New from MS-Windows Media Player now adware friendly

[CDS]

quote]It's amazingly hard to do anything as a normal user. Windows has been set up horribly like that.

BS, its amazingly nice to run as a User\power user combo on my PC, everything except patchs and updates to the OS or config changes I do from this user, very few games demand I run on admin. Very easy.

Sims 2 demands it. And thats the only game I play. And I only use Windows for games, Paint Shop Pro, and syncing my PDA.

So go and turn off your auto-patcher, and do it alone, its not a hard-locked configuration.

Its obvious you've never tried actully working with any modern Windows installation and decided since your experiances were crap, then its all shit.

I use WinXP Pro on my workstation, dual-booted with linux. I've used Windows a lot. I know other people who have used Windows a lot more than me, and think the same as me.

[Ace Pace]

Sims 2 demands it. And thats the only game I play. And I only use Windows for games, Paint Shop Pro, and syncing my PDA.

Well, there are exceptions, but most games run fine without needing admin rights.

I use WinXP Pro on my workstation, dual-booted with linux. I've used Windows a lot. I know other people who have used Windows a lot more than me, and think the same as me.

Again, if you don't know how to turn off Windows Update, then how can you call yourself knowledgeable?
Sure, Windows XP has problems, but learn to use it, don't just whine.

[CDS]

Sims 2 demands it. And thats the only game I play. And I only use Windows for games, Paint Shop Pro, and syncing my PDA.

Well, there are exceptions, but most games run fine without needing admin rights.

the only one I run doesn't. And I've had times where I've had to log off, go into admin, do what I want to do (eg. install hardware/software) then log back in as my usual username. Linux is so much smoother.

Again, if you don't know how to turn off Windows Update, then how can you call yourself knowledgeable?
Sure, Windows XP has problems, but learn to use it, don't just whine.

My Windows doesn't update automatically. I don't want it to. Thats the point. It shouldn't. I like the control, thanks.

[Ace Pace]

the only one I run doesn't. And I've had times where I've had to log off, go into admin, do what I want to do (eg. install hardware/software) then log back in as my usual username. Linux is so much smoother.

Yes, and in linux you need to tweak the config files before you can do anything, Linux was infinetly harder to set up after it was installed, yes the added control is nice, but I'd prefer my OS to not require me to hunt everywhere to set stuff up.

My Windows doesn't update automatically. I don't want it to. Thats the point. It shouldn't. I like the control, thanks.

Exactly, and there you have the control, my point. Yet in the start you claimed:

I want an operating system that does what I tell it to, not update patches when I don't want it to. What happens if i'm on a net connection that charges me shitload for bandwidth and I don't want to download patches at that time?

So what was your complaint there?

[CDS]

Yes, and in linux you need to tweak the config files before you can do anything, Linux was infinetly harder to set up after it was installed, yes the added control is nice, but I'd prefer my OS to not require me to hunt everywhere to set stuff up.

Hmm, that's never been my experience in redhat.. and it's always been just as easy as windows to configure stuff. Debian, however, is hard to set up, and I avoid that where I can.

My Windows doesn't update automatically. I don't want it to. Thats the point. It shouldn't. I like the control, thanks.

Exactly, and there you have the control, my point. Yet in the start you claimed:

I want an operating system that does what I tell it to, not update patches when I don't want it to. What happens if i'm on a net connection that charges me shitload for bandwidth and I don't want to download patches at that time?

So what was your complaint there?

I've seen it before where windows has tried to do something without me telling it to

[Ace Pace]

Hmm, that's never been my experience in redhat.. and it's always been just as easy as windows to configure stuff. Debian, however, is hard to set up, and I avoid that where I can.

I'll ignore your second point because its becoming useless, but perhaps I could learn something from this.
I've also tried redhat, whatever was free half a year ago on the redhat site, had my drivers on a disk, and backed up on a FAT32 partition, I install Red hat, all fine, untill I attempt to set up X(the GUI thing, sorry if I forget some of the names), it won't recognize my 9700 Pro, after aguing with it for a few hours, I got into the GUI, tried to set up the network, couldn't find where to do that anywhere.

Giving up, I turned to installing drivers for the Radeon and my CD-RW, no where was there any help file, and the drivers were not easy to install.

During the entire experiance, i've noticed a lack of easy tools, and no good help files.

I've used Knoppix on many occasions, to fix screw ups in my PC when some driver install goes bad, and it was never that bad, but the same there, couldn't set up a network or anything like that.

While Windows has several flaws outside of security, it is atleast easy to use right off the bat.

EDITed wrong wording.

