Vista ANI Exploit Patch Plagued With More Problems

[lxskllr]

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
[
I've had Vista for much longer than you have. 3 days worth of experience is nothing. Try several months. You will then realize the errors of your mistakes. If you want to use Vista, then fine. Be my guest. However, you do realize that you are giving up a use that your computer once had; many uses in fact.

I've had Vista for several months also. I can do anything I want with it. I've given up nothing. You need to get a clue. First I would suggest something that'll help your reading comprehension. Next take some computer tech courses. That way when you come in here with an argument you'll be at least halfway armed. Of course after you successfully complete those classes there probably won't be a argument...

 

[ScrapSilicon]

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod

Originally posted by: loup garou
Ahem

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Ahem

?Windows Vista was built from the ground up to simplify how people work together, find information, reduce IT costs, improve security and enable mobile environments,? said Shanen Boettcher, general manager of Windows Client Product Management at Microsoft.

lol

DIAF

You complete avoided everything after the commas. Don't be a n00b. She described the entire use of an OS. She was talking about Vista as a whole.

Shanen Boettcher

 

[lxskllr]

Originally posted by: ScrapSilicon

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod

Originally posted by: loup garou
Ahem

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Ahem

?Windows Vista was built from the ground up to simplify how people work together, find information, reduce IT costs, improve security and enable mobile environments,? said Shanen Boettcher, general manager of Windows Client Product Management at Microsoft.

lol

DIAF

You complete avoided everything after the commas. Don't be a n00b. She described the entire use of an OS. She was talking about Vista as a whole.

Shanen Boettcher

That's kind of a homely chick

 

[Quinton McLeod]

Originally posted by: lxskllr

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
[
I've had Vista for much longer than you have. 3 days worth of experience is nothing. Try several months. You will then realize the errors of your mistakes. If you want to use Vista, then fine. Be my guest. However, you do realize that you are giving up a use that your computer once had; many uses in fact.

I've had Vista for several months also. I can do anything I want with it. I've given up nothing. You need to get a clue. First I would suggest something that'll help your reading comprehension. Next take some computer tech courses. That way when you come in here with an argument you'll be at least halfway armed. Of course after you successfully complete those classes there probably won't be a argument...

You can do anything huh?
Burn a Blue Ray or HD DVD disc in Vista. Go ahead, I'll wait.
Oh, you need the program? Here ya go:

http://www.slysoft.com/en/anydvdhd.html

Yeah. So, umm... Go ahead and take some computer tech courses. That way, when you come in here with an argument, you'll be at least halfway armed. Of course, after you successfully complete those classes, there probably won't be an argument...

 

[Nothinman]

A) No. I mean't I could care less. It goes both way, so we're both right.

No, one is correct and the other isn't. In the other thread you attacked my english so it only makes sense that you get yours right too.

B) Ya think so? Personal opinion on your part.

On most people's part, you've heard the phrase about attracting more flied with honey than vinegar,right? Well so far all of your posts are soaked in vinegar.

C) No, I meant OS 10 because that is how it is spoken. I don't normally use roman numbers in my text, so why should it be different with the title of OS 10?

Because OS X is a brand, no matter how you actually speak it.

Apple was forced to bide by the RIAA's rules and I understand that. However, I never said I was an "Apple" advocate. I said I was a *nix advocate and included OS 10. Not because it was made by Apple. I am because it's based from Unix.

MS had no more choice than Apple in those regards and OS X is based on NeXt which is questionably unix at best.

 

[fyleow]

..

 

[Sunner]

This is like Link Vista Ultimate Edition...
Ugh.

And yeah, people like you are giving Linux, and Linux users/advocates(as in sane advocacy, not this religious nutjob crap) a bad name.
I'd ask you to stop, but I suppose that's not gonna do any good?

Oh and any retard would understand what "Built from the ground up with a focus on security" means.
It simply means security was a concern from the start of development, and features were added/changed accordingly, etc, not that they rewrote the whole damn thing.
Even if they had said "The entire OS is built from scratch" anyone with a clue would realize that it's marketing junk, Win2K+the stuff it shipped with had what? 25 million lines of code? 50?
Rewriting that from scratch would be far beyond stupid, and anyone that would care to begin with would realize that and see beyond the marketing.

