On Sunday, February 21, 2016 at 10:25:19 AM UTC-5, Mayayana wrote:
| I found XP to be more robust than 7even or Vista

I've found that, too. Vista/7 is a brittle system, and
with so many restrictions it's not easy to fix things
that go wrong. I was trying to install IE11 recently
on Win7-64 or on a Win7-32 laptop. I couldn't get it
to work on either one! Microsoft's own browser, which
hardly runs anywhere to begin with. Only Win7/8/10
are supported. Yet it wouldn't install.

Win7-32 needed SP1, but that wouldn't install because,
it said, there were problematic customizations. ???
It's an extra laptop that's hardly ever used.

On Win7-64 IE11 kept saying it needed to download
patches first. It was ridiculous that it should *require*
post SP1 patches that are not in the installer. As it
turned out, those patches either weren't relevant or
were already installed. That didn't satisfy IE11. By the
time I was through, Win7 was unstable and a warning on
the Desktop was telling me that it was not "genuine".
(It's a Dell. Windows should have been able to see that.)
I finally ended up reinstalling from a disk image. The sheer
incompetence displayed with that IE11 fiasco is
jaw-dropping. IE10 was similar. I've never managed to
update beyond IE9 on that computer. Not that I care
a great deal. I only want it for testing webpages. But
it's inexcusable that they can't even make their own
browser software install on their own product without
problems.

I have IE 11 running on Win 7-64. Installed with no drama at all.
Overall, Win 7 has been a very stable platform for me, at least
as good as XP was. Explorer does sometimes close and reload some
pages, IDK what that's all about. It didn't seem to do this in
previous versions, but there were some other changes I made
recently too.

On 02/21/2016 10:24 PM, Don Y wrote:
How do they resolve the names of their *own* hosts?
Or, is everything hardcoded IPs?

The hosts file -- until the addresses on the LAN change.

On 02/22/2016 06:36 AM, Mayayana wrote:
You mean you use something like Wix? you're
right, there's no webpage there. It's essentially
script-based software, served to a URL request.
Unfortunately, that also makes security almost
impossible.

https://developers.arcgis.com/javascript/jssamples/#

This is one example with samples. ESRI builds their API on top of the
dojo toolkit. The samples use the online ESRI data but we would be
pulling from our own servers, tiled or dynamic map services, geocoding
services, routing services, plus additional data in JSON or KML format.

This is not ours and Seattle is using Bing rather thanESRI. but this is
the general idea:

http://web6.seattle.gov/mnm/incidentresponse.aspx


We don't do public facing web apps so security is not an issue.

On 02/21/2016 10:45 PM, Don Y wrote:
There's been a PowerToy for that for many years, now. I pick different
wallpaper for each so I just need to remember what the background was
when I was working on whatever app. "The 4 Seasons" are a common
scheme that I use: if the wallpaper had golden leaves, it was undoubtedly
"Fall". Spring, Summer, Fall... so, it will be desktop #3.

I tried that a few years ago. It was okay but had some issues iirc.

On 02/21/2016 10:50 PM, Don Y wrote:
I'm surprised MS hasn't scheduled a cron job to automatically initiate
reboots -- rather than FIX leaks! :


They've come close. The default for Server 2008 was to download and
apply patches automatically. The people in a 911 dispatch center get a
little testy when the server reboots in the middle of calls. It's easy
enough to change the setting but that means the server never gets the
updates until you absolutely have to reboot and then there can be a
hundred or so.

Windows was never meant for the five nines world.

On 02/22/2016 06:08 AM, wrote:
The trouble with patents is they are totally useless if you don't
defend them - and the cost of defence usually excededs the value of
the patent by a significant margin over the long term.

Ask SCO about that. There was a court ruling last week that suggests
their ship is going down for the last time.

Sorry to know your experience with Symantec. If you need any help with Symantec Endpoint Protection just let us know. -Chetan

On Monday, February 22, 2016 at 8:22:35 AM UTC-6, trader_4 wrote:

https://clicky.com/marketshare/global/web-browsers/

On 02/21/2016 03:29 PM, wrote:

[snip]

Up until Win98 they all still had the original DOS core hidden in
them.

They tried to hide it, but ME was just as much DOS-based as 98.

[snip]

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"When utensils were invented, the Catholic church condemned them."

On 2/22/2016 7:44 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 02/21/2016 10:24 PM, Don Y wrote:
How do they resolve the names of their *own* hosts?
Or, is everything hardcoded IPs?