[Xon]

I'm more incliened to believe my BSc Computer Science teaching than some random person on the internet

...
I had some idiot teaching in my Computer Science course try and tell me Windows 95 wasnt a premptive multitasking OS. They aren’t infallible, and the IT department has an affair with hating Microsoft for some reason(never mind the massive site licenses they have signed on with MS, which they dont make avaliable to students...).

Time for some gratuitous linking to how Windows memory management works!

The Virtual-Memory Manager in Windows NT

This article provides an in-depth survey of the memory management system in Windows NT™. Specifically, these topics are explored in detail:

Virtual memory in Windows NT

• 32-bit virtual addresses
• Page directory, page tables, and page frames
• Translating a virtual address
• Process integrity
• Reserved and committed memory
• Translation lookaside buffers
• Page-table entry structure
• Page faults
• Sharing pages across process boundaries
• Prototype page-table entries
• Copy-on-write page optimization
• Characteristics of the virtual-memory manager
• The page-frame database
• Managing a working set of pages for each process

Virtual Address Space

Virtual Address Space
The virtual addresses used by a process do not represent the actual physical location of an object in memory. Instead, the system maintains a page map for each process, which is an internal data structure used to translate virtual addresses into corresponding physical addresses. Each time a thread references an address, the system translates the virtual address to a physical address.
...

Windows Me/98/95
The following table describes the virtual address space on Windows Me, Windows 98, and Windows 95.

• 0K - ~64K (0xFFFF) Not writable. This boundary is approximate due to the way the system loads some features of Microsoft® MS-DOS®. This memory is private to the process.
• ~64K (0x10000) -
  4 MB (0x3FFFFF) Reserved for MS-DOS compatibility. This memory is fully readable and writable by the process. However, this range of memory may have some MS-DOS–related structures or code in it, so processes should not arbitrarily read from or write to it. This memory is private to the process.
• 4MB (0x400000) -
  2GB (0x7FFFFFFF) Available for code and user data. User data is readable and writable by the process. Code is execute-only. This memory is private to the process.
• 2GB (0x80000000) -
  3GB (0xBFFFFFFF) Shared area, readable and writable by all processes. A number of system DLLs and other data are loaded into this space.
• 3GB (0xC0000000) -
  4GB (0xFFFFFFFF) System memory, readable or writable by any process. However, this is where low-level system code resides, so writing to this region may corrupt the system, with potentially catastrophic consequences.

(Underlining mine)

I think that is enough to pund it though your apparetly thick head that you are completely and utterly wrong on this point wrong

It's amazingly hard to do anything as a normal user. Windows has been set up horribly like that.

The whole point of being a 'normal' user is you can not make changes to the OS or anyone else data.

[Ace Pace]

While Windows has several deep flaws outside of security, it is atleast easy to use right off the bat.

Care to explain what you thing those 'dee[ flaws' are? Probably just a missunderstanding of how the features work. Windows is complex. Miss-configure something when you think you know what you are doing will probably open up large security flaws.

Wrong, wording,sorry I did not mean deep, flaws, I'll go and edit that , however, some stuff that annoys me is the lack of easy to acess tools that allow me to see whats going on in people's PC, the event viewer isn't much help, with the error messages being cryptic.
Another thing that makes me annoyed with Windows, is the ability for every program to decide on changes to the registry, I would very much like the ability to check what a program installs before it happens, or atleast the registry changes.

[Xon]

Wrong, wording,sorry I did not mean deep, flaws, I'll go and edit that

Thats alright, I've edited it out of my post to.

, however, some stuff that annoys me is the lack of easy to acess tools that allow me to see whats going on in people's PC, the event viewer isn't much help, with the error messages being cryptic.

The problem with error logging is every app uses their own solution. It would be great if everything dumped to the biult-in event log.

However, the Event viewer sucks. No searching, and such. You can export the event viewer logs to a SQL database and then use that to manipulate how you view it. But that cant be done out of the box.

With MS-SQL server biult into the next Windows, this will be much better in that regard. dotNETified SQL with realtime updates, you could do all types of interesting monitoring of the event log.

You can lookup the error code on Microsoft's website with the latest version of Event Viewer. Very handy, it tells you every byte it needs to send to MS(which typically isnt very much at all).

Another thing that makes me annoyed with Windows, is the ability for every program to decide on changes to the registry, I would very much like the ability to check what a program installs before it happens, or atleast the registry changes.

If the installer is an MSI file, you can actually dig up any registry changes it will make if it doesnt invoke some native exe todo work.

Look into the Application Compatibility toolkit v3.0, you can do all type of neat stuff. Like make an application which tries to install globally only install for the user (since the user doesnt have write access were needed).

[phongn]

You are completely, totally and utterly wrong. Go do some research on Windows before you presume to know about it.

