1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Virus, Virus, Everywhere!

Discussion in 'Notebooks' started by Ron, Jul 14, 2010.

  1. BillW50

    BillW50 Flightless Bird

    Richard Bonner wrote on Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:51:22 +0000 (UTC):
    > BillW50 (BillW50@aol.kom) wrote:
    >> In news:i26mae$el4$1@Kil-nws-1.UCIS.Dal.Ca,
    >> Richard Bonner typed on Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:39:58 +0000 (UTC):

    >
    >>> BillW50 (BillW50@aol.kom) wrote:
    >>>> I have one of those USB floppy drives too, but who knows why I
    >>>> do though?
    >>>> --
    >>>> Bill
    >>> *** It's convenient if one needs to get something from an old floppy
    >>> backup, or when some friend shows up with a file or utility I want
    >>> that is on floppy. Of course, it can be a life saver if one needs to
    >>> diagnose a hard drive when no CD or USB is available.

    >
    >> True, but who puts things on floppy anymore? Anything important should
    >> have been moved to another format by now, after all it is 2010.
    >> --
    >> Bill

    >
    > *** There is the cost of changing over those archives. I have heard
    > rumblings that some businesses are unhappy with having to now move CD-ROM
    > archives to DVD, a format that will in turn be obsolete in a few years
    > when anything that turns will be passe and we all go to solid state
    > drives.


    Really? I remember taking all of the software I had for a Commodore
    VIC-20 that I was using for a couple of years... well later I copied all
    of them and it all fit on a single 720kb 3.5" floppy. Considering a
    VIC-20 only had 3.5kb of available memory, a 3.5" floppy was like a huge
    hard drive for storage.

    I have 4TB worth of storage nowadays and I still have thousands of
    floppies around. And if I moved it all to this storage, it won't even
    make a dent in the space. So how costly could it be? As storage has been
    getting larger and larger and cheaper and cheaper all of the time.

    > I saw a piece on this somewhere regarding this cost to libraries.
    > At least some have simply opted to maintain the devices needed to view
    > film, microfilm, microfiche, floppy and CD-ROM discs.


    I still have microfiche and two viewers around. I haven't used them in
    decades and I don't think I ever will either.

    > So to answer your question, anyone with archives on floppy discs will
    > need a floppy drive, as will those with CD and DVD archives. Requests are
    > dwindling, but I still get people crying for help to retrieve something or
    > other off of floppy discs. I keep both 5.25 and 3.5 drives in working
    > order at work and at home, as do several friends of mine.
    >
    > I should also mention that in my case, since DOS has remained
    > compatible with itself, that I can easily run programs from the past
    > quarter century up to 2010. As such, I often find usable utilities on
    > floppy discs that have been given to me.


    All of the programs and utilities that I left on floppies wouldn't do me
    any good today anyway. As we have so much better programs and utilities
    nowadays. Maybe the old archives might be interesting to look at
    someday, but if they do fade away it won't be a big loss anyway.

    And by the way, I haven't touched a floppy in many years. But how often
    are those old floppies have become unreadable?

    --
    Bill
    Asus EEE PC 702G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
    Xandros Linux (build 2007-10-19 13:03)
     
  2. BillW50

    BillW50 Flightless Bird

    Richard Bonner wrote on Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:56:53 +0000 (UTC):
    > BillW50 (BillW50@aol.kom) wrote:
    >> In news:i26mte$f47$1@Kil-nws-1.UCIS.Dal.Ca,
    >> Richard Bonner typed on Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:50:06 +0000 (UTC):
    >>> BillW50 (BillW50@aol.kom) wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Richard Bonner wrote:
    >>>>> If you decide to switch to a different operating system, I
    >>>>> suggest Debian or Linux Mint. Regarding the latter, last year two
    >>>>> friends of mine switched from XP to Mint and won't go back for any
    >>>>> reason, now.
    >>>
    >>> (Snip)
    >>>> 4) Linux runs 5% of what I want to run. And Linux is also awful when
    >>>> it comes to running multimedia. As you need 3x more processing power
    >>>> than XP does on the same machine. Plus Linux support for different
    >>>> file types is very limited.
    >>> *** Those were similar complaints from my friend until he installed
    >>> Mint. He had issues with wireless Internet as well, but none with
    >>> Mint. His wife ran XP all the time he had Mint on another system in
    >>> their home. She is an accountant, but yet she too, has switched
    >>> exclusively to Mint.

    >
    >> Can you run the most popular games under Linux? Nope!

    >
    > *** I can ask my Mint friend; he is a gamer.


    I can't see a Linux user being a serious gamer. As the most popular
    games don't even run under Linux.

    >> When you buy new
    >> devices do you come with Linux drivers? Nope! When you buy a new digital
    >> camera with fancy software to edit video, does it run under Linux? Nope!
    >> Does your new scanner OCR software run under Linux? Nope! Hell I haven't
    >> even got my KW-TVUSB506RF-PRO USB TV tuner or Palm OS to work with Linux
    >> yet. Linux does so little it is almost completely useless to me.

    >
    > *** This was the same argument back in the Windows days. Why was
    > software made for it? The same will happen with Linux.


    Almost nobody was serious about Windows until about '93. And Linux was
    born in '91. And we have been waiting 19 years for Linux to mature.
    Trust me, it isn't ever going to happen! And anybody willing to wait for
    it to happen will died sadly very disappointed.

    >>> Am I saying it, or any operating system, is for every user? No.
    >>> However, I urge people to expand their horizons and give other ones a
    >>> good run if they are unhappy with their present operating system.

    >
    >> Apparently I am expanding my horizons far more than you or your friends.
    >> Because I know for a *fact* that Linux makes for a very lousy general
    >> purpose OS. Hell I am watching live TV right on my Windows right now
    >> with pause and rewind. You know how many years I would have to work and
    >> write my own code to get this working under Linux? It would take
    >> forever! So why bother?

    >
    > *** You need not - software makers will do it for you.


    I have been waiting 9 years now for software makers to do it. Sorry that
    is just way too long. Time to move on.

    >>> *** I am sorry that your Linux experience has not been a good one,
    >>> Bill. However, I belong to a computer group, of which more members
    >>> run Linux as compared to Windows. I also belong to a Linux-only
    >>> group. I don't see any of those users having the issues you describe.
    >>> Perhaps you are running software that requires Windows, but for
    >>> day-to day usage, Mint seems fine to me. I should also add that
    >>> several of the Linux users in these
    >>> groups are system administrators, and one is a retired IBM employee
    >>> with 35+years of experience. If Linux is that bad, I cannot see
    >>> persons with their experience sticking with such an operating system.

