It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Windows 7 security settings may leave PCs vulnerable to cyberattacks

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
For years now OS have been taking away choices from the user, and have taken over decisions which the user should be making, such as the fact that since Windows XP the OS decides when to download updates, when that should ALWAYS be a decision of the user.


Now I know it's been mentioned....

....But click on 'Start'
click on 'Control Panel'
click on 'Security'
click on 'Turn automatic updating on or off'




I, too, was one of the people who said they were never going to switch from XP based on the stuff I'd read on the web. I currently have Win7 on my desktop and Vista on my laptop. Honestly though I'd never go back.

Windows Vista is better than XP but Win7 is better than Vista IMO.

I have tried Linux as well. I tried Fedora and Ubuntu. Fedora wasn't bad and Ubuntu was excellent but for the average computer user they aren't as user friendly as windows yet.
I actually used Ubuntu in place of XP for about a year and a half and would only dual-boot into XP to play games. XP just wasn't as good as Ubuntu. Since Win7 came out though I replaced Ubuntu.

As far as security goes I use Comodo Free firewall and AVG anti-virus. I disbale UAC and windows firewall and automatic updates and have never had a virus or 'hacker' or trojan or similar.

For the people who will stick with windows XP for reasons such as this: understand that XP doesn't have any UAC whatsoever!




posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 05:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by porschedrifter
Meh... linux is not all that when you want to play games and edit video....
When you look at the software/hardware support of windows vs linux, linux just doesnt compare...

i'm on OS2008 right now which is a varient of linux


Yup I read it, UAC so what.... I had it completely disabled on Vista *gasp!*

W7 you don't have to disable it, it's not as anoying.
I'm not worried about the UAC issue, M$ will patch it any minute. And if you have other security software like peerguardian, hardware firewall on my router and another software firewall, then you are ok....

[edit on 26-10-2009 by porschedrifter]

When you don't know how to use it it doesn't. I run all that stuff and more. all of my hardware works, and I would have trouble finding some that didn't. I'm running slackware and its much more compatible than Vista, faster than Windows, and more stable.

Here's some insight into why Windows has problems:


First, desktop Windows stands firmly on a foundation as a stand-alone PC operating system. It was never, ever meant to work in a networked world. So, security holes that existed back in the day of Windows for Workgroups, 1991, are still with us today in 2009 and Windows 7.

Most of these problems come down to Windows has IPCs (interprocess communications), procedures that move information from one program to another, that were never designed with security in mind. Windows and Windows applications rely on these procedures to get work done. Over the years they've included DLLs (dynamic link libraries), OCXs (Object Linking and Embedding (OLE) Control Extension), and ActiveX. No matter what they're called, they do the same kind of work and they do it without any regard to security.

Source



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 05:32 AM
link   
reply to post by optyk phyba
 
Explanation: for the opportunity to show why your promoting ignorance mate!

1stly I have PERSONALLY watched you use win7 [the 64bit version] over those several months and yeah it's been a TOTAL BREEZE for you! BECAUSE you are a extremely well trained and TALENTED PC repair and install technician [both software and hardware] and I KNOW that you could install any of those OS's in your sleep...NOTE that it took several YEARS to get that level of insight and technique!


2ndly I debated win7's robustness with you LAST WEEK in person, and I made the point that even though win7 was available to the likes of you and therefor out in the wild, that that wild was really just a wilderness SANCTUARY and not the REAL WILD! Its been LESS than 1 MONTH in the REAL WILD and there's already a "potential" HOLE! Remember me explicitly saying that the engineers who design and make this stuff should "FIRST measure TWICE! and THEN cut ONCE!"
:shk:

3rdly I sat through the win7 party that you admin'ed and watched you show friends and family [90% bad users] all the cute bells and whistles and how "smooth" and "easy" it was to "use"......but not once did you really explain how many day's you took to learn it and get it all snazzy and shmiked up....or any of the problems you had....remember the voice recognition snafu "we" had! [I walked in and talked whilst you were training it...instant fubah requiring a DO OVER!
:shk:] I also watched you hand out big and fancy win7 party bags which were mostly filled with written instructions printed on paper!
INTUITIVE MY A$$!

