# Posts by eulampios

1016 posts • joined 10 Aug 2011

### Beat it, freetards! Dyn to shut down no-cost dynamic DNS next month

#### Re: What's the point?

Or alternatively, if you're using a router facing WAN (a modem without any repeated router/gateway, I have dd-wrt on it), you could request your IP with something like this:

 curl 2>/dev/null your_routers_LAN_IP \ | sed -n ' s/.*\&nbsp\;IP\: $$[.0-9]*$$<.*/\1/gp ' 

PS: both the code and pre tags don't scale very well on ELReg, hence a bunch of lines instead one only.

### Microsoft in 1-year Windows XP survival deal with UK govt

#### Re: @latex

I just finished submitting a paper with 13 algorithms and 53 equations in it.

And you try judging LaTeX and my points from it? Thanks, good for you. Just wanna clarify it for you, I got more than a 15-year experience of using LaTeX and a 25+ year experience of doing Math. I also tried MS Word before TeX, it was horrible.

Even with your 53 equations you didn't get the point.

Neither are you aware of the portability issue. There is no way you could change a custom style required by the journal in Word, you have to retype or reformat the document manually and entirely. You can do that easily using the provided class and style files supplied by the editors and point at it in the header \documentclass{} in (La)TeX.

You would never get graphics any close to pstricks, pst-euclide, commutative diagrams in or tikzpicture, presentation like in beamer or prosper. You can join various symbols to make a symbol if it's not available to you, define new symbols. There are tons of options and symbols. You don't need even google to google it, use this or this wiki .

He was amazed that the quick Excel plots looked far better than the laborious plots generated by MATLab or Python.

A Knowledge is talking yet again. Not sure about MatLab, but Python doesn't plot by itself, you might mean sage some other plugin. Crappy plot they must have been then. There is gnuplot, parigp, maxima and many more specialized tools. Many CAS would have a TeX mode output, you can edit. Is there an MS format mode? Never heard of that. There is pstricks with ps functions or generic curves with raw data, just like gnuplot, but your ignorance doesn't wanna hear that too, perhaps....

#### Re: @AC

No, it's you that seem to don't understand the difficulty.

0. older versions of Word were not capable of this text mark-up feature, so the formulas were kept as embedded graphics. No "good" way to convert this to LaTeX, I am sorry. LO/OO were always doing it in MathML-like XML, I don't know if they had ever done embedded at all though.

1. the capabilities of Office are very limited, those of (La)TeX are practically not. The quality of the output of the latter is much superior to that of the former.

What can be more concise, yet nicely legible and more intuitive than \int \iint or \Bigcup \Bigcap, \dot, dots etc

2. Did you try learning LaTeX?

3. See the above. To enhance readability you use the pdf/dvi output and also a good editor. If it helps you do use some of WYSIWYG elements, like LyX. For me it's GNU Emacs (that has a corresponding auc-tex mode, which I don't use persoanlly and am happy with the raw tex-mode). Sorry, MSO has no such tool.

...its rather sorry Equation Editor in its early history and have not returned.

Ohh.. sir, Microsoft Equations, what a really painful experience it was, it makes me shiver even now to remember how back in the nineties a few pages long document typed in MS Word and MS Equations would get unresponsive when you just need to save it after correcting a couple of words. Indeed, GUI and embedded graphics that is used to store the formulas was an obvious blunder for Microsoft, at least back then. Whilst,Don Knuth's TeX, I presume, long predates MS Equations. So it was now my own turn for the raw stupidity of not knowing/using it at the time... I was not exposed to Unix or Linux yet ..."better late than never" though :)

#### @AC

They need Office and the likes of Endnote to get the papers written. There is no F/OSS alternative that is 100% compatible with defacto MS Office standard.

Are you saying this out of actual knowledge or someone told you?

I mean, a Math, Physics and even Chemistry article be better written in (La)TeX. Binary PDF's are also accepted sourced from Office sometimes, yet those are looked down upon by the editors. It is usually because Office (and MSO in particular) are poorly designed for a layout with a lot of formulas.

A few formulas are OK, however, things get really complicated when you need lots of them or/and something complex, like a (commutative) diagram that is used in a lot of general or algebraic Math papers, or some exquisite graphics, like pstricks (or even like this) It would be a mess doing it in MSO or any other Office suite. Chemists (our respected commenter Chemist can correct if I am wrong) also need a lot of diagrams to lay out, so for them too. Egyptologists, cuneiform scientists, musicians would also find their life much easier with LaTeX.