    >
    >> That is because they don't do anything worthwhile with their computers!
    >> They just do the plain simple things that a PDA can handle alone. If you
    >> what to expand your horizons, Linux won't get you there. Hell Linux
    >> doesn't even have good IM software either. If you want to voice chat and
    >> webcam with your friends, the only one I know of that works under Linux
    >> is Skype for Linux. Well that is great, but what happens if your friends
    >> are using MSN, Yahoo, AIM, ICQ, or something else? You are screwed! And
    >> Skype charges you 10 cents to send a SMS text message to a cell phone.
    >> While the others do not and it is free. You just don't understand how
    >> limited your options under Linux really are, do you?
    >> --
    >> Bill

    >
    > *** No, because I rarely turn on my Linux machine. However, I will print
    > your post off and have some of those users answer these questions. I
    > will post back here after the next meeting.


    Well good luck with that, as you will need it. ;-)

    --
    Bill
    Asus EEE PC 702G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
    Xandros Linux (build 2007-10-19 13:03)
     
  3. BillW50

    BillW50 Flightless Bird

    BillW50 wrote on Sat, 24 Jul 2010 09:40:59 -0500:
    > Richard Bonner wrote on Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:56:53 +0000 (UTC):
    >> BillW50 (BillW50@aol.kom) wrote:
    >>> In news:i26mte$f47$1@Kil-nws-1.UCIS.Dal.Ca,
    >>> Richard Bonner typed on Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:50:06 +0000 (UTC):
    >>>> BillW50 (BillW50@aol.kom) wrote:
    >>> Can you run the most popular games under Linux? Nope!

    >>
    >> *** I can ask my Mint friend; he is a gamer.

    >
    > I can't see a Linux user being a serious gamer. As the most popular
    > games don't even run under Linux.


    Well I found a link to all of the Linux games here.

    http://icculus.org/lgfaq/gamelist.php

    And it lists only 383 games. Geez I think the Commodore 64 had over
    10,000 games. 383 games are really slim pickings. And there is only one
    of them that I would be interested in called X-Plane. And I already have
    the Windows version, so what would be the point?

    And you should read the X-Plane manual about what it says about
    installing it under Linux as well. Unlike Windows and the Mac, it don't
    matter which version of Windows or Mac OS you have, the installation is
    the same.

    Not so under Linux. It is all different. As there are different distros,
    interfaces, etc. under Linux. And there are no instructions to cover all
    Linux distros. So they only cover how to for just three of them. How so
    limited and it just complicates everything.

    There is just no way anybody could convince the 99% of the masses to
    start using Linux. The only hope for Linux to gain any favor at all is
    for all of the Linux distros to go away and to have only one Linux
    distro still standing. And the Linux community will never let that
    happen. So there isn't any hope for Linux really.


    --
    Bill
    Asus EEE PC 702G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
    Xandros Linux (build 2007-10-19 13:03)
     
  4. Sjouke Burry

    Sjouke Burry Flightless Bird

    BillW50 wrote:

    > And by the way, I haven't touched a floppy in many years. But how often
    > are those old floppies have become unreadable?
    >


    None of my system/install/backup floppys yet.
    But several cd's and dvd's already died.
    Floppy's dont like being handeled, or hot/dusty storage.
    And as I have computers(working) as old as 30 years, floppy
    works between most of them.
     
  5. BillW50

    BillW50 Flightless Bird

    Sjouke Burry wrote on Sat, 24 Jul 2010 17:53:01 +0200:
    > BillW50 wrote:
    >
    >> And by the way, I haven't touched a floppy in many years. But how
    >> often are those old floppies have become unreadable?
    >>

    >
    > None of my system/install/backup floppys yet.
    > But several cd's and dvd's already died.
    > Floppy's dont like being handeled, or hot/dusty storage.
    > And as I have computers(working) as old as 30 years, floppy
    > works between most of them.


    That is very good to hear! I was working for Philips when we created the
    CD. And believe it or not, the first ones were made out of glass. I
    don't believe any of them ever made it out in the market. And even today
    I wish today I had some of them. As they were designed for a much longer
    life than the plastic discs we have today. The bad thing though, they
    would shatter very easily. And yes, I accidentally broke one once. It
    flipped out of my hand and hit the floor and shattered into pieces.
    Oops! Good thing they were not made out of crystal or something. ;-)

    I only had two major problems with floppies in all of the years I used
    them. One was most floppies could be booted between 300 to 400 times.
    After that they were trash. Pain in the butt with copy protected boot
    floppies. As you had to go out and buy another one. What a scam!

    The other one was a Commodore GCR floppy drive hardly found a disk it
    didn't like. And about 5% of my disks, ended up with bad sectors in
    about 6 months after being written. It didn't matter if you used them or
    not. And you could write over them once again and they were good again
    for another 6 months.

    And I learned I could filter this problem by formatting them in MFM
    format first as this would catch them right away. I can't recall now if
    I was using a CP/M MFM format or the MS-DOS one.

    Besides those two things, I can't think of any serious problems I had
    with floppies.

    CDs are a totally different story. The early days, CD writers often left
    gaps of space if the computer couldn't keep up with the writing speed.
    Those CDs were always problematic. Some could read them and some could
    not. I don't think that happens anymore. At least with DVD burners (even
    burning CDs with them) it shouldn't anyway.

    I also hear tell that the RW format doesn't last so long. As the R
    format lasts so much longer. I personally haven't seen this problem yet.
    But it isn't a big worry for me either since anything important is
    already on another format too.

    The most stable mass storage format I ever seen has been IDE hard drives
    believe it or not. Although you can't put all of your eggs in one
    basket, as even hard drives could work perfectly fine one day and
    totally unrecoverable the next. Although a second backup should be
    really reliable.

    --
    Bill
    Asus EEE PC 702G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
    Xandros Linux (build 2007-10-19 13:03)
     
  6. Bruce Burden

    Bruce Burden Flightless Bird

    BillW50 <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:
    :
    : Apple II, CBM-DOS, CP/M 2.2, CP/M 3.0, MS-DOS 6.22, Windows 3.1, Windows
    : 98SE, Windows 2000 SP4, Windows XP SP2, Palm-OS 3.5.3, and the list goes
    : on and on.
    :
    So you are saying that a release OS is generally "finished",
    for some values of "finished".

