[ Preview ] { Unofficial } Windows 11.1

[😉 Good Guy 😉]

Windows 11.1 preview is here:

<https://youtu.be/cN4j7Hw7Zs0>
<https://youtu.be/cN4j7Hw7Zs0>
<https://youtu.be/cN4j7Hw7Zs0>
<https://youtu.be/cN4j7Hw7Zs0>
<https://youtu.be/cN4j7Hw7Zs0>

--

With over 1.3 billion devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is higher than any previous version

[Eric Stevens]

On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 18:30:00 +0000, ? Good Guy ?
<Hello...@example.onion> wrote:

>Windows 11.1 preview is here:
>
><https://youtu.be/cN4j7Hw7Zs0>
><https://youtu.be/cN4j7Hw7Zs0>
><https://youtu.be/cN4j7Hw7Zs0>
><https://youtu.be/cN4j7Hw7Zs0>
><https://youtu.be/cN4j7Hw7Zs0>
>
>

Is that all? Who thinks that's worth waiting for?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[Brian Gregory]

It's not real.

It's a big Powerpoint presentation done by some random dude.

--
Brian Gregory (in England).

[😉 Good Guy 😉]

Is that all? Who thinks that's worth waiting for?

This one is a better video with good commentary:

<https://youtu.be/ZJR3-UtmoUU>
<https://youtu.be/ZJR3-UtmoUU>
<https://youtu.be/ZJR3-UtmoUU>
<https://youtu.be/ZJR3-UtmoUU>
<https://youtu.be/ZJR3-UtmoUU>

--

With over 1.3 billion devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows.

[Sam E]

with spam for a sig.

[Frank Slootweg]

I much more enjoyed a subsequent video which YouTube presented:

'Upgrading From Windows 1.0 to Windows 8 On Actual Hardware'
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WP7AkJo3OE>

The guy goes from Windows 1.01 all the way to Windows 8.1 (Preview),
via

Windows 2.03
Windows 3.0
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows Me
Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7

It's way too long (1:14:15) to watch, but the idea is quite fun.

[Sailfish]

Eric Stevens graced us with on 6/16/2021 5:04 PM:

> On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 18:30:00 +0000, ? Good Guy ?
> <Hello...@example.onion> wrote:
>
>>
> Is that all? Who thinks that's worth waiting for?

So far, it appears to be mostly the GUI, with the underlying
apps/programs/control panel applets/ &c still being an unglodly mix of
Win10+Win8+Win7, ..., XP

https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-11/251941/windows-11-first-impressions
https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-11/251954/windows-11-a-few-more-screenshots

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

[knuttle]

On 6/17/2021 2:04 PM, Sailfish wrote:
> Eric Stevens graced us with on 6/16/2021 5:04 PM:
>> On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 18:30:00 +0000, ? Good Guy ?
>> <Hello...@example.onion> wrote:
>>
>>>
>> Is that all? Who thinks that's worth waiting for?
>
> So far, it appears to be mostly the GUI, with the underlying
> apps/programs/control panel applets/ &c still being an unglodly mix of
> Win10+Win8+Win7, ..., XP
>
> https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-11/251941/windows-11-first-impressions
>
> https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-11/251954/windows-11-a-few-more-screenshots
>
>

From what I have seen once you turn off all of the fluff, it will be
Windows 10 with a red welcome screen. This will be a long awaited
improvement over the old blue scrim I wonder it it will be the red
screen of death instead of the blue screen of death.

Red seems more fitting for that screen.


Has anyone seen any system requirement, space requirements, or what
computers and programs will not longer run Windows 11?

[😉 Good Guy 😉]

On 17/06/2021 19:17, knuttle wrote:

Has anyone seen any system requirement, space requirements, or what computers and programs will not longer run Windows 11?

There are links online but they are based on what the current spec for Windows 10 is. I suggest wait until next Thursday, 24th June 2021 at 11.00 Eastern. You will be able to watch it live online on <https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/event> where Satya Nadella and Panos Panay will unveil the product.

Your Windows 7, Windows 8 or Windows 10 serial number will continue to work on Windows 11 but it will be time limited. Microsoft wants to charge a small fee to existing Windows 7, Windows 8 or Windows 10 users. We have to wait and see what they announce. Insiders can download and use it now but you don't want to do this unless you have a spare hard disk.

--

With over 1.3 billion devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows.

[occam]

They say when you are about to die, your life experiences flash by your
eyes. This was like a preview of that. At this rate, it's going to be a
slow, arduous and excruciatingly dull death. (I missed out on Win Me, so
I'm thankful for small mercies.)

[Brian Gregory]

On 18/06/2021 06:52, occam wrote:
> They say when you are about to die, your life experiences flash by your
> eyes. This was like a preview of that. At this rate, it's going to be a
> slow, arduous and excruciatingly dull death. (I missed out on Win Me, so
> I'm thankful for small mercies.)

I don't know why there is so much said against Windows Me.
I didn't find it any worse than Windows 98.

[Chris]

On 17/06/2021 19:04, Sailfish wrote:
> Eric Stevens graced us with on 6/16/2021 5:04 PM:
>> On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 18:30:00 +0000, ? Good Guy ?
>> <Hello...@example.onion> wrote:
>>
>>>
>> Is that all? Who thinks that's worth waiting for?
>
> So far, it appears to be mostly the GUI, with the underlying
> apps/programs/control panel applets/ &c still being an unglodly mix of
> Win10+Win8+Win7, ..., XP

Did you expect anything else?

Windows hasn't fundamentally changed since Windows 7. It's all just a
skinning exercise so that the vendors can sell more hardware which
supports the 'new' windows.

[Peter Johnson]

+1 used every version except Win2000 amd don't know why I missed that.
None of them have taken more than a few minutes to find the features I
think are important or to dispose of the highlighted features I don't
intend to use.

[Mark Lloyd]

On 6/18/21 12:52 AM, occam wrote:

[snip]

> They say when you are about to die, your life experiences flash by your
> eyes. This was like a preview of that. At this rate, it's going to be a
> slow, arduous and excruciatingly dull death. (I missed out on Win Me, so
> I'm thankful for small mercies.)

ME wasn't much different from 98, although it had have the new more
fragile help system (which wasn't very helpful). Two advantage I
remember it that it included the driver for USB storage devices, and it
came on a bootable CD (IIRC 98 required a floppy).

This was far less of an improvement then when I went to 2000. If this
wasn't incompatible with so much of the new stuff, I'd still call it the
best version of Windows. Among other things, this was the last version
without the assume-you're-a-thief junk misleadingly called "activation".

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"The truths which God revealed have been overthrown by the truths which
man has discovered." [Lemuel K. Washburn, _Is The Bible Worth Reading
And Other Essays_, 1911]

[Mark Lloyd]

I didn't either. IIRC I read something about ME often being distributed
with marginal hardware. People were then blaming the wrong thing. The ME
I had was an upgrade.

[Mark Lloyd]

On 6/18/21 9:06 AM, Peter Johnson wrote:

[snip]

> +1 used every version except Win2000 amd don't know why I missed that.
> None of them have taken more than a few minutes to find the features I
> think are important or to dispose of the highlighted features I don't
> intend to use.

At the time I found 2000 to be the best version.

[Sailfish]

Chris graced us with on 6/18/2021 5:57 AM:

Actually, yes, and it still might happen since this is an early look-see
at just the current GUI update direction and not the foundational
changes. What I suspect is that they will make significant
infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall, just
like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.

[nospam]

In article <saimrc$4l8$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish

<NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:

> > Windows hasn't fundamentally changed since Windows 7. It's all just a
> > skinning exercise so that the vendors can sell more hardware which
> > supports the 'new' windows.
>
> Actually, yes, and it still might happen since this is an early look-see
> at just the current GUI update direction and not the foundational
> changes. What I suspect is that they will make significant
> infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall, just
> like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.

apple doesn't disallow non-store software and has stated on many
occasions that they aren't going to do that.

on the other hand, microsoft tried that with windows 10s, but had to
backpedal and call it a 'mode' of win10.

