Surprise Surprise, Windows fatally Flawed

[Azeron]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/26561.html

It would appear that Windows is now officially broken beyond repair. (well maybe not all hope)

Apparently the messaging system windows uses is fattally flawed. If you have ever coded a win32 application in C++ yu know what this article is talking about. Here let me explain it to yiou in an easy to understand way.

Whenever you move your mouse, open close a window, interact with windows in any way, it sends a message much like a telegram to the appropriate progem. The telegram (message) is made so that it triggers a preset reaction from the program. the program then does that action and you get some sort of result. If you have an idea on what the coee does and how it works, you could control that program using some sort of win32 compilied virus.

If you have ever worked with the win 32 api, its has to be something you think about, just becasue of the way its made, and you immediately say "Nah they would put a safegaurd into it so you couldn;t do it", becasue its one of things thats so fundemental, that you can't imagine them not protrecting against it.

Anyways, I don't think its a big problem, it would really ojnly affect a certain class of programs, mostly open source sicne you know what to trigger. Otherwise it woud just be firing blindly in the dark, sort to say.

[Mr Bean]

Eh any idiotic program that does it to begin with deservers it


And like all other bugs this will simply be fixed in the next verison

But to put it another way

Take sixty people, Put them in diffrent buildings
Have them write an OS, How many bugs do you think you'll find?

Of course MS has time on its side at some point Cnet's bug of the day is going to have to get rid of the MS section After XP was relased Gates talked very strongly that the Core would get endless refinements from that point on but fundlmentaly not shift and this creats a problem for MS haters, At somone point if the kernal is esitialy static and the only new things are mere extras then the OS will be compltelty or near totaly free of all bugs and lots of MS haters will have to sit down look at their computer and say now what?

[Pablo Sanchez]

Take sixty people, Put them in diffrent buildings
Have them write an OS, How many bugs do you think you'll find?

Since they will be working with peer review and the support of thousands of programming hobbyists, and all bugs will be fixed within hours of discovery... very few. (re. Linux)

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

A "glitch" to Microsoft is something that doesn't go wrong in their OS. The glitches will be fixed in the next version.

[Azeron]

well this isn't something thats easy to fix, and depending on how thw fix is made, tons of windows apps will need to be rewitten, including several of mine. I am just surpirsed that this bug was made like this, it would seem obvious to me to id the sender and desitination application.

completely rediculous.

[Mr Bean]

Since they will be working with peer review and the support of thousands of programming hobbyists, and all bugs will be fixed within hours of discovery... very few.

Well eeeeeeeeeeeexxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxussssseeeeeeeeeeeee me I'm sorry but I don't have the power of a ton of lifeless nerds to get them to work on my OS, Saddly Mr Gates does not hold the title of KING OF THE NERDS and all the powers and responsbilities that come with that position

You want to tell me your comparing sixty guys who worked for three years on and OS and acutal compare it to one devopled by two thousand?
Well real far there
And that OS would it be easy to use?
What no?

So much for strength in numbers

[Azeron]

look, win32 isn't perfect, but it is vastly superior in overall design to xWindows. They need to scrap the application server model and move to a more modern (and faster) approach.

[Stuart Mackey]

*snicker*

Yeah well. I am a basic level computer tech, so I work with windows systems alot and I am well aware of its flaws. The real problem, is the large installed user base makes it a prime target..well, when I say target..I mean as wide open as a whore in a 19th cetuary barracks room
Bill gates can crow all he likes about XP, but the issue is the shoddy design of all the damn 9x and NT systems out there, which will still be there for a long tome to come. As such expect continuing issues with Winblows.
{I am also getting into Linux/unix, its funny to be able say that the O/S is relible}

[Azeron]

stick with KDE 3.0, and get the mandrake distro, I think that is the best one.

Windows XP is about as stable as linux, and in some ways is more stable, especially the gui. linux guis are about 20 -30% slower on a comporable system (from personal experience).

You really can;t knock XP, I find it to be a good operating system. just as stable as everyone elses.

[Stuart Mackey]

stick with KDE 3.0, and get the mandrake distro, I think that is the best one.

Windows XP is about as stable as linux, and in some ways is more stable, especially the gui. linux guis are about 20 -30% slower on a comporable system (from personal experience).