    And, if you choose to dispute that, what do you think all of
    those patches are that Microsoft releases?

    Some companies choose to release updates monthly, quarterly,
    bi-annually, yearly, etc. Some choose to bump the revision numbers
    when they do so. But, all companies, as a rule, release a "finished"
    product (the customer may choose to disagree), and then that
    finished product is updated for the some time in the forseeable
    future.

    I believe your specific issue was that Linux is never "finished".
    Well, it is given the example you provide above.
    :
    : Not me, any OS that is always changing is dead! It means it is a piece
    : of crap and it can never be fixed. So they keep changing it over and
    : over again and still can't get it right.
    :
    Again, what do you think those patches are that Microsoft releases
    every month?
    :
    : OS/2 Warp was a good example of an OS ever changing and it turns into a
    : big disaster (over 50 fixpaks if I remember correctly). You can't keep
    : changing an OS because it breaks older and even sometimes newer
    : applications. And it makes everything so unstable. That is just terrible!
    :
    Shrug. What do you expect from half an OS? :)

    In all seriousness, I never used OS/2. But, I know people who
    did, and loved it. Wasn't OS/2 release around the time clones were
    starting to appear in ever increasing numbers? IBM may have made
    the mistake of only testing on official IBM hardware. I also believe
    the "big iron" people inside IBM made a comeback around this time,
    and essentially dismissed the PC market as something not worthy of
    IBM's involvement. Which also meant gutting the budgets and staff
    of the PC oriented groups. IBM contunued to sell PC's of course,
    but generally as loss leaders meant to get the "big iron" into a
    customers site.

    I note you don't list Windows ME in your list of "finished" OS's.
    I think many of your complaints about OS/2 could be echoed in ME.
    Sometimes, software just should not be released. Generally, the
    engineers know that. So, too, do the first level managers. At some
    point, however, you get to a decision maker who doesn't care how
    runny it is, it still must be released (to parahprase a Monty Python
    skit).
    :
    : Oddly enough I and others don't get viruses before and after.
    :
    From what I have read of your posts, you aren't a typical
    computer user, or 99.999% of the users out there. My father never
    met a download button he failed to push, and as a result, had more
    crap- and mal-ware on it that it should be possible to install.
    :
    : And that
    : job is the responsibility of the anti-virus coders.
    :
    I disagree. AV apps are a crutch for people who really should
    not have unfettered access to the internet, but do anyways.

    They are also window dressing, since they are in a no-win
    situation, always reacting to new threats. And, there are plenty
    of studies that show AV apps do a poor to barely adequate job
    of detecting malware once installed.
    :
    : Not the job of the
    : OS manufacture.
    :
    Actually, I believe it is the job of the software manufacturer.

    Microsoft boxed themselves in long ago, when they first went
    to the net with software that was never intended to be secure,
    because it was essentially a single user system. That single-user
    system remained in place until Win NT/Win XP (not sure if W2K was
    based on NT code or 95/98 code).

    Since apps had all the authority to install themselves, malware
    clearly had the same authority, and Microsoft and the world at
    large has been fighting a losing battle since. I think most any IT
    person will tell you the worst threat to a corporate network isn't
    the "bad guys" outside the network, but rather, some user with an
    infected USB device that can now spread internally. (baring some
    sort of "brain fart" by IT, of course).

    That doesn't, however, absolve software peddlers from creating
    crapware. It is still fairly simple to detect overflow conditions.
    And careful design may catch other exploit avenues, but all software
    peddlers should place more emphasis on security testing/validation,
    and few (apparently) do so. Unfortunately, this seems to be driven
    by the world at large, who now see hackers as "evil", so exploit
    testing/elimination isn't taught outside of a few black hat
    conferences.
    :
    : And I don't even know why they bother?
    :
    Lawyers. If sued, a company can fall back to the socially
    acceptable but completely lame "well, gosh, sorry, we didn't know!",
    and get off with little to no damage, as opposed to "yes, we knew
    we had a problem, and were working to resolve the issue, but didn't
    before the software was exploited."

    It is compeletely pathetic, but it is also reality. Also, such
    effort means more development costs, and higher costs to the
    consumer, and that tired drivel as well.
    :
    : I guess the
    : masses would complain if they didn't.
    :
    The masses don't know they should be demanding their software
    be better is the biggest issue. Unfortunately, MY customers aren't
    as clueless as the average computer user, thanks to Microsoft. If
    they were, my management wouldn't get irate calls when I screw up
    and allow a problem to excape, and then have THEM breathing down
    MY neck until I get a patch out.

    The typical computer user doesn't understand their software
    should be as secure and reliable as their local ATM. Unfortunately,
    the easiest ATM exploit vector is identical to the typical computer
    exploit vector - the end user.
    :
    : But updating your OS all of the
    : time is only asking for trouble.
    :
    Like the Department of Homeland Security, and most of the post
    9/11 "security", PC security is window dressing.

    I don't allow my XP system to talk to Microsoft without adult
    supervision (ie, ME!) because Microsoft can't be bothered to
    differentiate between actual security patches and DRM issues that
    are primarily of interest to themselves.

    But then, my XP system largely stays powered off, is behind a
    firewall that I have a high confidence hasn't been penetrated, and
    when I do use the XP machine, I don't accept anything that I didn't
    ask for, and don't understand if I did ask for it.

    Also, I am a trained software professional, so I am much more
    aware of the dangers and pitfalls that the average computer user.
    And, I am unimpressed with window dressing being masqueraded as
    "security".
    :
    : How do you figure? As that should be true of Vista and Windows 7 as
    : well, but it isn't happening.
    :
    No, it shouldn't. Vista and W7 don't offer anything of significance
    to the typical user. XP, and more importantly, the hardware it runs
    on, is very much "good enough" for the typical user. Vista, and
    Windows 7 is only replacing XP systems, outside of developing markets,
    of course.