[Frank Slootweg]

[Stripped alt.comp.microsoft.windows. Too many groups.]

In alt.comp.os.windows-8 Sailfish <NIXCAPS...@nixcapsunforgettable.com> wrote:
> Chris graced us with on 6/18/2021 5:57 AM:
> > On 17/06/2021 19:04, Sailfish wrote:
> >> Eric Stevens graced us with on 6/16/2021 5:04 PM:
> >>> On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 18:30:00 +0000, ? Good Guy ?
> >>> <Hello...@example.onion> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>> Is that all? Who thinks that's worth waiting for?
> >>
> >> So far, it appears to be mostly the GUI, with the underlying
> >> apps/programs/control panel applets/ &c still being an unglodly mix of
> >> Win10+Win8+Win7, ..., XP
> >
> > Did you expect anything else?
> >
> > Windows hasn't fundamentally changed since Windows 7. It's all just a
> > skinning exercise so that the vendors can sell more hardware which
> > supports the 'new' windows.
>
> Actually, yes, and it still might happen since this is an early look-see
> at just the current GUI update direction and not the foundational
> changes. What I suspect is that they will make significant
> infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall, just
> like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.

I don't think the latter is tecnically possible, unless they
completely re-design the OS. After all, "sideloading of non-Windows
Store software" involves just a bunch of files (.exe, .dll, etc.) and
some installation procedure/script/tool/<whatever>, if any.

What are they going to do? Prevent people to download files and put
them in the appropriate folders (Program Files, ProgramData, etc.)? I
don't think so.

[Sailfish]

nospam graced us with on 6/18/2021 11:11 AM:

REF:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/tim-cook-claims-sideloading-apps-would-destroy-security-and-privacy-of-ios/

[excerpt quote=\"
Tim Cook has claimed in an interview with Brut that if Apple was forced
to allow sideloading of apps, as Android does, it would destroy security
and privacy of iOS.
\" /]

[Sailfish]

Frank Slootweg graced us with on 6/18/2021 11:15 AM:

Well, since those and other filetypes are Microsoft-imagined, they could
simply re-imagine another set of executable filetype and "legacy" the
pre-Win11 ones, no? Windows executable aren't standalone and their
mime-type is first confirmed by the OS, yes?

[Sailfish]

Mark Lloyd graced us with on 6/18/2021 10:52 AM:

> On 6/18/21 12:52 AM, occam wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> They say when you are about to die, your life experiences flash by your
>> eyes. This was like a preview of that. At this rate, it's going to be a
>> slow, arduous and excruciatingly dull death. (I missed out on Win Me, so
>> I'm thankful for small mercies.)
>
> ME wasn't much different from 98, although it had have the new more
> fragile help system (which wasn't very helpful). Two advantage I
> remember it that it included the driver for USB storage devices, and it
> came on a bootable CD (IIRC 98 required a floppy).
>
> This was far less of an improvement then when I went to 2000. If this
> wasn't incompatible with so much of the new stuff, I'd still call it the
> best version of Windows. Among other things, this was the last version
> without the assume-you're-a-thief junk misleadingly called "activation".
>

That was my biggest rub with it. All the hype was mostly smoke and
mirrors. Also, I seem to recall that it introduced some compatibility
issues from my Win98SE system but that was so long ago, I can't recall
now what those were, only that they forced me to uninstall WinMe and
reinstall Win98.

[nospam]

In article <saiut4...@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg

<th...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:

> > Actually, yes, and it still might happen since this is an early look-see
> > at just the current GUI update direction and not the foundational
> > changes. What I suspect is that they will make significant
> > infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall, just
> > like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.
>
> I don't think the latter is tecnically possible, unless they
> completely re-design the OS. After all, "sideloading of non-Windows
> Store software" involves just a bunch of files (.exe, .dll, etc.) and
> some installation procedure/script/tool/<whatever>, if any.
>
> What are they going to do? Prevent people to download files and put
> them in the appropriate folders (Program Files, ProgramData, etc.)? I
> don't think so.

one way is by blocking apps that don't have the appropriate
microsoft-approved code signature from being launched.

however, it's very unlikely to happen because of the sheer volume of
legacy software that would instantly stop working along with the not
particularly wide choice on the microsoft store.

[nospam]

In article <saipf7$lm9$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish

<NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:

> >>> Windows hasn't fundamentally changed since Windows 7. It's all just a
> >>> skinning exercise so that the vendors can sell more hardware which
> >>> supports the 'new' windows.
> >> Actually, yes, and it still might happen since this is an early look-see
> >> at just the current GUI update direction and not the foundational
> >> changes. What I suspect is that they will make significant
> >> infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall, just
> >> like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.
> >
> > apple doesn't disallow non-store software and has stated on many
> > occasions that they aren't going to do that.
> >
> > on the other hand, microsoft tried that with windows 10s, but had to
> > backpedal and call it a 'mode' of win10.
> REF:
>
> https://www.zdnet.com/article/tim-cook-claims-sideloading-apps-would-destroy-s
> ecurity-and-privacy-of-ios/
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> Tim Cook has claimed in an interview with Brut that if Apple was forced
> to allow sideloading of apps, as Android does, it would destroy security
> and privacy of iOS.
> \" /]

that's for the iphone/ipad, not the mac.

the mac has always been able to run anything the user wants. recent
versions of mac os will require the user to confirm unsigned apps and
accept the risks, but that does not stop the user from running them if
that's what they really want to do.

mobile devices, both ios and android, limit what can be run because of
the security risks.

for android, it's easy to allow apps outside of the play store. for ios
devices, it's a little more involved, but not impossible.

app developers *must* be able to run their own apps, long before
they're ever in the store, so there will *always* be a way to do it.

unfortunately, we live in a world where running questionable software
is risky. the carefree days are long gone.

[Frank Slootweg]

They could only pull that off, if they completely seperate private/
personal/consumer/<whatever> users from business (etc.) users, as
there's no way they could afford to lose the income from the latter
part. (Not that they can afford to lose (most of) the former.)

Meantime, this article is brought to you, courtesy of 18+ year old
software, still running fine.

[David Brooks]

On 18/06/2021 20:34, nospam wrote:
> unfortunately, we live in a world where running questionable software
> is risky. the carefree days are long gone.

As an aside ....

Do you consider installing and running www.ClamXav.com to be risky?

[nospam]

In article <saita2$tsi$1...@hunterbd.eternal-september.org>, David Brooks

<Dav...@nomail.invalid> wrote:

> > unfortunately, we live in a world where running questionable software
> > is risky. the carefree days are long gone.
>
> As an aside ....
>
> Do you consider installing and running www.ClamXav.com to be risky?

that didn't take long for you to try to derail the thread.

your existence is what's risky.

[Michael Trew]

Windows 98, especially SE, was a great OS. Very light weight, and there
are, to this day, some hacked browsers that can "function" on the web on
Win 98.

ME should have never existed... could have easily waited for XP. ME was
rushed out when consumers were confused by the release of Windows 2000
-- home users were buying it thinking it was the next home release.
I've tried to install and run ME in the past... same hardware as 98 SE,
yet I've never experienced so many BSOD's before. Yuck.

[Sailfish]

Frank Slootweg graced us with on 6/18/2021 12:48 PM:

Who's to tell? Bill'em Gates salivates everyday when he see how enriched
Apple has become with their wall-garden approach. Apple successfully
separated their MacOS systems (non-walled garden) from the iOS
(walled-garden) ones. Microsoft could very well be trying to do the same
thing, again.

Multinationals seldom do anything that won't (in their minds) increase
market share AND quarterly revenues. I suspect Windows 11 (or whatever
they decide to call it) will be a move in that direction.