Another problem is portability, yes here we go again. When your mark-up is done in (La)TeX the the style can be changed as every particular journal wants, you just need to download their cls file and add a corresponding directive in the header of the source file. No manual work is ever required. Unless you know the journal that would publish your manuscript and follow it's style, it's a big deal.

Well, the most important still is the efficiency and speed with which you progress (even if you have solved your Fields Medal problem and rush for the publication) . When you got lots of these, believe me , it is much easier and faster to type, like, for this Fubini identity:

$$\iint\limits_{D}\sqrt{1+x^4}\ dA=\int\limits_{0}^1\int\limits_{0}^{x^3}\sqrt{1+x^4}\:dy\:dx$$

than do a couple dozen clicks with a considerably poorer output. You gotta learn it first which is hard... not from the technical standpoint though, but a purely psychological one.

Finally, installing Texlive suite is much easier to do on a GNU/Linux distro, than on Windows. Been there and done both.

### Microsoft frisks yet another Android gear maker for patent dosh

I have the slightest of interests of knowing who you are and what you do, mon ami. I really don't care. I didn't try insulting you personally, you did. This makes you an anonymous coward in my mind in the original and direct meaning. If I'd ever see you, I'd kick your arse, sir. Just wanna make sure you get this message that you lack the balls to refrain from insulting someone virtually with a screen and a keyboard vs. face-to-face like what a man would do.

Sorry if you can't get it.

Good bye!

#### @AC

What did Google steal? Why didn't those mentioned victims sue Google for the infringement? Yes I don't know if you have not heard while living apparently under some heavy rock for some time, Oracle were unable to prove that 2+2=3... I mean Google have beaten Larry up in court.

#### @no shill dogged

You don't support anyone? And you're even impartial to Microsoft... oops my bad, sir. I thought you were very partial. I apologize then, since it's just a coincidence that every time I notice, you're on the rapists' side, protecting every patent troll that happens to write some fuck-shit software during its spare time.

The power of your arguments are all being well appreciated. Should now bear your naivety, wisdom and great sense of fairness. hope I didn't forget anything, must write that down somewhere.

#### Re: Does this mean

As any patent troll claiming that their very character out many millions lines of code is most important piece there. However since it's all done covertly neither do we know what char is that nor whether that car is theirs indeed. There's a strong suspicion, it's MS' exfat long filename patent which they can (ab)use due to their still dominance on desktop market. Validity of this patent was questioned before ( as pointed out below) by Linus Torvalds successfully, so again we don't know how much MS is trolling for and who actually ends up paying, like it had occurred to B&N.

#### @dogged

Sony don't make a Windows phone?

Please remind us again when exactly did Sony already sign this agreement with Microsoft?

#### @RyokuMas

Is your privacy invaded when your email and emails addressed to you are scanned by a spam filter or a malware detection program?

I am guessing your fear is based not on what purpose is it done for but who does it. MS can invade privacy to incriminate a suspect they then lose all their scrupulosity at once, though.

I hope you and the other dogged Microsoft protagonist above get a share of that sweet don't-get-scroogled pie, Microsoft is so lavishly sharing.

### Windows 8 BREAKS ITSELF after system restores

#### Re: @ dogged

Fecal matter is all yours, sir :) and I am sorry for you not working for MS ... on the full-time basis.

This post has been deleted by a moderator

#### Re: Similar problem with W7?

I think there is an option of deleting Windows entirely and installing Linux Mint Debian Edition instead. Although LMDE people warn against some "rough edges", it's usually not a problem to fix a broken package/update. Just reminding that a typical GNU/Linux distro including this one handles updates for around 40 gigs of software (filling 99.99% of your needs, vs very few MS own products) through a single front-end for a reason called apt and with a few quite intuitive user interfaces to it, a GUI called synaptic, or a few command line tools, like aptitude or apt-get. You can filter to and fix a broken package in synaptic or just issue/copy paste from the error message to run :

"apt-get install -f"

That didn't help with the skype sound issues though the other day, but no surprises at all, since it wants to drag i386 libraries, thanks to Microsoft or skype poor coding. There were no broken packages there, the sound is just unreliable. How hard is it to write portable, modular software and get a 64 bit version? What a coincidence, when there is some incompetent mess, it should be MS.