    Until XP and the hardware it runs on ceases to be "good enough",
    (typically through breakage) Windows 7 will NOT enjoy the success
    XP did. I exclud Vista as it is already toast.
    :
    : Worse than that. Vista and Windows 7 are hand holding OS which insults
    : many advanced computer users.
    :
    Except that the advanced computer user comprises what tiny
    fraction of the market? Anytime I need to envision the "average
    computer user", I think of my parents. And one of them holds a
    Doctorate!

    I don't disagree with anything you discuss, as I feel the
    same way, in general. But, again, Windows wasn't created to cater
    to me.
    :
    : It is my belief that the original Microsoft OS coders that actually knew
    : what makes a great OS have retired.
    :
    They may have, as I understand there are/were many Microsoft
    software developers that have worked there long enough to be
    sitting on many splits of Microsoft shares.

    I'll never agree that Windows is "great" software. It did,
    however, bring the computer to the masses, for better and worse.
    It did so by being "simple" to use, at the expense of being a
    system that computer savy people may want to use because "simple"
    is often diametrically opposed to "customizable".

    I also take pleasure in pointing out that Microsoft did not
    develop many of the apps that are of the most use, and biggest
    cash cows. Word, Excel and Exploder were not original to Micro-
    soft.

    And, as I discussed above, it was crippled by its roots as a
    single user device that didn't need to worry about security, as
    said security was synonymous with physical security. Again,
    "simple" is often diametrically opposed to "secure".

    And, Microsoft is under no pressure to be backwards compatible,
    either. I loathe that I can't import a Word 97-2003 document, out-
    put it as a Word 2007 (.docx) document, and have trivial things
    like SECTION NUMBERS retained! So, I continue to output ALL of my
    documents as Word 97-2003 documents (.doc). But, what the hell do
    you expect when a change was made to try to spite a competing, and
    free product (specifically, OpenOffice)?

    Bruce
    --
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX.
    - Thuganlitha
    The Power and the Prophet
    Robert Don Hughes
     
