Repeated requests to McAfee for help getting their software running
again have gone unanswered! Program got into trouble and wouldn't
load to it was uninstalled and reloaded twice and attempts to start it
show the same error message. One message from McAfee was received
with sounds of wanting to help was received and it has been sent back
3 times. I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.

"nospambob" wrote in message
...
Repeated requests to McAfee for help getting their software running
again have gone unanswered! Program got into trouble and wouldn't
load to it was uninstalled and reloaded twice and attempts to start it
show the same error message. One message from McAfee was received
with sounds of wanting to help was received and it has been sent back
3 times. I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.

AVG Antivirus. They even have a 100% free version which works great and the
virus definitions are updated very regularly. Been using it here for last 6
months and still virus-free.
www.grisoft.com

--
Regards,

Dean Bielanowski
Editor,
Online Tool Reviews
http://www.onlinetoolreviews.com
Complete our tool survey, Win $200!
------------------------------------------------------------
Latest 6 Reviews:
- Betterley Tru-Cut Insert System
- Digital Calipers & Height Gauge
- Delta SS250 Scroll Saw (Review Updated)
- Porter Cable FR350A Framing Nailer
- WoodHaven Biscuit Master
- EZ Smart Guide System
------------------------------------------------------------

AVG gets my vote as well. Been using the free version for about a year, it
updates very smoothly every day, very easy to use (nothing to do) and
integrates perfectly into Outlook.

Ian

"Woodcrafter" wrote in message
u...

"nospambob" wrote in message
...
Repeated requests to McAfee for help getting their software running
again have gone unanswered! Program got into trouble and wouldn't
load to it was uninstalled and reloaded twice and attempts to start it
show the same error message. One message from McAfee was received
with sounds of wanting to help was received and it has been sent back
3 times. I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.

AVG Antivirus. They even have a 100% free version which works great and
the
virus definitions are updated very regularly. Been using it here for last
6
months and still virus-free.
www.grisoft.com

--
Regards,

Dean Bielanowski
Editor,
Online Tool Reviews
http://www.onlinetoolreviews.com
Complete our tool survey, Win $200!
------------------------------------------------------------
Latest 6 Reviews:
- Betterley Tru-Cut Insert System
- Digital Calipers & Height Gauge
- Delta SS250 Scroll Saw (Review Updated)
- Porter Cable FR350A Framing Nailer
- WoodHaven Biscuit Master
- EZ Smart Guide System
------------------------------------------------------------

Convinced me, bought it this morning. Thanks all for the suggestion
and support.

On Wed, 25 May 2005 18:50:03 -0400, "Ian Wheeler"
wrote:

AVG gets my vote as well. Been using the free version for about a year, it
updates very smoothly every day, very easy to use (nothing to do) and
integrates perfectly into Outlook.

Ian

I thought AVG was free for personal use. Been using it on a PC for
some years. It updates automatically, scans email. If you are using
it for business, you need to buy the license.

On Thu, 26 May 2005 08:53:44 -0700, nospambob
wrote:

Convinced me, bought it this morning. Thanks all for the suggestion
and support.

On Wed, 25 May 2005 18:50:03 -0400, "Ian Wheeler"
wrote:

AVG gets my vote as well. Been using the free version for about a year, it
updates very smoothly every day, very easy to use (nothing to do) and
integrates perfectly into Outlook.

Ian

I understood from the couple of days use of the free version that
E-mail was excluded and there was no support. After McAfee I've had
all of the no support I need! It is labeled Professional but that's
merely Madison Ave chatter as far as I'm concerned.

On Thu, 26 May 2005 19:50:23 GMT, Phisherman wrote:

I thought AVG was free for personal use. Been using it on a PC for
some years. It updates automatically, scans email. If you are using
it for business, you need to buy the license.

On Thu, 26 May 2005 08:53:44 -0700, nospambob
wrote:

Convinced me, bought it this morning. Thanks all for the suggestion
and support.

On Wed, 25 May 2005 18:50:03 -0400, "Ian Wheeler"
wrote:

AVG gets my vote as well. Been using the free version for about a year, it
updates very smoothly every day, very easy to use (nothing to do) and
integrates perfectly into Outlook.

Ian

Woodcrafter wrote:
"nospambob" wrote in message
...