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod

Originally posted by: HardWarrior
Q, I'm well aware of what I'm getting into, and it has very little to do with TRUE lost freedoms. It's all about business. That may be a dirty word to some people, but business makes the world go round. As for me being imprisoned, well, be healthy dude, let ME decide what value I see in what. I can easily offer you this "freedom", without badgering, hyperbole and innuendo. Can't you do the same for me, and the rest of the folks here?

I've had Vista installed for all of 3-days now, and I'm very pleased with it. Nothing you can type is going to change this.

Here's some advice from a person who's probably been around a fair sight longer than you: seek out the company of people who share your passion for this, and feel superior to all of us poor fools who REALLY don't care about this issue as much as you.

I'm not going to switch my OS because you finally find the right combination of words to throw at me. I seriously doubt that anyone here will respond any differently.

What do you consider a TRUE freedom? If you buy a Microwave from me and then 2 months later I take it back. How would you feel? Cheated, wouldn't you? What makes Vista any different? If you bought it, it's yours. That is how everything works. According to Microsoft's EULA, you do NOT own Vista. You are merely renting it.

Your excuse is business. Does Windows XP prevent you from finishing this so called business you speak of? Would Linux or OS 10 prevent you from completing this business? Of course not. So, using "business" as an excuse is an old and tired one.

I've had Vista for much longer than you have. 3 days worth of experience is nothing. Try several months. You will then realize the errors of your mistakes. If you want to use Vista, then fine. Be my guest. However, you do realize that you are giving up a use that your computer once had; many uses in fact.

True freedom? Full ownership of myself and my labor. Being able to defend myself and my property. Do you need more?

Microsoft has no interest in taking Vista back, not from me at least. They do, however, have every right to protect their intellectual property, which I think is what you're moaning about. Also, just like most of the *NIX crowd, you seem to have a deep-seated problem with the idea of viewing personal computing as pay-for-play endeavor. If MS was composed of a bunch of socially-crippled dorks, sitting in a basement somewhere, giving you free sh*t, you'd be just fine with it. And yeah, BUSINESS isn't always pretty, but it's the way things work. You're going to HAVE to live with that, sooner or later. And NO, I have no interest in owning Vista. It's good enough for me, as a non-lawyer, non-recreational whiner to be able to "use" it under the current licensing agreement. Is that okay with you?

Hold on there, sir. Just because I've had Vista for 4-days now implies nothing, as you were obviously hoping it did. As I mentioned, I'm probably a lot older than you, and I've had a love affair with computers since I saw my first Star Trek episode in 1966. Figure the rest out for yourself, if you have enough brain power left between those bouts of misplaced moral outrage over things you'll NEVER be able to control.

 

[gsellis]

How in the heck can the OP be so dense to interpret "Built from the ground up" to mean "we wrote every line of code from scratch"?

This means they analyzed how everything was done and redesigned it and put it together. It does not mean that every technique ever used in the past was thrown away and they invented 100% new stuff. That would be like not using steel beams to build a building because they used them in the past. So instead, we tried cotton balls. Nobody has built a building using cotton balls before.

:disgust:

 

[hasu]

Most of the posts totally deviates from OP's topic. If you Google "Vista was built from the ground up" you will find many articles with this claim. In fact I was under that impression too. That might have stemmed from microsoft's descriptions "built from ground up the vista security is..." or "vista's user interface is built from ground up.." or "Yahoo messenger compatibility in vista being built from ground up.." etc.

Whether vista is built from ground up or not may have little importance (in the industry). There are several reasons for that -- some of the big (huge?) (all relative terms - please do not flame on that) companies I know of are all still using Windows 2000. Most of the people are not even aware that there is a new operating system even though they might have "read somewhere" about vista. IT managers might actually be wondering whether to upgrade to the newer OS "Windows XP, Vista or .Net". Even IT team is not too keen in going with vista or even windows xp! Software consultants don't care if it is windows 2000, xp, vista or Linux. They won't work for free though.

OP's message is still valid. I was under that impression that vista was entirely new operating system. In fact microsoft said that vista (to xp) is like windows 95 (to dos). And they spend huge amount of time and (some exaggerated) amount of money (10bilion?) to build this.

 

[hasu]

Originally posted by: gsellis
How in the heck can the OP be so dense to interpret "Built from the ground up" to mean "we wrote every line of code from scratch"?

This means they analyzed how everything was done and redesigned it and put it together. It does not mean that every technique ever used in the past was thrown away and they invented 100% new stuff. That would be like not using steel beams to build a building because they used them in the past. So instead, we tried cotton balls. Nobody has built a building using cotton balls before.