4th As a consumer I'm ALWAYS RIGHT! Or NO $$$"s for YOU!
As a semi trained ARCHITECT I learned early on that any thing that gets built RELIES on its FOUNDATIONS and they rely on the type of Geology that they get sunk deep down into. I'm not blaming you personally as a techo but the original computer designers built too shallow and too rigid upon freaking QUICKSAND!!! WHY??? An evil ability to concieve of and think mid and/or long term financially.....They never intended to create themselves OUT of a JOB! Thats a freaking huge problem to getting things PERFECT the 1st time huh! This is exactly the reason YOU HAVE THE JOB YOU DO!


Personal Disclosure: As a old school programer [c64, microbee, apple 2e etc] there was no such thing as bad code....Knowing how to break things was just as important as knowing how to not break it. Remember the infinite loops requiring a external function key stroke to interrupt and snap out of the program...it wasn't a bug if you did it deliberately! To the BULK of you modern programmers who program in high level code [they think they are GODS] are useless for not being able to learn, speak, walk or dream in MICRO-CODE [raw machine code] and for also not being able to name a single byte of hardware memory address or the explicit machine code to look at or manipulate it! This victim mentality is what has gotten us a totally half a$$ Global IT environment!

P.S. Bad users? Bad coders? HOW ABOUT BAD BUILDERS and ARCHITECTS! There's the REAL PROBLEM!


[edit on 27-10-2009 by OmegaLogos]



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Here's some insight into why Windows has problems:

That article was all nice until it reached...:


For you, as a user, running Windows means that your PC will be attacked on an almost daily basis. Hacked Web sites, spam carrying malware, it's almost all meant for little old you and your Windows PC. Even with constant patching and added security programs, you're always going to be in danger of having your PC hijacked.


Well then why do I never have these problems? Never been attacked in my entire history of using Windows (>5 years).

Malware? You mean the malware idiots install then blame on Windows?

As far as Linux being more stable - why have I never had a BSOD in over 5 years with Windows?

As far as being faster, baloney. I experienced the exact opposite.



When you don't know how to use it it doesn't. I run all that stuff and more. all of my hardware works, and I would have trouble finding some that didn't. I'm running slackware and its much more compatible than Vista, faster than Windows, and more stable.

May I ask how? Could never get my printer to work, took a while to figure out how to install drivers, took ages to get the network running, sound in flash didn't work, sound would constantly cut out and cracle, it took longer to boot than Windows XP, when running burn in tests it would run slow, pretty much none of my applications ran properly even after hours of toying, and none of my system tools have any possibility of running. Since I do not get hacked in the first place the better security was non-existant as I was having no issues with it (or stability) in the first place.

It's good that at least some people can get it running. More power to you if you can get a free OS that is better than anything else for your needs.


[edit on 27/10/2009 by C0bzz]



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by porschedrifter
are you sure you mean user friendly and not user familiar?

Windows 7 is extremely user friendly.

If you look at the benchmarks you can see xp is slower than vista and w7 is slowly faster than Vista....

I dont work for M$ i'm just proud that they are finally back on track with operating systems.

I'd rather have W7 manage my quad core, 8gb of ram and DX10 for my gtx 275 than XP, its just better technology.


[edit on 26-10-2009 by porschedrifter]


I have very similar specs to you, but still using XP!
XP can manage all that except RAM which in my case, limits RAM usage to 3.5GB, no more! No problem because I hardly hit the max even when running 2 games simultaneously.... XP can handle multi-cores very good.

I'll probably switch to W7 once the OS matured.. Vista is a pain bec I was wanting to buy a gaming laptop but since I can't find any XP driver for it, I didn't bother


I'm familiar with Vista tweaks which works for general tasks but I also heard, they didn't improve much on gaming performance so I decided to stick with XP.



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


Alright this article is a bit of a fear mongering article.

Let me explain why this isn't a "ticking time bomb". And guess what? It's a lot easier to call something a ticking time bomb falsely then it is to tell the truth so bear with me.

Let's remember that all malware is, is just a regular old computer program that does something you don't want. If it did what you wanted, it wouldn't be a virus. It would just be a program.