### Android update process gives malware a leg-up to evil: Indiana U

#### @ Sandtitz

I also prefer Linux Mint, more precisely, LMDE. However, as far as Android is concerned and as many people have said many times before, it would be fair to count the actual number of devices that got trojans installed not the numbers of trojans ready to be installed.

There is very little evidence of anybody ever getting at least a tiny fraction of those nasty trojans advertised by the AV companies. Despite some individual ludicrous report(s) claiming to routinely intercept the traffic these mystical trojans engage in while using some undisclosed magical methods. I myself cannot present these numbers and can only judge by sampling the population available to me and compare it with the results seen with MS Windows malware. This is my statistics. Pretty much, it's a zero vs virtually everyone.

#### Re: @PM

Agreeing with you on the openness of Android and the unfortunate negative consequences of it that almost every OEM and ARM chip manufacturer to substantially mess things up. Thinking about one Chinese at the moment, Allwinner, that require bloody MS Windows to make their version of Android to upgrade. In general, there's the idiotic proprietary blobs, Linux kernel mess etc. And it's not only the vulnerabilities which are not that many for Android that get on people's nerves...

I would like to yet see or hear someone getting a trojan on a device or someone getting hacked due to the fact that the device was vulnerable. Well, I mean not from Kaspersky or MacAffee or Microsoft, I mean from someone that actually got it.

#### @the Anonymous Swiss Cheese connaisseur

You seem to be a knowledgeable Swiss Cheese gourmet. Have you tried the one made in Redmond, WA?

Talking about permissions? How would you call the OSes made by Microsoft over the last 20 some years that had no API to separate both applications and their permissions manifested to the user before the install? Those would qualify as big Swiss Cheese holes without any cheese left at all.

### Microsoft frisked blogger's Hotmail inbox, IM chat to hunt Windows 8 leaker, court told

#### @ cornz 1

the difference between Google and MSFT, as it now follows from it, is that Google throw ads at their customers, Microsoft throw their customers in jail.

Yes, who'd have thunk that, scroogled vs. screwed:

Hypocrisy (Frailty) -- thy name is Microsoft!

#### it's not only his employer's mail server

it is also used by a few hundred other million people. Otherwise it would have been @microsoft.com, @redmond.com or @windows.com

This news should be advertised much more. Think about all those squandered millions on the "don't get scroogled" campaign? Yeah,

-- Google reads your emails on gmail, and if their scripts do it for them to serve you ads, our security stuff personally reads it on outlook/hotmail when we want to put you in jail! Still not willing to migrate from gmail to outlook?!

#### @ Chris Miller and Khaptain

What sort of idiot employer and idiot employee are those?

It's a Microsoft's employee and his employer. Who is a lesser idiot? Well, I am not sure.

### Hidden 'Windigo' UNIX ZOMBIES are EVERYWHERE

#### @h4rm0ny

Okay, it seems that you're trying to sound superior to me and giving me a lesson here and there. I, on the other hand, was attempting to refrain from a pedantic tone.

What appears to me even before I got into this discussion (futile as I see, and it's not the first time we are disputing this over) with you is that your arguments are disingenuous at best.

Let me read how you rebuffed someone who brought up a few more arguments.

#### Re: @h4rm0ny, permissions

I'm not really familiar with Android so I'm not quite sure what you mean

The implemented Android permissions system, where every app when gets installed acquires a unique uid, so all apps are separated from both the user's data and other apps. It routinely joins certain groups seen to the user as certain permissions groups at the install time. This is done to fight apparent insecurity of an app and the fact that it could be a trojan. With introduction of SELinux a user might get even more power of that to turn some permissions off even when installing an app and agreeing to them.

Even without the SELinux part this is very smart, yet it is based on the good ol' POSIX permissions system. So it is smart and simple.

I am pretty baffled in with the fact that you never heard about it.

My question is, why didn't Microsoft invent it, since they have been in need of this 2 decades ago. I don't think it's only "Dave Cutler's own allergy to Unix" business. It's more of a culture issue, what is good, what is smart and how smart, political is the one that actually makes decisions, I might be wrong though.

I was mentioning it to demonstrate that simplicity can lead to some very clever things (more complex but still simple enough).