Repeated requests to McAfee for help getting their software running
again have gone unanswered! Program got into trouble and wouldn't
load to it was uninstalled and reloaded twice and attempts to start it
show the same error message. One message from McAfee was received
with sounds of wanting to help was received and it has been sent back
3 times. I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.


AVG Antivirus. They even have a 100% free version which works great and the
virus definitions are updated very regularly. Been using it here for last 6
months and still virus-free.
www.grisoft.com

I second that recommendation. Great program, simple to install,
configure, use and, most importantly, it works!

Free for home use and VERY reasonable for networks. I bought a ten
license network pack for $250 which includes updates and viruse
definitions for TWO years. Figures out to $12.50/yr per machine.
Compare that to even the best rebate offer Symantec offers.

Try the free version - fully functional - and see what you think.

"nospambob" wrote in message
...
Repeated requests to McAfee for help getting their software running
again have gone unanswered! Program got into trouble and wouldn't
load to it was uninstalled and reloaded twice and attempts to start it
show the same error message. One message from McAfee was received
with sounds of wanting to help was received and it has been sent back
3 times. I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.

I have been using the free version of AVG.

http://free.grisoft.com/doc/1/lng/us/tpl/v5

They have pay versions as well. I have tried several other virus filters.
But AVG has done the job for me. The strongest point in its favor is that it
doesn't load my machine down and slow the computing. Which is important for
my applications.

The only downside is that it does take a bit longer when using my new spam
filter. But even then, it doesn't load the machine down and everything gets
done like it is supposed to.

"nospambob" wrote in message
....
I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.

Norton or EZ Trust from Computer Associates. I have one at home, the other
at work, they are both pretty good.


http://store.ca.com/dr/sat1/ec_MAIN....ACHE_ID=179788

On Wed, 25 May 2005 14:59:34 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski"
wrote:


"nospambob" wrote in message
...
I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.

Norton or EZ Trust from Computer Associates. I have one at home, the other
at work, they are both pretty good.


OOI, what version of EZTrust are you running and are you using just
the virus or the fwall as well? V5.xx firewall is having a lot of
reported troubles. I have it and I have experienced these. The reports
come from the forums (mostly Zone Labs ones, which cover the same
virus/firewall engine)and match my experiences. CA's

In article ,
nospambob wrote:

Repeated requests to McAfee for help getting their software running
again have gone unanswered! Program got into trouble and wouldn't
load to it was uninstalled and reloaded twice and attempts to start it
show the same error message. One message from McAfee was received
with sounds of wanting to help was received and it has been sent back
3 times. I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.

OS X
Virus free since April 2001.
On line 24/7/365 'cept one line power failure
caused by some privatization deal south from here..*G*
UNIX rules!!!

and prior to installing OS X:

OS 9 and previous
Virus free since Jan. 1993.


-----------------------
Ad them up. 12 years, no virus.
No virus checkers either.

One virus in 1988

No virus from 1984 - 1988

Before everybody takes their shirts off, I only toot the Mac horn when
the topic has presented itself. I NEVER start threads extolling the
virtues of the vastly superior, crash-worthiness, viral immunity,
functionality and blazing speed of this obviously better platform.

G,D & R

Robatoy writes:


[...]

OS 9 and previous
Virus free since Jan. 1993.

OS9 was pretty old by 1993... dou you run it on a 6809 or a 68000? ;-)
--
Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.de/~hannappe
Phone: +49 228 73 2447 FAX ... 7869
Physikalisches Institut der Uni Bonn Nussallee 12, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
CERN: Phone: +412276 76461 Fax: ..77930 Bat. 892-R-A13 CH-1211 Geneve 23

On Wed, 25 May 2005 17:45:33 +0200, Juergen Hannappel wrote:
Robatoy writes:


[...]

OS 9 and previous
Virus free since Jan. 1993.

OS9 was pretty old by 1993... dou you run it on a 6809 or a 68000? ;-)

Ahhhhh, another person who knows OS-9. Mine was on a 6809E. Yours?

Dave "Feeling old..." Hinz

Dave Hinz wrote:

On Wed, 25 May 2005 17:45:33 +0200, Juergen Hannappel wrote:
Robatoy writes:


[...]