Most malware gets installed by the user. 99% of the time someone puts it there on purpose even though they don't know they're doing it. Rarely do viruses sneak in all by themselves. It does happen, but most of the time it's the user that's the weak link in security.

Viruses get you to help them by tricking the user into thinking the program is not a virus so they'll install it. Sometimes the virus will even call itself anti-virus instead of a virus so you'll install it lol.

That's how almost all viruses, trojans, spyware, adware, and malware get on a computer. The user doesn't know what it is. They think it's something else so they go ahead and install it. And when I say install, I mean double click on it.

UAC's job is simply to ask ARE YOU FREAKING SURE THIS ISN'T A VIRUS!??? But if you tell it, no it's not a virus, go ahead and install it, Windows is going to install it even if it IS a virus because Windows doesn't know. It needs you to tell it what you want installed and what you don't. If you don't want a virus then don't install one right?

Now about this article.

When it comes to programs that aren't already installed, Vista and Windows 7 work exactly the same. Anytime you install a new program Windows will ask ARE YOU FREAKING SURE!? Both Vista and 7 will do this. If you click no, the software/virus doesn't get installed and we all go home happy.

If you click yes, then both systems still work exactly the same. The program is given complete control over your system and can do whatever the freak it wants. After all, you just told Windows it was okay right?

The only difference in 7 is now when a program modifies UAC to never warn you of anything ever again, 7 won't warn you the program is doing this, Vista would.

But you can change it make 7 warn you just like Vista did. However, at this point, whatever program is doing it is already installed and running. This is the important part. By the time this becomes a problem you already have something nasty installed.

After all, a program can't run until its gotten UAC approval and it can't change your settings unless it's running. Therefore if it's changing your security settings in the background, that means the user has ALREADY given Windows the go ahead for that program. In other words, its already been given permission.

The only difference is Windows 7 only asks permission once where Vista will ask twice. You can change it so 7 works just like Vista though.

However, it's not really that big of deal though, because by the time Vista asks the second time the program has already been given complete control over everything else on your computer the first time you said okay.

All Vista is doing is asking you if you want to give the program permission again. But if it wanted to screw everything up, it already would have and could have done so the first time you said okay.

Here's the reason why it's not a ticking time bomb. The ONLY program that would ever change your security settings in the background without telling you IS MALWARE! UAC on 7 will still protect you just fine from a program that's NOT installed. The only difference is for programs that are ALREADY installed.

That means by the time this becomes a problem you are ALREADY INFECTED! In other words, to say this is a ticking time bomb is like a guy with HIV sitting around going, boy I hope I don't get HIV. That would really suck! Doesn't make any sense does it?

It's the same thing. You don't sit around and worry you might get more malware when you ALREADY have malware. You just get out your backup disks and reinstall the operating system.

If you have malware running, it can make other holes in your system that weren't there before and you most definitely will get more malware regardless of how UAC is set up and regardless of if you have Vista or 7.

The only thing you do if you have malware is get rid of what you already have. You don't sit around and worry about a ticking time bomb. The bomb already went off.


[edit on 27-10-2009 by tinfoilman]



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by porschedrifter
 


You love W7? Did you not read the article I excerpted and posted here?

That thing is a timebomb, and hacker heaven as soon as they find out how to use that vulnerability, if they haven't already found it.


It is no more a time bomb then the other 90% of computers on the internet. The root problem is still the same, stupid people doing stupid things like clicking on links in emails. Even this vulnerability is rendered useless with the slightest ounce of common sense. But it's new, and it's Microsoft, so bash away.

reply to post by OmegaLogos
 


Windows 7 had over 8 million official beta testers and most likely double or tripple that "unofficial" testers who still provided fedback via various MS monitored forums and blogs. I would say a potential 24 million people using Windows 7 before its official release is pretty "wild". Feel free to disagree.

[edit on 27-10-2009 by quackers]



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 08:47 AM
link   

But it's new, and it's Microsoft, so bash away.


99.9% of the time, viruses are installed because the end user did something stupid. It cracks me up when people complain about Windows being insecure when it was their own fault. Or suggest people use Linux, put down MS, despite themselves secretly using Windows.