My reason of mentioning AppArmor without SELiunux was based on the fact that AppArmor is more proper extension of the filesystem permission system, than SELinux. Not making any points which one of them is a better MAC implementation.

My point with Unix/Linux acl utility was that you can use a more fine grained access control mechanism if in need and when the simple system gets on your way.

#### Re: Services, @h4rm0ny

I would like to clarify a little more on what I said earlier.

1) free and/or open source:

Security through obscurity has been demonstrated to be a fallacy time and again. Moreover, dangerous bugs in proprietary apps are spotted through the reverse engineering usually. So, it's an exploit gets ready before you get a chance to see a code (especially, for someone that wants to patch it before MS or any other owner finds time and resources to do it for you and get it shipped)

2) when people question the advantage of the code being available for study, they perhaps might have something different than me (and many other people) in mind. So what do we have here? Linux kernel that surpassed any proprietary kernel implementation in so many categories. And BTW, the only way you can defend proprietary implementation of a particular project is to compare the binaries performance. And what can we compare? The abominable Flash-player vs mplayer or vlc? adobe pdf reader with evince/atril, kpdf etc?

In more details -- 64 bit skype version for GNU/Linux vs gpl-ed linphone. I got several 64bit Debian (and Debian systems here). Whenever I install skype, MS offers a 32bit version only. I have to use a multiarch option for it and install a whole lot of i386 libs (the apt does it for me) Perhaps due to this fact, I can't get the sound properly, you get so many sound devices and options in the options->sound devices tab, so it's a poor non-user-friendly, which doesn't work reliably anyways. To compare it with linphone available for most architectures for bot 32 and 64 versions. Works flawlessly out of the box. BTW, it's not the only case of a proprietary code that has portability issues. What that tells us? Without looking at the particular source code, one might observe a design problem, as I mentioned earlier, perhaps the developers could not distinguish all modules that should be separated. Do you have another hypothesis why MS cannot bring their code in order?

This is a response to your "That I flat-out reject as straight bias. You're just stating that GNU/Linux programmers are better than MS programmers..."

I'm trying to remember the last time I actually compiled my own kernel and I'm pretty sure it was about three years ago...

I do it regularly, it's no rocket science and is easily automated. The only obstacle is the hardware that builds, it better be a multicore recent system, like one of my machines I utilize for it spends about 10 mins to do it. More importantly, that you conveniently forget or talk this issue down. Don't you know that different distributions use different configs with different options turned on and off? There are a lot of intersections, yet they are not quite identical. Let's take an example of the last CVE, CVE-2014-2523 found in the Linux source code. If you look and see which distros and versions are vulnerable, you'd find no common denominator: most generic kernels shipped have this dccp protocol option turned off. Mine is on though (I am using a customized 3.12 version from Debian sid). Let us now try figuring this out for Windows. Do we have any variations in the kernel among the current up-to-date version? There might be some between XP, Vista, 8 and 8.1. Not as many as with the Linux versions even in the 3.* range, and none withing the same version of OS or kernel as a particular Linux kernel version can have.

If this is not a great advantage, I don't know what is for you? I mean, if you do not recognize heterogeneity as a huge advantage before homogeneity from the security stand point, we have different views here.

That's pretty much just a restatement of your previous point...

Not necessarily, the kernel is one thing, particular setups may not have to follow it. Once again, MS have/has been deaf for quite a long time to various remarks about their weakness as no way to strip a system down to a bare minimum before. They now recognize that and are talking about lowering the attack surface. And they are getting better, yet still not quite the same place where Debian and most other Linux and BSD distros have been for decades already.

Yes, a million different variations are great for consistent security and making sure your fix for your software is on all platforms in all the different packages. Surrrrre.

It's a flawed argument in my opinion. My counter to this is that had never been a problem in the past. Or you know any examples where this was a case? Committing a patch to all versions of the kernel are absolutely not a big deal, thanks to git. Distros are even faster to patch very important vulnerabilities. If we're talking about the kernel again. No waiting for the Tuesdays patch, remember ? :)

Again, you're shifting things into a weird game of My Team scores more points than Your Team...