The hosts file -- until the addresses on the LAN change.

OhMiGosh! Nobody can be THAT stupid -- for more than say *two* hosts??
What a maintenance nightmare...

On 2/22/2016 6:31 AM, Mayayana wrote:
| The use of these well known ports (80/53/443/137) may be innocent.

That's really not a relevant question. The man
testing had chosen all possible privacy options. It's
his computer. Microsoft had no business rigging
the system to call out.

A box sending a request on port 53 can be doing so as
part of network discovery. Or, are you claiming "call(ing)
out" should also include being able to detect the
immediate environment? Locate network shares on the
local intranet? etc.

You also don't know what the software was *trying* to do at the
time. E.g., Windows machines have long tried to "validate"
their licenses. If I build a new 7even box and DON'T let
it phone home, it will complain that the product has not been
"activated". Should MS require the user to expllicitly
perform the activation step? ("Please connect me to an
active internet connection and let me contact my activation
server as part of the terms of the license agreement
that you accepted when you installed this software. I
will not allow you to use this software until you do so")

First loads of IE always want to run off to some startup page
at microsoft. Is this convenience? (so the user sees
SOMETHING when he invokes the browser without explicitly
specifying a URL in the invocation) Or, a surreptitious
attempt by Microsoft to notice yet another instance of
it's product coming on-line?

How did we get to a point
where we presume someone breaking into a house
had innocent reasons and has done nothing wrong,
unless we actually catch them running off with a
TV set?

The adage "innocent until proven guilty". No one has
shown the content of these connection attempts. How
do we know it isn't just a "helpful attempt" to provide
information (even advertising services: sign up for
your free hotmail/mslive account, today!) to a CUSTOMER?

It's too easy to get caught up in paranoia/conspiracy
theories. I like seeing conclusive *data* before
forming an opinion.

I build "appliances". You typically can't sit down at a console
(nor telnet into my devices). How do I provide information
to the user regarding the proper operation of the device
when I may only have a tri-color LED with which to convey
that information? He can't examine my network status "on
command". He can't force me to ping some remote host so
he can see if the ICMP packets are being sourced from my
network interface and passing through *his* firewall.
He can't see if I am "seeing" his incoming connection
attempts, etc.

So, I intentionally perform some specific, observable
actions on startup to provide myself with information
about my environment AND let him observe how I am
integrating with that environment. And, use information
from those actions to decide whether my LED should glow
GREEN, YELLOW, or RED -- or blink some obscure "error
code" (that will send him running for a cheat sheet
that explains its meaning, likely causes and potential
remedies).

When a BofH starts beating his chest about my device's
"misbehavior" (it's spying on us; its trying to probe the
firewall; it's trying to access our web server; etc.)
I ask his boss how they would like me to redesign the
device -- and how much they would like to add to its
cost (to provide for those features).

The cincher is reminding the boss that this will be
yet another device that *his* IT department will then
have to maintain (instead of a turnkey appliance).

"Leave it the way it is. Bob, go back to work..."

The author of the article could have designed an
experiment where he captured some of the traffic
(to a masquerading host as well as to the actual
GENUINE hosts -- does the content differ?). Instead,
he just captured the low hanging fruit.

And, of course, there's no guarantee that the nature
of the traffic won't change when he "wakes up" and
actually starts USING the box!

Or, that the box isn't simply "being coy" -- biding
its time until it thinks no one is watching it before
sending out its data ("Hey, I've got this big disk
that I can use to REMEMBER all the stuff I want to send
home... why should I do it *now*??")

On 2/22/2016 6:08 AM, wrote:
The trouble with patents is they are totally useless if you don't
defend them - and the cost of defence usually excededs the value of
the patent by a significant margin over the long term.

Exactly. Patents only make sense to big corporations with
intimidating legal departments.

From the standpoint of a naive teenager, "patent" sounded like
something neat and impressive: "Wow! This must be a really
GOOD idea if it is patented!"

But, it's like watching sausage being made: the reality is
often very different (i.e., it's just "who got there first
and who was willing to pay the filing fees and preparation
fees")

If you want to protect something, go the trade secret route
(copyright if it makes sense -- but, you're still left
trying to locate counterfeits and argue that they are,
in fact sufficiently identical to your original work).
Trade secret, however, relies on treating your employees
well enough that they won't spill the beans. Even NDA's
only require that you treat it as you would YOUR OWN
information (so, a guy who is loose with his own personal
data can't be held to a higher standard with yours!).