OS 9 and previous
Virus free since Jan. 1993.

OS9 was pretty old by 1993... dou you run it on a 6809 or a 68000? ;-)

Ahhhhh, another person who knows OS-9. Mine was on a 6809E. Yours?

Dave "Feeling old..." Hinz

Mostly 68K's VME-bus.

On Wed, 25 May 2005 13:34:36 -0500, Duane Bozarth wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote:

On Wed, 25 May 2005 17:45:33 +0200, Juergen Hannappel wrote:

OS9 was pretty old by 1993... dou you run it on a 6809 or a 68000? ;-)

Ahhhhh, another person who knows OS-9. Mine was on a 6809E. Yours?

Mostly 68K's VME-bus.

Ah. Never got to run it on anything that new. Fun times, as you
said...mostly.

Duane Bozarth wrote in
:

Mostly 68K's VME-bus.

Ahhh - I was on the *other* side - Intel x86 and Multibus.
Ran iRMX as the RTOS. rq$sendmessage()...

Duane Bozarth wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote:

On Wed, 25 May 2005 17:45:33 +0200, Juergen Hannappel wrote:
Robatoy writes:


[...]

OS 9 and previous
Virus free since Jan. 1993.

OS9 was pretty old by 1993... dou you run it on a 6809 or a 68000? ;-)

Ahhhhh, another person who knows OS-9. Mine was on a 6809E. Yours?

Dave "Feeling old..." Hinz

Mostly 68K's VME-bus.

Small world. I may have done some hardware design work on those VMEbus
boards (mostly fixing the original designer's blunders). I still make
my living in the VME market.

Tom

In article ,
Juergen Hannappel wrote:

Robatoy writes:


[...]

OS 9 and previous
Virus free since Jan. 1993.

OS9 was pretty old by 1993... dou you run it on a 6809 or a 68000? ;-)

Cute.

OS 6 (SIX) wasn't even old by 1993.

I knew some parts of 'Old Europe' were a bit behind on some things, doc,
but system 7.6 wasn't released till Jan 24 1997.
This time, it seems, you were ahead by at least 7 years with the release
of OS 9.0 which was released just prior to OS X to prepare mac users for
the upgrade to OS X. I'd put that release around 1999 or 2000.

Have somebody check your homework. G

On Wed, 25 May 2005 13:03:37 -0400, Robatoy wrote:
In article ,
Juergen Hannappel wrote:

Robatoy writes:


[...]

OS 9 and previous
Virus free since Jan. 1993.

OS9 was pretty old by 1993... dou you run it on a 6809 or a 68000? ;-)

Cute.
OS 6 (SIX) wasn't even old by 1993.

I don't know OS 6, but OS9 was released at least by 1982.

I knew some parts of 'Old Europe' were a bit behind on some things, doc,
but system 7.6 wasn't released till Jan 24 1997.
This time, it seems, you were ahead by at least 7 years with the release
of OS 9.0 which was released just prior to OS X to prepare mac users for
the upgrade to OS X. I'd put that release around 1999 or 2000.

Have somebody check your homework. G

Have somebody check your history. G

In article ,
Dave Hinz wrote:

I don't know OS 6, but OS9 was released at least by 1982.

macintosh OS 9? Or are we talking Apple II stuff here?
If we are.. I'll beg off, as I know (in my best Schultz voice) NOTHING
about any Apples prior to 1984.

Dave Hinz wrote:

On Wed, 25 May 2005 13:03:37 -0400, Robatoy wrote:
In article ,
Juergen Hannappel wrote:

Robatoy writes:


[...]

OS 9 and previous
Virus free since Jan. 1993.

OS9 was pretty old by 1993... dou you run it on a 6809 or a 68000? ;-)

Cute.
OS 6 (SIX) wasn't even old by 1993.

I don't know OS 6, but OS9 was released at least by 1982.

....

I (think) Robotoy is referring to Mac OS 9, not Microware (Radisys) OS9.

Google found a thread from a year or so ago where a respondent posted
the following brief history...