If you didn't get it, I'll reiterate it for you, now it makes more sense after you have praised MS acl in your other comment, I would like you to come back to the Android open source realization of what MS should have done to fight so many trojan issues. No they didn't invent it, neither they touch upon many other categories. I mentioned them aplenty above. And BTW, the ultimate incentive for MS and most other proprietary entities are making as much money as possible. MS is a huge company, they probably have many talented programmers and designers (I mean, project and software designers). They also have as many or more managers, lawyers, financiers that have very different agendas than producing a good code and design. No, am I wrong? Didn't they try to "implant IE into the OS" to make non removable? What about the Vista to require more resources to make people upgrade to higher end hardware? What about their decisions in security, like ease of Auto-Play/Run? The decision to hide API's, poorly documenting them? To not ship products for alternative OSes damaging the design decisions so many times (remember 64 bit rewrite issues)? Deliberate incompatibility with other competitors products in their own? If this doesn't appeal to you, I apologize...

#### @h4rm0ny, permissions

Are we looking at and talking about the same thing really?

Correct me if I was wrong about the xp nightmare with the privileges gone wild? Even if it was improved in the higher versions of Windows, it has still brought a lot of damage as the most popular version of MS Windows as of recent.

Correct me also if it is true for every even modern version of MS Windows to not require any explicit privileges of a file to be executable? The system or shell decides whether it is or not and judges about it by looking at the extension of the file? No need for prompts like in your case with XFCE, (not in mine with the Mate desktop).

When you talk about overkill in Linux or *BSD, what exactly is it?

Have you heard about AppArmor or acl utility?

Does Windows acl solve the same problem Android extension of the apps permissions addresses?

#### @AC

You reminded me about a few more things, sir/ma'm:

-- Simplicity, in other words effectiveness: if things are smart, they must be simple, feasible, usable, otherwise they are overly complex, not effective, simply useless (the KISS principle is in action)

One such implementation of it is the POSIX file permission system that is easier, more simple than MS Windows. Hence, they are more usable and more used. On the other hand can be extended to acl, MAC system or Android extensions. Remember how messy it was with Windows XP?

#### Re: Services

What makes GNU/Linux more "secure by design" than modern Windows (i.e. 7 or 8).

There are a few things that you (I guess, pretend) to have never heard about. I might recommend you to go back to some classical text on this. Most of the tackled material remains true to this day, IMHO. Okay, let me provide you my own proof of the "Pythagoras Theorem", ... I mean, my own take, a list of my own. I promise you to not use this Euclid's own masterpiece

a list:

-- most software on GNU/Linux is free/open source, including the kernel and utilities;

-- the kernel is modular, where a huge number of options are togglable at the compile time;

-- various system pieces are mutually interchangeable; many different combinations exist out there, say, quite a few GNU/Linux, BSD, the hybrids of the latter, Android etc;

-- a GNU/Linux (*BSD) system can be stripped down much further, disassembled and assembled with much more ease, than can be Windows. MS Windows didn't invent a headless, bare minimum server; A Core Server -- things are improving in Redmond here after 20 some years of denial.

-- more accurate POSIX hierarchical filesystem structure vs. chaotic Windows that still mixes data and software;

-- much more numerous up-to-date versions in use, a much higher distro heterogeneity than with MS Windows;

-- lack of central secure repositories containing 99% of all used software in MS Windows; recent attempts with a Windows store are unraisable, yet semi, or rather one hundreds of a measure, since very few software is available there. Neither did MS invent the Android's apps' permissions system and its transparency to the user.

-- lack of a decent central packager paired with a repository utility (see the previous item), like dpkg+apt, familiar to you from Debian, that does security, integrity and dependency tests; installs updates most of the software in a near seamless fashion, literally by typing in a command, or by a few mouse-clicks

-- better and closer adherence to the main IT principles of modularity, KISS, software in the Linux/BSD camp of developers and sysadmins than in the proprietary camp including Microsoft folks; neither is F/OSS people changing their opinion on things IT like Microsoft has for the last decades demonstrated time and again.

-- lack of a competent IT culture and infrastructure around MS Windows: harder to troubleshoot and fix problems, than with GNU/Linux or *BSD. Most popular type of diagnosis and resolution with Windows are either:

It's a malware/viruses -- get yourself a good AV and disinfect your PC!

Could be anything.... -- reinstall your system!

--etc

Theses are some I got off the top of m head right now, there are a lot more, I am sure.

#### @h4rm0ny

I said that GNU/Linux would be pretty much the same malware-wise if it had the same user-base as Windows. That's not a dig at GNU/Linux, that's a simple and supportable opinion.

That's your theory, a hypothesis. It might not be true though.