[Sailfish]

nospam graced us with on 6/18/2021 12:34 PM:

Yes, as I mentioned above. As hard as it is to believe, Apple has
treated it MacOS system side of the business like a red-headed stepchild
once walled-garden iOS devices became their most profitable device offering.

> mobile devices, both ios and android, limit what can be run because of
> the security risks.
>

That is "A" reason but not the entire reason.

> for android, it's easy to allow apps outside of the play store. for ios
> devices, it's a little more involved, but not impossible.
>
> app developers *must* be able to run their own apps, long before
> they're ever in the store, so there will *always* be a way to do it.
>

Yes, I agree. However, that doesn't mean that Big Tech will afford a
means for them to monetize it outside their app stores. For example,
they could decide to allow it only on "enterprise" and/or "Ultimate"
versions of the OS, pretty much eliminating most market penetration by
3rd-party devs.

> unfortunately, we live in a world where running questionable software
> is risky. the carefree days are long gone.

That world is equally risky running supposedly non-risky software.

[nospam]

In article <saj03t$jeb$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish

bill gates is long gone, as is steve ballmer.

satya nadella runs the show now.

> Apple has become with their wall-garden approach.

the only walls are the ones people put up on their own.

> Apple successfully
> separated their MacOS systems (non-walled garden) from the iOS
> (walled-garden) ones.

they're different devices, designed in different eras and with
different design goals.

ios took lessons from the problems in mac os and windows and other
devices over the last 40ish years.

also, mobile devices have a lot more personal data on them, making them
a *much* higher value target.

> Microsoft could very well be trying to do the same
> thing, again.

that would break shitloads of software.

> Multinationals seldom do anything that won't (in their minds) increase
> market share AND quarterly revenues. I suspect Windows 11 (or whatever
> they decide to call it) will be a move in that direction.

they have a fiduciary obligation to their shareholders.

[nospam]

In article <saj0qu$jg$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish

it's true that ios is the majority of their revenue, however, it's a
myth that apple has ignored the mac or treated it as second rate
citizen. in fact, mac sales have been increasing by quite a bit,
especially over the last year.

> > mobile devices, both ios and android, limit what can be run because of
> > the security risks.
> >
> That is "A" reason but not the entire reason.

it is the most significant reason.

> > for android, it's easy to allow apps outside of the play store. for ios
> > devices, it's a little more involved, but not impossible.
> >
> > app developers *must* be able to run their own apps, long before
> > they're ever in the store, so there will *always* be a way to do it.
> >
> Yes, I agree. However, that doesn't mean that Big Tech will afford a
> means for them to monetize it outside their app stores. For example,
> they could decide to allow it only on "enterprise" and/or "Ultimate"
> versions of the OS, pretty much eliminating most market penetration by
> 3rd-party devs.

monetization is not the issue.

both ios and android offer enterprise distribution for companies who
write their own apps for internal use, which never see their respective
app stores.

enterprise distribution is actually one of the easiest and supported
ways non-store apps can be run on ios, but it's not the only way.

> > unfortunately, we live in a world where running questionable software
> > is risky. the carefree days are long gone.
>
> That world is equally risky running supposedly non-risky software.

nothing is 100% safe, but the risks from running an app from a well
established developer who code-signed their app is *much* less than a
non-signed app from some random website, from a developer who has no
other products, using a domain that was registered last week...

[Sailfish]

nospam graced us with on 6/18/2021 2:16 PM:

>
> bill gates is long gone, as is steve ballmer.
>
> satya nadella runs the show now.
>

Riiiight. Certainly a man of his worth has NO influence on the company
that continues to pay him hefty dividends.

>> Apple has become with their wall-garden approach.
>
> the only walls are the ones people put up on their own.
>

heh, the ol' wax-philosophical straw man counter ploy.

>> Apple successfully
>> separated their MacOS systems (non-walled garden) from the iOS
>> (walled-garden) ones.
>
> they're different devices, designed in different eras and with
> different design goals.
>

Agree

> ios took lessons from the problems in mac os and windows and other
> devices over the last 40ish years.
>

Agree

> also, mobile devices have a lot more personal data on them, making them
> a *much* higher value target.
>

Sure, though, not sure that was Jobs thought at the time.

Anyway, I'm not trying slime Apple for its founder's genius for
innovation. The iPhone was one of our generation's most revolutionary
inventions that even today is a major societal leveling tool and a curse
to privacy and child protection.

My point is that all multinational companies, hi-tech especially, care
only about bottom lines and how to increase them, including micros~1.

>> Microsoft could very well be trying to do the same
>> thing, again.
>
> that would break shitloads of software.
>

Well, as I said, if they took care of their enterprise accounts and
users willing to pay for the privilege via an "ultimate" offering, I see
see them doing the calculus that breaking a shitload of software that
they don't get any revenue from makes perfect sense.

>> Multinationals seldom do anything that won't (in their minds) increase
>> market share AND quarterly revenues. I suspect Windows 11 (or whatever
>> they decide to call it) will be a move in that direction.
>
> they have a fiduciary obligation to their shareholders.

That's why Microsoft released Vista when lots beta tester (myself
included, warned them about mass incompatibilities and why they released
Win8 and then knowing that those UI's created significant regression
problems to the solid Win7 install base. They make mistakes based on
faulty premises.

Additionally, there are rumors that the new system will reside on their
Azure cloud and unbridle the user from the need to even need a
sophisticated box to run programs. If that were to come about, I suspect
that allowing people to run their own roll-your-own programs on the
cloud would be highly unlikely.

[Sailfish]

nospam graced us with on 6/18/2021 2:16 PM:

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. I've read too many credible
past Mac-aligned articles where there has been lots of disappointment
from the MacOS folks based on lackluster hardware and "meh" software
updates.

>>> mobile devices, both ios and android, limit what can be run because of
>>> the security risks.
>>>
>> That is "A" reason but not the entire reason.
>
> it is the most significant reason.
>

Agree to disagree.

>>> for android, it's easy to allow apps outside of the play store. for ios
>>> devices, it's a little more involved, but not impossible.
>>>
>>> app developers *must* be able to run their own apps, long before
>>> they're ever in the store, so there will *always* be a way to do it.
>>>
>> Yes, I agree. However, that doesn't mean that Big Tech will afford a
>> means for them to monetize it outside their app stores. For example,
>> they could decide to allow it only on "enterprise" and/or "Ultimate"
>> versions of the OS, pretty much eliminating most market penetration by
>> 3rd-party devs.
>
> monetization is not the issue.
>
> both ios and android offer enterprise distribution for companies who
> write their own apps for internal use, which never see their respective
> app stores.
>
> enterprise distribution is actually one of the easiest and supported
> ways non-store apps can be run on ios, but it's not the only way.
>

My point above already ceded that point. But again, Microsoft allows it
because enterprise account provides them lost of revenue, including
hefty annual maintenace agreements.

>>> unfortunately, we live in a world where running questionable software
>>> is risky. the carefree days are long gone.
>> That world is equally risky running supposedly non-risky software.
>
> nothing is 100% safe, but the risks from running an app from a well
> established developer who code-signed their app is *much* less than a
> non-signed app from some random website, from a developer who has no
> other products, using a domain that was registered last week...

Perhaps yes, perhaps no. We've already established that Microsoft
systems (73+% market share) allow for non-store programs to run on their
systems and I've not read of any major influx of malware coming from
them. Most of it comes from *UX server systems.

Anyway, We may be able to find out soon if the Supremes rule against
them in the Epic vs. Apple lawsuit.

[Ken Blake]

On 6/18/2021 10:55 AM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
> On 6/18/21 9:06 AM, Peter Johnson wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> +1 used every version except Win2000 amd don't know why I missed that.
>> None of them have taken more than a few minutes to find the features I
>> think are important or to dispose of the highlighted features I don't
>> intend to use.
>
> At the time I found 2000 to be the best version.