You really can;t knock XP, I find it to be a good operating system. just as stable as everyone elses.

Yah, I am working slowly on mandrake 8.1.
XP is quite good, certainly their best. But I do take issue with its activation policies, and one or two other minor things.

[Azeron]

Well if you want to steal windows, its an issue, but not really for me.

But comparably if you weighed activiation problems with program distriibution issues with linux, then windows wins hands down.

Hey they both have thier points, up and down, just have to know whats right for you. There is not such thing as the ultimate technology

[Pablo Sanchez]

Well eeeeeeeeeeeexxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxussssseeeeeeeeeeeee me I'm sorry but I don't have the power of a ton of lifeless nerds to get them to work on my OS, Saddly Mr Gates does not hold the title of KING OF THE NERDS and all the powers and responsbilities that come with that position

You are going on a ST vs SW board to accuse people of being geeks. This amuses me to no end.

You want to tell me your comparing sixty guys who worked for three years on and OS and acutal compare it to one devopled by two thousand?
Well real far there

Hey, I'm not making the rules. Open source versus closed system--Linux versus Windows. It happened in real life, and Linux is more reliable and virus proof than Windows.

And that OS would it be easy to use?
What no?

So much for strength in numbers

You want to cite Ease of Use to support MS? Well, you'll have to get in line behind Mac, because their OS is simpler, more robust, and more resistant to viruses than Windows.

And Ease of Use is not a be all and end all argument. AOL is incredibly easy to use, but it is still reviled by almost all 'real' computer users.

[Stuart Mackey]

Well if you want to steal windows, its an issue, but not really for me.

Its not a piracy issue, its a privacy issue.

But comparably if you weighed activiation problems with program distriibution issues with linux, then windows wins hands down.

You cannot detirmine what is better on such a narrow basis.

Hey they both have thier points, up and down, just have to know whats right for you. There is not such thing as the ultimate technology

This is true

[Azeron]

As for mandatory registration, it isn't universal, new computer buyers don't have to. for upgraders and ionstallers, you don't have to present your id or give your name, just the region you are from.

to those not familiar with linux, whne you huy a windows program like starcraft, simply put it runs, on win 95 (mostly), win 98, ME ,win2k, XP.

On linux if you want a precomilied binairy, like yoiu are used to on windows, you hvae to have the compiliation for the right distro, and version, which changes every 3 months. Otherwise you have to compile the source, and allot of people who put out programs for linux, don't really put as much thought into easy compiling/installation as you might be used to with windows. really its a big reason why people don't use linux, its really a pain in the ass sometimes, sand doing things like modifing source code to get somethign to compile correctly, all comand line can make the more complicated windows installation issues seem like childs play. There is a great deal of software thats dependent on the latest version of an open source binairy. so in order to install a new program you might have to break or reinstall an older program. generally non-trivial linux programs won't compile at all if the version of linux you are using is about 1 1/2 years old to 2 years old. if they keep updating the program that is.

Here is something that is true if you are exposed to the open source universe or have made any contributions, when they mean cross-platofrm, they really mean cross-linux or cross-unix, not windows or any of the other numerous and useful OS's out there.

[Durandal]

Let's see ... cheap or free, unlimited licenses, superior stability, less virii, more secure, completely open, modest hardware requirements and support for virtually every chip architecture versus expensive, limited licenses, unstable, tons of virii, embarrassing amounts of exploits, security through obscurity and support for only one chip architecture.

Call me crazy, but I think Linux is a better solution for businesses, and so does my office's network admin.

[Azeron]

Let's see ... cheap or free, unlimited licenses, superior stability, less virii, more secure, completely open, modest hardware requirements and support for virtually every chip architecture versus expensive, limited licenses, unstable, tons of virii, embarrassing amounts of exploits, security through obscurity and support for only one chip architecture.

Call me crazy, but I think Linux is a better solution for businesses, and so does my office's network admin.

Yah you are crazy. Do you know how much money you would have to spend getting people up to speed on a new linux distro? TONS AND TONS of it. it would be flying out the window. The average office worker is a task specialist, not computer specialists, confusing them is not a good idea.

