Microsoft to patch 17-year-old computer bug

[Mod 11]

Guys,g uys, guys... This thread sound like kindergarden with "My dad is stronger than yours."

We are moving away from the original topic and as predicted, it's getting personal.

Please keep it nice and objective or I will have to distribute trips to the corner, with donkey hats.

 

[mass1965]

mass, there's a difference between UNIX based, and UNIX. I've never said that Mac OS isn't UNIX based, I've said that it isn't UNIX. But I'm sure that distinction is over your head.

As for considering the Apple website a reputable source of information, go right ahead and believe everything they write. That seems to be the limit of your computer knowledge, reading Apple's own publicity. I posted the link to Wikipedia because I thought it would be the easiest way for you to learn something, but it seems I was wrong. Unless it comes from Steve Jobs, you won't believe anything that anyone says.

I guess you're a perfect example of the average Apple customer and as I posted earlier, it's pointless trying to discuss anything or explain anything to you.

Just to set the correct record:

http://www.infoworld.com/t/platforms/leopard-gets-unix-03-certification-594

OS X's commercial credentials recently got a major boost from the Open Group. Thanks to the efforts of Apple's OS boss Kevin Van Vechten and his team, Leopard has cleared all of the hurdles required to attain UNIX 03 certification. That places Apple in elite company. Only Sun, IBM and HP are certified, so OS X turns the Big Three into the Big Four.

Did Open Source check with you before certifying OSX as a Unix implimentation? Oh I guess they are wrong as well

 

[YouVantOption]

Why all the aggressivity?

Because UNIX vs. VMS was settled years ago.

 

[YouVantOption]

Guys, guys, guys... This thread sounds like kindergarden with "My dad is stronger than yours."

We are moving away from the original topic and as predicted, it's getting personal.

Please keep it nice and objective or I will have to distribute trips to the corner, with donkey hats.

Fair enough. My browser is safer than your browser.

Microsoft Security Advisory (981374)
Vulnerability in Internet Explorer Could Allow Remote Code Execution
Published: March 09, 2010

Our investigation so far has shown that Internet Explorer 8 and Internet Explorer 5.01 Service Pack 4 on Microsoft Windows 2000 Service Pack 4 are not affected, and that Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 on Microsoft Windows 2000 Service Pack 4, and Internet Explorer 6 and Internet Explorer 7 are vulnerable.

 

[Techman]

Fair enough. My browser is safer than your browser.

"Internet Explorer 8 is not affected by this vulnerability" (from the link you posted. Maybe you should learn how to read the sites you link to)

Wrong. I run IE8 in protected mode on Windows 7. IE8 runs in a sandbox and is the most secure browser available today. Anyone who is running an older version should either move to the latest release or they deserve what happens. The main reason some people still run IE6 is due to corporate websites or Intranets that require it. Once again, the problem is not Microsoft's but the designers of those sites.

 

[Mod 11]

YVO, I don't get your point, unless trying to cause a reaction...

Microsoft Security Advisory (981374)

Microsoft is investigating new, public reports of a vulnerability in Internet Explorer 6 and Internet Explorer 7. Our investigation has shown that the latest version of the browser, Internet Explorer 8, is not affected. The main impact of the vulnerability is remote code execution. This advisory contains information about which versions of Internet Explorer are vulnerable as well as workarounds and mitigations for this issue.

Citing partial info just for the fun of getting a reaction isn't something we'll accept here.

 

[Below500k]

"Once again, the problem is not Microsoft's but the designers of those sites. "

Incorrect. The problem is and always was MS. They are a thorn in web developers sides, choosing to ignore w3 standards and inventing their own "flavors" due to illegal monopolistic policies, horridly programed and legacy (until 7) rendering and security "engines". Being a web tech dev since the very first ISP in our city, I've cursed MS to a million sufferings for Explorer's non-compliance and shoddy implementations, a million times.

 

[Techman]

"Once again, the problem is not Microsoft's but the designers of those sites. "

Incorrect. The problem is and always was MS. They are a thorn in web developers sides, choosing to ignore w3 standards and inventing their own "flavors" due to illegal monopolistic policies, horridly programed and legacy (until 7) rendering and security "engines". Being a web tech dev since the very first ISP in our city, I've cursed MS to a million sufferings for Explorer's non-compliance and shoddy implementations, a million times.