Except for the NT versions, I've run every version since 2.0. I never
thought any version was perfect, but in general I liked them all nd
thought every version was better than its predecessor with the exception
of 8.0, which I hated.

--
Ken

[David Brooks]

I'm asking for your opinion of the wisdom of installing a non-Apple
approved software package onto an Apple computer.


Am I correct in my belief that by so doing one is giving root access to
a stranger who can then take total control of one's computer?

[Chris]

Sailfish <NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:
> Chris graced us with on 6/18/2021 5:57 AM:
>> On 17/06/2021 19:04, Sailfish wrote:
>>> Eric Stevens graced us with on 6/16/2021 5:04 PM:
>>>> On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 18:30:00 +0000, ? Good Guy ?
>>>> <Hello...@example.onion> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Is that all? Who thinks that's worth waiting for?
>>>
>>> So far, it appears to be mostly the GUI, with the underlying
>>> apps/programs/control panel applets/ &c still being an unglodly mix of
>>> Win10+Win8+Win7, ..., XP
>>
>> Did you expect anything else?
>>
>> Windows hasn't fundamentally changed since Windows 7. It's all just a
>> skinning exercise so that the vendors can sell more hardware which
>> supports the 'new' windows.
>
> Actually, yes, and it still might happen since this is an early look-see
> at just the current GUI update direction and not the foundational
> changes.

What foundational changes would you like?

> What I suspect is that they will make significant
> infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall, just
> like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.

Apple haven't done anything like the sort.

There's no doubt that the app stores are a great way for
google/apple/microsoft to make money, but there are often alternatives.

[Chris]

You must have missed the Apple Silicon updates then. The new processors are
an order of magnitude faster than previous generation intels with lower
battery requirements. And apart from the butterfly keyboard the hardware
has always been great. Apple has driven the improvement in Windows laptop
quality. For a while MacBooks were the best Windows laptops.

The software updates are "meh" mostly because Apple doesn't fuck around
with stupid tiles or horrible UI changes. It's all relatively small
increments along a very mature and stable path.

[nospam]

In article <saj7la$jfe$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish

<NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:

> >
> > bill gates is long gone, as is steve ballmer.
> >
> > satya nadella runs the show now.
> >
> Riiiight. Certainly a man of his worth has NO influence on the company
> that continues to pay him hefty dividends.

he was on the board until just recently, but regardless, satya has the
final say in what microsoft does.

> >> Apple has become with their wall-garden approach.
> >
> > the only walls are the ones people put up on their own.
> >
> heh, the ol' wax-philosophical straw man counter ploy.

no straw man.

those who say apple is a walled garden are those who don't use it much,
if at all.

just about anything that can be done with a windows pc and certainly a
linux box can also be done on a mac.

ios and android are different than macos and windows in both design and
the hardware, but there aren't any walls there either. in fact, a lot
of tasks are much easier on ios than on android.

nothing is perfect in every situation.

> >> Apple successfully
> >> separated their MacOS systems (non-walled garden) from the iOS
> >> (walled-garden) ones.
> >
> > they're different devices, designed in different eras and with
> > different design goals.
> >
> Agree
> > ios took lessons from the problems in mac os and windows and other
> > devices over the last 40ish years.
> >
> Agree
> > also, mobile devices have a lot more personal data on them, making them
> > a *much* higher value target.
> >
> Sure, though, not sure that was Jobs thought at the time.

jobs was there throughout the design of the iphone and ipad.

> Anyway, I'm not trying slime Apple for its founder's genius for
> innovation. The iPhone was one of our generation's most revolutionary
> inventions that even today is a major societal leveling tool and a curse
> to privacy and child protection.
>
> My point is that all multinational companies, hi-tech especially, care
> only about bottom lines and how to increase them, including micros~1.

just about every company cares about bottom lines, otherwise they won't
be in business for very long.

public companies have an obligation to their shareholders to do so.

> >> Microsoft could very well be trying to do the same
> >> thing, again.
> >
> > that would break shitloads of software.
> >
> Well, as I said, if they took care of their enterprise accounts and
> users willing to pay for the privilege via an "ultimate" offering, I see
> see them doing the calculus that breaking a shitload of software that
> they don't get any revenue from makes perfect sense.

breaking existing software is not normally a good strategy.

this is particularly true for enterprise customers, who are not about
to rewrite all of their custom software.

> >> Multinationals seldom do anything that won't (in their minds) increase
> >> market share AND quarterly revenues. I suspect Windows 11 (or whatever
> >> they decide to call it) will be a move in that direction.
> >
> > they have a fiduciary obligation to their shareholders.
>
> That's why Microsoft released Vista when lots beta tester (myself
> included, warned them about mass incompatibilities and why they released
> Win8 and then knowing that those UI's created significant regression
> problems to the solid Win7 install base. They make mistakes based on
> faulty premises.

win8 was an attempt to be both desktop and mobile at the same time and
did neither particularly well.

> Additionally, there are rumors that the new system will reside on their
> Azure cloud and unbridle the user from the need to even need a
> sophisticated box to run programs. If that were to come about, I suspect
> that allowing people to run their own roll-your-own programs on the
> cloud would be highly unlikely.

that might be an option, given that other companies are already doing
it with great success.

if they do, it won't be the only version available. not everyone wants
a cloud solution.

[nospam]

In article <saj8mi$67m$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish

<NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:


> Anyway, We may be able to find out soon if the Supremes rule against
> them in the Epic vs. Apple lawsuit.

epic's lawsuit is in district court, not the supreme court, and it's
not particularly strong, but what matters is what the judge decides,
not what the court of public opinion thinks.

[nospam]

In article <sak9dk$bpa$1...@hunterbd.eternal-september.org>, David Brooks

<Dav...@nomail.invalid> wrote:

> >>> unfortunately, we live in a world where running questionable software
> >>> is risky. the carefree days are long gone.
> >>
> >> As an aside ....
> >>
> >> Do you consider installing and running www.ClamXav.com to be risky?
> >
> > that didn't take long for you to try to derail the thread.
> >
> > your existence is what's risky.
>
>
> I'm asking for your opinion of the wisdom of installing a non-Apple
> approved software package onto an Apple computer.

no you're not. you're trolling, as you usually do.

this thread is *not* about apple, none of the many groups it's
crossposted to are about apple, and your obsession with clamxav is
wildly unhealthy, to where you repeatedly ask about it for no apparent
reason.

follow the footsteps of your kid and go away forever.

[David Brooks]

On 19/06/2021 14:03, nospam wrote:
> In article <sak9dk$bpa$1...@hunterbd.eternal-september.org>, David Brooks
> <Dav...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>>> unfortunately, we live in a world where running questionable software
>>>>> is risky. the carefree days are long gone.
>>>>
>>>> As an aside ....
>>>>
>>>> Do you consider installing and running www.ClamXav.com to be risky?
>>>
>>> that didn't take long for you to try to derail the thread.
>>>
>>> your existence is what's risky.
>>
>>
>> I'm asking for your opinion of the wisdom of installing a non-Apple
>> approved software package onto an Apple computer.
>
> no you're not. you're trolling, as you usually do.

No. Not so. I'm seeking an answer - FROM *YOU* - about www.ClamXav.com

(In front of witnesses!)

> this thread is *not* about apple, none of the many groups it's
> crossposted to are about apple, and your obsession with clamxav is
> wildly unhealthy, to where you repeatedly ask about it for no apparent
> reason.

Much easier if you were to simply give your opinion on ClamXav

Have you EVER installed it on YOUR computer(s)?

> follow the footsteps of your kid and go away forever.

