Page 2 of 3
Posted: 2004-10-31 03:47pm
by Einhander Sn0m4n
Posted: 2004-10-31 03:50pm
by Vertigo1
Dammit you postcount++ whores, go spam some other thread. Your bullshit is getting real annoying.
DPDarkPrimus wrote:Einy, what about this?
Running processes:
C:\Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_03\bin\jusched.exe - Not necessary, kill
C:\Program Files\Dell\Media Experience\PCMService.exe - Kill
C:\Program Files\MusicMatch\MusicMatch Jukebox\mmtask.exe - Kill
C:\Program Files\Creative\SBAudigy2\Surround Mixer\CTSysVol.exe - Bloatware Creative software, kill!
C:\Program Files\Creative\SBAudigy2\DVDAudio\CTDVDDet.EXE - Same as above
C:\WINDOWS\system32\CTHELPER.EXE - If you don't do any audio editing, or play lots of games, then kill this one.
C:\Program Files\Winamp\winampa.exe - Kill this fucking hog pronto! There is no reason for it to be running at all.
C:\Program Files\Messenger\msmsgs.exe - Unless you use MSN Messenger, kill this bloated POS.
C:\WINDOWS\system32\CTsvcCDA.exe - Kill
C:\WINDOWS\system32\MsPMSPSv.exe - Not necessary at all. Its part of Media Player's DRM bullshit. Recommend you kill it to save memory.
C:\WINDOWS\system32\WISPTIS.EXE - Unless you use Microsoft's Journal Viewer, kill it.
O2 - BHO: Web assistant - {9ECB9560-04F9-4bbc-943D-298DDF1699E1} - C:\Program Files\Common Files\Symantec Shared\AdBlocking\NISShExt.dll - Kill. You don't need that shit anyways. Mozilla or FireFox are infinitely better, and don't eat up unecessary RAM to do it.
O3 - Toolbar: Web assistant - {0B53EAC3-8D69-4b9e-9B19-A37C9A5676A7} - C:\Program Files\Common Files\Symantec Shared\AdBlocking\NISShExt.dll - Again, kill.
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [SunJavaUpdateSched] C:\Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_05\bin\jusched.exe - Kill
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [PCMService] "C:\Program Files\Dell\Media Experience\PCMService.exe" - Kill
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [mmtask] c:\Program Files\MusicMatch\MusicMatch Jukebox\mmtask.exe - Kill
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [MMTray] C:\Program Files\MUSICMATCH\Musicmatch Jukebox\mm_tray.exe - Definitely kill!
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [URLLSTCK.exe] C:\Program Files\Norton Internet Security\UrlLstCk.exe - Kill. A properly configured HOSTS file will do more than this bloated POS anyways.
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [CTSysVol] C:\Program Files\Creative\SBAudigy2\Surround Mixer\CTSysVol.exe - Kill! Volume Control does the exact same job, with none of the bloat.
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [CTDVDDet] C:\Program Files\Creative\SBAudigy2\DVDAudio\CTDVDDet.EXE - Kill
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [CTHelper] CTHELPER.EXE - Kill
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [UpdReg] C:\WINDOWS\UpdReg.EXE - Kill
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [WinampAgent] C:\Program Files\Winamp\winampa.exe - Kill
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [QuickTime Task] "C:\Program Files\QuickTime\qttask.exe" -atboottime - Kill
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [Filetopia] C:\PROGRA~1\FILETO~1\FILETO~1.EXE /TRAY - Kill
O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [KernelFaultCheck] %systemroot%\system32\dumprep 0 -k - HAve a BSOD recently?