Or, by far, the best approach is to simply always have
something better that keeps customers coming back to you!
Let competitors copy your functionality (which can
usually be done in less effort/time than it took you
simply because you've already done most of the thinking
for them: "What should it do, how should it work")
but you spend your time and money coming out with the
NEXT, *better* device ("Why would I want that competitor's
device? It doesn't have these other new features, capabilities,
etc.")

On 2/22/2016 8:14 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 02/21/2016 10:50 PM, Don Y wrote:
I'm surprised MS hasn't scheduled a cron job to automatically initiate
reboots -- rather than FIX leaks! :

They've come close. The default for Server 2008 was to download and apply
patches automatically.

Yeah, but the reboot(s) are to apply the patches. Imagine if they simply
forced a reboot to ensure everything was starting from a "known state"?
(Don't worry about memory leaks or data corruption; just reboot often
enough that the consequences never manifest!)

One strategy for high reliability devices is to deliberately reboot
them so they are in a known state. I.e., instead of a big loop,
just let it run one iteration and arrange for HARDWARE to kick the
reset at about the same time. Note that this differs from a watchdog
which is NEVER intended to trip -- doing so is a sign of a failure!

But, you don't do this (regular resets) to HIDE flaws but, rather,
prevent anomalous conditions from hanging your product (e.g.,
a bit getting flipped in some flag that controls your code/loop)

The people in a 911 dispatch center get a little testy
when the server reboots in the middle of calls. It's easy enough to change the
setting but that means the server never gets the updates until you absolutely
have to reboot and then there can be a hundred or so.

Yup. So, you defer the updates -- which means the problem gets bigger
as well as the cost of the eventual "fix"... which means you postpone it
still more...

Windows was never meant for the five nines world.

It's hard making things that "just (continuously) run". My automation system
is never intended to see a reboot. So, how do you introduce updates?
Major configuration changes? New hardware? You have to address these
possibilities in the initial design -- you can't "retrofit" them!

On 2/22/2016 5:52 AM, wrote:
Or, is all of this just "change for the sake of change"?

Generally I also look at a computer as a "tool" and as long as it
isn't broken it's not obsolete. Just because you can make holes with a
laser doesn't make a drill obsolete, but if and when the time comes

This is an excellent analogy! I will steal it! :

you need to drill holes that are not round, getting a laser (or a cnc
mill) might become a good idea.

Yes -- so long as you're not buying one just to keep up with the
guy down the street!

And when you start having to change bits on the drill on a regular
basis, upgrading to a good keyless chuckon the old drill can improve
it's functionality significantly without having to replace it.

And yes, there are times when a second drill is a good tool to have at
your disposal - even if it is a hand cranked one.

Almost everything that I use a computer for is "meatware limited".
A faster computer, newer OS, etc. just means the machine waits
for me, more (relatively speaking).

When I got started in this business, if you were LUCKY, you could
do TWO iterations of the edit-build-test cycle in an 8 hour shift.
The tools were SO slow and the technology so inflexible, that
you spent a lot of time waiting for the tools *or* performing
"acts of contrition" to appease the silicon gods and coerce them to
honor your prayers.

So, you learned how to better "schedule" your efforts. Anticipate
the next problem when solving the current one. I.e., don't just
install the "fix" for the current problem but also install
any stubs, etc. to let you get a headstart understanding/verifying
the behavior of the NEXT thing you'll be testing.

Instead of:
[fix first problem, build new system, test]
"Great, that works!"
[create test conditions for next step, build new system]
"Hmmm, that's a problem..."
[fix second problem, build new system, test]
"Great, that works!"
do:
[fix first problem, create test conditions for next step, build, test]
"Great, that works! But, there's a problem with..."
[fix second problem, create test conditions for next step, build, test]
"OK, that's fixed! Now there's a problem with..."

If you keep this sort of mindset, you're always a step ahead of
the guy who relies on a faster machine to just keep "throwing darts"
at his perceived problems: "Hmmm... that didn't work, let's TRY this..."
And, less needing of the latest and greatest (speed, etc.)

"Go do something else while you're waiting for the machine"
instead of:
"Buy a faster machine so you're not waiting as much"

On 2/22/2016 6:41 AM, Mayayana wrote:
| The XP option has long set sail -- I'm *sure* MS is no longer
| making XP licenses available (to non-profits or ANYONE!).