That comment is in /really/ bad taste. :-(

[nospam]

In article <saksji$8cp$1...@hunterbd.eternal-september.org>, David Brooks

<Dav...@nomail.invalid> wrote:

> >>>>> unfortunately, we live in a world where running questionable software
> >>>>> is risky. the carefree days are long gone.
> >>>>
> >>>> As an aside ....
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you consider installing and running www.ClamXav.com to be risky?
> >>>
> >>> that didn't take long for you to try to derail the thread.
> >>>
> >>> your existence is what's risky.
> >>
> >>
> >> I'm asking for your opinion of the wisdom of installing a non-Apple
> >> approved software package onto an Apple computer.
> >
> > no you're not. you're trolling, as you usually do.
>
> No. Not so. I'm seeking an answer - FROM *YOU* - about www.ClamXav.com
>
> (In front of witnesses!)
>
> > this thread is *not* about apple, none of the many groups it's
> > crossposted to are about apple, and your obsession with clamxav is
> > wildly unhealthy, to where you repeatedly ask about it for no apparent
> > reason.
>
> Much easier if you were to simply give your opinion on ClamXav
>
> Have you EVER installed it on YOUR computer(s)?

you've asked that 18 bazillion times before. probably more.

> > follow the footsteps of your kid and go away forever.
>
> That comment is in /really/ bad taste. :-(

yes it is, and intentionally so.

[Sailfish]

Chris graced us with on 6/19/2021 5:27 AM:

Actually, I had read that Apple had finally decided to pay more
attention to its Mac line but that doesn't negate what I said about what
that had done in the past and the effect it had on its iMac fanbois at
the time.

[Sailfish]

nospam graced us with on 6/19/2021 6:03 AM:

Considering what's at stake, my guess is it won't stop at district, no
matter the decision.

[Sailfish]

Chris graced us with on 6/19/2021 3:57 AM:

> Sailfish <NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:
>> Chris graced us with on 6/18/2021 5:57 AM:
>>> On 17/06/2021 19:04, Sailfish wrote:
>>>> Eric Stevens graced us with on 6/16/2021 5:04 PM:
>>>>> On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 18:30:00 +0000, ? Good Guy ?
>>>>> <Hello...@example.onion> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that all? Who thinks that's worth waiting for?
>>>> So far, it appears to be mostly the GUI, with the underlying
>>>> apps/programs/control panel applets/ &c still being an unglodly mix of
>>>> Win10+Win8+Win7, ..., XP
>>> Did you expect anything else?
>>>
>>> Windows hasn't fundamentally changed since Windows 7. It's all just a
>>> skinning exercise so that the vendors can sell more hardware which
>>> supports the 'new' windows.
>> Actually, yes, and it still might happen since this is an early look-see
>> at just the current GUI update direction and not the foundational
>> changes.
>
> What foundational changes would you like?
>

Well, I'll consider wishes are like fishes and dare to hope.

1. Bring back Aero, in all it's previous glory (transparency,
skeuomorphic icons, rounded windows corners, transparency, &c.) I don't
mind if they farm it out, as long as they open the architecture APIs
that would allow 3rd parties to replicate it fully.

2. Make changes that would allow Win7 users and 3rd party developers to
create apps for its 30% cut store AND create the same programs access to
the APIs neccessary to allow them to be sold without going through the
30% Microsoft tax.

3. Provide less obscure access for power users rather than obfuscating
them as they now do on Win10.

There are others but this would be enough for me to seriously consider
upgrading.

>> What I suspect is that they will make significant
>> infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall, just
>> like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.
>
> Apple haven't done anything like the sort.
>

Yes, they have with iOS devices.

> There's no doubt that the app stores are a great way for
> google/apple/microsoft to make money, but there are often alternatives.
>

Often not. Ever found a browser option that isn't based on webkit? Or
are you hinting at *Nix solutions? Even Microsoft has given up the ghost
with trident and gone with webkit for Edge.

[Mark Lloyd]

On 6/18/21 3:24 PM, Michael Trew wrote:

[snip]

> ME should have never existed... could have easily waited for XP.  ME was
> rushed out when consumers were confused by the release of Windows 2000
> -- home users were buying it thinking it was the next home release. I've
> tried to install and run ME in the past... same hardware as 98 SE, yet
> I've never experienced so many BSOD's before.  Yuck.

I god a lot of those BSODs with ME. Just like 98. 2000 avoided mst of them.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our
inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the
state of facts and evidence." -- John Adams

[nospam]

In article <sakv05$cmi$2...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish

<NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:

> >> Anyway, We may be able to find out soon if the Supremes rule against
> >> them in the Epic vs. Apple lawsuit.
> >
> > epic's lawsuit is in district court, not the supreme court, and it's
> > not particularly strong, but what matters is what the judge decides,
> > not what the court of public opinion thinks.
>
> Considering what's at stake, my guess is it won't stop at district, no
> matter the decision.

maybe. i don't think the supreme court will take the case, but if they
did, it's not going to be heard and certainly not decided any time
soon.

[nospam]

In article <sal01o$mnh$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish

<NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:

> >>> Windows hasn't fundamentally changed since Windows 7. It's all just a
> >>> skinning exercise so that the vendors can sell more hardware which
> >>> supports the 'new' windows.
> >> Actually, yes, and it still might happen since this is an early look-see
> >> at just the current GUI update direction and not the foundational
> >> changes.
> >
> > What foundational changes would you like?
> >
> Well, I'll consider wishes are like fishes and dare to hope.
>
> 1. Bring back Aero, in all it's previous glory (transparency,
> skeuomorphic icons, rounded windows corners, transparency, &c.) I don't
> mind if they farm it out, as long as they open the architecture APIs
> that would allow 3rd parties to replicate it fully.

that's not really foundational, and the rounded corners are rumoured to
be in win11.

> 2. Make changes that would allow Win7 users and 3rd party developers to
> create apps for its 30% cut store AND create the same programs access to
> the APIs neccessary to allow them to be sold without going through the
> 30% Microsoft tax.

that exists now, and it's not a tax either. there's significant benefit
from the 30% cut.

> 3. Provide less obscure access for power users rather than obfuscating
> them as they now do on Win10.

power users don't care if a setting is obscured.

> There are others but this would be enough for me to seriously consider
> upgrading.
>
> >> What I suspect is that they will make significant
> >> infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall, just
> >> like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.
> >
> > Apple haven't done anything like the sort.
> >
> Yes, they have with iOS devices.

no they haven't.

> > There's no doubt that the app stores are a great way for
> > google/apple/microsoft to make money, but there are often alternatives.
> >
> Often not. Ever found a browser option that isn't based on webkit?

firefox

> Or
> are you hinting at *Nix solutions? Even Microsoft has given up the ghost
> with trident and gone with webkit for Edge.

what's wrong with webkit?

there's also a difference between webkit itself and google's fork, aka
blink.

[Sailfish]

nospam graced us with on 6/19/2021 6:03 AM:

> In article <saj7la$jfe$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish
> <NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:
>
>> Riiiight. Certainly a man of his worth has NO influence on the company
>> that continues to pay him hefty dividends.
>
> he was on the board until just recently, but regardless, satya has the
> final say in what microsoft does.
>

True but that's like saying Pres(s) Trump and Biden have the final say
when we all know that each of them had their puppetmaster. In Trump's
case it was most likely his son-in-law's father's money and with Biden
it's clear that it's not him designing the policy.

>>>> Apple has become with their wall-garden approach.
>>> the only walls are the ones people put up on their own.
>>>
>> heh, the ol' wax-philosophical straw man counter ploy.
>
> no straw man.
>
> those who say apple is a walled garden are those who don't use it much,
> if at all.
>
> just about anything that can be done with a windows pc and certainly a
> linux box can also be done on a mac.
>

Interesting though that one can't legally run MacOS on either of those
non-Apple platforms, no? Also, to design iOS apps, one must use a Mac
for development.

> ios and android are different than macos and windows in both design and
> the hardware, but there aren't any walls there either. in fact, a lot
> of tasks are much easier on ios than on android.
>
> nothing is perfect in every situation.
>

If one cannot easily sideload apps, then the system is, by design,
behind a walled garden.

