JorgeA

I love this crack down in the comments section: --JorgeA

This is epic. Not least is the amount of patience and calm that you were able to deploy against some of these folks. I find it annoying even to read through them, let alone trying to compose replies without going nuts!! These threads SHOULD be put all together in some way. Doubt there's a way to research this, but it would be interesting to go back to 2006-7 and see if some of these same people back then were praising Aero Glass and similar fancy visuals and other novel aspects of Vista that they're now looking down on. Great job, Formfiller. --JorgeA

Thanks, jaclaz.So if I do this, I'll put the firewall PC between the DSL router and the LAN. Now I get to study the best firewall configurations for this purpose! Too bad about "B". --JorgeA

Hewlett-Packard is at it again, confounding the fanboys. Check out this image from their new e-mail circular: The last line in the image reads: "New models just added." It ain't just old inventory that they're trying to get rid of. Why is HP selling Windows 7 PCs right now? So the folks at H-P understand a concept (choice) that appears to have eluded the Microsoft geniuses for a couple of years now. Neat little animation, too... --JorgeA

That was good reading. I see you had something to contribute in that thread. Two questions: A. For the security of the network being protected, does it matter whether the "firewall PC" is placed before or after the hardware firewall (the router)? Or not really? (maybe a case of M x N = N x M) B. (a separate, independent question) Suppose that "they" haven't targeted you yet, as you haven't popped up on "their" radar. Let's say that you have been a good obedient serf all along but are getting fed up. Can a dedicated firewall PC (on top of a hardware firewall) somehow help to protect you from getting hacked? --JorgeA

Thanks for the thoughts about "true" vs. "relative" PC security. You confirmed my leaning in that direction. --JorgeA

No mincing words here: Microsoft: Time to bury live tiles And there's more: I've said from the very beginning that this mess of scrolling and blinking tiles is a potential seizure-inducing nightmare for epileptics. The writer above finds them distracting and useless. And yet Live Tiles is one of the "selling" points of the Metro interface. Without them, we really are left with "a sea of blocky color tiles," many of which are the same color so it's hard tro find what you want. The alternative is to make these tiles look like icons, each with its own individual color design, over a background screen. But in that case we're getting close to the Desktop model. All of which means that, ultimately, there is no rationale for the Metro interface. --JorgeA

If I were the microsoft head honcho, I'd extend the life cycle of all current and former operating systems. Not only XP and 2000, but Windows ME/98/95 :-)Why not support all your former products any way possible? Try and reach the absolute total potential of each system. Write new drivers for hardware. Fix bugs, anything! I could go for that! Certainly a lot of PCs that were just fine, except for having an "obsolete" OS loaded on them, have gone to waste (literally). But IIRC it was in the XP era that the PC market really boomed, so if Microsoft were to adopt this policy immediately, then a big chunk of computers destined for the landfill could still be saved. It sure would create a lot of goodwill to counteract the bad feelings they've been engendering with Win8 and with the push to dump XP. Let all the recent versions of IE work on both XP and Vista. Issue at least some critical patches for IE6 and Win9x. Who could complain -- shareholders? As it is, they're facing a slow squeeze from all the ill will. Maybe they could even monetize this extended-support idea with a modestly priced plan, say for $25 or $50 a year. --JorgeA

Nice analysis, jaclaz. Maybe the MS exec meant to say that there have been 4 billion app downloads from the Windows Store, or maybe the guy said it right but the blogger forgot to type the zeroes (400 million). Based on what we've seen (and thanks for the links), 400 million sounds more plausible than 4 billion. --JorgeA

I guess one can always find someone who'll take a free carton of rotten eggs... That makes sense. Free OS + Paid Cloud would be like Google's Android model. --JorgeA

I've read in a nunber of places that you can't really totally protect your PC from an attacker who's determined enough to get into your system and has enough resources to try it, so the first part of ROTS's post may be germane to the discussion. If the assertion is true, then the best you can hope for is to raise the cost of hacking you to a high enough point that it will deter some percentage of would-be attackers and they'll move on to a softer target. Sort of like putting locks on the house door and windows, and installing an alarm system. A determined enough attacker can still set off a bomb to blast a hole in your house wall, and get in. Any thoughts on that? Am I being too pessimistic about the prospects for true (and not just relative) PC security? --JorgeA

Much appreciated, it looks promising! --JorgeA

Windows 8.1 update due in spring with concessions to mouse and keyboard usersWe know this news of course, but here's the reason I'm posting the story: Notice anything strange about these stats? Assuming the numbers are all correct, think about it -- 200 million Win8 licenses sold, but 4 million apps have been downloaded from the Windows Store? Let's stipulate, for the sake of argument, that that "200 million licenses" figure is not hype and that they are all now in use. This would seem to suggest that, on average, 1 in 50 Win8 users have downloaded even one app from the Windows Store. If this is on the mark, it doesn't bode well at all for the prospects of the Windows Store and for Microsoft's walled-garden model generally. --JorgeA