:disgust:

Very good point. But the truth may be, neither most people are very intelligent nor microsoft aim them.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: mechBgon

lol so?

LOL so you've been lampooned using your own chosen tactics

Oh, and

IM ON UR LANDROVERZ STEALIN UR WIPER BLADEZ! :evil:

/takes a bow

Thank you, thank you very much. It was fun. Look forward to doing it again.

/bows again farts at quinton

 

[Griffinhart]

It's pretty much common knowledge in the Tech world that Vista was based on the Windows 2003 codebase. The term built from the ground up is marketing speak and doesn't nescessarily mean everything was re-written from scratch. You're now just grasping at straws here. Clearly the OS was built from the start with Security, networking and .Net in mind. They kept what worked from the older OS and changed/removed what didn't. In the end the Cursor exploit was far less a risk on Vista than other versions of Windows from these changes. IE7 under Vista was not affected due to it being sandboxed, something earlier versions of Windows did not do. MS Mail was only at risk if you tried to forward or reply to the infected message, vs outlook express being at risk for just viewing the message.

To bring up useless car analogies, one can build or design a car from the ground up without having to rethink every part. It will still use componants that are available and in current cars. An electric car still uses wheels, brakes, motors and more yet they were built from the ground up to be a cleaner vehicle. It's how you assemble, enhance, replace parts that make the difference.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
No, one is correct and the other isn't. In the other thread you attacked my english so it only makes sense that you get yours right too.

They're both correct, just they mean very different things. Maybe he did mean that he could care less, in that he currently cares enough to be able to care less if given the opportunity. So maybe he cares. Some. Maybe a little.


eXtreme lolz to the maX

 

[Tegeril]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Nothinman
No, one is correct and the other isn't. In the other thread you attacked my english so it only makes sense that you get yours right too.

Quinton didn't know what he was talking about and backpedaled.


eXtreme lolz to the maX

Fixed.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Tegeril

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Nothinman
No, one is correct and the other isn't. In the other thread you attacked my english so it only makes sense that you get yours right too.

Quinton didn't know what he was talking about and backpedaled.


eXtreme lolz to the maX

Fixed.

Not really. Not even close. This makes me sad.

 

[nerp]

The whole "all information should be free" concept makes a lot of sense to people who want to steal copyrighted information and that's about it. Linux is very appealing to these people because it can be got for free. But for those of us who are actually in the content production business, know how much time and effort it takes and make a decent living doing it, the idea that all digital information should be free of all restrictions is a load of horse crap.

It's like whining about DRM. Big freaking deal. If you buy protected content, you'll have no problems. If you want to STEAL protected content, then by all means, whine away. If you hate DRM, don't buy protected content. Simple as that. And no, the DRM service DOES NOT affect non-protected content so here's a preemptive "SHUT UP."

Content producers and artists deserve to put limitations on their work because that's how capitalism works. If MS wants to craft an EULA restricting me from reverse engineering or pirating their OS, that's perfectly fine with me. I made the choice to buy Vista. Nobody forced me to do this. I can afford to buy software, music, movies and games. I get paid for my writing. I take no issue with other content producers expecting to get paid for theirs. And the fact of the matter is that I'll never be limited in what I want to do with my computer, regardless of my OS choice.

If you want to talk about proprietary, closed, restricted systems, stating that you support Apple is quite an interesting move to make in this discussion. It shows that one is more of a zealot, copy/pasting whatever fool on some advocacy forum spouts than an intelligent careful thinker. Do some actual research.

I run a slew of linux boxes, by the way. They have their place. But linux is crap for the desktop, the free alternatives to major apps (open office, gimp) blow chunks compared to actual professional tools (don't even try to tell me that they're just as good. Good enough for an adolescent writing bad poetry and putting photos on myspace maybe.)

Linux is great, but hardly an end-all solution and light years from being a solid desktop OS for everyone. If the linux community wants to beat MS and take over the desktop, they should stop worrying about advocacy and start rebuilding the os "from the ground up" to begin to come close to being usable for people who care more about their careers and accomplishing their work than whatever OS is running under the hood.

I'm sorry, but an OS shouldn't be a lifestyle choice. Using it simply because you "believe in it" is putting it in the realm of religion or philosophy. I'm sorry, but an operating system being such a source of passion is actually quite dorky. Use your computer, get your work done and shut up.