Not so. I posted a link in my first post in this thread.

Those are "previously purchased" (by retailer) licenses.
And at retail prices. We pay "a handful of dollars" for
a license. Because we get them from MS on a charitable
basis.

Of course, some benefactor could buy those licenses for
us and underwrite their cost. But, that's not something
we can count on. And, why would we want to move all those
"donated dollars" into OLD software when those dollars
can be used for other things, as well?

[MS might cut us a deal on a license; but they will be less
likely to spend those "virtual dollars" to pay for a dentist
visit for a student! The monies that a donor willing to buy
retail licenses spends could instead serve other needs]

Of course there are other issues, like the fact that
hardware and software support will be ending eventually.
But right now one can build an XP box, buy an XP disk,
and install nearly anything except Photoshop on it.

You can buy a (used) Dell box and reuse your Dell XP SP3 install
disk. Why bother buying XP? Building a box (and chasing
down the drivers, etc.)

| And, the normal update cycle of 7even is determinedly moving
| those boxes to the W10 model. At some point, one can expect
| 7even to simply *become* W10. Installing a "tuned" version
| of 7even (selectively NOT installing updates that compromise
| it) and then locking it down (as I did with XP) will leave
| those boxes as "vulnerable"/compromised as running XP in 2016
| would.

I'm running XP. I don't consider it to be
especially vulnerable. It's not even being
targetted at this point. And nearly all
security risks involve the software, not
the platform.

I avoid any problems by simply not letting the boxes talk to the
outside world. If you can gain physical access to them, then
chances are you won't try to HACK them but, rather, simply
STEAL them (and conveniently sidestep the security that is
present *in* the software).

On 2/22/2016 8:09 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 02/21/2016 10:45 PM, Don Y wrote:
There's been a PowerToy for that for many years, now. I pick different
wallpaper for each so I just need to remember what the background was
when I was working on whatever app. "The 4 Seasons" are a common
scheme that I use: if the wallpaper had golden leaves, it was undoubtedly
"Fall". Spring, Summer, Fall... so, it will be desktop #3.

I tried that a few years ago. It was okay but had some issues iirc.

Hmmm... dunno. It's never given me problems.

OTOH, I've been moving to bigger desktops so I don't have to alternate
between them as much/frequently.

Don Y writes:
On 2/22/2016 7:44 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 02/21/2016 10:24 PM, Don Y wrote:
How do they resolve the names of their *own* hosts?
Or, is everything hardcoded IPs?

The hosts file -- until the addresses on the LAN change.

OhMiGosh! Nobody can be THAT stupid -- for more than say *two* hosts??
What a maintenance nightmare...

Not at all. Set your /etc/nsswitch.conf to point your local
hosts file to the NIS server host map.

On 2/22/2016 11:53 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Don Y writes:
On 2/22/2016 7:44 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 02/21/2016 10:24 PM, Don Y wrote:
How do they resolve the names of their *own* hosts?
Or, is everything hardcoded IPs?

The hosts file -- until the addresses on the LAN change.

OhMiGosh! Nobody can be THAT stupid -- for more than say *two* hosts??
What a maintenance nightmare...

Not at all. Set your /etc/nsswitch.conf to point your local
hosts file to the NIS server host map.

They DON'T have their own DNS service -- but DO have NIS? :

(I also assumed these were Wintel boxen)

On 2/22/2016 6:09 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 03:36:16 -0800, T wrote:

On 02/20/2016 08:37 AM, Don Y wrote:
I have to build some computers for homeless teens. I'm
unsure if we'll be able to get W7 licenses (MS has tried to
dry up the availability of older OS's to push everyone
to their latest).

Hi Don,

Windows 7 Pro 64 bit OEM is still available from distributors
(D&H, Ma Labs, Tech Data, etc.)

Look for part number: FQC-08289

D&H currently has 4492 in stock

HTH,
-T
Still comes factory installed (under downgrade rights from Win10
licence) on a LOT of "corporate level" computers too - from Acer and
Lenovo for sure.

So, we have to buy RETAIL licenses at retail prices...
Or, retail computers (at retail prices)?

And, tell donors "No thanks, we can't use those scores of laptops
you want to donate cuz we'll have to BUY retail licenses for them"?

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 08:31:22 -0500, "Mayayana"
wrote:

| The use of these well known ports (80/53/443/137) may be innocent.