Let me see...IE7 has been out for what, 4 years now? IE 8 is the standard for IE browsers and everyone should have upgraded by now if they are using that browser. Can't you stop living in the past and move into the 21st century?

Mod 11, it should be obvious by now that certain posters have no interest in carrying on a decent discussion and are only posting to try to get a response from me. It would be nice if you applied some moderation to these threads and removed the flame bait posts and trolls from the threads. I had started a thread announcing that I would refrain from tech threads but reading a number of members' posts in that thread made me reconsider. But it seems that no matter what I post, there are those who jump in who are interested in nothing but starting a flame war.

I left one board because of the idiots and assholes who were ruining it for everyone. Looking at the sports threads and now the tech threads, it seems that merb is rapidly approaching the same level.

 

[Mod 11]

Okay... I've just read the whole thread again and found very good info, buried in tons of crap, useless cracks and personal attack.

Let's do something constructive here: Everybody will go back to what they posted and judge by themselves what is relevant or not, in a sense of being of any use to the discussion. Once this is done, edit irrelevant posts and delete useless junk who just fuel the fires. No "he started first" or "i'll take it out if take out his shit" allowed.

We'll see the results in a few days and decides if the Mods need to do some pruning. I would hate to loose good info by having the thread edited by the Mods

Thanks.

 

[Techman]

I've deleted all my posts that don't deal with the main topic which is system security.

I would also like to mention that this quote from mass1965 shows his main reason for participating in tech threads:

Did you get your moneys worth or do you want more. Techman is such an easy target...lol

 

[Below500k]

At the risk of being banned, even though I do not believe that I'm personally attacking TM (who most certainly has made it a point to attack me), nor de-railing the topic...

TM, I am not provoking, mearly correcting your clear and incorrect statement that began "Once again" a precise implication that MS had nothing to do with it's security problems, that it was "the designers of those sites".

If you call a far more accurate account of IE's historical problems flame, or trolling, and take personal offense to it, then that is your issue and I feel sorry for you for feeling that you have to personally defend the worlds largest software company.

I believe I have conducted myself in this and the other thread with politeness, accuracy and respect towards your viewpoint. Please excuse me if you feel that I have not.

 

[Techman]

You don't seem to get my point. I'm not saying now and did not say earlier that Microsoft has never made mistakes or that IE was always a great and secure browser. What I'm trying to get across is that in today's IT world, the reason that there are users still using IE6 is due to necessity caused by outdated sites and Intranets that still exist today that work on nothing else but IE6. When these sites were created, they were created to work with IE6 only. As time went on and IE6 was replaced by IE7 and now by IE8, and as other browser options became a viable choice, those sites were not re-written and still require the use of a browser that is security challenged and should no longer be in use by anyone. This has also resulted in slower adoption of Vista and now Windows 7 as IE 6 will not run on those platforms.

Anyone who is required to retain IE6 for such reasons should use that browser only for accessing those sites and install a different browser, I suggest Firefox, for their everyday browsing needs.

I don't care about the history of browser security problems. You won't see me start listing all the security problems with past versions of IE or FF or Safari or any other browser that's no longer in use today. What's important to users is informing them about what they need to know to protect themselves today, not listing security flaws in browsers that should be long retired.

If you are on the Windows platform, you should update your browser to IE 8 even if you don't use IE at all. If you are running XP, you should also consider moving to Windows 7 if your hardware can handle it - which means just about any system made in the last 6 years running at 2.4 Ghz or faster with 1 GB or RAM or more - which is a much more secure operating system.

This is not personal opinion, this is fact.

 

[Merlot]

I believe I have conducted myself in this and the other thread with politeness, accuracy and respect towards your viewpoint.

Really????

Go to post 97 with the mod warning in the other thread. When members posts cause the mod to suggest deleting posts, banning members, banning the Apple v Windows debate completely...it probably wasn't politeness or "respect" that motivated that reaction.

Cheers,

Merlot

 

[Below500k]

Hi TM,

I think a lot of the misinterpretations of your posts are because of your inference, intended or not. And all I was trying to do was clarify (on-topic) those points. It is unfortunate because generally you do know what you are talking about and are presenting good relevant info. I think that if you would simply acknowledge those mistaken (intended or not) points, the topics would stay "cleaner".