O4 - HKCU\..\Run: [AIM] C:\Program Files\AIM\aim.exe -cnetwait.odl - Kill
O4 - HKCU\..\Run: [MSMSGS] "C:\Program Files\Messenger\msmsgs.exe" /background - Kill
O4 - HKCU\..\Run: [SB Audigy 2 Startup Menu] /L:ENG - Kill
O4 - Global Startup: Adobe Gamma Loader.exe.lnk = C:\Program Files\Common Files\Adobe\Calibration\Adobe Gamma Loader.exe
O9 - Extra button: (no name) - {08B0E5C0-4FCB-11CF-AAA5-00401C608501} - (no file) - Kill
O9 - Extra 'Tools' menuitem: Sun Java Console - {08B0E5C0-4FCB-11CF-AAA5-00401C608501} - (no file) - Kill
O9 - Extra button: Research -
O9 - Extra button: AIM - {AC9E2541-2814-11d5-BC6D-00B0D0A1DE45} - C:\Program Files\AIM\aim.exe - Kill
O9 - Extra button: Messenger - {FB5F1910-F110-11d2-BB9E-00C04F795683} - C:\Program Files\Messenger\msmsgs.exe - Kill
O9 - Extra 'Tools' menuitem: Windows Messenger - {FB5F1910-F110-11d2-BB9E-00C04F795683} - C:\Program Files\Messenger\msmsgs.exe - Kill
Posted: 2004-10-31 03:54pm
by SirNitram
Tech^salvager wrote:darthdavid wrote:Tech^salvager wrote:
Too bad your going to have to live with it. muwhahahaha
Not on linux dingle-berry!!!
oh yeah!
I could!
You and the rest of the retards get the fuck out of this thread. This is not for your stupid 'omfg ie roxor haha linux dweebs' bullshit, and if I have to get an admin or SM to deal with this, you will not enjoy the attention. Capische?
Fucking dipshits.
Posted: 2004-10-31 04:00pm
by Dillon
Tech^salvager wrote:4. IE Deliberately Breaks Web Standards With Its Own 'De-Facto' "Standard".
6. IE is Microsoft's WEAPON OF MONOPOLY ENFORCEMENT.
Too bad your going to have to live with it. muwhahahaha
What the hell are you talking about? There are a multitude of other browsers out there that hand IE its ass in a paper bag.
Opera
Or even better,
FireFox
You only have to "live with it" if you willingly use the excuse for a web browser that IE is.
Posted: 2004-10-31 04:45pm
by Vertigo1
SirNitram wrote:You and the rest of the retards get the fuck out of this thread. This is not for your stupid 'omfg ie roxor haha linux dweebs' bullshit, and if I have to get an admin or SM to deal with this, you will not enjoy the attention. Capische?
Fucking dipshits.
Maybe the use of
this and
this will curb the problem a bit.
Posted: 2004-11-01 12:27am
by Ace Pace
Posted: 2004-11-01 12:45am
by Xon
Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:LOLOLOLOLOL!!! NO WE'RE NOT YOU GODSDAMNED FUCKTARD! FIREFOX IS GAINING EVERY DAY ON IE! W00T!
At this rate, Firefox should have a majority of the browser usage by 2020.
Ace Pace wrote:So for some reason you would run IE on Linux?
Scarily enough, there
is a version of IE that will run nativily on Linux.
But seriously, people should at the very least know how to install an anti-virus scanner (and keep it upto date!!!), update windows every month and get an spyware scanner/remover.
Or turn fucking ActiveX off.
Posted: 2004-11-01 12:48am
by Ace Pace
ggs wrote:Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:LOLOLOLOLOL!!! NO WE'RE NOT YOU GODSDAMNED FUCKTARD! FIREFOX IS GAINING EVERY DAY ON IE! W00T!
At this rate, Firefox should have a majority of the browser usage by 2020.
Only if browsers remain the same, which they will surely not.
I should be hoping that Longhorn changes stuff with its supposed new IE focus on "newer, better browsing" but I remain suspecious.
The only way Firefox takes IE, is if IE suddenly dissapears from every single old grammy home in the world.
Posted: 2004-11-01 02:12am
by Praxis
Ace Pace wrote:ggs wrote:Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:LOLOLOLOLOL!!! NO WE'RE NOT YOU GODSDAMNED FUCKTARD! FIREFOX IS GAINING EVERY DAY ON IE! W00T!
At this rate, Firefox should have a majority of the browser usage by 2020.
Only if browsers remain the same, which they will surely not.
I should be hoping that Longhorn changes stuff with its supposed new IE focus on "newer, better browsing" but I remain suspecious.
The only way Firefox takes IE, is if IE suddenly dissapears from every single old grammy home in the world.
I think IE will always have significant figures (for mommies and daddies that just use "The Internet", or the big E on their desktop), but once FireFox becomes popular outside the nerd circles, people will recommend it to all their friends and eventually it will gain large numbers. At least 30 to 50% I hope.