I'm more incliened to believe my BSc Computer Science teaching than some random person on the internet

Have you heard of the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy? At any rate, ggs has demonstrated how very wrong you (and by extension, your professor) was.

It's amazingly hard to do anything as a normal user. Windows has been set up horribly like that.

That's by design so you don't fuck anything up. It's amazing hard to do a lot of things under most UNIX-like operating systems when you run as a normal user as well. Go blame incompetent developers, not Microsoft, for making it hard to run as User -- what do you think HKCU and %USERPROFILE% are for?

I want an operating system that does what I tell it to, not update patches when I don't want it to. What happens if i'm on a net connection that charges me shitload for bandwidth and I don't want to download patches at that time?

Unfortunately, most people don't download patches for whatever reason and they spoil it for the small majority that has problems, like you. Furthermore, deploying patches to fix security problems ahead of time (in a manner analogous to vaccination) only works when it is mass deployed. Finally, if you don't want it, Microsoft explicitly gives you the option to turn it off.

[Xon]

Unfortunately, most people don't download patches for whatever reason and they spoil it for the small majority that has problems, like you. Furthermore, deploying patches to fix security problems ahead of time (in a manner analogous to vaccination) only works when it is mass deployed. Finally, if you don't want it, Microsoft explicitly gives you the option to turn it off.

And lets not let the fact that you need to explictily turn Windows Updates on before WinXP sp2, and with WinXP sp2 you get a screen which you need to be blind not to see prompting you to turn Automatic updates on(with the option of turning them off!) slip...

[phongn]

And lets not let the fact that you need to explictily turn Windows Updates on before WinXP sp2, and with WinXP sp2 you get a screen which you need to be blind not to see prompting you to turn Automatic updates on(with the option of turning them off!) slip...

Indeed, in the first reboot after SP2's application there's a huge security stage you must pass through.

If the installer is an MSI file, you can actually dig up any registry changes it will make if it doesnt invoke some native exe todo work.

There is also the mighty RegMon if you want to see what that installer is doing.

[Xon]

There is also the mighty RegMon if you want to see what that installer is doing.

Regmon is almight indead.

Prepackaged Compatibility Modes]linky

• Limited User Access: Redirects file-system and registry write requests to nonrestricted areas when the user has insufficient access permissions; useful for applications written for versions of Windows that have no security-related user accounts.
• Profile Setup Support: Installs the application for all users of a computer rather than only for the current user.

These arent directly accessable from the windows GUI, but you can get at them from the App Compatibility toolkit. IIRC You can then makes these settings apply to any file under a given directory too!

Learn to love them for getting old DOS games working(and other shitty products!).

[Durandal]

There are other reasons why Windows is an inferior OS. Some people argue that Windows isn't a true OS. One such reason is because of the way Windows does memory management: it doesn't.
One important task of an OS is to allocate parts of the memory to each process. to give a vague example, one process might use the memory addresses 0-20, while another process might use addresses 21-40. Thats the thing. If you're running Windows, it doesn't.
So, lets say process a wants to use memory address x, Oh no! It's already being used!

Then we see everyone's favourite sight: The Blue Screen of Death.

You sound like someone who just got done with a 100-level architectures class, and now you think you know everything about how a computer works. Tell me, if Windows doesn't do any memory management at all, then how the fuck do programs run in the first place? Every operating system has at least a basic form of managing memory, and all modern operating systems will confine processes to their own memory spaces.

Do you want to know just how stable an operating system that lacks protected memory really is? Run Mac OS 9 sometime. Windows XP is a joyous experience next to OS 9.

[CDS]

They aren’t infallible, and the IT department has an affair with hating Microsoft for some reason(never mind the massive site licenses they have signed on with MS, which they dont make avaliable to students...).

Quite the opposite to our university. Our computing department have an affair with MS, and I can get a free copy of whatever Microsoft software I want. Including Windows.

It's amazingly hard to do anything as a normal user. Windows has been set up horribly like that.

The whole point of being a 'normal' user is you can not make changes to the OS or anyone else data.

[/quote]
No. It's so you can't accidentally make changes. If you know the root password, it's easy to make changes in linux - just not accidentally. It's not in Windows.

[CDS]

Unfortunately, most people don't download patches for whatever reason and they spoil it for the small majority that has problems, like you. Furthermore, deploying patches to fix security problems ahead of time (in a manner analogous to vaccination) only works when it is mass deployed. Finally, if you don't want it, Microsoft explicitly gives you the option to turn it off.

I'll have you know I always run windows update when I'm on the connection to make it possible to do so.

In fact, it's my job to pick up the pieces after the LART when people neglect to do this.

