linux
| systems. I am almost certain that you have never done more than
| installed a Linux GUI system, played with it for a short time,
| condemned it in you mind, and uninstalled it.

Twice I tried getting used to it and once I looked
into the feasibility of porting VB6 software using
WINE. Do I need to use it and like it in order to
assess it?
Linux just isn't a desktop. It's fine for a server,
but I don't need a server. What Windows offers is
universality and relative ease of use, coupled with
tools for people at all levels.

The last time I tried Linux was a few years ago. I
had a simple test: Set it up and use it without needing
command line and get a firewall that would be easy to
configure to control all outgoing and incoming communication.
As easy as Online Armor is on XP. Even those 2 simple
requirements were impossible to fulfill. The response from
Linux fans: Command line is better and you don't need
a firewall to block outgoing on Linux because it's not
unsafe like Windows. That's classic Linux fan logic: If
you want what we don't got then you're wrong.

| Debian alone has 32,000+
| free software programs available.

And iPhones have even more, don't they? But that
means nothing if I don't want any of them. Linux has
Firefox and TBird. For graphics there's GIMP, which is
still a rough, unfinished project after almost 25 years
of development. But most of the software I typically
use won't run on Linux. That's not the fault of Linux,
but it's the facts. 90+% of PCs run Windows. Software
is easier to write for Windows. So there's lots of
software for Windows. Example: RAW photo work.
Aftershot Pro is very reasonably priced. On Linux?
Last I saw there was only UFRaw, which wasn't much
good. Even for basic graphics I have lots of choices.
GIMP isn't one of them. Or rather, GIMP is a choice
on Windows but not one worth using.

I can also write my own software on Windows.
Writing on Linux would be a steep learning curve.

| Those who have converted off of
| Windows have not found Linux to restrict their needs and uses for a
| computer.

That statement means nothing. I'd love to see
more people using Linux, because then maybe
developers would gradually make it more mainstream.
But it's just not happening. I don't know anyone
using Linux.

| The other Linux distributions make it easy to install some good
| programs right there in their interface.

That's what I *don't* want. If I moved to Linux
it would be to get free of busybody interference.
I don't want a system forcing file restrictions on
me. And I don't want a system with an applet
middleman to oversee software installs. I don't want
it calling home. I want it to work smoothly without
ever needing to call home.
Last time I tried Linux it was so intrusive about
file restrictions that I ended up making FAT32
partitions for storing files.

That's the problem I was talking about: Linux has
been going from half-built to Mac-style lockdown,
without ever reaching the sweet spot of Windows:
An OS that does what you want without needing
to learn a lot, but still allows almost any degree of
customization. Of course, Microsoft are working to
change that. But Linux and Mac are not worthy
substitutes. If you treat computer users as dumb
then your OS will be dumb.

| I am a software engineer and
| hated to have to re-learn how to use the Linux comandline. But there
| were many places on the web that explained how to install programs
| using the Linux comandline that were not in the GUI install interface.

That's fine if that's what you like. It's not
my preference. And it's not the preference
of the vast majority. To defend it and say
one can learn about it online is the classic
Linux defense, as I said above. There is no
defense for not having GUI options for virtually
anything you might want to do. It's been
relatively easy to achieve for over 20 years
now. But of course, it's easier on Windows,
because Microsoft want to encourage software
developers, so they make easy, RAD tools.

As far as I'm concerned, life's too short for
command line. I could also light my stove by
rubbing two sticks together. But why would I?
Command line simply isn't necessary in a properly
designed program. But most of what's on Linux
isn't properly designed. The emphasis is all on
functionality with none on usability.

In the rare cases where I need to do something
with command line, if I need to do it more than
once I'll probably write a script. For instance,
registering COM libraries. I can run a command
but since I do it occasionally I wrote a script
that works by just dropping the DLL onto the
script on my desktop. Why would I go to the trouble
of looking up and typing that command over and
over when I can use drag-drop?

What most Linux fans won't admit is that
command line is really a pointless fetish -- an
unwillingness to adapt. They want to light their
stove by rubbing sticks together because it makes
them feel like masters of arcane knowledge. Which
would be silly enough, but then they scorn others
who want to click a button rather than type out
an incantation.

Part of the problem there is also the culture. There
are too many unsocialized geeks who spend their
time either programming or playing childish computer
games. It's an adolescent culture. (Just look at
what gets top WINE support to see what the main
priorities are. A grown man playing video games is
a sad state of affairs.) Linux is not likely to ever be
a well designed system unless well-rounded people,
concerned with usability and productivity, decide
to polish it. And since there's no business case for
anyone doing that, it's not likely to happen.



You are stuck in a rut. Don't want to learn anything new.

That's a silly accusation.
Say you live in middle america.
Some Russians move to the next town and refuse to integrate.
They berate you for not learning to speak Russian.

Well, you'll never need to interface with them at all.
Your existing language suits your environment perfectly.
They don't have anything that you don't already have elsewhere.