Is it that you're forgetting the fact that you have to type in your password more times with Debian updates than for only two apps (FF and IE) in Windows. 2 vs all? Would you also prefer have an important, security update available ASAP than once a month? Please answer these questions:

-- there are only two pieces of software that needs updates, and/or

-- all the rest software stays magically updated without you needing to type in any passwords?

-- you can get updates for the 99.999% of installed apps, just like in Debian ?

-- updates for 3-party software are taken care of by a central packaging Windows system that installs, verifies the authenticity and integrity, checks for dependencies, keeps records for, notifies about and performs the updates when available of every piece of software

--Microsoft after all those long 20 some years has finally built itself a repository/store where you can securely install and update all apps and dlls?

If this is not completely true you might need to reconsider your little "congruency" theory, I suppose.

#### hey, Derrek

Have ever met a single victim of the Android malwares that are so numerous (according to Kasperski and others)? I myself have not. How many Windows users do you know that had never experienced a Windows malware at least once in their life? Well. I can't recall any, if I have, than there should be a really tiny percentage.

### Windows hits the skids, Mac OS X on the rise

#### Re: Paul Crawford @Matt "sorry, I dropped FreeBSD when ZFS was forced on us"

going from FreeBSD to MS Windows? Wow, what a turn?!

#### @Matt: reasons to switch away from Windows

are aplenty for geeks and ordinary clueless users. Money is pretty much the last one, I suppose. I now experience them all when need to help a friend with his/her Windows problem. Such as

-- an annoying trojan/virus

-- slowed down system due to fragmented or "out of control" registry, or filled up disk (windows folder is known to grow with time), or some other unknown reasons

-- "irrational" problems (like this one) not resolved by MS, OEMs, nor the so called "windows geeks" -- all offering their own mutually perpendicular solutions/workarounds , none of which would finally resolve the issue. My last shock was that an ntfs filesystem can be wiped out completely without any warning on a healthy hdd after playing a game

My own reasons include:

-- a proprietary, effectively non-modular architecture, that is, you can't separate, substitute various pieces of the system, like the kernel from gui, utilities, shells etc; one is a mess you might run into when a kernel patch won't let you boot, unlike with a typical GNU/Linux distros with multiple kernel versions option.

-- less flexibility and configurability: would like to trim a system to my needs, build my own kernels, make my own persistent live media with ease

-- lack of decent, proper IT culture around MS Windows and plenty of mouse-clicking clueless Windows "geeks" that know nothing but "reinstall Windows" solution to every problem.

-- lack of a central repository full of most software with tested security mechanism (Win8 store was too late and still got very few) , like apt for Debian system; this should also be wise enough to take care of dependencies and able to prevent installing and running multiple copies of the same libraries

-- etc

I did like and run FreeBSD up to the version 8.1-RC. It was a nice learning experience that let me study an alternative Unix system. Stopped using it when the FreeBSD foundation had gone awry with their GPL intolerance and view of all support from the patent troll in Cupertino, CA

In your turn, I haven't heard any argument from you, rather than you want to use a "decent Office suite", that is MSO from your other comment. Why LO/OO isn't decent enough for you? Is it a ribbon UI or a pivot table that you can't live without, or is it something else. The fact that the code of MSO is not portable is one big minus in my mind.

As far as I am concerned, I rely much more on GNU Emacs , which is available on most OS'es, however, there are some oddities and less control when running it on Windows.

#### @Matt, Re: eulampios IMHO...

I am sorry sir about you being unlucky with your Linux trials. In my own experience, most of the people that try Linux would switch to GNU/Linux either entirely or at least as a dual boot option, providing they do care about things IT.

#### @JDX

No, the bias is in this generality that all OSes being counted were obtained the same way. No, they aren't, and we both know this well, don't we?

Probably 99.9% of manual Windows installs are done on machines which came with Windows in the first place.

Yes, let's count all the manual installs.

#### IMHO, It would be fair

to compare the shares of each OS actually installed by users themselves removing the preinstalled, bundled, non-reimbursable ones. Or, at least explicitly putting them in different categories.

### Microsoft closing in on Apache's web server crown

#### both nobis.net and ubiquityhosting.com

domains don't seem to be switching yet they still run an outdated version of apache 2.2.15 on CentOS, if their http header doesn't lie.