That's really not a relevant question. The man
testing had chosen all possible privacy options. It's
his computer. Microsoft had no business rigging
the system to call out.

How did we get to a point
where we presume someone breaking into a house
had innocent reasons and has done nothing wrong,
unless we actually catch them running off with a
TV set?

I'm suspicious he missed some settings.

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 07:25:40 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Sorry to know your experience with Symantec. If you need any help with Symantec Endpoint Protection just let us know. -Chetan
Not a chance I'll ever waste another minute on that piece of crap.
NEVER

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 09:59:33 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 02/21/2016 03:29 PM, wrote:

[snip]

Up until Win98 they all still had the original DOS core hidden in
them.

They tried to hide it, but ME was just as much DOS-based as 98.

[snip]
I never even think of ME - it was such a non-event

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 10:45:35 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 2/22/2016 6:31 AM, Mayayana wrote:
| The use of these well known ports (80/53/443/137) may be innocent.

That's really not a relevant question. The man
testing had chosen all possible privacy options. It's
his computer. Microsoft had no business rigging
the system to call out.

A box sending a request on port 53 can be doing so as
part of network discovery. Or, are you claiming "call(ing)
out" should also include being able to detect the
immediate environment? Locate network shares on the
local intranet? etc.

You also don't know what the software was *trying* to do at the
time. E.g., Windows machines have long tried to "validate"
their licenses. If I build a new 7even box and DON'T let
it phone home, it will complain that the product has not been
"activated". Should MS require the user to expllicitly
perform the activation step? ("Please connect me to an
active internet connection and let me contact my activation
server as part of the terms of the license agreement
that you accepted when you installed this software. I
will not allow you to use this software until you do so")

The software end user agreement calls for either "call home"
authentication or manual authentication over the phone. It only needs
to be done once - and after that it doesn't attempt to "call home"
unless MAJOR modifications are made to the system.

First loads of IE always want to run off to some startup page
at microsoft. Is this convenience? (so the user sees
SOMETHING when he invokes the browser without explicitly
specifying a URL in the invocation) Or, a surreptitious
attempt by Microsoft to notice yet another instance of
it's product coming on-line?

How did we get to a point
where we presume someone breaking into a house
had innocent reasons and has done nothing wrong,
unless we actually catch them running off with a
TV set?

The adage "innocent until proven guilty". No one has
shown the content of these connection attempts. How
do we know it isn't just a "helpful attempt" to provide
information (even advertising services: sign up for
your free hotmail/mslive account, today!) to a CUSTOMER?

It's too easy to get caught up in paranoia/conspiracy
theories. I like seeing conclusive *data* before
forming an opinion.

I build "appliances". You typically can't sit down at a console
(nor telnet into my devices). How do I provide information
to the user regarding the proper operation of the device
when I may only have a tri-color LED with which to convey
that information? He can't examine my network status "on
command". He can't force me to ping some remote host so
he can see if the ICMP packets are being sourced from my
network interface and passing through *his* firewall.
He can't see if I am "seeing" his incoming connection
attempts, etc.

So, I intentionally perform some specific, observable
actions on startup to provide myself with information
about my environment AND let him observe how I am
integrating with that environment. And, use information
from those actions to decide whether my LED should glow
GREEN, YELLOW, or RED -- or blink some obscure "error
code" (that will send him running for a cheat sheet
that explains its meaning, likely causes and potential
remedies).

When a BofH starts beating his chest about my device's
"misbehavior" (it's spying on us; its trying to probe the
firewall; it's trying to access our web server; etc.)
I ask his boss how they would like me to redesign the
device -- and how much they would like to add to its
cost (to provide for those features).

The cincher is reminding the boss that this will be
yet another device that *his* IT department will then
have to maintain (instead of a turnkey appliance).

"Leave it the way it is. Bob, go back to work..."

The author of the article could have designed an
experiment where he captured some of the traffic
(to a masquerading host as well as to the actual
GENUINE hosts -- does the content differ?). Instead,
he just captured the low hanging fruit.

And, of course, there's no guarantee that the nature
of the traffic won't change when he "wakes up" and
actually starts USING the box!

Or, that the box isn't simply "being coy" -- biding
its time until it thinks no one is watching it before
sending out its data ("Hey, I've got this big disk
that I can use to REMEMBER all the stuff I want to send
home... why should I do it *now*??")