 

[JDMnAR1]

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
You will then realize the errors of your mistakes.

I really just want clarification of this phrase. I am wondering if this is really like a double negative making something positive. In other words, would an "error of my mistake" actually mean that I was correct in the first place?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: nerp
The whole "all information should be free" concept makes a lot of sense to people who want to steal copyrighted information and that's about it.

Holy moley that's a stupid statement.

Linux is very appealing to these people because it can be got for free. But for those of us who are actually in the content production business, know how much time and effort it takes and make a decent living doing it, the idea that all digital information should be free of all restrictions is a load of horse crap.

So's religion to a lot of atheists. So what?

It's like whining about DRM. Big freaking deal. If you buy protected content, you'll have no problems. If you want to STEAL protected content, then by all means, whine away. If you hate DRM, don't buy protected content. Simple as that. And no, the DRM service DOES NOT affect non-protected content so here's a preemptive "SHUT UP."

So if I buy a song from iTunes I will have no problems playing it on my OS of choice? Or on my portable media player of choice? Saying people are going to have no problems is silly.

Anyhow, the rest of the post is probably okay, except the part about Word being decent (cluestick: it's not. for all of us. maybe you though. i don't care ). It was hard to get past the pile you left at the beginning of the post.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: nerp
If you buy protected content, you'll have no problems. If you want to STEAL protected content, then by all means, whine away.

What if I buy protected content and want to play it on linux? This is something I want to do, and something that DRM makes difficult. Even playing my old DVDs takes a little jumping through hoops and is a legal grey-area on linux.

I run a slew of linux boxes, by the way. They have their place. But linux is crap for the desktop, the free alternatives to major apps (open office, gimp) blow chunks compared to actual professional tools (don't even try to tell me that they're just as good. Good enough for an adolescent writing bad poetry and putting photos on myspace maybe.)

Now this is some FUD. I have a close friend who switched from Photoshop to GIMP and is loving it. This guy does photography, graphic design, and website design for a living, by the way. Personally, at home I keep a Windows desktop around because I like to game every now and then, but for everything else I do, I prefer to use my Ubuntu laptop.

Linux is great, but hardly an end-all solution and light years from being a solid desktop OS for everyone. If the linux community wants to beat MS and take over the desktop, they should stop worrying about advocacy and start rebuilding the os "from the ground up" to begin to come close to being usable for people who care more about their careers and accomplishing their work than whatever OS is running under the hood.

Microsoft is light-years away from being a solid desktop OS for everyone. Linux is my prefered desktop, for myself, and that is good enough for me but that's kinda going off on a tangent. On another tangent, last I checked we have linux boxen with uptimes of a couple years, at best we have Microsoft boxen with uptime of a several months. I use linux where it is the best for the task, because I care about my job. For the same reason, I use Microsoft where it is the best for the task.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: ebaycj

Originally posted by: xtknight
Guess what? Every PC operating system will have that flaw. If you don't want them to, then get a new CPU with a different instruction set.

What flaw? The ANI flaw? If that's what you meant, you're completely wrong.

No. As described in the OP, the 'flaw' that new OSes are based off old ones.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: Griffinhart
It's pretty much common knowledge in the Tech world that Vista was based on the Windows 2003 codebase. The term built from the ground up is marketing speak and doesn't nescessarily mean everything was re-written from scratch. You're now just grasping at straws here. Clearly the OS was built from the start with Security, networking and .Net in mind. They kept what worked from the older OS and changed/removed what didn't. In the end the Cursor exploit was far less a risk on Vista than other versions of Windows from these changes. IE7 under Vista was not affected due to it being sandboxed, something earlier versions of Windows did not do. MS Mail was only at risk if you tried to forward or reply to the infected message, vs outlook express being at risk for just viewing the message.

To bring up useless car analogies, one can build or design a car from the ground up without having to rethink every part. It will still use componants that are available and in current cars. An electric car still uses wheels, brakes, motors and more yet they were built from the ground up to be a cleaner vehicle. It's how you assemble, enhance, replace parts that make the difference.

It's all just marketing mumbo-jumbo. Yeah, Microsoft says all these things about how everything is new and better in Vista, but that's just marketing so people feel good about paying money for something they really don't need if they already have XP or any other OS. I don't think you came blame people for believing such things. I would say MOST people believe what comes out of marketing, that is why marketing is big business. It's not about getting FACTS out. The facts have nothing to do with it when it comes to marketing.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: xtknight

Originally posted by: ebaycj

Originally posted by: xtknight
Guess what? Every PC operating system will have that flaw. If you don't want them to, then get a new CPU with a different instruction set.