  7. Bob Villa

    Bob Villa Flightless Bird

    On Jul 24, 10:59 pm, bruc...@realtime.net (Bruce Burden) wrote:
    > BillW50 <Bill...@aol.kom> wrote:
    >
    > :
    > : Apple II, CBM-DOS, CP/M 2.2, CP/M 3.0, MS-DOS 6.22, Windows 3.1, Windows
    > : 98SE, Windows 2000 SP4, Windows XP SP2, Palm-OS 3.5.3, and the list goes
    > : on and on.
    > :
    >         So you are saying that a release OS is generally "finished",
    >     for some values of "finished".
    >
    >         And, if you choose to dispute that, what do you think allof
    >     those patches are that Microsoft releases?
    >
    >         Some companies choose to release updates monthly, quarterly,
    >     bi-annually, yearly, etc. Some choose to bump the revision numbers
    >     when they do so. But, all companies, as a rule, release a "finished"
    >     product (the customer may choose to disagree), and then that
    >     finished product is updated for the some time in the forseeable
    >     future.
    >
    >         I believe your specific issue was that Linux is never "finished".
    >     Well, it is given the example you provide above.
    > :
    > : Not me, any OS that is always changing is dead! It means it is a piece
    > : of crap and it can never be fixed. So they keep changing it over and
    > : over again and still can't get it right.
    > :
    >         Again, what do you think those patches are that Microsoftreleases
    >     every month?
    > :
    > : OS/2 Warp was a good example of an OS ever changing and it turns into a
    > : big disaster (over 50 fixpaks if I remember correctly). You can't keep
    > : changing an OS because it breaks older and even sometimes newer
    > : applications. And it makes everything so unstable. That is just terrible!
    > :
    >         Shrug. What do you expect from half an OS? :)
    >
    >         In all seriousness, I never used OS/2. But, I know peoplewho
    >     did, and loved it. Wasn't OS/2 release around the time clones were
    >     starting to appear in ever increasing numbers? IBM may have made
    >     the mistake of only testing on official IBM hardware. I also believe
    >     the "big iron" people inside IBM made a comeback around this time,
    >     and essentially dismissed the PC market as something not worthy of
    >     IBM's involvement. Which also meant gutting the budgets and staff
    >     of the PC oriented groups. IBM contunued to sell PC's of course,
    >     but generally as loss leaders meant to get the "big iron" into a
    >     customers site.
    >
    >         I note you don't list Windows ME in your list of "finished" OS's.
    >     I think many of your complaints about OS/2 could be echoed in ME.
    >     Sometimes, software just should not be released. Generally, the
    >     engineers know that. So, too, do the first level managers. At some
    >     point, however, you get to a decision maker who doesn't care how
    >     runny it is, it still must be released (to parahprase a Monty Python
    >     skit).
    > :
    > : Oddly enough I and others don't get viruses before and after.
    > :
    >         From what I have read of your posts, you aren't a typical
    >     computer user, or 99.999% of the users out there. My father never
    >     met a download button he failed to push, and as a result, had more
    >     crap- and mal-ware on it that it should be possible to install.
    > :
    > :                                                              And that
    > : job is the responsibility of the anti-virus coders.
    > :
    >         I disagree. AV apps are a crutch for people who really should
    >     not have unfettered access to the internet, but do anyways.
    >
    >         They are also window dressing, since they are in a no-win
    >     situation, always reacting to new threats. And, there are plenty
    >     of studies that show AV apps do a poor to barely adequate job
    >     of detecting malware once installed.
    > :
    > :                                                    Not the job of the
    > : OS manufacture.
    > :
    >         Actually, I believe it is the job of the software manufacturer.
    >
    >         Microsoft boxed themselves in long ago, when they first went
    >     to the net with software that was never intended to be secure,
    >     because it was essentially a single user system. That single-user
    >     system remained in place until Win NT/Win XP (not sure if W2K was
    >     based on NT code or 95/98 code).
    >
    >         Since apps had all the authority to install themselves, malware
    >     clearly had the same authority, and Microsoft and the world at
    >     large has been fighting a losing battle since. I think most any IT
    >     person will tell you the worst threat to a corporate network isn't
    >     the "bad guys" outside the network, but rather, some user with an
    >     infected USB device that can now spread internally. (baring some
    >     sort of "brain fart" by IT, of course).
    >
    >         That doesn't, however, absolve software peddlers from creating
    >     crapware. It is still fairly simple to detect overflow conditions..
    >     And careful design may catch other exploit avenues, but all software
    >     peddlers should place more emphasis on security testing/validation,
    >     and few (apparently) do so. Unfortunately, this seems to be driven
    >     by the world at large, who now see hackers as "evil", so exploit
    >     testing/elimination isn't taught outside of a few black hat
    >     conferences.
    > :
    > :                 And I don't even know why they bother?
    > :
    >         Lawyers. If sued, a company can fall back to the socially
    >     acceptable but completely lame "well, gosh, sorry, we didn't know!",
    >     and get off with little to no damage, as opposed to "yes, we knew
    >     we had a problem, and were working to resolve the issue, but didn't
    >     before the software was exploited."
    >
    >         It is compeletely pathetic, but it is also reality. Also,such
    >     effort means more development costs, and higher costs to the
    >     consumer, and that tired drivel as well.
    > :
    > :                                                       I guess the
    > : masses would complain if they didn't.
    > :
    >         The masses don't know they should be demanding their software
    >     be better is the biggest issue. Unfortunately, MY customers aren't
    >     as clueless as the average computer user, thanks to Microsoft. If
    >     they were, my management wouldn't get irate calls when I screw up
    >     and allow a problem to excape, and then have THEM breathing down
    >     MY neck until I get a patch out.
    >
    >         The typical computer user doesn't understand their software
    >     should be as secure and reliable as their local ATM. Unfortunately,
    >     the easiest ATM exploit vector is identical to the typical computer
    >     exploit vector - the end user.
    > :
    > :                                      But updating your OS all of the
    > : time is only asking for trouble.
    > :
    >         Like the Department of Homeland Security, and most of thepost
    >     9/11 "security", PC security is window dressing.
    >
    >         I don't allow my XP system to talk to Microsoft without adult
    >     supervision (ie, ME!) because Microsoft can't be bothered to
    >     differentiate between actual security patches and DRM issues that
    >     are primarily of interest to themselves.
    >
    >         But then, my XP system largely stays powered off, is behind a
    >     firewall that I have a high confidence hasn't been penetrated, and
    >     when I do use the XP machine, I don't accept anything that I didn't
    >     ask for, and don't understand if I did ask for it.
    >
    >         Also, I am a trained software professional, so I am much more
    >     aware of the dangers and pitfalls that the average computer user.
    >     And, I am unimpressed with window dressing being masqueraded as
    >     "security".
    > :
    > : How do you figure? As that should be true of Vista and Windows 7 as
    > : well, but it isn't happening.
    > :
    >         No, it shouldn't. Vista and W7 don't offer anything of significance
    >     to the typical user. XP, and more importantly, the hardware it runs
    >     on, is very much "good enough" for the typical user. Vista, and
    >     Windows 7 is only replacing XP systems, outside of developing markets,
    >     of course.
    >
    >         Until XP and the hardware it runs on ceases to be "good enough",
    >     (typically through breakage) Windows 7 will NOT enjoy the success
    >     XP did. I exclud Vista as it is already toast.
    > :
    > : Worse than that. Vista and Windows 7 are hand holding OS which insults
    > : many advanced computer users.
    > :
    >         Except that the advanced computer user comprises what tiny
    >     fraction of the market? Anytime I need to envision the "average
    >     computer user", I think of my parents. And one of them holds a
    >     Doctorate!
    >
    >         I don't disagree with anything you discuss, as I feel the
    >     same way, in general. But, again, Windows wasn't created to cater
    >     to me.
    > :
    > : It is my belief that the original Microsoft OS coders that actually knew
    > : what makes a great OS have retired.
    > :
    >         They may have, as I understand there are/were many Microsoft
    >     software developers that have worked there long enough to be
    >     sitting on many splits of Microsoft shares.
    >
    >         I'll never agree that Windows is "great" software. It did,
    >     however, bring the computer to the masses, for better and worse.
    >     It did so by being "simple" to use, at the expense of being a
    >     system that computer savy people may want to use because "simple"
    >     is often diametrically opposed to "customizable".
    >
    >         I also take pleasure in pointing out that Microsoft did not
    >     develop many of the apps that are of the most use, and biggest
    >     cash cows. Word, Excel and Exploder were not original to Micro-
    >     soft.
    >
    >         And, as I discussed above, it was crippled by its roots as a
    >     single user device that didn't need to worry about security, as
    >     said security was synonymous with physical security. Again,
    >     "simple" is often diametrically opposed to "secure".
    >
    >         And, Microsoft is under no pressure to be backwards compatible,
    >     either. I loathe that I can't import a Word 97-2003 document, out-
    >     put it as a Word 2007 (.docx) document, and have trivial things
    >     like SECTION NUMBERS retained! So, I continue to output ALL of my
    >     documents as Word 97-2003 documents (.doc). But, what the hell do
    >     you expect when a change was made to try to spite a competing, and
    >     free product (specifically, OpenOffice)?
    >
    >                                                         Bruce
    > --
    > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >   "I like bad!"                         Bruce Burden    Austin, TX.
    >         - Thuganlitha
    >         The Power and the Prophet
    >         Robert Don Hughes


    Of course, I haven't read all of this head-butting but I believe Bruce
    has the higher ground. Leaving Bill in the rant, tirade, and BS seat.

    "I only had two major problems with floppies in all of the years I
    used
    them. One was most floppies could be booted between 300 to 400 times.
    After that they were trash. Pain in the butt with copy protected boot
    floppies. As you had to go out and buy another one. What a scam! "

    What kind of "engineer" would not know how to copy a protected floppy?
    One who invented the CD?

    bob_v
     
  8. CJB

    CJB Flightless Bird

    On Jul 25, 1:19 pm, Bob Villa <pheeh.z...@gmail.com> wrote:
    > On Jul 24, 10:59 pm, bruc...@realtime.net (Bruce Burden) wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > > BillW50 <Bill...@aol.kom> wrote:

    >
    > > :
    > > : Apple II, CBM-DOS, CP/M 2.2, CP/M 3.0, MS-DOS 6.22, Windows 3.1, Windows
    > > : 98SE, Windows 2000 SP4, Windows XP SP2, Palm-OS 3.5.3, and the list goes
    > > : on and on.
    > > :
    > >         So you are saying that a release OS is generally "finished",
    > >     for some values of "finished".

    >
    > >         And, if you choose to dispute that, what do you think all of
    > >     those patches are that Microsoft releases?

