Isn't this a Contradiction in Terms? IBM Dishes Out Small, Low-Power Supercomputer

As it happens, most modern processors have hardware support for protecting stack/data against execution. Many flavours of Unix use that.

Regards,

Iwo

snip...snip...snip...

Bill -

Would you care to be a tad more specific? I have downloaded God knows how many patches from the Microsoft Website for Win XP and none have ever contained a virus. One time, the security patch blocked winsock and wouldn't allow me back on line...but a virus?

Baphomet wrote: || I have downloaded God || knows how many patches from the Microsoft Website for Win XP and || none have ever contained a virus. One time, the security patch || blocked winsock and wouldn't allow me back on line...but a virus?

There were 35 hotfixes and SP1 and another hotfix for Mediaplayer.

That is what I like, a couple of MB download every week. I only know Superspice that had a similar update rate. Those guys with a dial-up connection have to bleed a bit to convince them to apply for DSL. :-)

THX to Kevin and Bill.

wouldn't

I dunno about XP, as I refuse to upgrade from Win98SE as long as it still works. I would assume as always that the 2 worms I have encountered in Win98 updates were, uh-hum, placed there by MS themselves in an attempt to get people to upgrade their machines and OS to XP rated equipment. I also still use Media Player 2.0, which BTW still can use all the codec/etc.... updates meant for much higher versions of what I call since they passed version 3.0 the biggest piece of crap they ever wrote. Media Player has so many damned bells and whistles now that there is no room for real usable code.

Bill @ GarberStreet Enterprizez };-) Web Site -

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:51:00 -0500, "Bill Garber" Gave us:

More utter stupidity from the total IT twit.

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:51:00 -0500, "Bill Garber" Gave us:

Do you know anything about computers at all?

how

Gosh Bill -

I think you're being just a bit paranoid. While Bill Gates may be a predatory capitalist in the finest traditions of classic Americana, I sincerely doubt that Microsoft would stoop so low as to deliberately introduce viruses into their security patches, regardless of their desire that people upgrade their operating system. As a practical matter, given the intense governmental scrutiny (both here and abroad) of some of their more invidious practices, this would be a suicide mission for Microsoft and Gates ain't stupid. Security lax yes, but stupid...never!

the

Gates

Just a bit paranoid, maybe, at least that is what my Psychiatrist keeps saying. Although I agree that it would be rather stupid on their part to introduce any type of sabotage software into their own system, I live by the old adage, "Trust No One". Really?, since when would the government scrutinize one of the largest forms of revenue they have available, big corporations? I had read somewhere that in May of 1976 Bill Gates was quoted to have said that software is stolen more often than purchased and something needs to be done to prevent this. Isn't that a good reason to ensure that people use newly purchased software rather than updated old versions? He was also quoted as saying that hardware must be purchased as no one would be willing to build a computer from scratch from parts they found, but then again, that is being done all the time. Anyway, it seems that most of the viruses offered within emails or posts is soon followed up by ads asking you to try out a new version of antivirus software. Could it be the people who are marketing the wares? With all the ways companies have come up with to market their goods, why not? Let's make it necessary for people to need new AV wares. Very difficult to discern the truth anymore, don't you agree?

Bill @ GarberStreet Enterprizez };-) Web Site -

Thought you were an MIT man :-)

There ain't no 'r' in HaaaVaaahd!

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 22:40:43 -0500, Keith R. Williams Gave us:

There is no stretched second syllable either.

It's Haaaavahd.

desire

more

Standard Oil, A.T.T., Microsoft, Enron, World Com, and currently the NY Stock Exchange and Mutual Funds.....

These are but a few of the trust busts and or investigations into corporate coruption. Given the political structure of this country, it's amazing that this is done at all...but in spite of overwhelming pressures to the contrary, the right thing is done on occasion.

Absolutely agreed. I doubt Gates has ever denied that he is in the business of selling software. Just yesterday, it was announced that Microsoft was going into the music download business.With XP, in case of a system crash which requires a reload, you have to get in touch with Microsoft for their blessing. This, I assume, is done to prevent software piracy. This doesn't mean I approve of the tactic.

Famous quotes from the past:

Bill Gates said that nobody would ever need more than 64K of RAM

Einstein said that nuclear energy would be so cheap, it wouldn't have to be metered.

I don't mean to suggest that scams don't exist. Take the case of the autoglass replacement outfit in Brookly, NY that went around busting car windows so they could replace them.

And then there are the folks who exploit software (e.g. Messenger) to present annoying popups and then sell the software to remedy this. I still believe that it is self proclaimed security experts who discover Microsoft vulnerabilites to provide guaranteed job security. The security flaws are just too obscure for the average black hat hacker.

Often, it is difficult to discern fact from fiction and sometimes the level of hypocrisy is so great, one needs a pair of hip boots just to go outside to smell the roses.

Atmel

You had to be there!

It's common, even near-universal among DSP's.

^^^

I must have had my Commodore 64 in mind. Whether 64 or 640, it was still a vast underestimate of future needs. The irony in all of this is that the future needs were necessitated by Microsoft's Windows.

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 13:28:13 -0800, "Baphomet" Gave us:

No matter what was in place, the need would have scaled up with time, storage space, and computer speed.

No matter what the shit was being run under.

You've obviously never listened to William F. Buckley.

Of course, though the comment was made about the IBM PC1, which "limited" the memory to 640K (704K was an easy hack).

Certainly. Those of us who bought the first PCs with 48K (16K cassette-only machines were available) knew this was a silly statement. Within a year, most of us had 640K-704K installed. ...and looking for more.