The SP2 Thread - Reloaded

By Batfink
in Microsoft (Windows)

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

DrunkenMaster

Posted
Posted
No offense, but that sounds like a terrible idea.

I think he has a point. IMO it would make Windows way more secure. Not going to make it to SP2 though.

separating Windows components isn't as easy as it sounds. That would take years, and Microsoft would likely only do that if required by the government.

By all accounts, MS is taking years to develop Longhorn. MS only said separating the components was impossible since they didn't want to lose more money during the anti-trust suits. Gates has said that more money/time will be spent on Longhorn than the Appollo space program and its one of the larger Engineering programs since.

Given the time, budget and scope of Longhorn, they have what it takes.

Explorer

MicroZombies

Posted
Posted

"Hahaha....if you don't like something, why use it? If you want something changed, change it yourself."

First of all you probably just glossed over this: "I PAID for the full version of Windows 2000 & the Windows XP PRO Upgrade." Speaking of BUSINESS have you ever heard of the term

"RETURN ON INVESTMENT"?

You probably also missed: " At the core of their Technology they have something that they could really work with and turn "Good" products into really GREAT & OUTSTANDING products. But that is NOT what they do ".

Also I would "Change it myself" - but Microsoft Windows is NOT OPEN SOURCE!!!! Not only that but if you what to do serious Application Development on top of the "Windows OS" - then you HAVE to also purchase a Microsoft Development Product/Compiler (i.e. $$Visual Studio$$). Then you get some code but NEVER the Windows SOURCE CODE ( for $80 you can buy Suse Linux & get EVERYTHING INCLUDED).

Did you read the story on how Microsoft reacted when some "Windows 2000" SOURCE CODE leaked onto the net - they threw a FIT & threatened those "Dirty Hacker Criminals" - like they weren't already sitting on Billions in Cash. God forbid that some people try to Fix Windows 2000 independently - Lord knows Microsoft won't really do it themselves like they are SUPPOSED TO - they can take their "Service Packs" and SHOVE IT!!!!

"they are a CORPORATION, and their FIRST responsibility as one is to bring the MOST profit in for their shareholders...It sounds callous, but welcome to the world in the year 2004..."

-> Ah yes I almost forgot about the Business aspect: But wait isn't a "Good Company" supposed to listen to their Customers Requests & Wished?

-> THIS MEANS WAR!!!!! :angry:

Community Regular

wase4711

Posted
Posted
New info bar info. Apart from that I can't really see much.

Oh, explorer kills itself when you right click on shortcuts to exes or exes themselves.

It even kills if you shift+delete. Funny stuff

hooray, more "bugs" in the "service pack!!

hopefully,they got the "security center", and the internet "slow down" issues fixed with this release...

Grand Master

null_

Posted
Posted
Nothing special, but the latest build (2111) has a new boot screen (well sort of). No more Home or Pro and Copyright been changed.

Got screenie from some other site.

I wonder whats up with that... maybe their going to get rid of Home and Pro and just have one workstation version of Windows XP :shifty:

Mentor

mufdvr3669

Posted
Posted
First of all you probably just glossed over this: "I PAID for the full version of Windows 2000 & the Windows XP PRO Upgrade." Speaking of BUSINESS have you ever heard of the term

"RETURN ON INVESTMENT"?

So you hated Microsoft so much that after you bought Windows 2000, that you went out and bought the Win XP Upgrade. That'll show em. Doesn't sound like you really hate them, just more that you like to complain about anything. :yes:

Explorer

MicroZombies

Posted
Posted

I upgraded to Windows XP from Windows 2000 because Windows XP had the drivers that I needed to do Multi-media stuff (Particularly Audio & CD-R Burning drivers). Windows 2000 was stable but horrible with Multimedia - Microsoft addressed this in Win XP. Does anyone remember what "Windows" was like BEFORE 2000 & XP came out?

OK just for the sake of disclose - I run both Windows XP & LINUX on INTEL based hardware. I am of the opinion that as time moves forward - technology (This includes Hardware - Software & Networking) should steadily improve! I have been computing for a LONG TIME & in the beginning there was nothing you can do but by each component separately & BUILD your PC Yourself - the Driver thing was ALWAYS a big pain in the ass - but you just had to deal with it. It is now 2004 & the Technology has gotten to the point that you no longer need to deal with this - it should all be OPEN & AUTOMATIC.