Whether a company gets virsuses, its mostly depends on the competence of the IT dept, not the users. Most virsuses can be stopped before they get into the hands of the user or do any damage. And its not like you cannot combine open source tech with windows. I run a modified apache (to id itself as IIS) on a windows 2k machine. Granted something is free, but anicllairy costs like better admins really add up. For every $1 you spend on licenses you are likely to spend about 16 on sequential expenses. So its not really such a cut and dry issue. It really depends on the people you are supporting.

whats a good idea for your netowrk admin, to most admins I have met who have just M$ certs, it would be a mind blowingly expensive option, considering the people involved.

[Stuart Mackey]

As for mandatory registration, it isn't universal, new computer buyers don't have to. for upgraders and ionstallers, you don't have to present your id or give your name, just the region you are from.

to those not familiar with linux, whne you huy a windows program like starcraft, simply put it runs, on win 95 (mostly), win 98, ME ,win2k, XP.

snip

Here is something that is true if you are exposed to the open source universe or have made any contributions, when they mean cross-platofrm, they really mean cross-linux or cross-unix, not windows or any of the other numerous and useful OS's out there.

I think you have to realise that Linux is not a gamers machine, but as a workstation and for server side stuff it beats Windows hands down. Unlike linux or Unix, windows is like a whore open for bussiness.

[Azeron]

I think you have to realise that Linux is not a gamers machine, but as a workstation and for server side stuff it beats Windows hands down. Unlike linux or Unix, windows is like a whore open for bussiness.

I think you are really getting too emotionally involved in this issue. A good Windows admin can secure a windows box just as good as a unix box.

As for using unix for servers, it has it points, but it doesn;t scale as well on a windows domain as a windows server does. Although Iam a fan of Samba and use it, it still is not nearly as robust as Widnwos controlled domain, or as fault tolerant since the CFIS protocol for windows domains is reversed engineered, not developed from a specification. (SAMBA refuses to use M$ specification becasue it would void any GPL licenses)

Management does not wabnt to buy 1 100k-200k to spend on 1 good unix admin to save 10-50k on a windows license when decent windows admins go for 50k, and you don;t jhave to worry about M$ just breaking the protocol for SAMBA implemented domains.

You really should stop demagouging thesue.

[Stuart Mackey]

I think you have to realise that Linux is not a gamers machine, but as a workstation and for server side stuff it beats Windows hands down. Unlike linux or Unix, windows is like a whore open for bussiness.

I think you are really getting too emotionally involved in this issue. A good Windows admin can secure a windows box just as good as a unix box.

WTF? where did this come from? Linux is manifestly not a gamers machine, you cannot play most of the main brand name games on it, well not easily.

As for using unix for servers, it has it points, but it doesn;t scale as well on a windows domain as a windows server does. Although Iam a fan of Samba and use it, it still is not nearly as robust as Widnwos controlled domain, or as fault tolerant since the CFIS protocol for windows domains is reversed engineered, not developed from a specification. (SAMBA refuses to use M$ specification becasue it would void any GPL licenses)

Management does not wabnt to buy 1 100k-200k to spend on 1 good unix admin to save 10-50k on a windows license when decent windows admins go for 50k, and you don;t jhave to worry about M$ just breaking the protocol for SAMBA implemented domains.

You really should stop demagouging thesue.

I dont know enough about linux/unix to rally debate it quite honestly. I can say that most of NZ's major banks/corperations do not use MS servers. But I digress I dont know enough to debate linux vs Windows.
As to demagouging this issue?? once again where the hell did this come from?

[Azeron]

I can say that most of NZ's major banks/corperations do not use MS servers

You are absolutely righjt on this subject, but its not something thats good. Right now anything new would be a major improvement on what most banks use.

If it weren;t for Non-disclousure Aggreements, i could tell you horror stories about what goes on in the tech rooms of major banks I have consuklted with. They are so desperete its insane, they are sitting on a time bomb just wwaiting to go off, and everyone is too afraid for thier jobs to do anything about it.

Oh I am not arguing that Linux really is a gaming machine, I am just pointing out that its really hard to work with compared to a windows machine. using it like a desktop really isn't a great idea. Linus for me is really command line operations.

using phrases like whores to describe operatating systems isn't considered good form. I suggest not taking technology as part of an indentity. turns employers off if they know what they are talking about. They have seen the latest greatest and best come and go too many times to fall for that.