#### Re: Apples & Pears

this is right, however, the most popular non-static content is PHP. Nginx handles it perfectly via fast cgi. This is also true with Perl, Python, Ruby. AMOF, my toy Perl cgi scripts run very well indeed.

### Backdoor snoops can access files on your Samsung phone via the cell network – claim

#### @AC

No, amusement is all ours to see how naive you really are. Any_Proprietary_OS_ has all those delicacies out of the box, it is a big fat back door, by definition. The sad part here is that you might not be able to verify it in any way other than through some kind of back-engineering.

And on top of that, it might be either impossible or very hard to load an alternative, open OS on the device at all. So Win Phone and surfaces are to be ruled out right there.

### It's 2014 and Microsoft Windows PCs can still be owned by a JPEG

#### 64 bit version rewrites

Another example that stands out is skype with the shitty design, apparently, since Microsoft or the former code owner seem to fail the main principle of IT of modular programming. The current MS skype offering has no 64-bit builds for Linux. You gotta install a whole bunch of dependent libs emulating i386 if you run a 64-bit version of the OS (multiarch in Debian terms). It's still a shitty little app as far as the sound is concerned. Compare it with linphone a sip client for Linux/BSD/Windows/Android working flawlessly on each platform.

#### @Slawek and dogged

And why do you assume that all "members of community" have benevolent intentions?

Just the mere statistics. The Law of Big Numbers (quite an important topic in Statistics and Probability Theory) The fact that with an open code given enough popularity for the project, the chances are higher than in the case when it is proprietary.

@dogged

Why do you have to trust all developers? A few people might be enough to spot mistakes or malevolent intentions of those you don't trust. Once again, no code is available to examine, change and redistribute, you have to have a trust to one entity? How reliable is that?

Okay, who do we trust? Say, Adobe flash player, pdf reader? Yes, sure. No malevolent intentions are needed.

### Microsoft to push out penultimate XP patch on March Patch Tuesday

#### Re: Linux

Good, try also Linux Mint 16 Mate (based on Ubuntu). I use that one for this purpose.

#### Re: Linux

the majority of people are perfectly happy to continue with the familiarity of Windows which they see as being free anyway because they bought this PC and it already has Windows.

That is the catch! That is why it is called "the MS Windows Tax". It appears to be free, though it is not. And btw, when I offer help with cleaning up, fix a slow, full of viruses PC, I offer a usb drive live Linux Mint persistent system with a few additional packages added to the base one. This would be either near impossible, expensive or plain hard with any version Windows. Cleaning and troubleshooting a Windows setup is more expensive than the original license. My setup is advertised as a viruses-immune, never aging, self-cleaning system. If this "ad" is true, and the system works and suits the needs, I install on the hard drive. No need to relearn and get used to the new operating system. At the very end, I do explain that it is not MS Windows, but a GNU/Linux distribution.

For the time being, I charge for the usb flash drive. Things are pretty automated now. When I get more people asking for the same, I might start charging them a pack of beers or a bottle of wine :)

### GNU security library GnuTLS fails on cert checks: Patch now

more modern and secure, in design at least

theoretically speaking, there are advantages, though no one really knows how much of this theory is actually implemented. Once again, a proprietary product is pretty much a black box.

Hard to compare the performance here. As far as popularity, number of supported architectures, portability, flexibility (options to turn on and off), modularity and interconnectivity, modular independence with other software (say Linux, FreeBSD kernels are tested to work for many different OS envelops), NT loses big time.

PS is very fresh (2005) compared to the much wider and more thoroughly used and better documented POSIX/Unix shells. Think of portability again.

So, no AC, unfortunately, the proprietary counterparts a more clear to lose than win in this case.

#### A suggested list

Evidence? Try taking similar proprietary product and the one with the source code freely available. Compare their performance, stability, popularity, security, scalability, versatility, flexibility, portability, availability, ease of use, ubiquity, adherence to the main principles of IT etc.

Say,

1) Linux kernel, Free,Open,NetBSD, Darwin vs. NT kernel

2) vim, GNU Emacs vs notepad ;) okay, you can take Visual Studio editor

3) a GNU Linux, a BSD distro vs. Microsoft Windows

4) gnu bash, zsh etc vs. power shell

5) Apache, nginx vs Microsoft IIS

etc

So what do we get here?