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 11:35:27 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 2/22/2016 5:52 AM, wrote:
Or, is all of this just "change for the sake of change"?

Generally I also look at a computer as a "tool" and as long as it
isn't broken it's not obsolete. Just because you can make holes with a
laser doesn't make a drill obsolete, but if and when the time comes

This is an excellent analogy! I will steal it! :

No need for a criminal record over it - I've offered that one MANY
times in the past. Feel free to use it - just preface it with "a smart
fellow I met on the internet said-------"

you need to drill holes that are not round, getting a laser (or a cnc
mill) might become a good idea.

Yes -- so long as you're not buying one just to keep up with the
guy down the street!

Buying a laser or mill to make round holes that you've made for
decades with a drill is not buying tools, it's buying TOYS.

Now, if all your drills break or wear out and you expect to be making
fancy not-round holed, PERHAPS buying a mill instead of a drill might
make sense. Unless the work is too fine for a mill, buying alaser is
STILL buying a toy if you don't have a clear requirement for it.

And when you start having to change bits on the drill on a regular
basis, upgrading to a good keyless chuckon the old drill can improve
it's functionality significantly without having to replace it.

And yes, there are times when a second drill is a good tool to have at
your disposal - even if it is a hand cranked one.

Almost everything that I use a computer for is "meatware limited".
A faster computer, newer OS, etc. just means the machine waits
for me, more (relatively speaking).

When I got started in this business, if you were LUCKY, you could
do TWO iterations of the edit-build-test cycle in an 8 hour shift.
The tools were SO slow and the technology so inflexible, that
you spent a lot of time waiting for the tools *or* performing
"acts of contrition" to appease the silicon gods and coerce them to
honor your prayers.

So, you learned how to better "schedule" your efforts. Anticipate
the next problem when solving the current one. I.e., don't just
install the "fix" for the current problem but also install
any stubs, etc. to let you get a headstart understanding/verifying
the behavior of the NEXT thing you'll be testing.

Instead of:
[fix first problem, build new system, test]
"Great, that works!"
[create test conditions for next step, build new system]
"Hmmm, that's a problem..."
[fix second problem, build new system, test]
"Great, that works!"
do:
[fix first problem, create test conditions for next step, build, test]
"Great, that works! But, there's a problem with..."
[fix second problem, create test conditions for next step, build, test]
"OK, that's fixed! Now there's a problem with..."

If you keep this sort of mindset, you're always a step ahead of
the guy who relies on a faster machine to just keep "throwing darts"
at his perceived problems: "Hmmm... that didn't work, let's TRY this..."
And, less needing of the latest and greatest (speed, etc.)

"Go do something else while you're waiting for the machine"
instead of:
"Buy a faster machine so you're not waiting as much"
A faster machine just allows you to make more mistakes in the same
period of time.

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 12:07:48 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 2/22/2016 6:09 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 03:36:16 -0800, T wrote:

On 02/20/2016 08:37 AM, Don Y wrote:
I have to build some computers for homeless teens. I'm
unsure if we'll be able to get W7 licenses (MS has tried to
dry up the availability of older OS's to push everyone
to their latest).

Hi Don,

Windows 7 Pro 64 bit OEM is still available from distributors
(D&H, Ma Labs, Tech Data, etc.)

Look for part number: FQC-08289

D&H currently has 4492 in stock

HTH,
-T
Still comes factory installed (under downgrade rights from Win10
licence) on a LOT of "corporate level" computers too - from Acer and
Lenovo for sure.

So, we have to buy RETAIL licenses at retail prices...
Or, retail computers (at retail prices)?

And, tell donors "No thanks, we can't use those scores of laptops
you want to donate cuz we'll have to BUY retail licenses for them"?

Qualify as a "refurbisher" and you can get xp for refurbished machine
licences. Cheap too.

On 2/22/2016 2:44 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 09:59:33 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 02/21/2016 03:29 PM, wrote:

[snip]

Up until Win98 they all still had the original DOS core hidden in
them.

They tried to hide it, but ME was just as much DOS-based as 98.

[snip]
I never even think of ME - it was such a non-event

How can you forget that key part of the Windows triad:

Windows Windows Windows
CE ME NT

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 15:53:15 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 2/22/2016 2:44 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 09:59:33 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 02/21/2016 03:29 PM, wrote:

[snip]

Up until Win98 they all still had the original DOS core hidden in
them.

They tried to hide it, but ME was just as much DOS-based as 98.

