Just another reason why Macs are better

[Timelessblur]

I didn't bother with any of this. I simply downloaded the redistributable version of Windows XP SP2 (a 266 MB self-extracting compressed executable archive), keep it archived, and copy it to my Windows machine any time I feel like reinstalling Windows.

When Windows restarts after installing SP2 in this way, the first thing it does is ask you to choose an automatic update setting. Then it restarts again before going through the process you mentioned.

2 ways to do it. I just stated how it was done with automatic updates from what I seen. Did I do it that way on my computers heck no. I had the download one for the family computer and my desktop. For the laptop and a few of the people in the dorm computers I had the SP2 cd Microsoft was mailling out for free. All you had to do was fill out an online form and say ship it. (free shiping as well.)

I rather use the cd meathod over the online meathod but that is just me mainly because I dont have to deal with some flaky internet connection for a lot of people or I dont have to go online to do it. I was just telling you how it was done though automatic updates and how it work in there which clearly most people here have 0 clue how to XP works and only run on here say, even fewer have a clue about automatic updates.

 

[Tech^salvager]

I had to agree to the terms when I made an account (which unless I missed it, dont mention installing spyware) but I didn't have to manually download and install a thing on the PC for the SJ program to work. Hell, you can sign up and start using it in Safari and see what I mean. The sites they pop up can install that junk without permission which is what worries me

Sorry I can't do that in safari as seeing I don't have a mac with OSX yet. But I am getting me a mac clone. Anyways I'm not going to be signing up to try this out. I may try later but just not right now.

 

[Mord]

I wouldnt say macs are better for this reason, its just a lack of spyware for the mac.... macs are what 2% of the market? if i wroke a virus or spyware i could care less about macs, becuase I would want it to effect alot of people and everyone uses windows....

there are more macs than linux desktops and there are a few linux concept viruses about, the Mac OS is based on BSD the most secure OS in the world, it has little to do with security through obscurity.

 

[Mechcozmo]

You are familiar with the Terminal.app, no? tinker away. You can screw things up royally if you so choose, just enable root and start raising hell.

Relative to hardware, Mac software is even more tinker-happy.

Terminal, ah yes. Great fun there. Anyone know of the one command that you shouldn't run, no matter what? (And then try it to see if it works? )

 

[clayj]

maybe some people can't use the service packs. i installed SP2 and was unable to use my computer for a month. i wasn't able to save any of my info, and i ended up having to reformat the hard drive and do a clean install. people with computers (and i'm running a computer made in 2002, it has a pentium 4) that are older than one or two years cannot use these service packs, therefore, they are useless to many PC users.

Come on. The system requirements for Windows XP SP-2 are NO DIFFERENT than those for Windows XP with no service packs. There is no excuse for anyone with Windows XP not to be using SP-2 by now... even in a corporate environment, the IT staff have had sufficient time to make whatever allowances are necessary in order to use SP-2. And for those who can't download SP-2, Microsoft provides it absolutely free of charge on CD.

Sorry, but I say it again: There is no reason for ANYONE to be using Windows XP or XP SP-1 right now. Everyone should be using SP-2.

 

[rasp]

Terminal, ah yes. Great fun there. Anyone know of the one command that you shouldn't run, no matter what? (And then try it to see if it works? )

One command? hmm...

As root, watch rm, dd, and cp. I once killed a partition with cp, meant to copy a disk image to a floppy disk and instead used /dev/hda (linux). End of that server. Reinstall, restore from backup.

Moral of the story, triple check your commands at 1am, or just go to bed and work on the box rested.

 

[clayj]

Terminal, ah yes. Great fun there. Anyone know of the one command that you shouldn't run, no matter what? (And then try it to see if it works? )

"rm -r" ?

 

[Mav451]

Come on. The system requirements for Windows XP SP-2 are NO DIFFERENT than those for Windows XP with no service packs. There is no excuse for anyone with Windows XP not to be using SP-2 by now... even in a corporate environment, the IT staff have had sufficient time to make whatever allowances are necessary in order to use SP-2. And for those who can't download SP-2, Microsoft provides it absolutely free of charge on CD.

