From: Mayayana on 7 May 2010 10:37
|| > The final insult
| They will continue insulting on the forums. Here's what anybody
| can expect on the forums, if going there.:
Thank you for your question and thank you
for using Microsoft products and thank you
sincerely for your rich user experience
contribution here on the newsgroups. Which
Microsoft product do you need help buying?
This post is nothing other than this post, as-is.
It may not be copied, construed, referenced,
pondered, reacted to, or reprinted without permission.
If you are not the intended recipient you must
stop reading... right this minute.
Thank you and have a good day.
Official Happiness and Rich User Experience
Council Disclaimer Statement
From: Schmidt on 7 May 2010 14:24
"Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMessage(a)swspectrum.com> schrieb im
> Otherwise, I'm not really sure what you're getting at with
> respect to your post. Microsoft is shutting down their
> NNTP newsgroups. No spin, no marketing.
> There may be replacement forums, which I
> would most certainly encourage and welcome for this group,
> but the NNTP newsgroups will be gone and not replaced.
That's again wrong and "fuddy" information -
only the (leading) news-server: 'msnews.microsoft.com'
will get closed - and that is not the same as that
what you just wrote:
"the NNTP newsgroups will be gone and not replaced"
The groups will be available on the appropriate usenet-
mirrors, hosted by the different ISPs even after the leading
server was closed - and that also does not say anything
about, *where* in the "NNTP-namespace" the community
will announce its new home ...behind either new names -
behind an established older namespace, which was not
"driven" by msnews.microsoft.com.
> � Talking about honesty, I personally would be happy, if
> � you'd stick with your own words at least (considering this
> � community dead) - and stay away from the new place,
> � we will find for ourselfs over the next days and weeks.
> I wouldn't really have any interest in the "new place"
Good to know.
> because I suspect (as is occurring here) there will be few
> questions, particularly for a site that not many seeking help
> will be aware of.
Again this "pessimistic view"...
If we publish the new home early (as a public readable
reminder in this very NewsGroup, as well as on a bunch
of different, wellknown sites which the community often
frequents, then there should not be much changes in the
expected traffic in these new, yet to be named groups.
> The level of knowledge here is amazing but the demand
> for it is waning.
Why did you mention then, that you'd be "sad ...and missing
this group" - do you mean, that *your* "demand for
knowledge is waning"?
All pure sarcasm?
From: GS on 7 May 2010 14:41
Mayayana explained on 5/7/2010 :
>>> But their report on
>>> Avast also says it doesn't block all outbound traffic.
>> I didn't think this was an issue since I know what the outbound content
> For me a big part of a firewall's function is
> controlling outbound traffic. If all you need
> is to be invisible to inbound sniffing then
> Windows firewall may even be good enough
> for that. But outbound filtering is necessary
> to control 1) unrecognized malware that might
> get onto the system 2) spyware 3) undesired
> software updates 4) junk and snooping software
> that MS or others might have running.
> I originally discovered what RPC several years
> ago when I was using AtGuard. AtGuard had an
> adblocking function. (It was way ahead of its time.)
> If it missed an ad one could drag that ad to a
> rubbish barrel icon in order to train the filter. One
> day I saw an ad for MS Visual Studio. I accidentally
> used the wrong mouse button to drag it into the
> barrel. AtGuard then popped up and asked if I
> wanted to allow DCOM out! MS was apparently going
> to rummage around my system without asking me
> as part of bringing me to their advertising page.
Thanks for sharing that fair and valuable info! The context I was
implying is that something like you describe here has to first get in
past the firewall in order to be able to create outbound content. You
raise some very good points about the need to have control over
outbound content at the PC level, and so moves me to re-examine this.
Currently, I am the only user of the computers on my network and is why
my focus (at the time) was not on unwary outbound content. In fact, I
stopped even emailing client files because email is known for it's
vulnerability to be either 'tagged', 'ambushed', or 'hijacked' en
route. I also stopped passing anything non-trivial via Live Messenger
or Remote Assistance sessions. (Clients can only download files from
their dedicated folder on my website which requires user authentication
and access code.)
I read in a recent post here how often we find stuff about something
other than what we came looking for. The info you've shared here fits
that, and so I thank you for sharing it. Fact is, the more I read here
the more I realize how little I know about the things I'm interested
in. I just hope my learning process continues for a long time yet!
From: Henning on 7 May 2010 14:57
"Bob Butler" <noway(a)nospam.ever> skrev i meddelandet
> "MM" <kylix_is(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> On Thu, 6 May 2010 12:03:45 -0700, "Bob Butler" <noway(a)nospam.ever>
>> But why?
> Because randomly confiscating private property is not the answer
>> They might be causing great financial hardship to millions of
>> coders, businesses and users, including (further) loss of employment
>> in the world's greatest recession since the 1930s.
> Choosing any vendor's product always carries the inherent risk that
> support will end. I think it was unelievably short-sighted and stupid for
> MS to drop VB given its widespread use but that was their decision. The
> recession was not caused by MS dropping VB and companies are still able to
> use VB so any financial hardship has been self-inflicted by making the
> (IMO) foolish decision to try to convert existing code.
>> I think desperate
>> times need desperate measures,
> That kind of thinking can be used to justify most anything. Truly
> desperate times can require desperate measures but having to switch to a
> new development platform hardly qualifies. Had MS needed a government
> rescue to survive the recession then I might agree that there would be
> justification for demanding concessions like you propose. If there was a
> sngle shred of evidence that releasing VB for further support and
> development would have a serious positive impact on the global recession
> then there would be reason to put a lot of public pressure on MS to take
> action but even then it'd have to be a major factor before dscussion of
> forcing the release would make sense to me.
>> The Dow lost 1000 points at one point
>> during the early hours.
> So something unexpected and as yet fully unexplained happening is cause to
> run riot and begin privatizing unrelated property? When the government
> can start randomly taking anything that some people want from others that
> have it then nobody's property is safe.
I'm sure nobody will be satisfied to hear that his properties are safe ;)
From: C. Kevin Provance on 7 May 2010 15:11
"David Kaye" <sfdavidkaye2(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:hrsenm$hsd$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
: "Larry Serflaten" <serflaten(a)usinternet.com> wrote:
: >We would still need someone to provide 'free' access. I doubt my
: >provider offers NNTP, and from the sound of things, many other
: >major players are letting go also....
: Eternal September provides free access. There are others as well. And even
: the paid ones aren't very expensive. If people are really really into these
: discussions they should be willing to fork over at least a little money to
: help support them.
FWIW, I connect through NewsHosting.com. I checked their website, and apparently they ae not free. I got my connection through them through BrightHouse (Time Warner up north) when BH dropped Usenet access. It was complimentary. I don't have any login info either, just a server I point to and boom, there it is.
I think there is a caveat, when I'm not on MSFT's server, and I'm idle over five minutes, I get a message I'm no longer connected. After I dismiss it, I'm connected again.