Posted: 2004-11-01 11:32am
by Dillon
Praxis wrote:Ace Pace wrote:ggs wrote:
At this rate, Firefox should have a majority of the browser usage by 2020.
Only if browsers remain the same, which they will surely not.
I should be hoping that Longhorn changes stuff with its supposed new IE focus on "newer, better browsing" but I remain suspecious.
The only way Firefox takes IE, is if IE suddenly dissapears from every single old grammy home in the world.
I think IE will always have significant figures (for mommies and daddies that just use "The Internet", or the big E on their desktop), but once FireFox becomes popular outside the nerd circles, people will recommend it to all their friends and eventually it will gain large numbers. At least 30 to 50% I hope.
Not if Microsoft goes out of buisness. Their prices keep rising, and hopefully, people will eventually get tired of the bullshit, and look to alternatives.
Just imagine it...
Bill Gates: Your usage of Firefox is your weakness.
Me: Your greed and impotence is yours.
Basically, it ends with me using force lightning on Bill Gates, and in this version, Darth Vader does not turn on me.
Posted: 2004-11-01 11:37am
by Praxis
Reminds me of...
http://microsith.com/fence-interview.php3
"DF: We have a new enemy - Linus Torvalds. He could destroy us. The Source is strong with him. The son of Torvalds must not become a Hacker."
"DF: Perhaps you refer to the imminent release of RedHat 6.1? Yes...I assure you we are quite safe from your friends. Everything that has transpired has done so according to my design. Your friends out there in Durham... are walking into a trap. "
Posted: 2004-11-01 06:32pm
by Xon
observer_20000 wrote:Not if Microsoft goes out of buisness. Their prices keep rising, and hopefully, people will eventually get tired of the bullshit, and look to alternatives.
Actually the prices
do not keep rising. The price for windows has stayed constant since Windows 3.11 era. Sure the server OSes cost more, but that is kinda expected.
What has happened is the total price of computers has dropped to make the OS a larger chuck of the total price.
Posted: 2004-11-01 06:39pm
by Praxis
ggs wrote:observer_20000 wrote:Not if Microsoft goes out of buisness. Their prices keep rising, and hopefully, people will eventually get tired of the bullshit, and look to alternatives.
Actually the prices
do not keep rising. The price for windows has stayed constant since Windows 3.11 era. Sure the server OSes cost more, but that is kinda expected.
What has happened is the total price of computers has dropped to make the OS a larger chuck of the total price.
Wha-at? Not true at all.
How much did Windows 3.1 cost?
How much did Windows 95 cost when it was released?
How much does Windows XP Pro cost? $300.
How much does Windows XP Home cost? $200.
See my point?
Posted: 2004-11-01 06:43pm
by Tech^salvager
Actually they have stay the same. If I remmeber corectly it was about 99usd for win 1.0 I will look it up. But they really haven't changed the price. And the Masses don't buy windows they usually buy a x86 compy with windows which ususally cost less espically if its from dell.
Posted: 2004-11-01 06:57pm
by Praxis
Tech^salvager wrote:Actually they have stay the same. If I remmeber corectly it was about 99usd for win 1.0 I will look it up. But they really haven't changed the price. And the Masses don't buy windows they usually buy a x86 compy with windows which ususally cost less espically if its from dell.
Dell...cost less...*snicker*
Seriously, Dell's are more overpriced than the low end Macs!
An $800 Dell has slightly weaker specs than an $800 eMac...and a $1199 Dell laptop has much weaker specs than a $999 iBook. It's downright sad how overpriced Dell is.
Posted: 2004-11-01 08:17pm
by Tech^salvager
Praxis wrote:Tech^salvager wrote:Actually they have stay the same. If I remmeber corectly it was about 99usd for win 1.0 I will look it up. But they really haven't changed the price. And the Masses don't buy windows they usually buy a x86 compy with windows which ususally cost less espically if its from dell.
Dell...cost less...*snicker*
Seriously, Dell's are more overpriced than the low end Macs!
An $800 Dell has slightly weaker specs than an $800 eMac...and a $1199 Dell laptop has much weaker specs than a $999 iBook. It's downright sad how overpriced Dell is.
ok yeah....? I've seen dells go as low as 499 before of course after rebates still.