If they would integrate with the community and LEAD you
to their better way instead of badmouthing you for not
dropping everything you hold dear and converting to their ways,
the community would thrive.

All of what
you said above is personal opinion and is either just wrong or borders
on it.
So that's what 'wrong adjacent' means...
There are a few Linux distros now that you don't ever have to use the
commandline if you don't want to. As a software engineer not using the
commandline is very limiting.

Please list those distros; CURRENT version.
Enumerate the GUI tools to:
Seamlessly integrate with a windows network
Share the desktop, either direction, with windows
Install software (It's amazing that some distros require
the command line to install a GUI software installer.)
Configure a firewall, on the fly, as new situations are encountered

Then, there's the whole nightmare of hardware drivers that actually
enable all the functions of hardware devices that don't come with
linux drivers.

I got this far without even mentioning CHAOS...oops...



I've been tolerant of Mint and Zorin, but the last couple of versions
have rendered all my notes on how to install/use the older versions
worthless. Lots of change, and not for the better. Doesn't matter
how 'good' the OS is if you can't figure out how to configure it.

The command line is useless if you don't know what to type...or if
they moved or renamed the file you need to edit...
GUI has the options listed on the screen. Pick one and you're done.

Puppy Linux still reigns supreme for ease of use, but it's not a full
desktop solution.

On 8/2/2018 5:18 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/08/18 11:41, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2018-08-02 04:41, Mayayana wrote:
"Anonymous" wrote

| This is really a very disappointing explanation of the various Linux
| systems. I am almost certain that you have never done more than
| installed a Linux GUI system, played with it for a short time,
| condemned it in you mind, and uninstalled it.

Twice I tried getting used to it and once I looked
into the feasibility of porting VB6 software using
WINE. Do I need to use it and like it in order to
assess it?
Linux just isn't a desktop. It's fine for a server,
but I don't need a server. What Windows offers is
universality and relative ease of use, coupled with
tools for people at all levels.

Well, I'm using a Linux desktop, with a GUI, obviously, since many
years. Nothing to it.

I had guests in my house using my computer and not noticing it was not
Windows.

OK, what was your guest trying to install or configure?
Linux is a GREAT platform for an appliance configured by a guru
for use by an ordinary human.
A linux distro is good for the masses WHEN it comes up ootb with EVERYTHING
they need already configured and working perfectly.

Most of the pieces exist. Someone with deep pockets, empathy and an open
mind needs to CREATE a (note that 'a' is SINGULAR) linux based desktop
computing environment and SUPPORT it.

You prefer Windows? That's fine, use whatever you like and works for
you. But don't lie.

Well strictly linux is a kernel, upon which a desktop may be constructed
:-)

I ditched windows about 2005. when Gnome/debian got to be better than
win98 *for what I wanted to do*.

I'd been running lunux servers a lot before that.

I switched to Mint because I was fed up with the latest code noit being
avialable under debian 'stable'

And I like MATE a lot. Tried xfce and cinnamon, but mate has the best
balance *for me*.

In article
Dan Purgert wrote:

Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Dan Purgert wrote:
Mayayana wrote:

snip
I write this not to convince Mayayana to switch, but to let others that
most of what he posts about Linux is rubbish.

Wait, we're supposed to "convince" people to switch their OS of choice?
Man, I've been doing this wrong forever ...


--
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 16:46:37 -0400, Andreas Kohlbach
wrote:

On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 22:14:09 -0400, Mayayana wrote:

"Anonymous" wrote

| MS has it wrong. I'll keep my pc and run Linux.
|
|
https://www.computerworld.com/article/3293429/microsoft-windows/with-daas-windows-coming-say-goodbye-to-your-pc-as-you-know-it.html
|

You should also read the article linked, from Mary Jo
Foley. She makes her living being a Microsoft cheerleader
and generally has her facts straight, albeit skewed to
make MS look good.

What she seems to be saying is that MS is heading
toward offering Windows as a rental for corporate
customers.

Then the article has a bad start saying

| For over 30 years, we’ve thought of PCs primarily as Windows machines,
| which we owned and controlled. That’s about to change forever.

This indicates *all* Windows users. Like Daas is the followup to Windows 10.

But that won't change Windows users. They will take it. History confirms
that when something like "Oh, look at Windows ME, that is awful, I switch
to Linux." or "If Trump gets elected I move to Canada" never really
happened (that often). Linux will not receive many Windows user as the
articles tries to predict.


"...and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more
disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right
themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But
when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the
same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism,
it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off..."

(seemed appropriate somehow)

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote
| On 02/08/18 20:56, Mayayana wrote:
| You think that's just my reckless, halfwit opinion?
| Maybe. But it also seems to be the opinion of the
| vast majority of people, who could have Linux for
| free but aren't interested.
|
|
| I thionk you have spun the real issue.
|
| When linux comes pre-isntalled so they user doesnt havce to install it,
| it outselles the competrion. Android for example
|
| Or chrome books

I'm beginning to think you're an alias of the
notorious nospam, who argues incessantly to
no purpose.