"Assuming you [mean] OS-9 the Real-Time OS and Not OS9 the Mac OS, OS9
first
started about 1978 on the 6809 processor. It was ported to the 68K
family
about 1982. In 1987 the OS was ported to other Processors, I believe
the
x86 was the first. This was know as OS9000 at the time. Since then
OS9
has been ported to the PPC,MIPS,Hitachi H series, Sparc, ARM, and other
processors.
For a detailed timeline you might want to contact Radisys(Microware)
directly."

Brings back many old memories...some good, some not so much.

In article , says...
I don't know OS 6, but OS9 was released at least by 1982


You beat me to it, Dave. IIRC, it was written OS/9, but I'm not sure.
I do remember being impressed with it at the time. I think it required
a 6809 and wouldn't run on a 6800, but again it's been a long time so I
could be mistaken. Didn't it have some sort of dynamic function loading
that was new, at least for micros?

--
BNSF = Build Now, Seep Forever

In article ,
Juergen Hannappel wrote:

Robatoy writes:


[...]

OS 9 and previous
Virus free since Jan. 1993.

OS9 was pretty old by 1993... dou you run it on a 6809 or a 68000? ;-)

We can't be talking about the same OS 9. I was an infant in 1982. (33)

In article , Robatoy wrote:

We can't be talking about the same OS 9. I was an infant in 1982. (33)

Is it 2015 already? Guess I slept longer than I thought.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

On Wed, 25 May 2005 11:18:29 -0400, Robatoy wrote:
In article ,
nospambob wrote:

Repeated requests to McAfee for help getting their software running
again have gone unanswered! Program got into trouble and wouldn't
load to it was uninstalled and reloaded twice and attempts to start it
show the same error message. One message from McAfee was received
with sounds of wanting to help was received and it has been sent back
3 times. I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.

OS X
Virus free since April 2001.

In other words, for the entire history of OSX.

UNIX rules!!!

I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.

and prior to installing OS X:

OS 9 and previous
Virus free since Jan. 1993.

There ya go.

Dave Hinz wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 11:18:29 -0400, Robatoy wrote:

In article ,
nospambob wrote:


Repeated requests to McAfee for help getting their software running
again have gone unanswered! Program got into trouble and wouldn't
load to it was uninstalled and reloaded twice and attempts to start it
show the same error message. One message from McAfee was received
with sounds of wanting to help was received and it has been sent back
3 times. I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.

OS X
Virus free since April 2001.


In other words, for the entire history of OSX.


UNIX rules!!!


I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.


Longest I have up is 419 days, FreeBSD, and only because of a major
power outtage (UPS couldn't last 13 hrs). Prior to that, it had a 642
day uptime.

--
Odinn
RCOS #7

"The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never
worshipped anything but himself." -- Sir Richard Francis Burton

Reeky's unofficial homepage ... http://www.reeky.org
'03 FLHTI ........... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/ElectraGlide
'97 VN1500D ......... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/VulcanClassic
Atlanta Biker Net ... http://www.atlantabiker.net
Vulcan Riders Assoc . http://www.vulcanriders.org

rot13 to reply

On Wed, 25 May 2005 15:55:40 -0400, Odinn wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote:

I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.

Longest I have up is 419 days, FreeBSD, and only because of a major
power outtage (UPS couldn't last 13 hrs). Prior to that, it had a 642
day uptime.

Nice. Does FreeBSD have the bug where after 497 days, the uptime
display starts over at 0 days? First time that linux box did it, I
spent some non-trivial time trying to figure out what the hell went
wrong. Turned out I just was seeing the uptime reporting bug.

Been around that twice on the system described above. It was a sunday
morning in 2002 when it was last bounced...and that was a planned
reboot. It. Just. Works.

Dave Hinz wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 15:55:40 -0400, Odinn wrote:

Dave Hinz wrote:



I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.

Longest I have up is 419 days, FreeBSD, and only because of a major
power outtage (UPS couldn't last 13 hrs). Prior to that, it had a 642
day uptime.


Nice. Does FreeBSD have the bug where after 497 days, the uptime
display starts over at 0 days? First time that linux box did it, I
spent some non-trivial time trying to figure out what the hell went
wrong. Turned out I just was seeing the uptime reporting bug.

Not at all, my uptime was showing 642 days when we lost the power. 497
seems like such a weird number to bug out on (only 9 bits in use, but
first 5 bits are 1s and the rest 0s with the last bit hitting a 1 = 497).