    >
    > >         Some companies choose to release updates monthly, quarterly,
    > >     bi-annually, yearly, etc. Some choose to bump the revision numbers
    > >     when they do so. But, all companies, as a rule, release a "finished"
    > >     product (the customer may choose to disagree), and then that
    > >     finished product is updated for the some time in the forseeable
    > >     future.

    >
    > >         I believe your specific issue was that Linux is never "finished".
    > >     Well, it is given the example you provide above.
    > > :
    > > : Not me, any OS that is always changing is dead! It means it is a piece
    > > : of crap and it can never be fixed. So they keep changing it over and
    > > : over again and still can't get it right.
    > > :
    > >         Again, what do you think those patches are that Microsoft releases
    > >     every month?
    > > :
    > > : OS/2 Warp was a good example of an OS ever changing and it turns intoa
    > > : big disaster (over 50 fixpaks if I remember correctly). You can't keep
    > > : changing an OS because it breaks older and even sometimes newer
    > > : applications. And it makes everything so unstable. That is just terrible!
    > > :
    > >         Shrug. What do you expect from half an OS? :)

    >
    > >         In all seriousness, I never used OS/2. But, I know people who
    > >     did, and loved it. Wasn't OS/2 release around the time clones were
    > >     starting to appear in ever increasing numbers? IBM may have made
    > >     the mistake of only testing on official IBM hardware. I also believe
    > >     the "big iron" people inside IBM made a comeback around this time,
    > >     and essentially dismissed the PC market as something not worthyof
    > >     IBM's involvement. Which also meant gutting the budgets and staff
    > >     of the PC oriented groups. IBM contunued to sell PC's of course,
    > >     but generally as loss leaders meant to get the "big iron" into a
    > >     customers site.

    >
    > >         I note you don't list Windows ME in your list of "finished" OS's.
    > >     I think many of your complaints about OS/2 could be echoed in ME.
    > >     Sometimes, software just should not be released. Generally, the
    > >     engineers know that. So, too, do the first level managers. At some
    > >     point, however, you get to a decision maker who doesn't care how
    > >     runny it is, it still must be released (to parahprase a Monty Python
    > >     skit).
    > > :
    > > : Oddly enough I and others don't get viruses before and after.
    > > :
    > >         From what I have read of your posts, you aren't a typical
    > >     computer user, or 99.999% of the users out there. My father never
    > >     met a download button he failed to push, and as a result, had more
    > >     crap- and mal-ware on it that it should be possible to install.
    > > :
    > > :                                                               And that
    > > : job is the responsibility of the anti-virus coders.
    > > :
    > >         I disagree. AV apps are a crutch for people who really should
    > >     not have unfettered access to the internet, but do anyways.

    >
    > >         They are also window dressing, since they are in a no-win
    > >     situation, always reacting to new threats. And, there are plenty
    > >     of studies that show AV apps do a poor to barely adequate job
    > >     of detecting malware once installed.
    > > :
    > > :                                                     Not the job of the
    > > : OS manufacture.
    > > :
    > >         Actually, I believe it is the job of the software manufacturer.

    >
    > >         Microsoft boxed themselves in long ago, when they firstwent
    > >     to the net with software that was never intended to be secure,
    > >     because it was essentially a single user system. That single-user
    > >     system remained in place until Win NT/Win XP (not sure if W2K was
    > >     based on NT code or 95/98 code).

    >
    > >         Since apps had all the authority to install themselves,malware
    > >     clearly had the same authority, and Microsoft and the world at
    > >     large has been fighting a losing battle since. I think most anyIT
    > >     person will tell you the worst threat to a corporate network isn't
    > >     the "bad guys" outside the network, but rather, some user with an
    > >     infected USB device that can now spread internally. (baring some
    > >     sort of "brain fart" by IT, of course).

    >
    > >         That doesn't, however, absolve software peddlers from creating
    > >     crapware. It is still fairly simple to detect overflow conditions.
    > >     And careful design may catch other exploit avenues, but all software
    > >     peddlers should place more emphasis on security testing/validation,
    > >     and few (apparently) do so. Unfortunately, this seems to be driven
    > >     by the world at large, who now see hackers as "evil", so exploit
    > >     testing/elimination isn't taught outside of a few black hat
    > >     conferences.
    > > :
    > > :                 And I don't even know why they bother?
    > > :
    > >         Lawyers. If sued, a company can fall back to the socially
    > >     acceptable but completely lame "well, gosh, sorry, we didn't know!",
    > >     and get off with little to no damage, as opposed to "yes, we knew
    > >     we had a problem, and were working to resolve the issue, but didn't
    > >     before the software was exploited."

    >
    > >         It is compeletely pathetic, but it is also reality. Also, such
    > >     effort means more development costs, and higher costs to the
    > >     consumer, and that tired drivel as well.
    > > :
    > > :                                                        I guess the
    > > : masses would complain if they didn't.
    > > :
    > >         The masses don't know they should be demanding their software
    > >     be better is the biggest issue. Unfortunately, MY customers aren't
    > >     as clueless as the average computer user, thanks to Microsoft. If
    > >     they were, my management wouldn't get irate calls when I screw up
    > >     and allow a problem to excape, and then have THEM breathing down
    > >     MY neck until I get a patch out.

    >
    > >         The typical computer user doesn't understand their software
    > >     should be as secure and reliable as their local ATM. Unfortunately,
    > >     the easiest ATM exploit vector is identical to the typical computer
    > >     exploit vector - the end user.
    > > :
    > > :                                       But updating your OS all of the
    > > : time is only asking for trouble.
    > > :
    > >         Like the Department of Homeland Security, and most of the post
    > >     9/11 "security", PC security is window dressing.

    >
    > >         I don't allow my XP system to talk to Microsoft withoutadult
    > >     supervision (ie, ME!) because Microsoft can't be bothered to
    > >     differentiate between actual security patches and DRM issues that
    > >     are primarily of interest to themselves.

    >
    > >         But then, my XP system largely stays powered off, is behind a
    > >     firewall that I have a high confidence hasn't been penetrated, and
    > >     when I do use the XP machine, I don't accept anything that I didn't
    > >     ask for, and don't understand if I did ask for it.