[snip]
I never even think of ME - it was such a non-event

How can you forget that key part of the Windows triad:

Windows Windows Windows
CE ME NT
NT actually worked!!!

On 02/22/2016 12:05 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 2/22/2016 11:53 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Don Y writes:
On 2/22/2016 7:44 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 02/21/2016 10:24 PM, Don Y wrote:
How do they resolve the names of their *own* hosts?
Or, is everything hardcoded IPs?

The hosts file -- until the addresses on the LAN change.

OhMiGosh! Nobody can be THAT stupid -- for more than say *two* hosts??
What a maintenance nightmare...

Not at all. Set your /etc/nsswitch.conf to point your local
hosts file to the NIS server host map.

They DON'T have their own DNS service -- but DO have NIS? :

(I also assumed these were Wintel boxen)


What I referred to were Windows boxes.

| You mean you use something like Wix? you're
| right, there's no webpage there. It's essentially
| script-based software, served to a URL request.
| Unfortunately, that also makes security almost
| impossible.
|
| This is not ours and Seattle is using Bing rather thanESRI. but this is
| the general idea:
|
| http://web6.seattle.gov/mnm/incidentresponse.aspx
|
|
| We don't do public facing web apps so security is not an issue.
|

That's not Wix. I don't have a Wix link offhand, but
it's actually even further removed from being a webpage
than what you linked. A typical Wix page is nearly all
script. The script embeds obfuscated strings that
detail specs for the webpage. The webpage content
is loaded from the Wix server. So without script there's
actually no webpage there. And with script you have to
trust that whatever eventually loads will be safe. Looking
at the pre-script source code is of no value.

But the security problem is similar with the page you
linked. First, it's completely broken without script. (I
see the left-side menu but no content at all.) Second,
the script is coming from a number of locations. On
many sites those scripts will also come from advertisers
and trackers. That means not only trusting script but also
trusting the script of a half dozen remote URLs, and
then trusting the script from the dozen URLs they link to.
It's an orgy of software being loaded willy nilly into the
browser, just to display a webpage. Meanwhile, one of
the biggest threats these days is malware installed
through script used in ads bought through big ad servers
anonymously. Browsing simply cannot be made safe with
script enabled, yet the script mania fad is breaking the
Internet for anyone who disables it. All unnecessarily.

So the very idea of using big libraries to create pages
that break without script ends up forcing people to be
unsafe online. It used to be a matter of common sense
and common courtesy not to use script unless absolutely
necessary. Dynamic functionality by anyone other than
amateurs was done with server-side PHP or ASP. Now
it's all being done clientside, often with a dozen or more
javascript files, and a total page load of over 1 MB in
some cases. I don't mind enabling script at a site like
Netflix. They do a good job with it and it really does
add a lot of useful functionality. But very few sites are
like that. Most have no business using any script at all.

Increasingly it's also being used to force ads and
tracking. For instance, some of the Microsoft pages
are now blank gray without script. When the page
loads, script removes the gray block. The page is
fine if I read it without style, because it never needed
script in the first place! But Microsoft doesn't want
you to be able to read their pages unless you let
them rummage around on your system, so the
deliberately block your access if you disable script.
And it's not just MS. That trick is becoming common.

[snip]

I never even think of ME - it was such a non-event


For the most part, yes. It was disappointing if you were expecting a big
improvement over 98.

One important little thing: it contained a driver for USB storage
devices. Yes, the driver could be downloaded for 98, but it is
convenient to not have to download it (and remember to download it).

ME also came on a bootable CD.

It was still the last of the DOS-based Windows versions.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

Jesus loves you all, and can't wait to control you like a small
household pet

On 02/22/2016 04:53 PM, Don Y wrote:

[snip]

How can you forget that key part of the Windows triad:

Windows Windows Windows
CE ME NT


HELP! It crashed, and it won't boot up.

On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 13:45:08 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:


[snip]

I never even think of ME - it was such a non-event


For the most part, yes. It was disappointing if you were expecting a big
improvement over 98.

One important little thing: it contained a driver for USB storage
devices. Yes, the driver could be downloaded for 98, but it is
convenient to not have to download it (and remember to download it).

ME also came on a bootable CD.

It was still the last of the DOS-based Windows versions.
Came with 98 SE if I remember correctly.

On 02/23/2016 06:33 PM, wrote:

[snip]

ME also came on a bootable CD.