Been around that twice on the system described above. It was a sunday
morning in 2002 when it was last bounced...and that was a planned
reboot. It. Just. Works.

My home desktop is FreeBSD, my desktop at work is FreeBSD, my laptop is
windows, I also have a Solaris and 7 AIX boxes at home and a couple of
windows machines for the wife and daughter. At work, I manage AIX,
Solaris, HP-UX, Linux and Windows servers (over 200 in this office
alone). Thank goodness I don't do desktop support (over 1500 desktops
and laptops at our company).

--
Odinn
RCOS #7

"The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never
worshipped anything but himself." -- Sir Richard Francis Burton

Reeky's unofficial homepage ... http://www.reeky.org
'03 FLHTI ........... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/ElectraGlide
'97 VN1500D ......... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/VulcanClassic
Atlanta Biker Net ... http://www.atlantabiker.net
Vulcan Riders Assoc . http://www.vulcanriders.org

rot13 to reply

On Wed, 25 May 2005 15:55:40 -0400, Odinn
wrote:

UNIX rules!!!


I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.


Longest I have up is 419 days, FreeBSD, and only because of a major
power outtage (UPS couldn't last 13 hrs). Prior to that, it had a 642
day uptime.

All right, I know you Linux guys are going to blink a couple of times
and scratch your heads, wondering how I could even think to ask such a
thing, but why one Earth would you care how long the computer has been
running continously? I know mine has been on for a couple of months
(Win2000 professional) but I can't imagine keeping track of the number
of days, or even really caring if it got shut off for a while (it just
stays on because I'm sort of lazy, and I figure the cancer-research
screensaver can use it when I'm otherwise occupied). What are you
doing, trying to find the zillionth decimal place of PI with a 486 or
something equally odd?

On Fri, 27 May 2005 05:57:53 -0500, Prometheus wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 15:55:40 -0400, Odinn
wrote:

UNIX rules!!!


I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.


Longest I have up is 419 days, FreeBSD, and only because of a major
power outtage (UPS couldn't last 13 hrs). Prior to that, it had a 642
day uptime.

All right, I know you Linux guys are going to blink a couple of times
and scratch your heads, wondering how I could even think to ask such a
thing, but why one Earth would you care how long the computer has been
running continously?

Well, as I mentioned, one of mine is monitoring several dozen financial
service provider websites that our company has on the Internet. My
boss's boss's boss would get touchy if we didn't know something went
down because the monitoring boxes failed, because people wouldn't be
able to do things like buy houses and other kinda important stuff.

I know mine has been on for a couple of months
(Win2000 professional) but I can't imagine keeping track of the number
of days,

We're not keeping track of it, just run 'uptime' and it tells ya. Well,
on the one, I know it rolled over the 497 days thing twice, so I guess
I'm keeping track of it somewhat...


or even really caring if it got shut off for a while (it just
stays on because I'm sort of lazy, and I figure the cancer-research
screensaver can use it when I'm otherwise occupied). What are you
doing, trying to find the zillionth decimal place of PI with a 486 or
something equally odd?

No, it's running a critical business function that can't just crash at
random times because it feels like it. Someone else mentioned a control
system at a steel mill, which would require literally tons of metal to
be reprocessed should it fail.

But, raw uptime isn't the primary reason, or even _a_ primary reason, to
switch to an OS. Just Not Breaking is damn nice once you get used to
it.

Prometheus wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 15:55:40 -0400, Odinn
wrote:


UNIX rules!!!


I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.


Longest I have up is 419 days, FreeBSD, and only because of a major
power outtage (UPS couldn't last 13 hrs). Prior to that, it had a 642
day uptime.


All right, I know you Linux guys are going to blink a couple of times
and scratch your heads, wondering how I could even think to ask such a
thing, but why one Earth would you care how long the computer has been
running continously? I know mine has been on for a couple of months
(Win2000 professional) but I can't imagine keeping track of the number
of days, or even really caring if it got shut off for a while (it just
stays on because I'm sort of lazy, and I figure the cancer-research
screensaver can use it when I'm otherwise occupied). What are you
doing, trying to find the zillionth decimal place of PI with a 486 or
something equally odd?