[Stuart Mackey]

I can say that most of NZ's major banks/corperations do not use MS servers

You are absolutely righjt on this subject, but its not something thats good. Right now anything new would be a major improvement on what most banks use.

I hear its a wee gem from IBM

If it weren;t for Non-disclousure Aggreements, i could tell you horror stories about what goes on in the tech rooms of major banks I have consuklted with. They are so desperete its insane, they are sitting on a time bomb just wwaiting to go off, and everyone is too afraid for thier jobs to do anything about it.

Oh yes, Thats a nice way of saying you know but never having to justify a opinion in a post. What firm employes you and whith whom have you consulted? what qualifications do you have for this?

Oh I am not arguing that Linux really is a gaming machine, I am just pointing out that its really hard to work with compared to a windows machine. using it like a desktop really isn't a great idea. Linus for me is really command line operations.

I
n a bussiness environment? oh yes, nor argument there.

using phrases like whores to describe operatating systems isn't considered good form.

I am not interested in 'Good form' cucumber sanwitchs or cricket, I call something as I see it, and Windows security, esp on 9x O'S's is not good, it is wide open to abuse, to describe it as a whore is not too far from the truth, if a little vulger. What you think of this does not concern me.

I suggest not taking technology as part of an indentity. turns employers off if they know what they are talking about. They have seen the latest greatest and best come and go too many times to fall for that.

What turns who off what? I can say that most employers/managers I have ever known always like to have a broad understanding of systems that they are responsible for. I have always thought that its is somewhat negligent not to have this understanding, after all how can you do your job as a manager/employer if you dont understand whats going on, and understand what your people are talking aout?

[Azeron]

What turns who off what? I can say that most employers/managers I have ever known always like to have a broad understanding of systems that they are responsible for. I have always thought that its is somewhat negligent not to have this understanding, after all how can you do your job as a manager/employer if you dont understand whats going on, and understand what your people are talking aout?

If only, If only...

[Mr Bean]

Pablo Pablo there are several distinct kinds of *Nerds and the classic and some-what nerdist is the Computer nerd There are many kinds but none as worse or shall we say *less enlightend than a Linux geek


Take the classic example of Linux VS Windows
Now exluding all other things, Forgetting everything else, I don't care if the new Linux protocol gives me a 1 micro-second ping to the moon and washs dishs and does the landrey I don't care(Same thing Windows)

Take THE most fundmental issue of all, Learning how to use it
Now Compare Windows Vs Linux in that, But forget everything BUT the community that represents each side

The horror storyes I could tell... Coming from 1988 trying to learn Unix then 97 Dabbing with Linux and I made the biggest mistake of my life
I went to a Linux web-board
Arrgh the attidue for newbies....
How to describe it....
Hmm I know!
Take a Goose-stepping Neo-Commie-Nazi, Germen duegon porn enjoying fellow
Square him
And you have something vaugly more polite than the avarage linux user

It was like meeting a thosand User99's and them all being on the same board...

People call me baised towards Windows and yes its true I am, And most of the reason can be traced back to the Community that supports it

This has been a UFR provided by Mr Bean
(Un-Focused Ramble)

[Darth Wong]

Windows security and stability is a subject that is completely polluted with FUD and doubletalk on the part of M$.

Myth: Windows is just as stable as Linux.
Fact: Define "stable". Even if you disregard blue-screen crashes (which still happen with every version of Windows, including those based on the NT kernel), you must reboot a Windows machine very few weeks, if only because you cannot install Windows security updates without a reboot (hell, you can't do anything without a reboot). M$ measures stability in terms of percentage uptime, which is a ludicrous way of measuring it; if your machine reboots quickly, you can reboot every week and still have a great-looking percentage uptime. Linux users like to measure uptime in terms of continuous uptime, ie- time between reboots. Care to guess why M$ doesn't like to measure uptime this way?

Myth: Windows is just as secure as Linux. We know this because Linux has just as many security alerts as Windows, if not more.
Fact: M$ doesn't issue a security update unless there is an absolutely critical, earthshaking security hole in Windows (usually one which allows a remote attacker to take control of your system), and certainly not for freeware Windows apps. Linux security updates are issued not only for the OS itself, but also for all of the freeware open-source apps which run on Linux and are often distributed with it for free. Moreover, they are issued for all kinds of vulnerabilities both big and small, such as local exploits. Microsoft doesn't give a rat's ass about local exploits.