It was still the last of the DOS-based Windows versions.
Came with 98 SE if I remember correctly.


My 98SE CD is not bootable. 98SE could be the one where only some of the
CDs were bootable.

BTW, even though the ME CD is bootable, it still requires a DOS boot to
partition the disk (with at least one FAT partition). Partitioning was
later added to the Windows boot disk.

Win ME still added that device driver (USB storage).

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to
realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -- Ronald
Reagan

On Sun, 21 Feb 2016 07:53:49 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 18:46:47 -0700, "Ashton Crusher"
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 09:37:12 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

I have to build some computers for homeless teens. I'm
unsure if we'll be able to get W7 licenses (MS has tried to
dry up the availability of older OS's to push everyone
to their latest).

W10 allegedly is rife with spyware ("data collection"
that MS no doubt uses to sell *you* to THEIR customers;
you are no longer a customer but, rather, a commodity).

Does anyone have first-hand experience with how pervasive
this is? And, if there are *reliable* ways to disable it?

Finally, how much risk these students will later be at
(for it to reintroduce itself to their machines) as they
accept future updates.

[I prefer to lock-down these sorts of machines so the
student doesn't come looking for "support" (from me)
later when an update mucks something up...]

[[I'm sorely tempted to install a FOSS OS but figure that
would leave them even farther out on a limb...]]


Win10 is fine. They are being spied on constantly by all the apps
they are using on their smart phones. I can't believe the hysteria
that has been created over win10 "spying".

I have no problem with Win10. I can't imagine the so-called "spying"
affecting me. You can easily make it "look like" Win7. So you don't
see any effect of it "spying."
I see zero ads. That's zip, zilch, nada ads.
Win10 is more robust than Win7 in my experience. Fewer hangs
and hard resets.
It also installs faster and has a smaller footprint.

I was reluctant given all the horror stories put out about it but I've
got it on three computers now and it seems fine. Didn't even need to
do anything special to get the "win7" desktop look.

On Sunday, February 21, 2016 at 10:31:19 AM UTC-6, Don Y wrote:
On 2/21/2016 8:02 AM, Uncle Monster wrote:
Are there not a number of closed military bases around the country that
could be repurposed for housing the homeless kids and families? Heck, those
FEMA concentration camps could also be put to good use. o_O

Again, the "home" is just a symptom of the problem.
These kids have lost their original support systems.
Single parent, drugs, abuse, incarceration, etc. so they've
LEFT those environments ("Anything has got to be BETTER
than this!")

There are lots of places where they can get a roof over
their heads -- even if only tenuously. But, they need
encouragement and support to stay in school so *they* don't
end up as "societal refuse" -- contributing little and
requiring (support, crime, incarceration, etc.) much!

Do you expect their *teachers* to fill the role that their
parents haven't? Or, expect them to cling to others (of the
opposite sex!) in similar situations (and baby makes three)?

Expecting a "home" (housing) to solve the problem is akin to
outlawing guns to solve the "gun problem"! Or, outlawing
drugs to solve the "drug problem". It's too naive.

I haven't heard much about boot camps for wayward youth lately but those closed military bases could be used for that. I remember when judges sent juvenile delinquents to the military as a way to get them to straighten up. Thanks to the social engineering by Democrats back in the 1960's, there are millions of fatherless young men who have NO discipline at all and look for direction anywhere they can get it, like gangs and other criminal organizations. A boot camp setup at one of those closed bases with all the facilities of a small town plus the personnel who can knock heads and get those kids in line would be a lot cheaper than a prison. Those fatherless kids are savages who need to become civilized through education, strict training and discipline. It would be a good job for military veterans and retired drill instructors. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Strict Monster

On 2/25/2016 9:34 AM, Uncle Monster wrote:
I haven't heard much about boot camps for wayward youth lately but those closed military bases could be used for that. I remember when judges sent juvenile delinquents to the military as a way to get them to straighten up. Thanks to the social engineering by Democrats back in the 1960's, there are millions of fatherless young men who have NO discipline at all and look for direction anywhere they can get it, like gangs and other criminal organizations. A boot camp setup at one of those closed bases with all the facilities of a small town plus the personnel who can knock heads and get those kids in line would be a lot cheaper than a prison. Those fatherless kids are savages who need to become civilized through education, strict training and discipline. It would be a good job for military veterans and retired drill instructors. ^_^

That's really a good idea.

--
Maggie