Since the company I work for writes (and hosts) online banking. Uptime
is critical. Banks want 5-9s of uptime (that's 99.999% uptime for those
who don't know what 5-9s is), which is about 300 seconds of downtime per
year. Having a system that requires a reboot every month is
detrimental. Our applications and web servers are redundant, so we can
shut down one to upgrade it while the others take the load, but it's
much more difficult with database servers. You need something that is
stable and not very vulnerable, plus tons of security controls
(firewalls, ACLs, PKI, IPSec, etc) to limit access to any possible
vulnerabilities.

--
Odinn
RCOS #7

"The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never
worshipped anything but himself." -- Sir Richard Francis Burton

Reeky's unofficial homepage ... http://www.reeky.org
'03 FLHTI ........... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/ElectraGlide
'97 VN1500D ......... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/VulcanClassic
Atlanta Biker Net ... http://www.atlantabiker.net
Vulcan Riders Assoc . http://www.vulcanriders.org

rot13 to reply

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 May 2005 11:18:29 -0400, Robatoy
wrote:
In article ,
nospambob wrote:

Repeated requests to McAfee for help getting their software running
again have gone unanswered! Program got into trouble and wouldn't
load to it was uninstalled and reloaded twice and attempts to start it
show the same error message. One message from McAfee was received
with sounds of wanting to help was received and it has been sent back
3 times. I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.

OS X
Virus free since April 2001.

In other words, for the entire history of OSX.

UNIX rules!!!

I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.

i think the current record for one of our customers is upwards of 9 years.

Charles Spitzer wrote:
"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 25 May 2005 11:18:29 -0400, Robatoy
wrote:

In article ,
nospambob wrote:


Repeated requests to McAfee for help getting their software running
again have gone unanswered! Program got into trouble and wouldn't
load to it was uninstalled and reloaded twice and attempts to start it
show the same error message. One message from McAfee was received
with sounds of wanting to help was received and it has been sent back
3 times. I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.

OS X
Virus free since April 2001.

In other words, for the entire history of OSX.


UNIX rules!!!

I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.


i think the current record for one of our customers is upwards of 9 years.


That would be one out-of-date kernel with gawd only knows how many
security holes in it.

--
Odinn
RCOS #7

"The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never
worshipped anything but himself." -- Sir Richard Francis Burton

Reeky's unofficial homepage ... http://www.reeky.org
'03 FLHTI ........... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/ElectraGlide
'97 VN1500D ......... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/VulcanClassic
Atlanta Biker Net ... http://www.atlantabiker.net
Vulcan Riders Assoc . http://www.vulcanriders.org

rot13 to reply

"Odinn" wrote in message
...
Charles Spitzer wrote:
"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 25 May 2005 11:18:29 -0400, Robatoy
wrote:

In article ,
nospambob wrote:


Repeated requests to McAfee for help getting their software running
again have gone unanswered! Program got into trouble and wouldn't
load to it was uninstalled and reloaded twice and attempts to start it
show the same error message. One message from McAfee was received
with sounds of wanting to help was received and it has been sent back
3 times. I used Norton before switching to McAfee and am wondering if
there are other options available.

OS X
Virus free since April 2001.

In other words, for the entire history of OSX.


UNIX rules!!!

I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.


i think the current record for one of our customers is upwards of 9
years.
That would be one out-of-date kernel with gawd only knows how many
security holes in it.

http://stratus.com

no security holes. out of date perhaps, but lots of our customers don't
upgrade for years and years if it's working ok. lots of our customers can't
have the computer stop working for normal upgrades because there is no
scheduled downtime allowed.

--
Odinn
RCOS #7

"The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never
worshipped anything but himself." -- Sir Richard Francis Burton

Reeky's unofficial homepage ... http://www.reeky.org
'03 FLHTI ........... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/ElectraGlide
'97 VN1500D ......... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/VulcanClassic
Atlanta Biker Net ... http://www.atlantabiker.net
Vulcan Riders Assoc . http://www.vulcanriders.org

rot13 to reply

On Wed, 25 May 2005 18:26:30 -0400, Odinn wrote:
Charles Spitzer wrote:
"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...

I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.

i think the current record for one of our customers is upwards of 9 years.

That would be one out-of-date kernel with gawd only knows how many
security holes in it.