>>> also, mobile devices have a lot more personal data on them, making them
>>> a *much* higher value target.
>>>
>> Sure, though, not sure that was Jobs thought at the time.
>
> jobs was there throughout the design of the iphone and ipad.
>

Near the end, with cancer ravaging his body, it's questionable how
in-tuned he was with the details of their development. I honestly don't
know how knowledgeable he was with the full ramifications of the privacy
monetization aspects. I'd be interested in reading a credible article
about it is you have one.

>> Anyway, I'm not trying slime Apple for its founder's genius for
>> innovation. The iPhone was one of our generation's most revolutionary
>> inventions that even today is a major societal leveling tool and a curse
>> to privacy and child protection.
>>
>> My point is that all multinational companies, hi-tech especially, care
>> only about bottom lines and how to increase them, including micros~1.
>
> just about every company cares about bottom lines, otherwise they won't
> be in business for very long.
>
> public companies have an obligation to their shareholders to do so.
>

Of course, and if harvesting of personal information is profitable
(which it surely is) then they'll pursue it, as they surely have. That
the reason there needs to be a strong balancing force to keep them in
control. Our DOJ and past administrations have allowed this
laissez-faire corruption to continue and only give lip-service to
spanking them for their over-reach.

>
> breaking existing software is not normally a good strategy.
>
> this is particularly true for enterprise customers, who are not about
> to rewrite all of their custom software.
>

Firefox in the not too distant past legacied their XUL/XPCOM rendering
and extension APIs, essentially, killing off all of their huge 3d party
developers programs and not providing any migration APIs that would
allow those extensions to be re-designed to run on the new architecture.

Even when Apple, followed by Microsoft changed their desktop from
skeuomorphic to flat-design caused corporations to invest in re-training
their employees.

And let's not forget all the love Microsoft engendered when they decided
that just what their Office users needed was to throw out the old menu
UI and expose them to all the fantastic goodness of multi-layered ribbons!

>
>> Additionally, there are rumors that the new system will reside on their
>> Azure cloud and unbridle the user from the need to even need a
>> sophisticated box to run programs. If that were to come about, I suspect
>> that allowing people to run their own roll-your-own programs on the
>> cloud would be highly unlikely.
>
> that might be an option, given that other companies are already doing
> it with great success.
>
> if they do, it won't be the only version available. not everyone wants
> a cloud solution.

Agreed, I being one of them. Luckily for me, my computing needs are
nicely handled with what I have now on Win7. And for programs like
TurboTax, my Win10 virtual machine on VBox handles that fine. Gaming is
an area where I may have to purchase a Win10+ box since I never really
took to consoles.

[Sailfish]

nospam graced us with on 6/19/2021 8:06 AM:

>>> What foundational changes would you like?
>>>
>> Well, I'll consider wishes are like fishes and dare to hope.
>>
>> 1. Bring back Aero, in all it's previous glory (transparency,
>> skeuomorphic icons, rounded windows corners, transparency, &c.) I don't
>> mind if they farm it out, as long as they open the architecture APIs
>> that would allow 3rd parties to replicate it fully.
>
> that's not really foundational, and the rounded corners are rumoured to
> be in win11.
>

Agree to disagree. It was the desktop after all.

>> 2. Make changes that would allow Win7 users and 3rd party developers to
>> create apps for its 30% cut store AND create the same programs access to
>> the APIs neccessary to allow them to be sold without going through the
>> 30% Microsoft tax.
>
> that exists now, and it's not a tax either. there's significant benefit
> from the 30% cut.
>

Now, yes. Win 11whatever, who knows.

>> 3. Provide less obscure access for power users rather than obfuscating
>> them as they now do on Win10.
>
> power users don't care if a setting is obscured.
>

Agree to disagree. It's a hassle to go through many steps now where only
a few were needed prior.

>> There are others but this would be enough for me to seriously consider
>> upgrading.
>>
>>>> What I suspect is that they will make significant
>>>> infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall, just
>>>> like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.
>>> Apple haven't done anything like the sort.
>>>
>> Yes, they have with iOS devices.
>
> no they haven't.
>

le sigh:
REF:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/tim-cook-claims-sideloading-apps-would-destroy-security-and-privacy-of-ios/

[excerpt quote=\"
Tim Cook has claimed in an interview with Brut that if Apple was forced
to allow sideloading of apps, as Android does, it would destroy security
and privacy of iOS.
\" /]
>

> what's wrong with webkit?
>

Other than the anti-competitive aspect of forcing all browser developers
to use their competitor's web access engine? Do I really need to spell
it out; especially considering the privacy history associated with both
those companies.

[David Brooks]

On 19/06/2021 15:12, nospam wrote:
> In article <saksji$8cp$1...@hunterbd.eternal-september.org>, David Brooks
> <Dav...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> unfortunately, we live in a world where running questionable software
>>>>>>> is risky. the carefree days are long gone.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As an aside ....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you consider installing and running www.ClamXav.com to be risky?
>>>>>
>>>>> that didn't take long for you to try to derail the thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> your existence is what's risky.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm asking for your opinion of the wisdom of installing a non-Apple
>>>> approved software package onto an Apple computer.
>>>
>>> no you're not. you're trolling, as you usually do.
>>
>> No. Not so. I'm seeking an answer - FROM *YOU* - about www.ClamXav.com
>>
>> (In front of witnesses!)
>>
>>> this thread is *not* about apple, none of the many groups it's
>>> crossposted to are about apple, and your obsession with clamxav is
>>> wildly unhealthy, to where you repeatedly ask about it for no apparent
>>> reason.
>>
>> Much easier if you were to simply give your opinion on ClamXav
>>
>> Have you EVER installed it on YOUR computer(s)?
>
> you've asked that 18 bazillion times before. probably more.

Quote relevant MIDs

>>> follow the footsteps of your kid and go away forever.
>>
>> That comment is in /really/ bad taste. :-(
>
> yes it is, and intentionally so.

Did YOU break this link? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kqytf31a8E

[Michael Trew]

On 6/19/2021 9:48 AM, David Brooks wrote:
> Much easier if you were to simply give your opinion on ClamXav

I've never heard of it... I used to work for Apple Care tech support,
and we recommend everyone install a free program, now called
MalwareBytes for Mac.

[Michael Trew]

On 6/19/2021 10:54 AM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
> On 6/18/21 3:24 PM, Michael Trew wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> ME should have never existed... could have easily waited for XP. ME
>> was rushed out when consumers were confused by the release of Windows
>> 2000 -- home users were buying it thinking it was the next home
>> release. I've tried to install and run ME in the past... same hardware
>> as 98 SE, yet I've never experienced so many BSOD's before. Yuck.
>
> I god a lot of those BSODs with ME. Just like 98. 2000 avoided mst of them.
>

I did as well, but ME still seemed glitchier, like a lot of thought
didn't go into the OS in whole. The kind of put makeup on 98 SE.

[Ken Blake]

You're saying what many other people said, but it wasn't my experience.
I had no problems with Me.