Sorry, but I say it again: There is no reason for ANYONE to be using Windows XP or XP SP-1 right now. Everyone should be using SP-2.

Yep

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/updates/sp2/cdorder/en_us/default.mspx

 

[wrldwzrd89]

Come on. The system requirements for Windows XP SP-2 are NO DIFFERENT than those for Windows XP with no service packs. There is no excuse for anyone with Windows XP not to be using SP-2 by now... even in a corporate environment, the IT staff have had sufficient time to make whatever allowances are necessary in order to use SP-2. And for those who can't download SP-2, Microsoft provides it absolutely free of charge on CD.

Sorry, but I say it again: There is no reason for ANYONE to be using Windows XP or XP SP-1 right now. Everyone should be using SP-2.

My company isn't ready for SP2 yet, in large part because they have so many internal applications that either need to be tested with SP2 or are known NOT to work properly with SP2 installed.

 

[panphage]

I like how some people are trying to defend Windows by stating (correctly) that all you have to do is A, B, C, and D, and your spyware/security problems are gone. I guess maybe they have another chance in 2007 with longhorn to make A, B, C, and D the defaults and have a somewhat more secure system out of the box. I think the point of this demo is similar to the experiment where they hooked default installs of windows, linux, and os x up to the internet to see what happened. By default windows is much less secure. It's not a case of "it should just work" but a case of "active x controls in IE are more dangerous than they are helpful so they should be off by default." I mean come on, people aren't smart! Or else why do so many (can't remember the statistic but I think it was about 70% of windows users) think they have an antivirus and firewall when they don't?

 

[Mord]

Come on. The system requirements for Windows XP SP-2 are NO DIFFERENT than those for Windows XP with no service packs. There is no excuse for anyone with Windows XP not to be using SP-2 by now... even in a corporate environment, the IT staff have had sufficient time to make whatever allowances are necessary in order to use SP-2. And for those who can't download SP-2, Microsoft provides it absolutely free of charge on CD.

Sorry, but I say it again: There is no reason for ANYONE to be using Windows XP or XP SP-1 right now. Everyone should be using SP-2.

apart from people you know like use one of the many many applications that dont work with SP2 , to get the security of SP2 all you have to do is enable the default firewall and use firefox.

 

[Timelessblur]

apart from people you know like use one of the many many applications that dont work with SP2 , to get the security of SP2 all you have to do is enable the default firewall and use firefox.

why do people keep complaing about that when we can just bring up the list of apps that broke from 10.2 to 10.3 for OSX. that the size of the upgrade. oh and by the way it more than what you stated to get the secerity of SP2 is wrong there is a lot more stuff that was done besided just that to protect the computers. Also SP2 made XP even more memory effected which already was blowing OSX out of the water.

 

[deputy_doofy]

I keep seeing this phrase used here by people who don't believe that the user/owner of a computer should have to perform any maintenance, e.g., installing updates and service packs.

You can't just buy a car and drive it around. You have to put gas in it. You have to change the oil every so often, rotate (or replace) the tires, get the alignment checked, replace the brake pads, switch out the windshield wiper blades, change the transmission fluid, etc.

Guess what, folks. Computers are like cars. You have to install necessary upgrades and perform maintenance. It is your responsibility as a car/computer owner to keep on top of this. If you don't, bad things may happen... your car's engine may seize up from lack of oil, or your computer (or, more likely, its software) may fail due to a problem in the code that's resolved by an upgrade or patch. Sure, some OSes are easier to maintain than others. But it's ludicrous to use an outdated version of an OS (in this case, Windows XP SP-1) for a test when Microsoft has been urging EVERYONE to install SP-2.

So please, stop saying "well, it should just work". Yes, I agree that it should, in an ideal world where there aren't miscreants writing viruses, worms, Trojans, spyware, and adware. But for now, everyone, and this includes Windows, Mac, and Linux users, needs to be an active computer user (not a passive one) and keep their machine up-to-date.