#### Re: there is a gnupg though

Note that GCC C does not issue a diagnostic for the GnuTLS or Apple SSL/TLS bugs even with "all" warnings enabled.

And which one that could compile them both would? For as many architectures?

#### there is a gnupg though

a very popular product, even the diehard jobsians, BSD-only, gpl haters cannot live without. There is also a gcc that is still the best compiler. Those allergic to gpl, gnu and FSF are creating their own clang compiler....

### Linux-friendly Munich: Ja, we'll take open source collab cloud

#### @the brave anonymous coward

Oh yeah, that would be because they get to drink from the teat of tax payer money...money never runs out and they are never held accountable.

Do you mean us, tax payers, that have to support Microsoft and their fat proprietary brethren with our own money for Schools, government institutions and pretty much everything that follows? No accountability indeed when this money is swallowed by the private giant leech from Redmond, WA.

### Fiendish Internet Explorer 10 zero-day targets US soldiers

#### @AC, look at other more consistent figures

This is great discrepancy with pretty much every other source Look at this numbers . According to it currently, IE holds about 20%, while Chrome more than 40%.

#### Re: @AC

None of your links talk about successful exploitation of getting a root. The first of them does mention an escape from the sandbox on the browser (very old one, applicable only to devices prior to Android 2.2) AMOF, MS Windows had no mandatory app sandbox mechanism (at least until Windows 8). So, again nothing specific.

Sure - but Linux has historically had some of the highest vulnerability counts of any OS (approaching 1,000 known holes in the kernel alone)

So, what is counted? Without weighing severity of each bug, one cannot say just by looking at the number. Does it apply to ALL versions of Linux, all or most generic configurations, architectures or not? You see you apply the monolithic Microsoft measure to this. MS kernels or whatever they call kernel cannot be configured in many gazillions ways with various options (like built into or as separate etc module). There is many more architectures and so many more current and extant versions of Linux kernel out there than for any other OS. Heterogeneity of Linux distros and Linux kernels diminishes that number substantially.

#### Re: @AC

IE has a 75% market share of PC users

According to various statistics IE's market share fluctuates around 25%. Not sure where did you get the 75% number. It's pretty unlikely, if the 25% estimate is correct since Firefox, chrome et al are also counted for PC users.

but there certainly have been previous exploits that have rooted Android via the browser,

Links please, or do you mean a browser/Android exploit together with the privilege escalation exploit of the Linux kernel can render that. That is theory, a possibility, yet it doesn't mean it had been ever demonstrated.

hat has sucessully attacked OS-X / Linux via the browser

So again, you're trying to make it sound like it had happened.

Potential, yet a very unlikely situation. Did you follow our own links and saw that this java trojan would write itself /etc/init.d? How well do you know Linux-based systems to run web browsers as root?

A java browser plug-in exploiting a patched java vulnerability?

I am not using java plug-in, even most people don't use it nowadays (FF turns it off by default). JS is more of headache due to a much heavier use, FF's user are still more safe with noscript...

#### theory vs. practice, @ the 2nd AC

the theoretical ability to boot into another kernel version is great except when your last update makes changes which render all the previous versions of the kernel un-bootable,

Sorry about that AC, can't recall it happening to me, actually.

So for me it's both practical and theoretical advantage, while missing in the MS Windows.

In your case, what could that be GRUB is pretty hard to break,

-- unless you updated/changed a proprietary video driver, but it's still bootable into mesa or a console non-X.

-- or you/update messed up with your configs, updates rarely (never happened to me), in case you did it, it's not the fault of the OS. And, it's still fairly easy to fix it by booting into a recovery mode (one user env) or a live system.

I suggested that taking examples of random /different/ bugs an using them to illustrate better

I've done it for you, pwn2own wasn't random enough for you? My perception was that Google has been super-fast, while MS does it ... on Tuesdays every month. On the other note, Chrome has yet to be compromised in the wild, unlike a popular target IE.

Lunix is ace/MS sucks attitude which flows through your posts because it holds back the FOSS movement as a whole.

Sorry, no it doesn't depend on me it depends on MS. BTW, holding back the FOSS movement, or rather using predatory practices and dirty tactics is one big thing. Sucking in the IT sense is a very different one. Say, Apple got the first one and many people despise them equally ( while Oracle got... Larry to join this very good company). In my opinion, MS deserves every beating and derision it receives for the both. No, it's all up to MS to not suck, I am afraid.