    >
    > >         Also, I am a trained software professional, so I am much more
    > >     aware of the dangers and pitfalls that the average computer user.
    > >     And, I am unimpressed with window dressing being masqueraded as
    > >     "security".
    > > :
    > > : How do you figure? As that should be true of Vista and Windows 7 as
    > > : well, but it isn't happening.
    > > :
    > >         No, it shouldn't. Vista and W7 don't offer anything of significance
    > >     to the typical user. XP, and more importantly, the hardware it runs
    > >     on, is very much "good enough" for the typical user. Vista, and
    > >     Windows 7 is only replacing XP systems, outside of developing markets,
    > >     of course.

    >
    > >         Until XP and the hardware it runs on ceases to be "goodenough",
    > >     (typically through breakage) Windows 7 will NOT enjoy the success
    > >     XP did. I exclud Vista as it is already toast.
    > > :
    > > : Worse than that. Vista and Windows 7 are hand holding OS which insults
    > > : many advanced computer users.
    > > :
    > >         Except that the advanced computer user comprises what tiny
    > >     fraction of the market? Anytime I need to envision the "average
    > >     computer user", I think of my parents. And one of them holds a
    > >     Doctorate!

    >
    > >         I don't disagree with anything you discuss, as I feel the
    > >     same way, in general. But, again, Windows wasn't created to cater
    > >     to me.
    > > :
    > > : It is my belief that the original Microsoft OS coders that actually knew
    > > : what makes a great OS have retired.
    > > :
    > >         They may have, as I understand there are/were many Microsoft
    > >     software developers that have worked there long enough to be
    > >     sitting on many splits of Microsoft shares.

    >
    > >         I'll never agree that Windows is "great" software. It did,
    > >     however, bring the computer to the masses, for better and worse..
    > >     It did so by being "simple" to use, at the expense of being a
    > >     system that computer savy people may want to use because "simple"
    > >     is often diametrically opposed to "customizable".

    >
    > >         I also take pleasure in pointing out that Microsoft didnot
    > >     develop many of the apps that are of the most use, and biggest
    > >     cash cows. Word, Excel and Exploder were not original to Micro-
    > >     soft.

    >
    > ...
    >
    > read more »


    Warning:

    MalwareBytes download website seems to have been hacked.

    At http://www.malwarebytes.org/ the Free Download button which should
    direct you to

    http://www.malwarebytes.org/mbam-download.php

    actually diverts you to

    http://majorgeeks.com/download.php?det=5756

    And the free offer suddenly turns into a Shareware fee of $24.95

    Obviously a product to avoid - yet another virus protection app. which
    most likely also installs a virus of its own.

    CJB.
     
  9. BillW50

    BillW50 Flightless Bird

    Bob Villa wrote on Sun, 25 Jul 2010 05:19:18 -0700 (PDT):

    > Of course, I haven't read all of this head-butting but I believe Bruce
    > has the higher ground. Leaving Bill in the rant, tirade, and BS seat.


    Too bad you didn't read it all Bob, as there is no head-butting for one.
    And second of all I never would have taken you for an ad hominem
    attacker. And rant, tirade, and BS seat is just all in your head. As
    there are none of this out here.

    > "I only had two major problems with floppies in all of the years I
    > used
    > them. One was most floppies could be booted between 300 to 400 times.
    > After that they were trash. Pain in the butt with copy protected boot
    > floppies. As you had to go out and buy another one. What a scam! "
    >
    > What kind of "engineer" would not know how to copy a protected floppy?
    > One who invented the CD?


    I didn't invent the CD for one, Philips did. And I worked as an
    electronic engineer in the scientific division and not in the consumer
    division. But we had CD drives in house before they became widely available.

    And as for cracking the copy protection of Berkeley Softworks, they used
    extended tracks and changed the sync timing. So copy software was
    totally useless. Yes the code to check for the copy protection could be
    hacked out. But when Berkeley Softworks released GEOS v1.3 of their new
    desktop, they also included AFAIK one of the first trojans. As it would
    check if the copy protection was removed. And if it was, it would in a
    month or two delete all of the boot files. Nice eh?

    --
    Bill
    Asus EEE PC 702G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
    Xandros Linux (build 2007-10-19 13:03)
     
  10. BillW50

    BillW50 Flightless Bird

    What happened to Berkeley Softworks? [Re: Virus, Virus, Everywhere!]

    BillW50 wrote on Tue, 27 Jul 2010 09:11:40 -0500:

    [snip]

    >> "I only had two major problems with floppies in all of the years I
    >> used
    >> them. One was most floppies could be booted between 300 to 400 times.
    >> After that they were trash. Pain in the butt with copy protected boot
    >> floppies. As you had to go out and buy another one. What a scam! "
    >>
    >> What kind of "engineer" would not know how to copy a protected floppy?
    >> One who invented the CD?


    [snip]

    > And as for cracking the copy protection of Berkeley Softworks, they used
    > extended tracks and changed the sync timing. So copy software was
    > totally useless. Yes the code to check for the copy protection could be
    > hacked out. But when Berkeley Softworks released GEOS v1.3 of their new
    > desktop, they also included AFAIK one of the first trojans. As it would
    > check if the copy protection was removed. And if it was, it would in a
    > month or two delete all of the boot files. Nice eh?


    I got curious about whatever happened to GEOS (aka Berkeley Softworks).
    And I found out it later ended up with CMD and later still with Click
    Here Software. You can download the boot disks from the following:

    http://cbmfiles.com/geos/geos-13.php

    And at the time, it was the second most popular GUI OS just behind the
    Mac. Not something you hear a lot and I bet most people never even heard
    of GEOS. And today you can run GEOS under almost any OS with an emulator
    called VICE.

    http://www.viceteam.org/

    And you can read more about Berkeley Softworks heavy copy protection
    here. And start reading under the heading of "What Went Wrong With GEOS".

    http://www.commodore.ca/history/company/turks_geos.htm

    And for me it has been very nostalgic running GEOS 128 once again. And I
    forgot that there was no scroll bars. Yet it was still very functional.
    As all you did was to move the mouse at the bottom of the screen to
    scroll down, or the top to scroll up. And the trash could only hold one
    file. So you could only undo the last one. And it had that nice
    uncluttered look to it. Awww... what a nice time to be using computers
    back then. Too bad it isn't very functional anymore by today's
    standards. But still fun to play with after all of these years. ;-)

    --
    Bill
    Asus EEE PC 702G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
    Xandros Linux (build 2007-10-19 13:03)
     
  11. Bob Villa

    Bob Villa Flightless Bird

    On Jul 27, 9:11 am, BillW50 <Bill...@aol.kom> wrote:
    > Bob Villa wrote on Sun, 25 Jul 2010 05:19:18 -0700 (PDT):
    >
    > > Of course, I haven't read all of this head-butting but I believe Bruce
    > > has the higher ground.  Leaving Bill in the rant, tirade, and BS seat..