I don't disagree with you, but these car analogies still seem flawed.
It's more like the neighborhood my car is driving in.
The PC "car" must be be maintained, sure, but every neighborhood it's driving in seems to have criminals running through the street, chasing the car like loose dogs. People are running and diving for your door handles. They so desperately want to get in and control your . In the meantime, the guys who aren't necessarily trying to break in and steal the car are throwing rocks at your car. They at least want you to know they've been there. You've been "0wn3d" by some thug and he has made his mark on your car (the lovely dent).
With a PC, EVERY neighborhood is a "bad" neighborhood and you need that special chemical spray that they used on K.I.T.T. (Knight Rider - man, I'm effin' old) to keep people from breaking in, and to be impenetrable to bullets and other projectiles.

 

[spercharged69]

...Yeah, i'd say 90% of PC users can't reliably use their cell phone's phonebook. You're asking a lot from them, they don't want to use computers but have to, and suffer from this crap.

LOL. And Apple's userbase is much better? Wasn't the entire switch Ad Campaign commercials showing people who were too stupid to use a PC, but switched to Apple and without the confusion of a right mouse button were able to continue forwarding funny email attachments to everyone they know?

SP2 is not downloaded automatically, however, even if you're set to download all updates automatically. You're not even told where to get it unless you're deliberately looking for it.

According to reports, Microsoft had also issued an alert on its website stating that the tool that allowed users to disable the download of SP 2 on the their computer temporarily will only be available till April 12 and at the end of this grace period the Service Pack would be automatically downloaded to all users using Windows XP and Windows XP SP1.

-http://www.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/showstory.jsp?storyid=57816&s=ln

HAY GUYZ I GOT A PC WITH A WINXP INSTALL FROM DECEMBER 2000... LOL I RAN A VIRUS AND GUESS WHAT IT GOT INFECTED LOLOLOL M$ SURE DOES SUCK LOOK AT HOW EASY IT GOT INFECTED!!! LOLOLOL

Am I doing this right?

 

[angelneo]

I agreed with most poster that the test is bias as installing that 3rd party software would definitely get spywares and virus.

Actually for me, I don't really like the idea of having my computer automatically downloading patches or updates without my knowledge. Perhaps, I am paranoid but I have encounter one instance when I found out that my ISP conduct computer scan without permission on the ground that they are looking for virus. I prefer to download and execute the download or at least request my authorization before downloading or sending any information.

 

[spercharged69]

Perhaps, I am paranoid but I have encounter one instance when I found out that my ISP conduct computer scan without permission on the ground that they are looking for virus.

They conducted a port scan, they didn't look at any of your files.

You probably get portscanned randomy by any of the millions of the people on the internet all day long. Nothing to get your panties in a twist about.

 

[dsharits]

A Microsoft spokesperson said the company, based in Redmond, Wash., is "committed to making Windows the most reliable operating system available"

I love that line. Good luck, MS.

Daniel

 

[Mord]

why do people keep complaing about that when we can just bring up the list of apps that broke from 10.2 to 10.3 for OSX. that the size of the upgrade. oh and by the way it more than what you stated to get the secerity of SP2 is wrong there is a lot more stuff that was done besided just that to protect the computers. Also SP2 made XP even more memory effected which already was blowing OSX out of the water.

it's a statement not a complaint, i never claimed that mac os x was better in that respect

 

[angelneo]

They conducted a port scan, they didn't look at any of your files.

You probably get portscanned randomy by any of the millions of the people on the internet all day long. Nothing to get your panties in a twist about.

That incident was about 3-4 years ago when spywares are still relatively unheard of. Apparently, one of their customers who installed a software to prevent hacking picks up their so called "port scans". The incident make it into our local papers and the ISP publicly apologises for it.

 

[gco212]

This experiment just doesn't seem fair. You have to use the up-to-date version of a product, in my mind. I mean, it's a bit like comparing XP to OS8 or OS9. Maybe OS8 and OS9 are older than XP w/ SP1, but it's still an out-of-date OS to me.

 

[Mechcozmo]

"rm -r" ?

You forgot the sudo.... and I think there is more to it but I can't remember it right now. Essentially the command runs until it tries to erase itself.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

You forgot the sudo.... and I think there is more to it but I can't remember it right now. Essentially the command runs until it tries to erase itself.

sudo rm -rf /

It'll even erase itself on Mac OS X, since the command caches itself in memory then executes the cached copy.