From: kf_lists at secnetops.com (KF_lists)
Subject: lame bitching about xpsp2

Yeah ... take this to NTBugtraq or something...
-KF


Steffen Schumacher wrote:
> I just wanted to remind everyone, that discussions, such as this, which
> doesn't actually reveal any security related issues, could very elegantly
> be taken off list, and help reduce the noise on this list.
> 
> This Windows vs. *nix and bsd discussion doesn't belong here, if it is
> not solely about security related issues. I don't wan't to read 300 lines of
> evangelism, bitching, personal attacks and what not, in order find 10 lines
> of pseudo security related statements. Such communication should IMHO be 
> taken off list, with replies to all involved.
> 
> So for instance: Its ok to discuss the methods and technical aspects of SP2,
> but not if there is installation problems or not. This you can post to MS.
> but for the love of god! Please no more evangelism!
> 
> Off-list communication explained:
> Its quite easy too - all one have to do, when replying to a mail with mentioned
> content, is to reply to anyone in the to and cc fields, but remove the address
> of this list (its full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com), and you're all set.
> 
> /Steffen
> 
> PS. replies to this mail S H O U L D be taken off list!!!
> 
> 
> On 17.08.2004 15:34:47 +0000, ktabic wrote:
> 
>>On Mon, 2004-08-16 at 19:13 -0400, joe wrote:
>>
>>>Like I said, they were doing *nix back in 1980. Whether they bought it or
>>>created it, they had it IF they wanted to use it. I have no doubt in their
>>>ability to have integrated it with the other stuff they were doing if they
>>>had chosen to. They didn't choose to. 
>>>
>>>As for where the stack and those tools came from, I have legal access to the
>>>OS source, I can see where it comes from. You aren't as accurate as you
>>>would like to think.
>>>
>>
>>Nether are you, apparently.
>>>From the Windows XP Release notes:
>>Portions of this product are based in part on the work of the Regents of
>>the University of California, Berkeley and its contributors.
>>Of course, this doens't prove that M$ uses it in the TCP/IP stack, but
>>there is plenty of evidence that they did. Harder to prove now, since
>>Berkeley dropped the advertising copyright section.
>>But the existance of that opyright statement points to some of Berkeleys
>>stuff being in there (as well as MIT's, HP's, University of South
>>California's, University of Michigan's and others, which just shows that
>>Windows isn't really written purely by M$...
>>Of course, most, if not all, or even more, are still in Windows 2003.
>>
>>
>>>>>Err no, their goal is to maintain a profit and compete 
>>>>
>>>>With no competitors ?
>>>
>>>You are free to believe what you will. The investments MS has made in other
>>>software/computer companies though should help you understand the answer to
>>>that one.
>>>
>>
>>How will those investments help? Oh, I know they put in some money to
>>Apple once, but that was because if Apple went, there was no question of
>>M$ being a monopoly. OTOH I don't remember M$ investing in Linux. Nor do
>>I remember M$ investing in any other office suite. Sure, they invest in
>>companies writing software, but only cause it doesn't compete in thier
>>main market. IMHO the only reason M$ invest the money is to proverbally
>>fatten the company up, in case M$ wants that software latter.
>>
>>
>>>Absolutely you can buy machines without Microsoft Software. As for your
>>>second comment, there probably are cases that this is true but there are
>>>also laptops you can buy with Linux on them or no OS on them. My last 3
>>>machines I have purchased have all had no OS on them. You can even buy a
>>>desktop from Dell with Linux though I understand from my Dell friends they
>>>don't sell very well. 
>>>
>>
>>But there aren't that many companies that do that. So most people end up
>>buying MS software even if they don't want it.
>>And have you tried getting the refund for the cra^H^H^Hunwanted
>>software?
>>
>>
>>>>Cause they already don't have a choice now. They get given laptops with 
>>>>M$ on it at school. Now ...whos trolling here ?