    >
    > Too bad you didn't read it all Bob, as there is no head-butting for one.
    > And second of all I never would have taken you for an ad hominem
    > attacker. And rant, tirade, and BS seat is just all in your head. As
    > there are none of this out here.
    >
    > > "I only had two major problems with floppies in all of the years I
    > > used
    > > them. One was most floppies could be booted between 300 to 400 times.
    > > After that they were trash. Pain in the butt with copy protected boot
    > > floppies. As you had to go out and buy another one. What a scam! "

    >
    > > What kind of "engineer" would not know how to copy a protected floppy?
    > > One who invented the CD?

    >
    > I didn't invent the CD for one, Philips did. And I worked as an
    > electronic engineer in the scientific division and not in the consumer
    > division. But we had CD drives in house before they became widely available.
    >
    > And as for cracking the copy protection of Berkeley Softworks, they used
    > extended tracks and changed the sync timing. So copy software was
    > totally useless. Yes the code to check for the copy protection could be
    > hacked out. But when Berkeley Softworks released GEOS v1.3 of their new
    > desktop, they also included AFAIK one of the first trojans. As it would
    > check if the copy protection was removed. And if it was, it would in a
    > month or two delete all of the boot files. Nice eh?
    >
    > --
    > Bill
    > Asus EEE PC 702G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
    > Xandros Linux (build 2007-10-19 13:03)


    Okay Bill, I'll take back the tirade part. Here is your quote, "I was
    working for Philips when we created the
    CD".
     
  12. BillW50

    BillW50 Flightless Bird

    In
    news:75c47f1f-010b-411c-ad6d-c340dde0edbd@x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com,
    Bob Villa typed on Tue, 27 Jul 2010 19:42:33 -0700 (PDT):
    > Okay Bill, I'll take back the tirade part. Here is your quote, "I was
    > working for Philips when we created the CD".


    I was working for Philips at that time and that is true. I used and
    tested the CD drives before they became public as well. And I knew the
    engineers who was working on them. And we chatted and socialized a lot.
    I don't know how much I had any input, but they must have picked up a
    few things from my experience anyway. And when any engineer had any
    problems, I got called. So is there anything in the CD drive that came
    from me? Very probable to be honest.

    --
    Bill
    Gateway MX6124 ('06 era) 1 of 3 - Windows XP SP2
     
  13. Bob Villa

    Bob Villa Flightless Bird

    On Jul 27, 10:23 pm, "BillW50" <Bill...@aol.kom> wrote:
    > Innews:75c47f1f-010b-411c-ad6d-c340dde0edbd@x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com,
    > Bob Villa typed on Tue, 27 Jul 2010 19:42:33 -0700 (PDT):
    >
    > > Okay Bill, I'll take back the tirade part.  Here is your quote, "I was
    > > working for Philips when we created the CD".

    >
    > I was working for Philips at that time and that is true. I used and
    > tested the CD drives before they became public as well. And I knew the
    > engineers who was working on them. And we chatted and socialized a lot.
    > I don't know how much I had any input, but they must have picked up a
    > few things from my experience anyway. And when any engineer had any
    > problems, I got called. So is there anything in the CD drive that came
    > from me? Very probable to be honest.
    >
    > --
    > Bill
    > Gateway MX6124 ('06 era) 1 of 3 - Windows XP SP2


    You are a hopeless egocentric...with delusions of grandeur.
    The only way you get your point across is by beating it to death. You
    always get the last word and think you have won. People give up
    talking to you because you are like the "Energizer Bunny".
    I know you have more to say...but I have said mine.
     
  14. BillW50

    BillW50 Flightless Bird

    On 7/28/2010 5:56 AM, Bob Villa wrote:
    > On Jul 27, 10:23 pm, "BillW50"<Bill...@aol.kom> wrote:
    >> Innews:75c47f1f-010b-411c-ad6d-c340dde0edbd@x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com,
    >> Bob Villa typed on Tue, 27 Jul 2010 19:42:33 -0700 (PDT):
    >>
    >>> Okay Bill, I'll take back the tirade part. Here is your quote, "I was
    >>> working for Philips when we created the CD".

    >>
    >> I was working for Philips at that time and that is true. I used and
    >> tested the CD drives before they became public as well. And I knew the
    >> engineers who was working on them. And we chatted and socialized a lot.
    >> I don't know how much I had any input, but they must have picked up a
    >> few things from my experience anyway. And when any engineer had any
    >> problems, I got called. So is there anything in the CD drive that came
    >> from me? Very probable to be honest.

    >
    > You are a hopeless egocentric...with delusions of grandeur.
    > The only way you get your point across is by beating it to death. You
    > always get the last word and think you have won. People give up
    > talking to you because you are like the "Energizer Bunny".
    > I know you have more to say...but I have said mine.


    Boy are you lost! There is no winning or losing here. There is no
    competition at all. Nor should there be. It just doesn't exists. All
    that goes on here is people helping people.

    And there are not any right or wrong opinions or answers. As what works
    for one, may or may not be helpful to somebody else. That is just how
    life works here.

    And no grandeur from me. As I haven't said anything about myself for
    decades. But when people like you start attacking others, I can't let it
    continue and not to say anything. So it is people like you who make me
    do so. And if you are looking for somebody to blame, I suggest looking
    in the mirror.

    And while I was in school getting my EE degree, I was never competitive
    or anything. Nor did I care about being competitive. And I thought I was
    just working hard enough to get by. And to my surprise, not only did I
    pass with flying colors, but tops in my class. And I also had the
    highest test scores they had seen in the last 5 years.

    So this allowed many opportunities to open up for me that otherwise
    wouldn't have been possible. And it wasn't my own doing as I wasn't
    really trying, but the doing of others. As I really didn't care if I
    just squeaked by to be to honest. And who knows what would have happened
    if I actually tried to apply myself.

    --
    Bill
    Gateway MX6124 ('06 era) 1 of 3 - Windows XP SP2
     

Share This Page