What's "the real issue"? We were talking about
the usability of Linux as a desktop system.
Android and Chrome are not desktop OSs,
which is the point I was just making. So the
issue for you is which OS has the most
hardware installs for any purpose? Does that
matter somehow? You want Linux to win the
install count and that will prove Linux beats
Windows.... or something like that?

Good luck using your Android device as a
desktop. Maybe that explains why your typing
averages 3 typos per line. I'm guessing that
you're on a bus, using a broken chopstick to
type on your computer phone, and it screws
up every time you go over a bump, right?

I'll be curious to see how your new letterhead
comes out. I guess you must be creating it
with Libre Office on a 3 inch screen.... Woops!
Watch out for those bumps!

On 8/2/2018 6:22 AM, Mayayana wrote:
"Dan Purgert" wrote


I did once try a VB6 replacement for Linux, called
Gambas. The author seemed to mainly be interested
in telling VB people that they code wrong. Then he
explained that he would provide a product to make
us code right. And he gave it a cute, anthropomorphic
lobster logo. But he completely missed the point. VB
isn't a beginner tool. It's anything from beginner to
advanced, depending on what you need.

Gambas was to enable my transition to linux.
I'd hoped to convert my VB6 programs to Gambas.
Learning C was out of the question.
What I found was a lot of, "this feature not yet implemented."
Over the years it didn't get much better. Not enough
of what I needed.
In a pinch, I could use xbasic to write cross-platform
apps, but there was no reason to go to the effort.

Aside:
MIT AppInventor is a hoot. Very limited, but it's amazing
what you can do on a smart phone sticking jigsaw pieces together.

I remember the days when you could just type a command.
In this week's linux install/configure attempts,
the majority of my keystrokes have been "sudo" and typing
my password, only to find that the command no longer exists
in this version of that distro with the other desktop.

In article
"Mayayana" wrote:

"Caver1" wrote

| You are stuck in a rut. Don't want to learn anything new....
| As a software engineer not using the
| commandline is very limiting.
|
And I'm the one stuck in a rut? I write software.
I don't use command line. Maybe writing software *on
Linux* needs command line. But probably not, since that
would be in line with what I'm saying and you've
proclaimed what I'm saying to be wrong.

Yes, what I say is my opinions, analysis and
personal experience. Is that a problem? We've been
discussing the downhill slide of Win10 and whether
Linux is an option. It's not a good option for me.
If I'm eventually faced with choosing between MS
renal spyware and Linux then I might have to bite
the bullet and make do.

I have no impartial surveys to quote saying that
Linux isn't as good as Windows. Nor do I even think
that myself. I just don't find it usable as a desktop
system and doubt it ever will be.

You think that's just my reckless, halfwit opinion?
Maybe. But it also seems to be the opinion of the
vast majority of people, who could have Linux for
free but aren't interested. That's been the case for
20-odd years now. So you're faced with a somewhat
awkard conumndrum: Most of the world is "wrong"
while you're right.

Did people want BetaMax instead of VHS, which was superior to VHS? Again
its price and later huge library of movies was the advantage of VHS which
dominated the market well into the 2000s until DVD took over.

Regaeding the VHS comment:

Betamax had better video. VHS had the ability for mulitspeed and tape
lenght first.


On 2-Aug-2018, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:

On 08/01/2018 06:48 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"Paul" wrote

| But that won't change Windows users. They will take it.
|
| You don't seem to have thought this through.
|
| 1) Microsoft cannot afford to start putting a rental OS
| on OEM computers. This will free the OEMs to put a
| fully functional unconstrained OS on the machine instead.
| A hardware manufacturer cannot ship a product with
| a rental OS on it. That would be "bonkers".

And if the system on that computer is not named
Windows who would bother with it? Windows is rotten to
the core with spyware and many years of neglect of the
users privacy and security.

snip

In comp.os.linux.misc Mayayana wrote:
"Dan Purgert" wrote
....
I meant not so long ago software would have informed
that something was needed and not snuck online to
install it without asking. Especially something so gigantic.

I've used a firewall since Win98. The first time I
remember anything trying to phone home without asking
was Norton System Works. I was installing it for a
friend. (Maybe 2005-ish?) The firewall told me it was
trying to go out. The Norton install never said so. It
just paused for a long time -- a minute or more -- and
then finally gave up and carried on the install.

Do you remember what process it was? MSI file? Setup? If so, then it is
probably checking its digital signed files to be sure the files are
valid.

I also block with firewalls since I don't like these phoning home
without my permissions.

--
Quote of the Week: "The ants are a people not strong, yet they prepare their meat in the summer." --Proverbs 30:25 (Bible)
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org / http://antfarm.ma.cx
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
| |o o| | ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and URL/link.
\ _ /
( )