Very Computer

Oops #1: Your laptop may overheat.
http://www.theinquirer.net/12110104.htm

Oops #2: You may lose files.
http://www.theinquirer.net/12110105.htm

Oops #3: You mean you *haven't* disabled cookies yet?
http://www.theinquirer.net/09110112.htm

Cool, reliable and secure, nevertheless.

;)

Regards,
Wei Shun

This is no real news. It is just confirming that MS has shitty
quality control, contrary to Erik Funkenbuschs claim that it takes
so long to get patches out because they are tested very rigously
and extensive to ensure they are not causing further problems.
Problem is, MS would even botch a "Hello World" program.

Peter
--
This problem was sponsored by Microsoft

On Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:21:48 +0100, Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=

# Microsoft Hello World Version 2.0 - Final
#include <stdio.h>
main()
{
        int n;
        printf ("\nHello World.") ;
        for (;;)
        {
                memset ( *(rand ()%n) , 32 , 50 ) ;
        }

Quote:}

I was over in comp.os.linux.setup and some one posted about XP and
linux.  The really interesting part was that the guy did a tcpdump and
noticed XP still phones home no matter that you tell it not to.  XP does
spy on the user but he said he can't decrypt it.

Quote:> I was over in comp.os.linux.setup and some one posted about XP and
> linux.  The really interesting part was that the guy did a tcpdump and
> noticed XP still phones home no matter that you tell it not to.  XP does
> spy on the user but he said he can't decrypt it.

   I'd like to know how tcpdump can monitor a non TCP/IP dial
connection ... just to learn; otherwise I'd assume it is a false
information.

Quote:> # Microsoft Hello World Version 2.0 - Final
> #include <stdio.h>
> main()
> {
>    int n;
>    printf ("\nHello World.") ;
>    for (;;)
>    {
>            memset ( *(rand ()%n) , 32 , 50 ) ;
>    }
> }

Hello

Is this code public domain, or would you like me to attribute it to you
when I use it?

-Ed

--

/d{def}def/f{/Times findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5/m
{moveto}d -1 r 230 350 m 0 1 179{1 index show 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}
for /s 15 d f pop 240 420 m 0 1 3 { 4 2 1 r sub -1 r show } for showpage

Why do you assume that a Dial connection is Non-TCP?
Forgot to buy your daily clue?

Peter
--
The sticker on the side of the box said "Supported Platforms: Win 95,
Win NT 4.0 or better", so clearly Linux was a supported platform.

Quote:> Why do you assume that a Dial connection is Non-TCP?
> Forgot to buy your daily clue?

   Don't know; just thought Microsoft would do it in a
propietary way, it wouldn't be as strange. I do not know
what it is "daily clue" and haven't bought anyone ever.

What if the XP box goes thru a Linux box setup as DHCP??
What if the XP box is using an ethernet adapter??
It still uses tcp/ip.  The info isn't false.  He just doesn't know how
to decrypt what XP is sending over to home is all... (Note: clue: phone
home... ET phone home... XP phone home...)

Well, even MS can not simply bypass the reality of the internet.
That means also TCP/IP. So tcpdump should give some answers.
That it can't because the connection is scrambled says only one
thing: MS is afraid that people could really know what they are
spying on.
So, you should start to get a clue. As you seem to be in no position
to aquire one just so, you have to buy one. In true MS tradition, it
has to be a daily dose of clue.

Peter
--
Get the new Windows XP. Now with eXtra Problems included

You can't use it at all, it's Microsoft's Hello World code.  In fact,
before you look at it, you should have agreed to the 43-page non-disclosure
and license agreement.  Any distribution of any variety, and Microsoft will
sue you for every penny you've got.  :)

Oh, and you left out the part that breaks the entire OS should you try to
uninstall the "hello world" program, as this is an essential part of the
OS, and not merely a ploy by Microsoft to force everyone to use its program
and so dominate the massive "hello world" program industry.

Quote:> Well, even MS can not simply bypass the reality of the internet.
> That means also TCP/IP. So tcpdump should give some answers.

   Your opinion, obviously very important to you, and probably
true, but nothing more nothing less than mine (as an opinion). Just
trying to reach the fact that not each thing said in in a newsgroup
has to be true, even when it is about how bad are Microsoft guys.

Quote:> That it can't because the connection is scrambled says only one
> thing: MS is afraid that people could really know what they are
> spying on.

   If they are spying at all. I don't say that they do or that the not do,
just that assuming some kind of things is too easy always about
Microsoft ... but even when you think certain things, one can't just
tell them as the objetive truth.

Quote:> So, you should start to get a clue. As you seem to be in no position
> to aquire one just so, you have to buy one. In true MS tradition, it
> has to be a daily dose of clue.

   Again your well docummented opinion, very valuable : thanks.

Quote:> What if the XP box goes thru a Linux box setup as DHCP??
> What if the XP box is using an ethernet adapter??
> It still uses tcp/ip.  The info isn't false.  He just doesn't know how
> to decrypt what XP is sending over to home is all... (Note: clue: phone
> home... ET phone home... XP phone home...)

   Ok, I was just thinking about a modem only machine, and that in
such case it wasn't forced to use TCP/IP. I suppose Windows XP
send information to Microsoft ... even that Windows 2000 and
earlier ones did too. Anyway, I suppose too that just statistical data
is sent ... just like *X if you compile it with no care :-) The real
sin in here would be that it does when you tell it not to do ... let's
wait and see what is all this XP about.

Care to substantiate? You know obviously *about this stuff,
otherwise you would not talk this bullshit.

Quote:>> That it can't because the connection is scrambled says only one
>> thing: MS is afraid that people could really know what they are
>> spying on.

>    If they are spying at all. I don't say that they do or that the not
>    do,
> just that assuming some kind of things is too easy always about
> Microsoft ... but even when you think certain things, one can't just
> tell them as the objetive truth.

I simply do not care if it is true. MS has to prove that it's untrue,
it is they who send encrypted stuff. So it is they who have to *exactly*
say what is in this data. If they fail to do so, I can assume whatever
I want.

Peter
--
I just found out that the brain is like a computer.
If that's true, then there really aren't any stupid people.
Just people running Windows.