--
Ken

[Rene Lamontagne]

Yeah, I had no problems with ME, always wondered what the hell everyone
was bellyacking about, Only ever had 1 or 2 blue screens throughout its
life. :-)

Rene

[...w¡ñ§±¤n]

8.0 was like ME.
- occasionally a black sheep appears in the family

--
...w¡ñ§±¤n

[nospam]

In article <sal4aj$iod$2...@hunterbd.eternal-september.org>, David Brooks

<Dav...@nomail.invalid> wrote:

> >>>>>> As an aside ....
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Do you consider installing and running www.ClamXav.com to be risky?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> that didn't take long for you to try to derail the thread.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> your existence is what's risky.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm asking for your opinion of the wisdom of installing a non-Apple
> >>>> approved software package onto an Apple computer.
> >>>
> >>> no you're not. you're trolling, as you usually do.
> >>
> >> No. Not so. I'm seeking an answer - FROM *YOU* - about www.ClamXav.com
> >>
> >> (In front of witnesses!)
> >>
> >>> this thread is *not* about apple, none of the many groups it's
> >>> crossposted to are about apple, and your obsession with clamxav is
> >>> wildly unhealthy, to where you repeatedly ask about it for no apparent
> >>> reason.
> >>
> >> Much easier if you were to simply give your opinion on ClamXav
> >>
> >> Have you EVER installed it on YOUR computer(s)?
> >
> > you've asked that 18 bazillion times before. probably more.
>
> Quote relevant MIDs

don't pretend that you never asked about it before.

> >>> follow the footsteps of your kid and go away forever.
> >>
> >> That comment is in /really/ bad taste. :-(
> >
> > yes it is, and intentionally so.
>
> Did YOU break this link? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kqytf31a8E

the link is not broken and it's even less relevant than your fucked up
obsession with clamxav.

[nospam]

In article <sal56l$od4$2...@dont-email.me>, Michael Trew

<mt99...@ymail.com> wrote:

> > Much easier if you were to simply give your opinion on ClamXav
>
> I've never heard of it... I used to work for Apple Care tech support,
> and we recommend everyone install a free program, now called
> MalwareBytes for Mac.

that is bad advice.

[nospam]

In article <sal2hh$7br$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish

<NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:

> >> Riiiight. Certainly a man of his worth has NO influence on the company
> >> that continues to pay him hefty dividends.
> >
> > he was on the board until just recently, but regardless, satya has the
> > final say in what microsoft does.
> >
> True but that's like saying Pres(s) Trump and Biden have the final say
> when we all know that each of them had their puppetmaster. In Trump's
> case it was most likely his son-in-law's father's money and with Biden
> it's clear that it's not him designing the policy.

it's nothing at all like that, which isn't even accurate.

> >>>> Apple has become with their wall-garden approach.
> >>> the only walls are the ones people put up on their own.
> >>>
> >> heh, the ol' wax-philosophical straw man counter ploy.
> >
> > no straw man.
> >
> > those who say apple is a walled garden are those who don't use it much,
> > if at all.
> >
> > just about anything that can be done with a windows pc and certainly a
> > linux box can also be done on a mac.
> >
> Interesting though that one can't legally run MacOS on either of those
> non-Apple platforms, no?

so what? the claim was that macs were a walled garden. that is false.
they are not.

> Also, to design iOS apps, one must use a Mac
> for development.

false. there are cross-platform options, plus apple just announced
support for writing ios apps on an ipad.

it also doesn't matter. using a mac is the least of anyone's problems
in writing apps. if money is a problem, then a used mac is more than
sufficient. if the app is any good, the mac will pay for itself in
short order, regardless of how much the mac cost, which can be used for
windows development too, along with just about everything else.

> > ios and android are different than macos and windows in both design and
> > the hardware, but there aren't any walls there either. in fact, a lot
> > of tasks are much easier on ios than on android.
> >
> > nothing is perfect in every situation.
> >
> If one cannot easily sideload apps, then the system is, by design,
> behind a walled garden.

nope. the walls have many doors. they're normally closed, but it's not
difficult to open one.

> >>> also, mobile devices have a lot more personal data on them, making them
> >>> a *much* higher value target.
> >>>
> >> Sure, though, not sure that was Jobs thought at the time.
> >
> > jobs was there throughout the design of the iphone and ipad.
> >
> Near the end, with cancer ravaging his body, it's questionable how
> in-tuned he was with the details of their development. I honestly don't
> know how knowledgeable he was with the full ramifications of the privacy
> monetization aspects. I'd be interested in reading a credible article
> about it is you have one.

jobs was on top of things right up until the last few months, about the
time he resigned as ceo.

> >> Anyway, I'm not trying slime Apple for its founder's genius for
> >> innovation. The iPhone was one of our generation's most revolutionary
> >> inventions that even today is a major societal leveling tool and a curse
> >> to privacy and child protection.
> >>
> >> My point is that all multinational companies, hi-tech especially, care
> >> only about bottom lines and how to increase them, including micros~1.
> >
> > just about every company cares about bottom lines, otherwise they won't
> > be in business for very long.
> >
> > public companies have an obligation to their shareholders to do so.
> >
> Of course, and if harvesting of personal information is profitable
> (which it surely is) then they'll pursue it, as they surely have. That
> the reason there needs to be a strong balancing force to keep them in
> control. Our DOJ and past administrations have allowed this
> laissez-faire corruption to continue and only give lip-service to
> spanking them for their over-reach.

the problem is that politicians don't understand technology (or much
else*), plus they are also paid off by lobbyists. their goal is to stay
in office, not to do what's good for society.

* it ain't just technology they don't understand:
<https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jun/09/texas-republican-louie-
gohmert-climate-change>
The Texas Republican congressman Louie Gohmert has asked a
senior US government official if changing the moon¹s orbit around
the Earth, or the Earth¹s orbit around the sun, might be a solution
for climate change.
...
³We know there¹s been significant solar flare activity, and so Š is
there anything that the National Forest Service or BLM can do to
change the course of the moon¹s orbit, or the Earth¹s orbit around
the sun?² Gohmert asked. ³Obviously that would have profound
effects on our climate.²

> >> Additionally, there are rumors that the new system will reside on their
> >> Azure cloud and unbridle the user from the need to even need a
> >> sophisticated box to run programs. If that were to come about, I suspect
> >> that allowing people to run their own roll-your-own programs on the
> >> cloud would be highly unlikely.
> >
> > that might be an option, given that other companies are already doing
> > it with great success.
> >
> > if they do, it won't be the only version available. not everyone wants
> > a cloud solution.
>
> Agreed, I being one of them. Luckily for me, my computing needs are
> nicely handled with what I have now on Win7. And for programs like
> TurboTax, my Win10 virtual machine on VBox handles that fine.

both local hardware and cloud solutions have their uses.

nothing is ideal for every situation.

> Gaming is
> an area where I may have to purchase a Win10+ box since I never really
> took to consoles.

there's always stadia :)

[nospam]

In article <sal413$i4f$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish

<NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:


> >> 3. Provide less obscure access for power users rather than obfuscating
> >> them as they now do on Win10.
> >
> > power users don't care if a setting is obscured.
> >
> Agree to disagree. It's a hassle to go through many steps now where only
> a few were needed prior.

it's a one time change.

there are also third party tools to simplify tweaking hidden settings
and have been forever.

> >> There are others but this would be enough for me to seriously consider
> >> upgrading.
> >>
> >>>> What I suspect is that they will make significant
> >>>> infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall, just
> >>>> like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.
> >>> Apple haven't done anything like the sort.
> >>>
> >> Yes, they have with iOS devices.
> >
> > no they haven't.
> >
> le sigh:
> REF:
>
> https://www.zdnet.com/article/tim-cook-claims-sideloading-apps-would-destroy-s
> ecurity-and-privacy-of-ios/
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> Tim Cook has claimed in an interview with Brut that if Apple was forced
> to allow sideloading of apps, as Android does, it would destroy security
> and privacy of iOS.
> \" /]

once again, you don't understand the context.

> > what's wrong with webkit?
> >
> Other than the anti-competitive aspect of forcing all browser developers
> to use their competitor's web access engine? Do I really need to spell
> it out; especially considering the privacy history associated with both
> those companies.

nobody is forcing anyone, and the privacy issues are outside of webkit
anyway.

webkit is open source, add/remove whatever you want.

webkit is also very good, which is why so many companies use it.

nothing prevents writing something else, which microsoft tried and
failed.

there are chromium-based browsers (aka blink, a webkit fork) with the
google-bits stripped out, for example.