That is a delicious bit of information! The case for Windows 8 is collapsing like a Ukrainian government. And check out this amazing table: If this reflects reality, then the bottom line is that WinXP -- for all its supposed obsolescence and lack of modern security technology -- is the safest of the current Microsoft OSes. Just amazing. Great find! It's late at night here, so tomorrow I'll read the Secunia report to see if the analysis holds up. But right now this sure doesn't look good for FrankenWindows. --JorgeA EDIT: I read the Secunia report. There's something there with respect to "vulnerabilities" (which are defined as, "an error in software which can be exploited with a security impact and gain) that has me scratching my head: according to Secunia, "vulnerabilities" in Windows XP and 7 (note: independently of third-party software) went up from 49 and 50, respectively, in 2012 to 99 and 102 in 2013, or about the same levels as in 2011. Don't understand how an OS can suddenly be "half" as vulnerable next year and then "twice" as vulnerable again the year after that, especially since these OSes are patched monthly. Do Windows patches introduce their own new security flaws, perhaps even more flaws than they fix?? Maybe someone reading this is familiar with Secunia's methodology.

If that's the way things turn out, it will be bad. I have successfully avoided getting a Microsoft account ever since they were trying to push Passport back in the days of Windows 98; I'm not itching to get one now. --JorgeA

The interesting part is that Mary Jo Foley (in her "update" to the article) downright cites Paul Thurrott as (a reliable) source: http://winsupersite.com/windows-8/further-changes-coming-windows-threshold and concludes by saying how welcome are these changes (that will hopefully lead to Windows 9 being an astounding success on mobiles, touch and traditional desktops) Paul Thurrott of course cites Mary Jo Foley as "base source", and concludes that the big news such as the return of the Start Menu and Metro NCI apps runnning in windows on the desktop, cannot but lead to Windows 9 being an astounding success on mobiles, touch and traditional desktops. Not only they are BORG , but they want to appear as wise ones (you know like each of them had not already at the time already praised the Windows 8 as the best third thing in life after sliced bread and ice-cream, and now claim to have always hated the new interface and design and predicted it's failure). jaclaz There's a lot of truth in that. But Mary Jo Foley was never a big Win8 booster. She thought it worked on a tablet, but her general enthusiasm for it never reached anywhere near the levels of Thurrott's manic phase of his Win8 bipolarity. And AFAIK Woody Leonhard always disliked Windows 8. Wasn't he one of the leading and early critics? I'd be curious to see links to articles where he praised it unequivocally like so many Metrotards. --JorgeA

A highly readable roundup of the Windows wrecking team and what's become of them: Turmoil at Microsoft; implications for Windows users Woody is absolutely not a Win8 fan. He is hopeful about the next version of Windows because all the wreckers are gone, but this observation near the end gives me pause: Given that it was precisely the attempt to integrate "mobile" and "cloud" into Windows that created the current mess, if anything this suggests that the new Windows team might drive even deeper into the mire. Time will tell... --JorgeA

Yeah, that's bad. Linux is even worse -- at best, they commit to supporting a given "long term" support version for what, three years. The prospect of having to reconstitute my PC every couple of years has helped to deter me from making the switch to Linux. Microsoft has actually been pretty good about this, typically supporting their OSes for 8-10 years. Better than everybody else, anyway. --JorgeA

This year's RSA cybersecurity conference felt the consequences of their (alleged) collaboration with the spooks: RSA Security Event Dominated By NSA Surveillance Talk --JorgeA

My first reaction was a maybe, then I went and read some about it. Short answer --- No. Looks to be geared more towards the smart phone crowd and by using that device alone, those that are watching probably know what they are going to send before they even type it. Secondly, you and your recipient's IP address is well known by anyone that cares to be watching. Besides, who knows who is footing the bill for this FREE service. For all we know it could be one of the alphabet agencies or a collaborative effort. bpalone fix typo Good points, especially that last one. --JorgeA

And now for a bit of hopeful privacy news -- Maintain your email privacy with ShazzleMail Comments? Could this actually help freedom lovers in Ukraine, Venezuela, Iran... the U.S.? --JorgeA

Been a busy couple of days, but I hope to get the chance to dig into some of the recent postings here and comment on them. For now, feast on this tidbit: Microsoft's Julie Larson-Green becomes chief experience officer for Bing, Office, Skype, and more Yippee, she gets to ruin several more Microsoft user interfaces... --JorgeA EDIT: funny typo

Welcome back, Charlotte. I was getting worried that something untoward might have happened during one of those endless snow shoveling sessions. (From sometimes scary experience, I know that it's very heavy work.) Sounds like you really got hammered. We got about 6 inches on top of everything that was already on the ground, but that's like nothing compared to what fell on you. No problem here with inflicting the masssive data dump on us, it'll keep us busy for a while. --JorgeA

Understood, jaclaz. Thank you. I'll think about this (and also read Flasche's links) and then weigh the time and effort (or maybe even fun) of learning the relevant technology, versus the additional security that it might provide. --JorgeA

No comment needed: Cisco Gains Traction In The Connected Road Race And: [emphasis added] Umm, yeah, I have thought about the possibilities that this technology presents. But I wonder if you have, Mr. Elfrink. Hard-hitting observations down in the comments section (most of them). --JorgeA