I started on Wintel but now - at this point - I am getting ready to head towards APPLE - they have the right Idea if you ask me - Its all about INTEGRATION. It is really fustrasting when the Silicon Technology is Constanly Advancing - yet the Software Technology just comes out in peice-meal fashion - in long intervals - you never know wether it is worth it or not - wether it is really an upgrade or not (Again Windows ME is a perfect example is this)!

Microsoft can keep on pulling their "Dirty Tricks" based on their perceived IGNORANCE of the Community. I for one have had enough of it!!!! I don't want to keep on buying the Latest Versions of "Windows", "Office" & "Visual Studio" over & over again - with a "New Surprise" included every time!!!!

:p

Explorer

MicroZombies

Posted
Posted

I hope that you are not a Computer Science student my friend. "Windows" is a piece of SOFTWARE that comes on a disc. It is an IMPORTANT piece of software because it is an Operating System (or more precisely contains an OS KERNEL/CORE) along with "Other Software" - for example "Media Player" - also written by Microsoft that also comes on that disc but is not vital like the OS. Why is it important - because without it you can't "Boot up" the machine. The content of the disk - or the Software - is code written by Microsoft & then compiled by Microsoft - it is written specifically to work with "x86" based Hardware. The problem that we are now encountering is one of "Legacy".

I don't mind that Microsoft puts all of this software on One Disc - that is fine - most people don't build PCs - they just buy one straight from an OEM - it has an OS (Usually Windows) Pre-Installed.

Once again just because you have a machine that has the Windows OS installed on it doesn't mean that you can now only install Microsoft Applications on it - you can install other software from other corporations on that machine or even write your own Applications - if you have programming skills ;) . You don't particularly have to install Windows for that matter as other Companies make OS's (Granted Windows has more support than Linux - but APPLE & Microsoft are about equal in terms of Third Party Software Developers on their Platforms).

All I am asking Microsoft to do is separate the Core OS Kernel Component of Windows from their Applications like "Explorer" - it is OK to put it on the same disk but these components should be MODULAR - the User should have a choice in the matter. The reason WHY Microsoft is having so many problems in the realm of Security (And this is why I made my Suggestion Originally because SP2 is a major Security Overhaul - even though I give them grief Microsoft is indeed working on it) is because of this "Code Mingling". For example if you open up "Outlook Express" to write an e-mail have you noticed that the little "Messenger" icon pops up every time? What does "Messenger" have to do with "Outlook" (hint it uses that routine)? Did you know that "Messenger" has a HUGE HOLE in it that allows Hackers into your system leading to HAVOCK?!

Like you said - I can't make Microsoft listen to me - but I can only hope they do because "Windows" does have a lot of potential & can be a LOT BETTER that it is at this point (and I have been around since the DOS/Windows 3.1 days) - as a matter of fact Microsoft will probably get there soon - I hope! :whistle:

Oh About that Integration thing - I metioned Apple and then at that point started dreaming about their new POWERBOOKS. OS X is def a good example of a SOLID OS. This is because it is Unix-based & Open Source.

MAC OS X is specifically written for APPLE Hardware. Windows has to run on a WIDE RANGE of Hardware - it is challenging I never said that writing software was Easy!!!

Grand Master

+BeLGaRaTh Subscriber¹

Posted
  • Subscriber¹
Posted

Microzombies ... give up whilst you are ahead ... you are pullling people down (by that I mean insulting them) and then expecting them to agree with you ... basically they do not have to conform to your elitism ...

As you appear to be doing, we can all type big sentances and paragraphs, and maybe also highlight words in bold writing etc, does that make you better than most? I think not :(

All I can say at this time and date, is I am glad that not all computer users are not as blinkered as yourself, or the whole internet would collapse in a week.

Rising Star

OSUKid7

Posted
Posted

BeLGaRaTh - my thoughts exactly. It's still your choice to use whatever software/OS you want. In my mind, it's nice of Microsoft to let third-party developers use their OS. Did some OS zen make them do that? I don't think so. Stop complaining to us and do something about it. I agree with you on some points, but I realize computers, and technology in general, are gifts. If I want something changed badly enough, I'll find a solution. Otherwise I'll live with it how it is.

Mentor

ZTrang

Posted
Posted
Did you read the story on how Microsoft reacted when some "Windows 2000" SOURCE CODE leaked onto the net - they threw a FIT & threatened those "Dirty Hacker Criminals" - like they weren't already sitting on Billions in Cash. God forbid that some people try to Fix Windows 2000 independently - Lord knows Microsoft won't really do it themselves like they are SUPPOSED TO - they can take their "Service Packs" and SHOVE IT!!!!

