|
Posted by Cool_X on January 19, 2006, 4:11 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Thanks Todd, that was helpful.
But why couldn't the security people here have told me that Win9X wasn't as
vulnerable???
Or even that "Critical" updates would still be issued through June of this
year???
At least M$ says that triggering it would require more "user interaction" in
Win9X.
I find it interesting that these "security people" here can get into an
irrelevant discussion I
barely understand about Win 9X's "16-bitness" but don't even know about what
this dumbed-down
"rather technical" article from a company that can't produce quality code. It
may have been
written for idiots by a Microserf idiot, but at least it got to the point...
And anyone promoting this "Fedora" junk should realize that some people don't
want to stop
using something they know AND PAID FOR until they feel like they've gotten their
MONEY'S WORTH
out of their investment. Specifically, if you want me to use *nix so bad, then
why don't you
REIMBURSE ME for the retail cost of what I paid for Windoze and Office??? Your
delusions of
Linux "standardization and user friendliness" sicken me, especially when you
CAN'T put your
money where your mouth is, because you LOVE anything that's FREE!!!
Again, many thanks to Todd and John Hyde, and Leythos should look at why he's
alienated people
enough to be impostors, rather than pursuing a false dream of actually stopping
them, because
that happens all the time in my local NG, and nobody can stop it...
Here's to hoping I'll someday get as competent response as a poster than as a
lurker...
Cool_X
Todd H. wrote:
> For whomever is still following this patched issue:
>
> http://blogs.technet.com/msrc/archive/2006/01/13/417431.aspx
>
>
| 
XML site map