Win XP vulnerable to that TCP/IP hack, Microsoft doesn't care.
2009-Sep-17, Thursday 16:06So, that TCP/IP issue I mentioned last time in " Computer Security - Anything But Windows. Seriously."?
Microsoft: No TCP/IP patches for you, XP
So, in other words, Microsoft has forgotten how to maintain the code for Win XP. Either they've dumped too much critical build infrastructure, or it's just "too difficult" to build a patch that goes that deep into the XP kernel.
Either way, it really doesn't speak well for toolchain maintenance, development process and their software architecture (or lack thereof).
Bear in mind, this is for a version of the OS that is not supposed to be end-of-life yet. I have no issue with inability to patch end-of-lifed OS versions - I wouldn't expect to see patches for Win98, for example.
In short, Microsoft's other excuse for why they aren't bothering to patch XP is that your Windows XP machine will theoretically hang if it's being attacked, so you're obviously perfectly safe from being hacked. Ahahah. Very funny. At least to me, anyway.
So: Computer Security - Anything But Windows. Seriously. Really, Seriously. Run, don't walk. Try something else.
Microsoft: No TCP/IP patches for you, XP
"We're talking about code that is 12 to 15 years old in its origin, so backporting that level of code is essentially not feasible," said security program manager Adrian Stone during Microsoft's monthly post-patch Webcast, referring to Windows 2000 and XP.
So, in other words, Microsoft has forgotten how to maintain the code for Win XP. Either they've dumped too much critical build infrastructure, or it's just "too difficult" to build a patch that goes that deep into the XP kernel.
Either way, it really doesn't speak well for toolchain maintenance, development process and their software architecture (or lack thereof).
Bear in mind, this is for a version of the OS that is not supposed to be end-of-life yet. I have no issue with inability to patch end-of-lifed OS versions - I wouldn't expect to see patches for Win98, for example.
Although the two bugs can be exploited on Windows 2000 and XP, Microsoft downplayed their impact. "A system would become unresponsive due to memory consumption ... [but] a successful attack requires a sustained flood of specially crafted TCP packets, and the system will recover once the flood ceases."
In short, Microsoft's other excuse for why they aren't bothering to patch XP is that your Windows XP machine will theoretically hang if it's being attacked, so you're obviously perfectly safe from being hacked. Ahahah. Very funny. At least to me, anyway.
So: Computer Security - Anything But Windows. Seriously. Really, Seriously. Run, don't walk. Try something else.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-17 07:35 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-17 07:44 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-17 08:56 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-17 09:59 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-17 10:06 (UTC)I shall think on't some more, thank you.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-17 10:22 (UTC)http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=594050
http://architosh.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1414
both forum threads seem to contain a lot of options for Mac native CAD programs, as well as a few people talking about running it under VMWare. :-)
I assume part of the issue is that you have a copy of AutoCAD, and/or you are working with files already in AutoCAD and/or need to share them with other people with AutoCAD?
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-17 10:44 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-17 13:54 (UTC)I suspect it's going to backfire horribly on them when a frustrated third party supplies a fix, and Microsoft end up looking very foolish.
Wine
Date: 2009-09-17 18:59 (UTC)Parallels/VMWare Fusion (both of which require a windows license) are relatively cheap (compared with, eg, AutoCAD or Windows) and pretty polished. But at that point you're buying a Mac + virtualisation software (US$80 seems to be the price point) + Microsoft Windows + application. So if you absolutely depend on a complex application which only runs on Windows, you're a bit stuck with buying Windows, etc.
If your usage is simple enough that there's some work-alike compatible programme that will run natively and do what you want that can be a better migration option. DXF shapefiles are relatively widely supported in other applications, which may offer some scope if you just need basic read/write; I'm not sure about DWG but it'd be worth checking. (The biggest sticking point for my current day job is Microsoft Visio files, where Visio is also Windows only, it won't run under Wine at present, and there are few other programs able to understand the format.)
Ewen
Re: Wine
Date: 2009-09-17 21:49 (UTC)But, for anything serious like Autocad, virtualisation's probably going to be better for you.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-18 00:09 (UTC)Let me cut and paste an amusing email sent at work when the manager asked why people were wasting time on Win7. Please note: said email writer did an excellent job of not explaining to said manager why he was an idiot
"If you feel that it would be beneficial to give Windows 7 testing Project status, I'd be happy to make it so!
As for the reasoning behind Windows 7 testing, I'll list a few that rank quite high in my opinion:
* the Windows 7 Release Candidate had already shown a lot of promise as replacement of Windows XP, this is confirmed by the stability and compatibility seen so far by the Release To Manufacture version
* Windows XP, while still being supported by MS, will no longer suffice as OS of choice for our research community, mostly due to its RAM access limitation in 32bit, and its overall tendency to get noticeably slower over time. Win 7 has thus far not shown this in my experience
* One of our objectives has to be aware and knowledgeable of current technology trends, and foster understanding of emerging ones. Windows 7 is likely to be sold on DELL PCs from end of October onwards
* If compatibility testing bears out what I currently see as a worthwhile improvement over Windows XP, I foresee us using it instead of Windows Vista in our lab environments (when OS upgrades are to be undertaken), in the same way that some university departments have skipped Windows 2000 when considering upgrades from Win98"
I'm now running Win7 at home, I've been running it since beta, because its better than XP and Vista and haven't got around to updating parallels yet.
If you want to bitch about M$ vrs Apple, a better way to do that would be to compare cost. I'll upgrade to Snow Leopard because its cheap, I probably won't upgrade to Win7 Pro - because I have no inclination to give M$ money and no longer working for a university means I won't be covered by their site license.
Re: Wine
Date: 2009-09-18 02:37 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-18 13:27 (UTC)The thing is, Win7 is an improvement, yes. But I still don't trust Microsoft to code their way out of a paper bag. I still see zero evidence that they actually give a shit about spending serious effort on implementing well known software engineering processes that massively improve your quality of product output.
I see evidence of a bit better end-cycle polishing, and actually taking the time to go round a proper test cycle instead of just shoving a beta out the door, but that doesn't change the serious under the hood stuff that makes a real difference to things like security.
Windows 7 pre-release versions have already been demonstrated to have major security holes, one of them in the RC just this month.
Re: Wine
Date: 2009-09-18 13:33 (UTC)As far as virtual machines go, VirtualBox from SUN is quite good IME. They just recently introduced a 3D graphics driver beta feature, but I haven't tried it yet.
Also, hello by the way! :-) Do I know you from somewhere, or did you just randomly find this post?
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-18 13:37 (UTC)Re: Wine
Date: 2009-09-18 19:47 (UTC)We have actually met in person, once, about 9 years ago. In Melbourne. When you and various others were running Netizen. (I randomly turned up via ASR and "borrowed" some bandwidth.)
Ewen
Re: Wine
Date: 2009-09-19 05:37 (UTC)