Do you really think that the source code was stolen to improve Windows? No. It was stolen either (1) because somebody gets a kick out of doing things like that or (2) because somebody wants to figure out so-far unfound security holes in Windows to exploit. People don't steal things to help society. They steal things for their own sadistic interests. Also, will you please stop bolding, upper-casing, and putting quotes around everything? It makes the few good points you make really, really hard to read.

Mentor

ZTrang

Posted
Posted
I started on Wintel but now - at this point - I am getting ready to head towards APPLE - they have the right Idea if you ask me - Its all about INTEGRATION. It is really fustrasting when the Silicon Technology is Constanly Advancing - yet the Software Technology just comes out in peice-meal fashion - in long intervals - you never know wether it is worth it or not - wether it is really an upgrade or not (Again Windows ME is a perfect example is this)!

Reading many of the posts you have made on this thread, you seem to be contradicting yourself with this paragraph. You believe wholeheartedly that integration in an OS is key, and that Apple is doing well by integrating as much as possible, and yet you then slam Microsoft for putting in "unnecessary" features? You seem to have the Microsoft-bashing bug, which means that you will probably find a way to rationalize away my logic, but the integration Apple might do (and has already done) won't be any better than Microsoft's. Actually, I find Microsoft's integrated features, such as IE, to be very convenient. Maybe I don't quite understand your point, but it seems if you're looking for integration, you should be loving Microsoft, which is striving to integrate as much as possible.

Also, Windows still has some driver problems precisely because it allows compatibility with so much hardware. You can either go the Apple route, where you restrict hardware and drive up prices but make absolutely sure that everything released for Mac OS works perfectly (or almost perfectly), or you can allow more competition, lower prices, and a wider variety, and sacrifice a little bit of overall stability. Frankly, I would rather solve a few problems than buy outrageously expensive hardware with a very small selection.

Anyway, maybe you could clarify about why you think Apple integration is good, while you feel that Microsoft integration is evil.

Explorer

MicroZombies

Posted
Posted

The Code LEAKED onto the INTERNET - It Happens all the time - its nobody's fault - just read elsewhere on this web site that the latest build of SP2 leaked out even though Microsoft didn't want to release it - not a big deal really. The Internet has a life of its own - its really hard it control it because it was built with

de-centralization in mind.

ZTrang - First of all MicroSOFT makes mostly SOFTWARE for Systems with MICRO-chips in them ( Keyboards & Mouses with Microsoft's name on it is Hardware - but not Silicon - Generic Keyboards & Mice work just as well).

Secondly I am not bashing Microsoft for "putting in unnecessary features". They could make any Application Software that they want that runs ON TOP of their OPERATING SYSTEM Software. They can even PUT IT ALL ON ONE DISC. I am just of the Opinion that when you are installing a OPERATING SYSTEM you should have the OPTION to install the rest of Microsoft's Software OR NOT!!! I just want Microsoft to be more open with what is "Windows" exactly - because they have abused this in the past - they like to keep it Murky & Cloudy.

Have you personally Installed different versions of WINDOWS as well as LINUX on System Hardware with no

OS pre-installed on it - then you will know EXACTLY WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT!!!!! :D

Rising Star

OSUKid7

Posted
Posted

Wow, first I thought you were just ignorant, now you're dumb. Stop it with the formatting...that's incredibly annoying as other people have pointed out.

You must be one of those people who doesn't read the tech news before he responds. "It happens all the time"...as in code leaking? eh...no, get it right - the W2K and NT4 code was leaked - that's it - ever. Other software (from MS) has been leaked, but never before the source code.

You seem to forget that it is Microsoft's goal to make money. That is number one. Next they try to please their customers, but only after making a larger profit. Oh yeah, so they're gonna remove stuff from Windows (like, for example, WMP) that draws more customers to its products. That makes no sense in a business world. BTW, you can always remove the parts of Windows that you don't want (some even before the installation), or at least remove access to them. Heck, why not just delete the files if you're so ****ed with them? Or better yet, just don't use the programs! Jeez. I bet 10 years ago you were complaining that Windows didn't have enough features to be worth buying. Now you think there's too many.

All to vote MicroZombies off the neowin island?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.