[edit on 27/10/2009 by C0bzz]



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   
i like linux but not everyone wants a car that they have to build themselves.

i work with windows 7 at work and installed it at home on a test computer.

if you for think for a second that xp or vista is any safer you are wrong. All operating systems(you too mac users) have faults that can be exploited into "hackers heaven". The thing is hackers would rather pay more attention to windows because more people us windows so instead of finding an exploit in mac and getting 15% of the people they can find one in windows and get 80% of the people.

The best defense is to not be an idiot. i can safely say that 95% of problems are the users own fault. i have used xp and vista and now 7 and throughout the last 5 years caught maybe 2 viruses and that was my own fault for downloading programs without checking the source.

if your know what you are doing or stay away from sites your aren't sure about you will be fine.

[edit on 27-10-2009 by Doc Tesla]



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by wylekat
(I cant figure out the DVD player in Xubuntu to save my life).


To watch DVD movies, you need VLC Player installed. You can easily install it with Synaptic Package Manager. Thanks for the Linux support, I run Fedora myself, I like the tweaking necessary to get Fedora configured, while Ubuntu works out of the box.



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Yep - got windows 7 running on my work PC and am very happy with it so far.....Vista was just horrible and sluggish....files transfers were a killer but most of the things have been sorted out such as the USB stack in the new OS.....

First time I have been positive with microsoft since XP with SP2.....



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by C0bzz


Excellent post.

I was waiting for someone to point out XP has no UAC control lol.

If you are having slow file transfers in Vista, disable ''remote differential compression''
maximumpcguides.com...

I personally use this tweak in W7 as well.


Originally posted by ahnggk
I have very similar specs to you, but still using XP!
XP can manage all that except RAM which in my case, limits RAM usage to 3.5GB, no more!
I'm familiar with Vista tweaks which works for general tasks but I also heard, they didn't improve much on gaming performance so I decided to stick with XP.


Umm apparently you haven't seen any actual game performance benchmarks lately....
and as for the memory issue, 32bit os's have that limitation, XP/W7/Vista x64 all handled my 8gb nicely


[edit on 27-10-2009 by porschedrifter]



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by quackers
 
Explanation: So you assess that 8 million official MS sanctioned beta stooges/testers plus an as yet undetermined additional possible/probable 16-17 million contributers of the beta and RC [25 million total approx] in anyway equates to 1.5 billion+ potential users stress testing the RTM! Thats barely 0.5% of the total current 100% potential wild environment of users. [0.41666% approx] And it seems that the 8 million Official Testers failed to catch this "potential hole" and plug it! Less than 1 month of the RTM in the REAL wild and we suddenly have heads of IT security companies waving a red flag! Remember me explicitly posting above that the engineers who design and make this stuff should "FIRST measure TWICE! and THEN cut ONCE!"?


RE: DeVaan has a point -- the best protection is useless if people are so annoyed that they turn it off. But Voskuil says cybercriminals have already begun to tweak their attacks to slip through the medium setting. "It defeats the purpose of the whole system," says Voskuil. "Anybody can do whatever they want; all they need to do is get the user to launch code.".....


Personal Disclosure: IMO sanctioned beta/Wild testers is highly congruent with a WILDERNESS SANCTUARY!
Has that myopia cleared up yet?


P.S. Are the security companies pushing this "win7 is vulnerable via its UAC default setting" trying to drum up business? Was this potential "hole" known about and allowed to slip through to drum up more IT business? Were TPTB of IT already hand in glove with each other on this revenue raising exercise?

Remember that TPTB of IT never intended to create themselves OUT of a JOB! Thats a freaking huge problem to getting things PERFECT the 1st time huh!



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
For years now OS have been taking away choices from the user, and have taken over decisions which the user should be making, such as the fact that since Windows XP the OS decides when to download updates, when that should ALWAYS be a decision of the user.

I hate it when I am doing something, such as watching a movie and then I keep getting a message that "windows must restart for the updates it downloaded by itself to take effect"....

Doesn't anyone else find that annoying as hell?