What flaw? The ANI flaw? If that's what you meant, you're completely wrong.

No. As described in the OP, the 'flaw' that new OSes are based off old ones.

So if I switch to Debian on PowerPC, then it won't be base off any previous version of Debian since switching architectures is your solution to that problem.

 

[Nothinman]

They're both correct, just they mean very different things. Maybe he did mean that he could care less, in that he currently cares enough to be able to care less if given the opportunity. So maybe he cares. Some. Maybe a little.

True, but given the way the phrase is usually used that seems pretty unlikely. =)

The whole "all information should be free" concept makes a lot of sense to people who want to steal copyrighted information and that's about it. Linux is very appealing to these people because it can be got for free.

Yea, those of us that like having the source code available because it allows us to fix problems, run the software on systems the original developer didn't have or think of, learn from, etc are all really using those reason to hide our true intentions of just wanting other people to do lots of work for us for free.

But for those of us who are actually in the content production business, know how much time and effort it takes and make a decent living doing it, the idea that all digital information should be free of all restrictions is a load of horse crap.

The fact that you want me to buy your media without the ability to play it on any of the equipment that I own is horse crap.

If you buy protected content, you'll have no problems.

Right, just like Ars had no problems at all with the DRM'd content from the commercial BitTorrent service: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070227-8929.html .

If the linux community wants to beat MS and take over the desktop,

The Linux community wants no such thing. Some people within that community do, but that's their business and because of the freedom granted they can go off and try to do that all they want.

I'm sorry, but an OS shouldn't be a lifestyle choice. Using it simply because you "believe in it" is putting it in the realm of religion or philosophy. I'm sorry, but an operating system being such a source of passion is actually quite dorky. Use your computer, get your work done and shut up.

I'm sorry, but you shouldn't expect people to change their beliefs just because you call them dorks. And you're just as bad as the "information wants to be free" crowd with your whole "Information should be tightly controlled so that I can make tons of money" mantra.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: nerp
The whole "all information should be free" concept makes a lot of sense to people who want to steal copyrighted information and that's about it. Linux is very appealing to these people because it can be got for free. But for those of us who are actually in the content production business, know how much time and effort it takes and make a decent living doing it, the idea that all digital information should be free of all restrictions is a load of horse crap.

It's like whining about DRM. Big freaking deal. If you buy protected content, you'll have no problems. If you want to STEAL protected content, then by all means, whine away. If you hate DRM, don't buy protected content. Simple as that. And no, the DRM service DOES NOT affect non-protected content so here's a preemptive "SHUT UP."

Content producers and artists deserve to put limitations on their work because that's how capitalism works. If MS wants to craft an EULA restricting me from reverse engineering or pirating their OS, that's perfectly fine with me. I made the choice to buy Vista. Nobody forced me to do this. I can afford to buy software, music, movies and games. I get paid for my writing. I take no issue with other content producers expecting to get paid for theirs. And the fact of the matter is that I'll never be limited in what I want to do with my computer, regardless of my OS choice.

If you want to talk about proprietary, closed, restricted systems, stating that you support Apple is quite an interesting move to make in this discussion. It shows that one is more of a zealot, copy/pasting whatever fool on some advocacy forum spouts than an intelligent careful thinker. Do some actual research.

I run a slew of linux boxes, by the way. They have their place. But linux is crap for the desktop, the free alternatives to major apps (open office, gimp) blow chunks compared to actual professional tools (don't even try to tell me that they're just as good. Good enough for an adolescent writing bad poetry and putting photos on myspace maybe.)

Linux is great, but hardly an end-all solution and light years from being a solid desktop OS for everyone. If the linux community wants to beat MS and take over the desktop, they should stop worrying about advocacy and start rebuilding the os "from the ground up" to begin to come close to being usable for people who care more about their careers and accomplishing their work than whatever OS is running under the hood.

I'm sorry, but an OS shouldn't be a lifestyle choice. Using it simply because you "believe in it" is putting it in the realm of religion or philosophy. I'm sorry, but an operating system being such a source of passion is actually quite dorky. Use your computer, get your work done and shut up.

Such a shame.
Some decent points hidden in a load of horse crap.