Why did you bring macs into this arugment?
Posted: 2004-11-01 08:28pm
by Einhander Sn0m4n
OI!!
Praxis, Techy... Read this little gem I found
here:
Posted: 2004-11-01 08:41pm
by Tech^salvager
Not bad Einhander.
Posted: 2004-11-01 08:43pm
by Praxis
Tech^salvager wrote:Praxis wrote:Tech^salvager wrote:Actually they have stay the same. If I remmeber corectly it was about 99usd for win 1.0 I will look it up. But they really haven't changed the price. And the Masses don't buy windows they usually buy a x86 compy with windows which ususally cost less espically if its from dell.
Dell...cost less...*snicker*
Seriously, Dell's are more overpriced than the low end Macs!
An $800 Dell has slightly weaker specs than an $800 eMac...and a $1199 Dell laptop has much weaker specs than a $999 iBook. It's downright sad how overpriced Dell is.
ok yeah....? I've seen dells go as low as 499 before of course after rebates still.
Dells go as low as $499, with the components of a $299 machine! $499 gets you a CELERON, small monitor, and cheap everything with Windows. What, you don't understand that a $499 machine has weaker components than a $799 one?
Why did you bring macs into this arugment?
Because Apple seems to have a reputation for machines that are a bit overpriced (true on the low end desktops), and Dell is even worse yet doesn't have this reputation.
Posted: 2004-11-01 08:45pm
by Praxis
Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:snip
Good deal there, yes, but what does that have to do with:
1) Windows pricing
2) Dell pricing
? Since it was addressed to me and tech.
Posted: 2004-11-01 08:49pm
by Einhander Sn0m4n
Praxis wrote:Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:snip
Good deal there, yes, but what does that have to do with:
1) Windows pricing
2) Dell pricing
? Since it was addressed to me and tech.
1. You can Linux the box.
2. It's cheaper than the Dell while being far more powerful.
?. I thought yall would be interested...
Posted: 2004-11-01 09:10pm
by Tech^salvager
Praxis wrote:Tech^salvager wrote:Praxis wrote:Dell...cost less...*snicker*
Seriously, Dell's are more overpriced than the low end Macs!
An $800 Dell has slightly weaker specs than an $800 eMac...and a $1199 Dell laptop has much weaker specs than a $999 iBook. It's downright sad how overpriced Dell is.
ok yeah....? I've seen dells go as low as 499 before of course after rebates still.
Dells go as low as $499, with the components of a $299 machine! $499 gets you a CELERON, small monitor, and cheap everything with Windows. What, you don't understand that a $499 machine has weaker components than a $799 one?
Why did you bring macs into this arugment?
Because Apple seems to have a reputation for machines that are a bit overpriced (true on the low end desktops), and Dell is even worse yet doesn't have this reputation.
No Dells are priced very competive and the componets would cost more then 299. I understand that the higher price machine has better componets. What I was saying is that Dells cost less then Macs
Its because Dells markets better then Apple does thats how.
Posted: 2004-11-01 09:37pm
by Praxis
Tech^salvager wrote:
No Dells are priced very competive and the componets would cost more then 299. I understand that the higher price machine has better componets. What I was saying is that Dells cost less then Macs
Its because Dells markets better then Apple does thats how.
Then explain how a $999 iBook has better specs than a $1199 Dell.
Or how a $799 eMac has better specs than a $799 Dell.
Posted: 2004-11-01 09:54pm
by darthdavid
Tech^salvager wrote:No Dells are priced very competive and the componets would cost more then 299. I understand that the higher price machine has better componets. What I was saying is that Dells cost less then Macs
Its because Dells markets better then Apple does thats how.
Which is ofcourse why a dell with the same performance as my ~400-500 box would've cost 1+ kilobucks easily.
Posted: 2004-11-01 10:44pm
by Tech^salvager
Praxis wrote:Tech^salvager wrote:
No Dells are priced very competive and the componets would cost more then 299. I understand that the higher price machine has better componets. What I was saying is that Dells cost less then Macs
Its because Dells markets better then Apple does thats how.
Then explain how a $999 iBook has better specs than a $1199 Dell.
Or how a $799 eMac has better specs than a $799 Dell.
Their differnet tech ( architecture ) for one thing. Here can you pull up the iBook specs?