Its the reason many people have switched to Ubuntu Linux, which frankly is completely awesome as a operating system. No spyware, no antivirus, no annoying messages, no constant restarts, no slowing down over time, no nothing. Its just a very, very fast and efficient, stable, secure system that leaves the user in control.

I really wish everybody would try it. There is nothing better than having several thousands of programs to choose from, pick a few and see them download and install automatically just as easy as it should be.

Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala comes this Thursday and its amazing. Ive been using it since alpha version 4.

You guys really should try it. It makes me happy just talking about it.

A video about the package manager from where you install programs (ignore the ugly mouse cursor, the guy has poor taste and enjoys that look I guess, its not default):



Note: There is a another newer program you can use to install programs as well, its called Ubuntu Software Center:





[edit on 27-10-2009 by Copernicus]



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Well, I managed my first Blender image in Xubuntu... And I gotta say that the way the OS handled things was amazing. I was SUPPOSED to have made a couple images for a local sci fi group, and then, my 3d computer blew a motherboard. Money is keeping it from sitting on my desk, being whipped and abused....

It may be Blender's actually built for Linux- it may be during my brief respite from blendering 7-8 hours a day gave me a rest... I dunno- but the results I got are just completely unbelievable.

I did this just a while ago- Haven t done anything unusual, slapped lights in my usual way, did a backdrop and put a picture of Earth on it, and dumped it into Gimp to tweak it slightly and add lightbulbs. For anyone who doesn't have a clue- it's a test run of a Starship under construction- minus spacedock, support vehicles, ect. Just the saucer and neck for now.

And got this.





That has been one of the most realistic, prettiest pictures I have turned out YET, without using yafaray for rendering!

[edit on 27-10-2009 by wylekat]



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


Installed VLC, and it STILL wont play. Blame the DVD drive?

Hi ho, Hi ho, a second line? Here we go.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by OmegaLogos
 


im sure we will talk more about this later...

*. in the wild refers to the fact that it is available - from the time MS posted it on their site it was considered IN THE WILD. what you refer to is when people can BUY the fpp from MS which is not the same.
*. there are vulnerabilities and exploits that leverage those vulnerabilities. there is no such thing as a 'potential hole'. if a vulnerability is found it may be exploited by a cracker, if it achieves what is desired, otherwise its generally ignored. whats really being discussed is the mistaken idea that uac is a one-stop-do-it-all security application; its not.
*. two betas, two rcs, and an rtm - thats more than measured once. none of this stuff is knocked out the same day. years of testing, reassessing and refining continues to be done. given an unlimited budget, time and resources, you can achieve lots of things but in the real world with budgets and deadlines there is no perfection in an imperfect world.
*. took me less than an hour to work out the new interface (from screen shots online before i got my copy), the rest, i, like every other tech will be learning until MS EOLs it. its not a static system. think service packs and updates.
*. every os has problems. most of my issues were due to poor third party software, like adobe flash player.
*. the speech recognition training only takes 5 minutes to generate a profile. it wasnt a big deal, it could have been the cat banging on the screen door.
*. info in the party pack was just an over view of things to try at the party with the guests. but it had web links for more info and i gave those out so that they could get additional information if they wanted it, and some helpful vids to watch. i did it because i am nice. nothing more nothing less. maybe you should have read through them (in the white folder under my pc).
*. this isnt a restaraunt. the customer isnt always right and MS doesnt have to sell you anything. nor do you own the OS after you paid your money. you are leasing it. very different. think eula
*. they have built these foundations from scratch. try researching the history of intel or steve wasniack. computers have limitations. 0.1 in binary gives a never ending string and moving to decimal doesnt change the issue. 1 divided by 3 gives the same end result, a never ending string. this will not change with quantum computing as there are not and never will be enough particles in the universe. again given an unlimited budget, time and resources, you can achieve lots of things but in the real world with budgets and deadlines there is no perfection in an imperfect world.
*. bugs vs features, which is which and why shouldnt you confuse the two ? ie7 breaking to prevent an attack getting through is better than the system getting attacked. thats a feature not a bug, its called a 'sandbox'. although the average user sees it the other way, its better that the system gets attacked than them having to restart their browser.
*. bean counters vs technicians - bean counters will never alot enough money to things they dont understand. think intel and the 4004 / 8008.
*. in the old days, when you only had a two page address table to deal with, things were easier. nowdays those tables would fill a large shelf. also windows and linux address memory differently, which doubles what you have.
*. coders arent considered gods, just cheap-as-chips.
*. just bad code bro. just bad code.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by OmegaLogos
 


