|
WARNING! Latest MP3 / XP vulnerability (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Teknikol |
| quote: | Originally posted by Mr.Mystery
Doubt it. |
Norton Commander if that's allright with you |
|
|
| mr_smidge |
| quote: | Originally posted by Philby
linux? :toothless |
It just has (a lot) less than Windows. |
|
|
| CynepMeH |
| quote: | Originally posted by djSlain
how do we know if we have 32 bit /64 bit XP? |
In 99% cases you'd have 32-bit version. 64-bit version is for 64-bit platform (CPU). So, if you got Intel PIII or P4, you are 32 bit.
Check out this article on MS if you want more info:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/overview.asp |
|
|
| CynepMeH |
| quote: | Originally posted by mr_smidge
It just has (a lot) less than Windows. |
Linux is less prone to viruses because of the way the OS architecture is. However, it has its own holes and bugs. And if you are novice in Linux, forget it - the headache of setting it up and managing it is far worse than any XP/Win9x nightmare. I know it 'coz I was a linux newbie once... And trust me, I'll take 3 XP re-installs over one kernel compile on *nix... :D
Ok, back to music.... Sorry for "geek speak" - hope bug info helps.
P.S. Moderators - it may be worth while to post this bug info as a "sticky" post??? Just a thought.
:D |
|
|
| ...x-LosT |
| the patch for windows xp has been posted for automatic downloading from windowsupdate site. If anyone applies regular microsoft updates for xp, or if you have xp setted for automatic update, then don't worry. just download latest winamp. |
|
|
| jonsimmonds |
yup linux is loads more securer than windows, so long as its set up correctly, and its free!
Jon |
|
|
| SYNthSRI |
| quote: | Originally posted by djSlain
how do we know if we have 32 bit /64 bit XP? |
I'm 100% sure you have 32 Bit version
64 bit is for datacenter servers, which you do not have, furthermore the hardware needed you probably can't afford ;) |
|
|
| SYNthSRI |
| quote: | Originally posted by jonsimmonds
yup linux is loads more securer than windows, so long as its set up correctly, and its free!
Jon |
fine example of an ignorant statement.
Linux is worse the Windows in terms of Security., please research before you type.
FreeBSD on the other hand is a diff. story. |
|
|
| CynepMeH |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYNthSRI
fine example of an ignorant statement.
Linux is worse the Windows in terms of Security., please research before you type.
FreeBSD on the other hand is a diff. story. |
A bit of "geekiness":
At first it was a battle of Mac Vs. PC
Then it was Windows vs. Linux
Enter the new age: Linux vs. BSD
"I sense tremor in the force" :)
I say use whatever makes you happy... Your OS is like religion - you may notice some inadequacies (is that how u spell it?) but it's yours and you're willing to die defending it... Moreover, you try to force your "OS religion" upon everyone you meet. My choice of religion: MS-DOS 6.22! Gimme CLI and I am a happy guy!
:toothless |
|
|
| CynepMeH |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYNthSRI
fine example of an ignorant statement.
Linux is worse the Windows in terms of Security., please research before you type.
FreeBSD on the other hand is a diff. story. |
By the way.... Not to burst yer bubble... but please do check out http://www.openbsd.org/security.html to see just how "secure" your BSD is.
The truth is THERE IS NO SECURE OS. The moment you believe you cannot be broken into (even in disconnected from the net mode) is the moment your local neighborhood punks break into your house and steal your machine. Just watch Mission Impossible - based on a true story! :toothless
|
|
|
| SYNthSRI |
LOL dude..I never said BSD is 100%
nothing is, just that people LOVE to use Linux with the word Secure synonymously which is totally false.
With Microsoft's new Secure initiative, they are doing a damn good job of fixing various holes with the OS's proactively instead of reactively.
Um...didn't mean to sound harsh in the earlier post, really..I didn't :)
smoooochies :p |
|
|
|
|