[CDS]

You sound like someone who just got done with a 100-level architectures class, and now you think you know everything about how a computer works. Tell me, if Windows doesn't do any memory management at all, then how the fuck do programs run in the first place? Every operating system has at least a basic form of managing memory, and all modern operating systems will confine processes to their own memory spaces.

I never said it had no memory memagement. Just a shit one.

Do you want to know just how stable an operating system that lacks protected memory really is? Run Mac OS 9 sometime. Windows XP is a joyous experience next to OS 9.

Why are you running OS9 when you can run OSX?

[Durandal]

You sound like someone who just got done with a 100-level architectures class, and now you think you know everything about how a computer works. Tell me, if Windows doesn't do any memory management at all, then how the fuck do programs run in the first place? Every operating system has at least a basic form of managing memory, and all modern operating systems will confine processes to their own memory spaces.

I never said it had no memory memagement. Just a shit one.

One such reason is because of the way Windows does memory management: it doesn't.

Do you want to know just how stable an operating system that lacks protected memory really is? Run Mac OS 9 sometime. Windows XP is a joyous experience next to OS 9.

Why are you running OS9 when you can run OSX?

I am. Now address my god damn point or concede.

[phongn]

No. It's so you can't accidentally make changes. If you know the root password, it's easy to make changes in linux - just not accidentally. It's not in Windows.

Actually, it isn't. The point is so that you can't make changes to the system's or other people's data. If you logged on as Administrator or root you could make hash or someone else's data or system configuration intentionally as well as accidentially.

[CDS]

You sound like someone who just got done with a 100-level architectures class, and now you think you know everything about how a computer works. Tell me, if Windows doesn't do any memory management at all, then how the fuck do programs run in the first place? Every operating system has at least a basic form of managing memory, and all modern operating systems will confine processes to their own memory spaces.

I never said it had no memory memagement. Just a shit one.

One such reason is because of the way Windows does memory management: it doesn't.

OK, apologies, that latter quote came out differently to how I intended it to.

Do you want to know just how stable an operating system that lacks protected memory really is? Run Mac OS 9 sometime. Windows XP is a joyous experience next to OS 9.

Why are you running OS9 when you can run OSX?

I am. Now address my god damn point or concede.

[/quote]
I'll ask the question again: why are you running OS9 when you can run OSX?
The only reason I can think of is because you've got a low spec Apple. I don't know much about iMacs, but I believe the G4 can be upgraded to OSX, and that's a couple of years old, now.

[phongn]

I'll ask the question again: why are you running OS9 when you can run OSX?
The only reason I can think of is because you've got a low spec Apple. I don't know much about iMacs, but I believe the G4 can be upgraded to OSX, and that's a couple of years old, now.

He's running OS X but his sentence may have been unclear.

[General Zod]

I'll ask the question again: why are you running OS9 when you can run OSX?
The only reason I can think of is because you've got a low spec Apple. I don't know much about iMacs, but I believe the G4 can be upgraded to OSX, and that's a couple of years old, now.

he just said he was running OSX, or can't you read? the point was fairly obvious, that windows was not the most unstable operating system that's out there, regardless of your attempts to paint it as such.

[CDS]

No. It's so you can't accidentally make changes. If you know the root password, it's easy to make changes in linux - just not accidentally. It's not in Windows.

Actually, it isn't. The point is so that you can't make changes to the system's or other people's data. If you logged on as Administrator or root you could make hash or someone else's data or system configuration intentionally as well as accidentially.

Oh please. If the administrator really wanted to get into your files he could. Thats what passwords are for. The reason why you can simply type in
su -
is so that if you have the rights to (ie. you "have root") you can simply log in as root without logging out, something that windows hasn't managed yet.

sudo is also good at this.

Type in rm -rf as root, and you'll see why it's important that you shouldn't stay logged in as root.

[Xon]

I never said it had no memory memagement. Just a shit one.

You claimed that windows didnt have a protected memory scheme. Which is blatently wrong.

One important task of an OS is to allocate parts of the memory to each process. to give a vague example, one process might use the memory addresses 0-20, while another process might use addresses 21-40. Thats the thing. If you're running Windows, it doesn't.
So, lets say process a wants to use memory address x, Oh no! It's already being used!

[CDS]

I'll ask the question again: why are you running OS9 when you can run OSX?
The only reason I can think of is because you've got a low spec Apple. I don't know much about iMacs, but I believe the G4 can be upgraded to OSX, and that's a couple of years old, now.

he just said he was running OSX, or can't you read? the point was fairly obvious, that windows was not the most unstable operating system that's out there, regardless of your attempts to paint it as such.

I can't claim it is simply because I don't have experience with every OS thats out there... and I'll be very suprised if you have, as well.

But I have heard of some *very* bad ones.