So all beta testers are stooges? Beta testers are first and foremost ordinary members of the public, not paid shills. Not everyone who beta tests is a MS fanboy either, and Windows 7 has had plenty of criticisms during it's testing phases (the infighting is there for all to see on MSDN or just about any IT related forum). Your assertion that beta testers cannot be impartial is blatantly false and many test specifically to find problems like this just so they can bash Microsoft.

You can decry the .5% figure till you are blue in the face, it is the largest beta test Microsoft have ever done, and it might very well be in the running for being the largest beta ever. Are you suggesting that Microsoft have beta tests consisting of hundreds of millions of people? You're not that thick surely.

Some holes are only found after a specific sequence of events has occurred, it is unreasonable to expect that every single hole be found before RTM, it is not practical, or even possible. If they did, no one would ever release any software period. Not all vulnerabilities can be exploited from the wild many require the most basic access such as "physical" local network access, something most malware perps have no interest in cracking (breaking into your house so they can plug a thumb drive in might give them away).

In the real world, all malware is 100% avoidable, it's down to the end user to pull their head out their rectum. It's not Microsoft's fault if you open an attachment from a Nigerian you never heard of.


To the poster who mentioned that XP did not have UAC, no, it did not, but it did have user accounts which people never bothered with (as well as group policy). As a result of that laziness administrator accounts were the default and with that the elevated privileges that allowed malware to run freely. UAC is a crap attempt at tackling this "administrator" issue by relegating the operator to "user" without inherent administrator rights, in an attempt to protect them from their own stupidity. An impossible task as now the stupid just whine about things not working because they were not run with elevated privileges, or still get malware because they do not read annoying interruptions to continue with their task as quickly as possible.









[edit on 28-10-2009 by quackers]

[edit on 28-10-2009 by quackers]



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:51 PM
link   
UAC being on its setting is not a hole. It is on a medium setting for user friendliness reasons, If you disagree with this design choice then go back in time to 2006 where the default setting on Vista was high, which ended up as being one of Vistas main criticisms. Like anything you don't get something for free.

Also, software engineers are not stupid. I would trust them much more rather than some guy on the Internet.


4th As a consumer I'm ALWAYS RIGHT! Or NO $$$"s for YOU!

Wouldn't want customers like you.


[edit on 29/10/2009 by C0bzz]



posted on Oct, 30 2009 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by C0bzz

Here's some insight into why Windows has problems:

That article was all nice until it reached...:


For you, as a user, running Windows means that your PC will be attacked on an almost daily basis. Hacked Web sites, spam carrying malware, it's almost all meant for little old you and your Windows PC. Even with constant patching and added security programs, you're always going to be in danger of having your PC hijacked.


Well then why do I never have these problems? Never been attacked in my entire history of using Windows (>5 years).

Malware? You mean the malware idiots install then blame on Windows?

As far as Linux being more stable - why have I never had a BSOD in over 5 years with Windows?

As far as being faster, baloney. I experienced the exact opposite.



When you don't know how to use it it doesn't. I run all that stuff and more. all of my hardware works, and I would have trouble finding some that didn't. I'm running slackware and its much more compatible than Vista, faster than Windows, and more stable.

May I ask how? Could never get my printer to work, took a while to figure out how to install drivers, took ages to get the network running, sound in flash didn't work, sound would constantly cut out and cracle, it took longer to boot than Windows XP, when running burn in tests it would run slow, pretty much none of my applications ran properly even after hours of toying, and none of my system tools have any possibility of running. Since I do not get hacked in the first place the better security was non-existant as I was having no issues with it (or stability) in the first place.

It's good that at least some people can get it running. More power to you if you can get a free OS that is better than anything else for your needs.


[edit on 27/10/2009 by C0bzz]


So if you have windows installed and you've never been attacked what software were you running that monitors your network traffic? Just wondering.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join