So do I. Hundreds is SMALL.
What about those who only had one system, and had to
reinstall to get it working, thus system FINALLY worked
again, therefore no reason to post for help on usenet
anymore?
NO, this has been the biggest fastest deployment in history of any piece of
software.
SP2 is VERY well conceived.
Biggest OR fastest are desireable?
How about, smallest because little needed patched, or
slowest because such a mammoth SP was extensively tested?
Now, if this were a sweeping change to the core components,
a sweeping overhaul, of OE or IE, that might be a different
story, but it wouldn't have to be HUGE to do that, a few
dozen MB at most.
Nope, I nail MS every time they screw up like the Prescott fiasco in SP2
which they new about in June in RC2 but didn't adress in RTM. That HUGE
snafu affects a microscopic fraction of users.
U nail them every time they sell a copy of windows?
That is screwing up, selling an OS that is SO insecure until
patched. It should've been recalled like a defective
product in any other industry.
What could "Hire a professional to help you out." possibly
mean then?
You suggest paying someone to help fix flaws in a product
already paid for. Shouldn't MICROSOFT be the one footing
the bill?
Usually that home users was already hopeless infected and in dire need of
professional help. While he's sitting there massively infected he's fouling
the Inet for the rest of us.
So, due to Microsoft's defective OS, the USER is fouling the
Inet? Nope, the OS is fouling up the Inet, the user is
still a victim, waiting for the OS to work as advertised.
Get a clue....all existent SW has such vulnerabilities including Linux. MS
has been the focus of the hacker freaks because of market percentage...DUH!
Actually, NO!
That is nonsense, an urban myth that it's simply due to
Microsoft's popularity in the market. The _FACT_ is that MS
never made a reasonable effort to secure it, so in addition
to minor bugs, misc. vulnerabilities present in many if not
all OS, there are also holes big enough to drive a truck
though.
Or, let's look at it another way...
Who cares WHY MS is the focus of hacker freaks, when the
bottom line is that you can choose a product that ISN'T the
target of hacker freaks and be more secure?
MS has gotten serious about security.
Wouldn't it be fairer to state that they have gotten serious
about MARKETING security buzzwords?
In the end, they only try to sell more copies of windows.
You have no hope of having a secure OS because they want the
next sale, too. You have taken the bait and are on their
hook but don't even realize it.
With SP2's firewall and MS's
Automatic Updates and a good virus scanner and a good spyware checker, one
is in good shape.
Automatic Updates are great... if you want to have a fully
working system that suddenly stops working without your
"doing" anything in particular.
Bottom line - make regular backups to removable media and
leave a working system alone, rather focusing on secure
computing practices and already-secure apps. Then you have
no need to hope, cross fingers, wave around a chicken or
roll the bones to find out if your system will KEEP working
after MS is done "fixing" it.