>>>
>>>Schools are giving kids laptops now? Do you mean they are letting kids use
>>>school laptops? In that case, this is a choice of the school. This isn't MS
>>>saying it has to be that way. Buy your kid his/her own laptop, don't rely on
>>>the school and people's tax dollars. Then put whatever the heck you want on
>>>it. Alternatively, load up vmware on the laptop and run Linux or BSD in the
>>>virtual machine. 
>>>
>>
>>http://www.portables1.ngfl.gov.uk/shughes2/page2.html
>>Of course, that was several years ago. It's now been explanded to over
>>200,000 in just one county, no idea how many around the country
>>
>>>>Do not even go there. Why do they have it installed at home in the first 
>>>>place ? So Its a monopoly, and  have to just shut the fsck up, accept 
>>>>it, keep quiet and pay ? Don't think, we did it for you before with 
>>>>loads of money invested too, so that surely is a factor of trust. 
>>>>Criticism is banned. Yeah thats fair.
>>>
>>>I think it is there because MS has done the most to get the computers into
>>>people's homes. They have done the most to make machine's usable for
>>>everyone and inexpensive enough for many. The only other company that has
>>>done anything decent in these areas is Apple and that is in the former, not
>>>the latter category. Apple gave tons of machine's away in schools to hook
>>>kids into wanting them and that didn't work out so well because the costs
>>>were still a bit much for people at home. Now we have a case where the free
>>>OSes are realizing that the world isn't going to change to use their OS, so
>>>they change to be as similar as possible to the OS that is on top. I
>>>actually think this is great, it opens up the choices. However don't expect
>>>right around the corner Mr. and Mrs. Smith and their 2.3 children will be
>>>running BSD at home. It isn't there yet and at present, the interface is
>>>still chasing what MS has, not revolutionizing it. 
>>
>>Oh, nice choice. Lets go with BSD, rather than Linux. Well done, that
>>man. Of course BSD's interface isn't as good as Windows. You want to try
>>GNOME or KDE instead (and yes I know that BSD can have either or both of
>>those, but you statement, straight up, appears to compare CLI againist
>>GUI)
>>
>>>You obviously also do not understand the concept of a monopoly. A monopoly
>>>is when there is only one supplier of a good or service, there is no choice
>>>period. This does not describe situation we have. Anyway, it isn't an end to
>>>monopoly you are looking for. It is an end to MS, if SUSE (or name your fav
>>>vendor) should all of a sudden become immensely popular and own 99% of the
>>>desktops you would be singing some religious hymn about it. Not touting how
>>>bad monopolies are. 
>>
>>Incorrect. Under UK law a company has a monopoly once:
>>Market share is over 25%
>>High Barriers to entry
>>Abnormal Profits
>>Can exercise control over price or output
>>
>>Microsoft has all of those in this country
>>It has all of those in the US to. And I'm sure if you actually checked
>>US laws, you would find a similar situation. Monopoly isn't having 100%
>>market share, but control of the market.
>>Of course, given M$'s nature and Billy Boys dreams, they have to
>>maintain a monopoly, since they can't become an oligopoly (and even if
>>they had the desire, no one would want to)
>>
>>>Criticism is absolutely not banned, but if you are going to criticize,
>>>understand what you are talking about. You run around spouting half truths
>>>and incorrect information intermixed with religious quotes like it means
>>>something simply because you believe it must be so probably because you have
>>>heard it from 14 other religious zealots. 
>>>
>>
>>So he is doing exactly the same as you.
>>
>>>If the level of intelligence and capability of Windows users came up to the
>>>level of Linux users and especially of BSD users then many issues would
>>>slide into the background. Unfortunately for Linux, its user's intelligence
>>>averages are going to go down as they get more penetration of the desktops.
>>>Watch how Linux gets dumbed down for their use and as issues start to creep
>>>in more and more. 
>>>
>>
>>Ah, a traditional arguement. The users are stuipid, except I know some
>>users who as far, far more intelligent than you or I.
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
>>Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists