I'm Switching....

How come you switched back?

Thud said:

The filesystem has to be mounted BEFORE windows can even read the registry!

The reason the registry is vulnerable is because MS has provided an interface to it via windows scripting host. But that would be the same whether MS used xml files scattered everywhere, or a central repository.

Click to expand...

What the blazes is the difference why or how the registry is vulnerable? It still results in an endless new threat - new protection measures loop! 'Nuff said! And consider this: that vulnerability results in rendering the admin user useless. A lower permissions user can effortlessly cause registry damage! More 'nuff said!

witeshark said:

What the blazes is the difference why or how the registry is vulnerable?

Click to expand...

Because the registry itself is not the problem. There is nothing inherently wrong or broken with the Windows Registry.

If Windows used XML files to store configuration files, you'd be saying that the XML files were the "absolute file system root."
That doesn't make any sense at all, and neither does saying the same thing about the registry.

You have good reasons to complain about window's handling of the registry, user permissions, etc but you also should understand what the registry actually is.

whiteshark said:

I have never read so much absolute crap! Darwin is the name of the OS X kernel And the FreeBSD OS that is the OS X base is Nextstep. The windows registry is the effective system core because it is the absolute file system root to which all apps are based and allows worms to lower security settings and turn off software firewall etc and notice that new registry editing worms are out daily Find a nice stone bridge troll

Click to expand...

"Find a nice stone bridge troll"...... Sigh.

I don't even think I need to comment on anything else in the post since several other users have already replied with facts that clearly discredit your claim.

I am an Apple Tier 2 Technician; I know what Darwin is.... you don’t.

witeshark said:

The Norton shows registry editing done by new worms every day. And then there's this:
If you need to reinstall WindowsXP and want to keep all your current installed applications and settings:

Start WindowsXP

Insert the Windows XP installer CD, and quit back out of the application that starts.

Go to Start - Run and navigate to

i386\WINNT32

(the guy who posted this appended a space and then /unattend but I'm not sure if you can type that into the Run dialog so I didn't.)

When the program runs you will get a choice to nuke the whole drive and start over or do an "upgrade" - which is what we want. In the "upgrade" you are installing the OS, but saving applications, files and settings
And you will be warned some data may be lost. All hard evidence of a very weak OS center

Click to expand...

An honest question: Is English your native language? (I'm not trying to be offensive, I really am just asking.)

You seem to repeat yourself right after several people provide valid evidence and arguments concerning the Windows Registry - if Windows used the same system as OS X and stored configuration information in separate XML files, a worm/virus could just as easily defect and manipulate these files as it does the Windows Registry. OS X's config. system is not any more inherently secure than Windows, Windows just deals with billions of more attacks a day. Once again I must insist on the difference in market share: Windows XP/2k: 90% ; OS X: 1.5%.

I can guarantee you that if tomorrow the market bases suddenly pulled a full 180, OS X would definitely be in serious trouble... And would probably be worse off than Windows XP is, I don't think I'd be crazy to say that Microsoft definitely has more experience dealing with Viruses/Hackers than Apple does.

As a side note: In Windows 3.1, before the introduction of the Windows registry in Win 95+, Microsoft used a very similar config. system to the OS X of today. All applications stored their configurations in separate "*.ini" files, much like OS X apps store theirs in XML files. Microsoft decided it would easier and faster if all configuration information was stored in a single, centralized database.

Ok, I'm done. This guy clearly has no idea what he's talking about. It's pointless to even try.

But I do hope I helped other people.

Guys, this is ridiculous. We are all here because we LIKE Apple, not because we have to BEAT DOWN on PCs. I'm constantly amazed that people could have so much knowledge about these intricate systems and yet not have one ounce of maturity for all that information. I hate it whenever threads like this get opened because all it does is start flame wars between the three people here who like both OSes and the others who just want to flame PCs because they're still bitter. Get OVER it already. These forums aren't designed for flame wars, or calling people trolls, or starting fights over 'how bad PCs are.' They're for open, enjoyable discussion about switching. End. Don't start fights just because you don't like to hear that some people don't like Apple as much as you do.

witeshark said:

So this See Norton will happen to a Linux or Unix BSD or Mac OS X WHEN Hello!

Click to expand...

Is that URL to Norton correct? It will not go in over here but all other sites do.

dtravis7 said:

Is that URL to Norton correct? It will not go in over here but all other sites do.

Click to expand...

yup -text = http://www.norton.com

OS's

I personally like both OSX and XP and 2k even. I do PREFER OSX but don't hate the new Microsoft OS's. I have used XP in a professional way since it first came out and 2k before that. I know what I am doing and RARELY if ever get attacked, But work on systems all the time for people that are so bad. I can fix any system without formatting and loosing all their data, but some are so SCREWED UP it takes a day or two to catch all the spyware and problems with Winsock and TCP/IP and hidden locked processes.

OSX and the NIX based OS's are more secure and stable. I do not care what anyone says, I have used them all starting with the Atari 8-bit, every version of MSDOS, Windows, OS/2, Mac OS, Linux and now OSX. I owned the Atari ST and Amiga till they died out. OSX is the most stable OS I have used in my life of computing, and the nicest overall to use and install Applications under. I have both Macs and PC's and use them both, but if I can do my work under OSX, I do it there.

XP though is a very stable OS. As far as security, it's getting better but it's not just the marketshare, It's more easily hacked into than any NIX or OSX.

As far as the roots of OSX, read, you will find what Darwin is, There is a lot of FREEBSD there, and a lot of features are there from NextStep.

I am not taking any sides here and wish this all would end as I hate people arguing and fighting. Both of you have some good points.

They both are very good OS's. OSX to me and most people I KNOW who go back as far as I do in computers and OS's prefer OSX. Microsoft is making XP better all the time, but I will stick with OSX for most of my computer work. I now use Windows mostly for Gaming and helping all my Windows friends. It's nice to have a working XP system when you are troubleshooting another system!

Lets call a truce. This is such a nice place to hang out and we don't need the fighting here.

witeshark said:

yup -text = http://www.norton.com

Click to expand...

Strange, it finally went in. Maybe they are having sever trouble.

falltime said:

Forum Rule #1: No Personal Bickering / Flaming






I don't think I've said anything to warrant any of these kind of remarks.

Moderator?

Click to expand...

No you haven't. Your posts were quite restrained, even after the name calling and ranting.

Really, after recently working with Macs I've enjoyed the experience, but I am developing a dislike for some in the Mac community from all of the constant uninformed ranting against PCs. At least Linux bigots usually know something about the technology they criticize.

I'm really quite confused by the people who say that their PCs are "snappier" or just "better" for things like browsing and checking email. I have been running my home LAN with PC's for around 6 years and my entire family grew up using them for exactly those purposes under everything from Win95/NT4 through 98 to XP-Pro.

In the last 2 years I've been adding Macs to the LAN and everyone in my family has switched to using the Macs for these tasks, noone is twisting their arms or even knøbbling the PCs to encourage the switch it just seems to happen naturally.

My daughter's eMac failed the other day and she chose to use my 1Ghz iMac iwhile it was being repaired even though it is sat right next to an XP2200 system running XP-Pro with a 19inch screen, when I asked a few hours later what she was doing the reply was "talking to my friends on MSN"! She *chose* to use a Mac to run MSN over a fully featured PC sat right next to it, what more dåmning an indictment of PCs could you have than that?

There is only one use now to which the PCs are put and that is running games although as most of them don't work under XP even that usage is dropping as people can't be bothered to switch OSs.

We have the odd day when I have a gang of teenagers around the house who are bored enough to have a LAN party and then we have mega arguments over who plays on which machine, the daft thing is that the PCs get chosen last even though they theoretically have better graphics capabilities and larger screens (and are decked out with game-pads and joysticks)!

(on a side note 7-way medal of honour parties are really really noisy! The other day I thought I was in a remake of Saving Private Ryan)

Amen-Moses

Amen-Moses said:

There is only one use now to which the PCs are put and that is running games although as most of them don't work under XP even that usage is dropping as people can't be bothered to switch OSs.

Click to expand...

Eh? What do you mean most games don't work under XP?

dirtydog said:

Eh? What do you mean most games don't work under XP?

Click to expand...

Of my collection of games about 50% or so no longer work under XP and about another 20% don't like my current Gfx card even though they worked perfectly under XP with the last one (i.e they don't like the ATI card but worked with a lower spec NVidia card).

I could probably spend a few hours per game hunting down patches and/or compatible drivers and I could also go and get a second NVidia Gfx card (the one I had was given away before I realised the problem existed) and a KVM set-up to fix the 20% but most of the affected games don't seem to be popular enough for me to bother.

What I find most annoying is when games that are only a couple of years old no longer work on my PC yet I'm quite happily still buying and playing games designed to work under Mac OS 7!

If anyone knows how to get Simon the Sorcerer 3D to work on a ATI 9200SE card in XP-Pro can they please let me know. I've only just bought the game and would like to at least play it once!

(and no the "compatibility" thing doesn't work, in fact I've never managed to get a single game to work fully using it.)

The other option I have considered is to try and get the games to work on OS X under simulation, but somehow I doubt that would work for more than a handful of games.

Oh and before anyone says that at least all the latest games work with PCs I had to patch Far Cry to make it work, and it came in the box with the bloody graphics card!

Amen-Moses

XP has been out for four years; any game released in that time works under XP. Many older games also work perfectly, without any compatiblity mode needed; eg. Unreal Tournament from 1999 and Colin McRae Rally 2 from 2000 to name two from my collection.

Any games which will run at more than single figure fps on a Radeon 9200SE must be ancient and/or obscure titles, like the one you name which I've never heard of.

It's a bit odd you saying games from the OS 7 era still work on OS 10, when the latter is Unix based which means it is incapable of running any older Mac software natively.

OK this is the end of the thread. A few things for every person here to consider....

1. We are not a Windows bashing board. Windows has good things about it. Macs have good things about. Both Mac and Windows have horrid things about them too. Depends on your needs and concerns which works best for you.

2. Most importantly, there are some gross violations of the forum rules regarding personal flames and bickering. Name calling and personal flames will NEVER be tolerated here. The strength of this board comes from the civility we have even in disagreement. Under no circumstances will this be violated.

This is your one and only warning. Next time, keep it to yourselves or ignore the other user. But if it happens again, you will be banned.

dirtydog said:

XP has been out for four years; any game released in that time works under XP. Many older games also work perfectly, without any compatiblity mode needed; eg. Unreal Tournament from 1999 and Colin McRae Rally 2 from 2000 to name two from my collection.

Any games which will run at more than single figure fps on a Radeon 9200SE must be ancient and/or obscure titles, like the one you name which I've never heard of.

It's a bit odd you saying games from the OS 7 era still work on OS 10, when the latter is Unix based which means it is incapable of running any older Mac software natively.

Click to expand...

Just because XP has been out for 4 years doesn't mean that all new releases will work under it, many people still have not switched from 98/Me and many developers aim for the larger market. I alway now look out for the XP designator on the side of a game before buying if it is a full price game.

StS 3D came out around 2002 and is a DX 7.0 game so theoretically should work, in fact I only found a couple of mentions of problems on the web neither of which had any replies from people with a fix.

The 9200SE card plays the following games fine:

UT, UT 2003, UT 2004, Halo, HL1 & 2, Far Cry, WC III, American McGees Alice, Star Wars Jedi Outcast, Myst III, IV, Uru + all expansions, Medal of Honour (all of them).

Those are only the ones currently installed and littered around the desk, I have been trying for years to get my son to put them away after he uses them!

In the corner I have a box full of games that do not work, some are very early DOS & Win3.1 games some are win95 only but most are 95/98 DX games. Example of games that don't work on my current PC set up : Tomb raider series, Mortal Combat series, Disc Worls 1 & 2 and Film Noir, Unnecessary Roughness 95, Imperium Galactica, Myst, Riven, Rayman series, Machiavelli the Prince, Grand Pix (in fact none of my Microprose Games), Privateer 2 the Darkening ... you get the idea.

DX-8 and beyond seem to be the most likely to work although, as with Far Cry, some of those need patches to work fully.

Mac OS X comes complete with the Classic application which allows previous OS software to work, I have not yet bought a Mac title which fails to work on Classic but there are probably some that won't.

Amen-Moses

schweb said:

OK this is the end of the thread. A few things for every person here to consider....

2. Most importantly, there are some gross violations of the forum rules regarding personal flames and bickering. Name calling and personal flames will NEVER be tolerated here. The strength of this board comes from the civility we have even in disagreement. Under no circumstances will this be violated.

Click to expand...

Could we not simply delete the offending posts and leave others to carry on the discussion?

That is what we tend to do on the forums I moderate.

Individual posters should obviously be PM'd about why the posts are deleted and if they do it again then banning is always an option.

Amen-Moses