From: Dustin Cook on
Char Jackson <none(a)none.invalid> wrote in

> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:59:33 -0400, "David H. Lipman"
> <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:
>>From: "Char Jackson" <none(a)none.invalid>
>>| On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 07:48:20 -0400, Leythos <spam999free(a)>
>>| wrote:
>>>>In article <qluiq59i975s6scc2slnl6gf6fcc02onvr(a)>,
>>>>none(a)none.invalid says...
>>>>> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 22:14:24 -0400, "David H. Lipman"
>>>>> <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:
>>>>> >From: "Char Jackson" <none(a)none.invalid>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >| On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 18:57:13 -0400, ToolPackinMama
>>>>> >| <philnblanc(a)> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>>People I meet have many times asked me if they should shut
>>>>> >>>their Windows computers off at night, and I always say, "Yes,
>>>>> >>>keep your PC off unless you are using it."
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>>I figure if it's off, an infected computer can do less damage.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >| I agree with the advice, although I don't follow it myself. To
>>>>> >| me, the primary reason for turning a system off is to save
>>>>> >| electricity.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >Actualy the quiescent temperature is better since you dont have
>>>>> >hard drive warming exapnsion and drive cooling contraction cycles
>>>>> >adding tom the wear and tear factor
>>>>> and
>>>>> >aging of a hard disk.
>>>>> Probably true, but I have no evidence, even anecdotal evidence, to
>>>>> indicate that it makes an appreciable difference in equipment
>>>>> life. :)
>>>>If you've worked with Electronics for any length of time,
>>| Just over 45 years. The end is in sight. :)
>>>>and with
>>>>devices that have bearings, you would know, without guessing, that
>>>>turning off a device increases chances of a problem when you try and
>>>>use it again. There are also times when a device fails due to normal
>>| I know what you're saying is a commonly held belief. I used to
>>| repeat it myself, but I have to admit that looking back over the
>>| last 20-30 years that it simply isn't true. I think it used to be
>>| true in the days of vacuum tubes, but not since then.
>>| Here's someone who agrees with me, or vice versa:
>>| <
>>| ff>
>>| <
>>| g-at-night-145/>
>>| The articles are mostly about saving energy, but they touch on the
>>| power cycle issue, as well.
>>If chips are soldered down they STILL suffer from chip-creep due to
>>exapansion/contraction cycles.
> I hear you, but I just don't buy that it's a significant issue. In
> fact, I don't think it's an issue at all.

So you've never heard of chip creep either then..

Are you actually fixing stuff professionally and charging money for your
services or just some dude helping his neighbors out?

"Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...hrrngh.. nudge
this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior

From: Rex Ballard on
On Mar 23, 3:51 am, RayLopez99 <raylope...(a)> wrote:
> Seriously, has anybody seen--or even heard--of a serious virus
> (including rootkit or malware) problem in Windows when using
> commercial antivirus protection?

In just 2 days, this topic has generated over 200 articles. Most of
whom have had very unpleasant things to say about Microsoft.

You tried valiantly to defend Microsoft, numerous times. But people
felt strongly enough about this issue to respond back several times.
Some just gave up and want back to personal attacks (shame on you Mr
Kohlmann). But that turned into more personal attacks (shame on you
One Shot, One Kill).

You like to claim that 99% of the people who use computers choose
Windows. In reality, most people don't really have much of a choice.
Windows comes on the computer, whether they like it or not, they can't
get service or support if they take it off completely, and Retailers
don't ever put Linux machine on display in the retail stores, in a way
that users can actually take a properly configured Linux machine for a
"Test Drive".

Even more remarkable is that - at minimum - tens of millions of users
(assuming 1% of 1 billion) are willing to install Linux themselves.

Most people really identify with he Mac commercial, enough that
roughly 28 million people decide they would rather spend 3-5 times
more money for a Mac running OS/X than a machine that has only been
configured to run Windows.

Best Buy is now selling separate support program and replacement
program. The support program is for those who stick with Windows, and
plan to stay with it. The replacement program is only if you drop
your computer or for some other reason it needs to be replaced due to
a hardware problem.

This may be because so many people were refusing to pay for a service/
replacement program that was nullified if they installed Linux.

Furthermore, more and more people are opting not to buy new versions
of Microsoft Office. Will Office 97 or Office 2000 run on Windows 7?
Maybe they are just moving Office 2003 over. Still, there isn't
really an overwhelming case to be made for spending even $169 to
upgrade to Office 2007. Microsoft has tried to offset this by
offering free trial-versions that automatically charge your credit
card when you forget to tell them you don't want it.

Even that hasn't worked very well, so now they are offering you a free
download of Office 2010, whenever it becomes available - if you by
Office 2007 now. Furthermore, the retailers are taking as much as $40
off if you buy it in the store.

Of course, if you don't buy the 3 year replacement plan, and the 3
year service plan, for a total price of around $500, then the store
actually loses money on the sale. So does the manufacturer. In fact,
the only company that makes any money on the sale of a Laptop or
desktop system - is Microsoft.

From: FromTheRafters on
"ASCII" <me2(a)> wrote in message
> FromTheRafters wrote:
>>I was trying to calculate the yearly
>>energy expenditure versus the savings

Sweet! Thanks for the link.

From: FromTheRafters on
"RayLopez99" <raylopez88(a)> wrote in message

What are your views on JavaScript? Is it a source for malware to
infect your computer?

I thought that offering programming rights to strangers on the web might
not be such a good idea. Sure, neat things can be done, but then you're
stuck with trying to filter out the unwanted input (or disabling certain
things when it is known that the input to the interpreter comes from
untrustworthy sources). Such filtering methods and/or
compartmentalization zones can be a PITA. I was against HTML in e-mail
too, totally unnecessary and it adds bulk, and all went to make it a
better malware ingress vector.

I was recently surprised (since I'm coding an
ASP.NET web application right now) that home page did
not have any JavaScript (when I looked at the HTML source code via my

Sometimes, the page you get served depends on what browser was detected.
It would not surprise me if a noscript page got delivered to a noscript
browser, but I have no direct knowledge of this.

I was surprised--I don't like JavaScript that much because
it's server side and essentially is just eye candy for the user (but
saves a round trip to the server, so it is useful for performance I
guess)--but I was --unless I misread the source code, via View |
Source --shocked that MSFT did not have any JavaScript on their home
page. Maybe it's been turned off by so many browsers that it's
passe? Or perhaps so many different versions of it out there? At one
point I think MSFT had their own flavor of JavaScript that was not
compatible with the others.


From: Leythos on
In article <Xns9D46D2860D081HHI2948AJD832(a)>,
bughunter.dustin(a) says...
> Actually, I didn't say chip creep was an issue on soldered chips; If you
> understood the principles behind chip creep in the first place that
> wouldn't even be a question you'd consider... Chip creep only applies to
> socketed chips.

While chip creep may only apply to socketed chips, I've seen chips,
actually the pins, come unsoldered by hot/cold cycles. We had a real
issue with that in the military in at one point.

You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.
Trust yourself.
spam999free(a) (remove 999 for proper email address)