Yup, it sure would. But, if it's located in the right place,
network-wise, the risk is minimized.

On Wed, 25 May 2005 13:42:22 -0700, Charles Spitzer wrote:

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...

I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.

i think the current record for one of our customers is upwards of 9 years.

Not surprising. I should mention that the Linux box in question is
running 3 websites with thousands of hits a day, and a monitoring
application that watches our ecommerce sites, sends notifications, and
so on - so it's a busy little box, not just off in a corner building
uptime. (Not implying your clients' box is like that, not my point).

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 May 2005 13:42:22 -0700, Charles Spitzer
wrote:

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...

I've got one Linux box that has an uptime of (checks) 1004 days.

i think the current record for one of our customers is upwards of 9
years.

Not surprising. I should mention that the Linux box in question is
running 3 websites with thousands of hits a day, and a monitoring
application that watches our ecommerce sites, sends notifications, and
so on - so it's a busy little box, not just off in a corner building
uptime. (Not implying your clients' box is like that, not my point).

the longest one i personally encountered was one running a steel plant. if
the computer stopped, the plant had big problems because the line had to be
restarted, which involved having to remelt a lot of steel because it had
cooled too much.

another one was a rail road who had brick walled off one of our computers
into a room that had no other door. it was 3 years before they even found it
by tracing cables.

On Wed, 25 May 2005 11:18:29 -0400, Robatoy
wrote:

Before everybody takes their shirts off, I only toot the Mac horn when
the topic has presented itself. I NEVER start threads extolling the
virtues of the vastly superior, crash-worthiness, viral immunity,
functionality and blazing speed of this obviously better platform.

The whole Mac/Unix/Linux thing really torques me because those who
tout it so heavily never seem to consider that it is darn hard to come
up with commercial applications to accomplish real work on them. I
have 40 some apps on my Windows XP box, of which only 3-4 are
utilities. I use them all on a regular basis. They are all commercial
applications with support available. They all installed the first time
w/o problems and most have been upgraded w/o problems. I have been
running MS operating systems since 1986 on my personal computers at
home and have never had a virus. I buy cheap hardware from God only
knows where and plug it in and it works - every time.

I despise Windows for many reasons - security included - but it works
when you need to get work done - something I never found to be true
with Linux apps. And there is software out there for just about
anything you want to do - unlike either Linux/Unix or Mac.

If the Linux community would go after commercial software developers
so that there were some real applications available it might make some
inroads, but Open Office just doesn't cut it. Likewise if Apple were
to blow the box open so that I can slap in cheap off-shore upgrades
when I want to then open up their software licensing rules and re-work
that horrid user interface they would be worth a look. But for now, in
the real world of people who need to do lots of different tasks,
Windows XP is the clear winner in terms of usability and
functionality.

It's about time for my semi-annual Linux trial, so this opinion is
subject to change if the conditions have changed.

--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

Tim Douglass wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 11:18:29 -0400, Robatoy
wrote:


Before everybody takes their shirts off, I only toot the Mac horn when
the topic has presented itself. I NEVER start threads extolling the
virtues of the vastly superior, crash-worthiness, viral immunity,
functionality and blazing speed of this obviously better platform.


The whole Mac/Unix/Linux thing really torques me because those who
tout it so heavily never seem to consider that it is darn hard to come
up with commercial applications to accomplish real work on them.

I think it just depends on your version of commercial. Been in hi-tech a
long time. UNIX had most of the PC apps long before a PC was around -- a
lot more expensive tis true... But cost per user is now in the cellar...

I
have 40 some apps on my Windows XP box, of which only 3-4 are
utilities. I use them all on a regular basis. They are all commercial
applications with support available. They all installed the first time
w/o problems and most have been upgraded w/o problems. I have been
running MS operating systems since 1986 on my personal computers at
home and have never had a virus. I buy cheap hardware from God only
knows where and plug it in and it works - every time.

Been using MS since 1979 -- C-BASIC days. Used Seattle DOS -- oops I
mean MS DOS 1 (1981). Used Cybers, IBM, Honeywell, GE and Datapoint
before that. :-) Forgot the rest... :-( Too many...

Since many commercial mainframes /mini / grid PC/ systems have thousands
of users they are cheaper per user than your software.