Myth: People only write viruses for Windows because it's the dominant platform, not because it's inherently more vulnerable.
Fact: That is one of the reasons people write viruses for Windows. The other reason is that all Windows machines are highly standardized (the ease of commercial app distribution translates to ease of virus distribution), right down to the location of individual files. Moreover, the standard Windows E-mail app has VB scripting and HTML rendering installed and enabled by default, neither of which you'll find in a typical Linux E-mail client (hell, you can't turn off HTML rendering in Outlook Express even if you try).

Myth: It is extremely difficult to get users up and running on Linux.
Fact: Most users don't give a shit what their OS is, as long as the app has a GUI that they can work with. Many users, particularly secretarial and data-entry drones, only work with very basic wordpro or database entry screens anyway. For certain types of users, Windows does make more sense. But it is a myth that dummy-users universally prefer Windows. Linux is harder to configure for a newbie, but not to use. My wife uses Linux without a problem, and she's one of those people who doesn't know the difference between HD and RAM.

Myth: It is very difficult to install apps on Linux.
Fact: Ever tried it? It's only difficult if you're hopelessly clueless and you don't know how to read a README file. 99% of open-source apps nowadays will compile with "configure ; make". Precompiled binaries for RTCW and OpenOffice work fine. And in many cases, the apps you need come bundled with the distro anyway, already pre-compiled and configured.

The best argument in favour of Windows is its installed software base, gaming, its graphics performance, and the use of bleeding-edge hardware, since vendors write drivers for Windows. For companies which have already paid all the money necessary to license it and train all of their personnel, it's pointless to switch. But if you're a startup and you want to set up a new LAN for basic office work or custom-written apps, it's not a good idea.

[TrailerParkJawa]

Myth: People only write viruses for Windows because it's the dominant platform, not because it's inherently more vulnerable.
Fact: That is one of the reasons people write viruses for Windows. The other reason is that all Windows machines are highly standardized (the ease of commercial app distribution translates to ease of virus distribution), right down to the location of individual files. Moreover, the standard Windows E-mail app has VB scripting and HTML rendering installed and enabled by default, neither of which you'll find in a typical Linux E-mail client (hell, you can't turn off HTML rendering in Outlook Express even if you try).

Right on! VB scripting and automatically running HTML in the email clients is why virus' like Nimbda did so much damage. Its a real pain in the ass to try and patch every machine in a company with all the latest microsoft updates. Ever notice if you try to uninstall OE it warns you that it may cause Outlook to not run properly?

They are not the same program even though the naming scheme is similar. I think its pretty common for anyone to assume that Outlook Express must be a cropped down version of Outlook. Anyway, for home use I like to use Opera as my email client. It gives full headers unlike Outlook 2000, its much faster, and it lets its easier to turn java on and off. Its not perfect though, it crashes more than IE on my machine at least.

Myth: It is extremely difficult to get users up and running on Linux.
Fact: Most users don't give a shit what their OS is, as long as the app has a GUI that they can work with. Many users, particularly secretarial and data-entry drones, only work with very basic wordpro or database entry screens anyway. For certain types of users, Windows does make more sense. But it is a myth that dummy-users universally prefer Windows. Linux is harder to configure for a newbie, but not to use . My wife uses Linux without a problem, and she's one of those people who doesn't know the difference between HD and RAM.

I think its important to point out that for most users there is no need to train them on how to use the basics of Windows. They already know how because they have PC's at home with Windows. This is why most people prefer it, not so much because they are dummies. Its very rare when I have to teach somone how to open a file, save a file, run word, where to find the browser, etc.

In time Linux might start making inroads into the desktop environment, but I think its going to take time.

Disclosure: Im a desktop support guy in a mainly Windows environment. We have about 300 machines we are about 50% nt 30% 2k 10% win98, and the rest are solaris or linux. Id like to learn more about Linux, but there is not much need for it at work. So, Im gonna stick it on my Thinkpad at home when I get over my current case of lazies.