I agree, IE 8 is indeed the best of MS to date.

The slow adoption rate however is of no fault but there own and not the site devs. It cost MS dearly (+/- 40% of the browser market) being so lax and un-cooperative to standards. Again being there first hand, the frustration level, even to this day (we still have to support 7) costs us dev time.

I for one have been very pleased with 8, the only thing left for MS to do is deal with some minor box model issues, it would be so nice if they just gave in and complied, especially with HTML 5 and CSS 3 coming shortly.

 

[Below500k]

Really????

Go to post 97 with the mod warning in the other thread. When the mod suggests deleting posts, banning members, banning the Apple v Windows debate completely...it probably wasn't politeness or "respect" that motivated that reaction.

Cheers,

Merlot

Yes that one was indeed a little pointy and passive agressive, but not disrespectful, nor impolite.

 

[Techman]

The slow adoption rate however is of no fault but there own and not the site devs.

I support a chain of car dealerships that are required to use IE 6 to access a number of suppliers' sites. This requirement has prevented them from upgrading their systems to Vista or Win 7. I would like you to explain to me how that is Microsoft's fault. They didn't write the code for those sites or have any input into them in any way. The companies who run those sites have refused to make changes, or to completely rebuild the sites, which would enable the use of other browsers. I have a number of other clients in similar situations.

I also have other clients, as well as our own suppliers, who run secured sites that are accessible with any browser with 128 bit encryption. These clients have been moving to Vista and Windows 7 as systems are replaced.

Companies are responsible for the web sites they run, not Microsoft. These companies refusal or inability to adapt to new technology is causing other companies to remain with Windows XP which is a very insecure operating system in today's world. It has also led to a lot of misinformation being published on the web and in print stating that downgrades to XP are due to problems with Vista when this has rarely been the case. Of course, most people who read such articles on the net or even in the newspapers tend to read the headline only which is often sensationalized and skip the story which may present a more balanced and accurate view.

When it comes to my posts here on MERB, I do my best to help people out with their questions and their problems. Few if any of them are interested in a technology history lesson, what they want is accurate information that helps them fix a problem or make a choice. Attacking anyone or any platform doesn't help anyone and only leads to them tuning out all together. When someone is looking for a way to remove some malware, it doesn't help the situation for someone to start in throwing crap around saying how Macs don't get malware, that MS is garbage, etc... that won't help the person who needs help. So yes, it pisses me off and annoys the crap out of me to see threads hijacked like that. In the future I'll try to do a better job and avoid feeding the trolls.

 

[rumpleforeskiin]

So yes, it pisses me off and annoys the crap out of me to see threads hijacked like that. In the future I'll try to do a better job and avoid feeding the trolls.

Thank you, your holiness.

 

[Techman]

Thank you, your holiness.

You're welcome, my son.

 

[Mod 11]

One done, a few to go. Thanks Techman.

 

[Merlot]

When it comes to my posts here on MERB, I do my best to help people out with their questions and their problems. Few if any of them are interested in a technology history lesson, what they want is accurate information that helps them fix a problem or make a choice. Attacking anyone or any platform doesn't help anyone and only leads to them tuning out all together. When someone is looking for a way to remove some malware, it doesn't help the situation for someone to start in throwing crap around saying how Macs don't get malware, that MS is garbage, etc... that won't help the person who needs help. So yes, it pisses me off and annoys the crap out of me to see threads hijacked like that. In the future I'll try to do a better job and avoid feeding the trolls.

Hello Techman,

Beyond letting yourself be baited by the "trolls", and maybe doing just an eentsy weentsy bit of baiting yourself...lol, anyone looking at the information fairly can see you know exactly what you are talking about. Keep the faith and remember feeding the trolls just lets them know where to go for more.

Back to our program, one thing I've noticed though about everyone's information is that the computer layman per se is being left behind. While the information being given may be generally understood by most readers of these posts the professionals here are talking as if everyone else knows what the mere mention of any specific system or application means to others in term of precise practical use. A little more "layman speak" the clarifies the functional difference of whatever subject is being addressed at the time would be helpful.

Merci/Garcias/Grazzi/Danke,

Merlot