I despise Windows for many reasons - security included - but it works
when you need to get work done - something I never found to be true
with Linux apps. And there is software out there for just about
anything you want to do - unlike either Linux/Unix or Mac.

Many would beg to differ. I have used mainframes, minis, PCs Linux,
Apple, CPM, Seattle DOS etc etc etc. What irritates me is when my
current system is not like the OS I just got used to. :-)


If the Linux community would go after commercial software developers
so that there were some real applications available it might make some
inroads, but Open Office just doesn't cut it.

Think it might be comfort level. We switched here. There was pouting and
whining. Now nobody remembers we switched they are so similar in
function. Training was 10 minutes -- so go figger.

If I could get a CASE tool (one user) that I could afford personally we
would switch most systems.

Right now I am using XP -- but all but 2 systems are dual boot.

Likewise if Apple were
to blow the box open so that I can slap in cheap off-shore upgrades
when I want to then open up their software licensing rules and re-work
that horrid user interface they would be worth a look.

Wait for the secret (shhh) negotiations to end....

But for now, in
the real world of people who need to do lots of different tasks,
Windows XP is the clear winner in terms of usability and
functionality.

Again. In my experience it's what you are used to. :-)


It's about time for my semi-annual Linux trial, so this opinion is
subject to change if the conditions have changed.

Got Slackware, Linux and Suse here as well as XP.

Shut down our Win2000 server. Running Linux Mandrake 10 64 bit on AMD
Athlon now. Almost never reboot -- less I wanna change something. The
Windows server was a constant trial. Ate a _lot_ of my time. The Linux
server is boring. Nothing to do -- unless I wish to do something. It
just keeps working.

Good luck with the virgins. If you ever have a spare I'll head over and
set up the Linux for you.



--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com


--
Will
Occasional Techno-geek

On Wed, 25 May 2005 16:30:35 -0700, Tim Douglass wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 11:18:29 -0400, Robatoy
wrote:

Before everybody takes their shirts off, I only toot the Mac horn when
the topic has presented itself. I NEVER start threads extolling the
virtues of the vastly superior, crash-worthiness, viral immunity,
functionality and blazing speed of this obviously better platform.

The whole Mac/Unix/Linux thing really torques me because those who
tout it so heavily never seem to consider that it is darn hard to come
up with commercial applications to accomplish real work on them.

Like what? I have yet to find something I can't do.

I
have 40 some apps on my Windows XP box, of which only 3-4 are
utilities. I use them all on a regular basis. They are all commercial
applications with support available.

*nix and Mac have this, of course. Some of 'em are even free, with paid
support if you feel the need.

They all installed the first time
w/o problems and most have been upgraded w/o problems.

I'm not seeing a difference yet.

I have been
running MS operating systems since 1986 on my personal computers at
home and have never had a virus. I buy cheap hardware from God only
knows where and plug it in and it works - every time.

If I choose to use Linux on commodity hardware, it works every time as
well.

I despise Windows for many reasons - security included - but it works
when you need to get work done - something I never found to be true
with Linux apps. And there is software out there for just about
anything you want to do - unlike either Linux/Unix or Mac.

What specific need have you been unable to find an app for? The "There
aren't any apps" argument was sort-of valid 5 years ago, but today? Not
hardly.

If the Linux community would go after commercial software developers
so that there were some real applications available it might make some
inroads, but Open Office just doesn't cut it. Likewise if Apple were
to blow the box open so that I can slap in cheap off-shore upgrades

Every Apple tower system made in recent memory (last to generations at
least) has been standard hardware for user-replacable stuff. Memory,
cards, disk, and so on. Maybe you haven't looked real close?

when I want to then open up their software licensing rules and re-work
that horrid user interface they would be worth a look.

I have never heard anyone else complain that Apple's UI is difficult to
use.

But for now, in
the real world of people who need to do lots of different tasks,
Windows XP is the clear winner in terms of usability and
functionality.

Well, if you say so. Glad you're happy; you just don't know what you're
missing.

It's about time for my semi-annual Linux trial, so this opinion is
subject to change if the conditions have changed.

Are you open to suggestions?

"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"

"Bad news & good news, Kid. Bad news is that you're going to be
sacrificed at dawn. Good news is that I know how to get you out of
it..."