[Sailfish]

nospam graced us with on 6/19/2021 11:22 AM:

>> Agree to disagree. It's a hassle to go through many steps now where only
>> a few were needed prior.
>
> it's a one time change.
>
> there are also third party tools to simplify tweaking hidden settings
> and have been forever.
>

Just to remind you, you entreated me as to what I would like. I replied.
Obviously, you disagree. Whatever.

>>>> There are others but this would be enough for me to seriously consider
>>>> upgrading.
>>>>
>>>>>> What I suspect is that they will make significant
>>>>>> infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall, just
>>>>>> like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.
>>>>> Apple haven't done anything like the sort.
>>>>>
>>>> Yes, they have with iOS devices.
>>> no they haven't.
>>>
>> le sigh:
>> REF:
>>
>> https://www.zdnet.com/article/tim-cook-claims-sideloading-apps-would-destroy-s
>> ecurity-and-privacy-of-ios/
>>
>> [excerpt quote=\"
>> Tim Cook has claimed in an interview with Brut that if Apple was forced
>> to allow sideloading of apps, as Android does, it would destroy security
>> and privacy of iOS.
>> \" /]
>
> once again, you don't understand the context.
>

And, oddly, you refused to refute my legitimate response with
clarification. Instead, simply skirting away.

>
> nobody is forcing anyone, and the privacy issues are outside of webkit
> anyway.
>

Wrong. If they disallow direct web access, they are forcing anyone and
everyone. Also, they who control the data that is being transfered on
the web control the competition. Do you think the developers of Brave or
Firefox or even Edge wouldn't prefer to use a fork of the same webkit
for their browsers?

> webkit is open source, add/remove whatever you want.
>

Not on iOS it isn't.
REF:
https://www.wired.com/story/firefox-launched-a-new-android-app-to-lure-users-from-chrome/

[excerpt quote=\"
Apple’s closed ecosystem requires that all browsers, including Chrome,
use WebKit as their underlying engines.
\" /]

> webkit is also very good, which is why so many companies use it.
>

It is very good and the main reason Google fork'd it for their use.
Mainly so they could move Blink in a more competitive way to meet their
needs.

Of course, they could do that since, well, they also created their own
smartphone by reverse-engineering Apple's Java modules but keeping
compatibility the modules argument lists.

The simple fact is that Apple AND Alphabet have an iron-fist hold on the
competition with their stores, guaranteeing that they'll always get 30%
of every sale. This is obviously detrimental to consumers since the
competitors will simply pass most of that 30% tax onto the hapless
consumers.

> nothing prevents writing something else, which microsoft tried and
> failed.
>

Yes, there is. Microsoft failed for a number of reasons, not the least
being their fumbling attempts at Win8 and Windows Phone which almost
completely eroded their trustworthiness to consumers but, more
importantly, to their enterprise accounts.

They won't enter those waters again anytime soon. However, they are
wealthy enough that they can plan another line of attack at some point.

Most others aren't ... maybe Amazon, maybe Facebook???

> there are chromium-based browsers (aka blink, a webkit fork) with the
> google-bits stripped out, for example.

No one without an established platform would even bother. There will
need to be a technology paradigm change. One that separates the service
from the devices.

[Chris]

This is a windows discussion so why are bringing in a mobile OS?

macOS has no pay wall for software.

>> There's no doubt that the app stores are a great way for
>> google/apple/microsoft to make money, but there are often alternatives.
>>
> Often not. Ever found a browser option that isn't based on webkit?

What's that got to do with app stores? But anyway I use firefox. It uses
gecko.

[Sailfish]

nospam graced us with on 6/19/2021 11:22 AM:

> In article <sal2hh$7br$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish
> <NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Riiiight. Certainly a man of his worth has NO influence on the company
>>>> that continues to pay him hefty dividends.
>>> he was on the board until just recently, but regardless, satya has the
>>> final say in what microsoft does.
>>>
>> True but that's like saying Pres(s) Trump and Biden have the final say
>> when we all know that each of them had their puppetmaster. In Trump's
>> case it was most likely his son-in-law's father's money and with Biden
>> it's clear that it's not him designing the policy.
>
> it's nothing at all like that, which isn't even accurate.
>

So you say. Anyway, I used it only as an analogy and don't wish to
swerve off-topic.

>>>>>> Apple has become with their wall-garden approach.
>>>>> the only walls are the ones people put up on their own.
>>>>>
>>>> heh, the ol' wax-philosophical straw man counter ploy.
>>> no straw man.
>>>
>>> those who say apple is a walled garden are those who don't use it much,
>>> if at all.
>>>
>>> just about anything that can be done with a windows pc and certainly a
>>> linux box can also be done on a mac.
>>>
>> Interesting though that one can't legally run MacOS on either of those
>> non-Apple platforms, no?
>
> so what? the claim was that macs were a walled garden. that is false.
> they are not.
>

I don't recall ever claiming Macs are walled gardens.

>> Also, to design iOS apps, one must use a Mac
>> for development.
>
> false. there are cross-platform options, plus apple just announced
> support for writing ios apps on an ipad.
>

True. wrt to the requirements Apple forces developers to use Mac XCODE
to develop native apps on iPhones.

Oh, how magnanimous of them! Allowing one to develop native apps on
another one of their expensive devices. What next, them opening it up
for developing native apps on an Apple Watch?

> it also doesn't matter. using a mac is the least of anyone's problems
> in writing apps. if money is a problem, then a used mac is more than
> sufficient. if the app is any good, the mac will pay for itself in
> short order, regardless of how much the mac cost, which can be used for
> windows development too, along with just about everything else.
>

It does matter and is at the heart of what a walled garden is all about.
Whether it be paying 30% to the OS owners, or closed systems or forcing
developers to use competitor's software for web access, it all
anti-competitive turning the outside developers into working in a
company-owned environment where innovations are stymied and consumers
are over-priced.

>> If one cannot easily sideload apps, then the system is, by design,
>> behind a walled garden.
>
> nope. the walls have many doors. they're normally closed, but it's not
> difficult to open one.
>

If the doors are not "normally" opened then the possibility to monetize
their software in any meaningful way will never happen.

>>>>> also, mobile devices have a lot more personal data on them, making them
>>>>> a *much* higher value target.
>>>>>
>>>> Sure, though, not sure that was Jobs thought at the time.
>>> jobs was there throughout the design of the iphone and ipad.
>>>
>> Near the end, with cancer ravaging his body, it's questionable how
>> in-tuned he was with the details of their development. I honestly don't
>> know how knowledgeable he was with the full ramifications of the privacy
>> monetization aspects. I'd be interested in reading a credible article
>> about it is you have one.
>
> jobs was on top of things right up until the last few months, about the
> time he resigned as ceo.
>

About that article? I'm still interested. Not a taunt, simply intrigued.

>> Of course, and if harvesting of personal information is profitable
>> (which it surely is) then they'll pursue it, as they surely have. That
>> the reason there needs to be a strong balancing force to keep them in
>> control. Our DOJ and past administrations have allowed this
>> laissez-faire corruption to continue and only give lip-service to
>> spanking them for their over-reach.
>
> the problem is that politicians don't understand technology (or much
> else*), plus they are also paid off by lobbyists. their goal is to stay
> in office, not to do what's good for society.
>

On this we can agree. Less
Progressive/Libertarian/Conservative/Nativist, more Populist (no Trump
was NOT a Populist.) However, if you choose to respond, I welcome it but
will not continue this sub-thread.

>
>> Agreed, I being one of them. Luckily for me, my computing needs are
>> nicely handled with what I have now on Win7. And for programs like
>> TurboTax, my Win10 virtual machine on VBox handles that fine.
>
> both local hardware and cloud solutions have their uses.
>
> nothing is ideal for every situation.
>

Agree.

>> Gaming is
>> an area where I may have to purchase a Win10+ box since I never really
>> took to consoles.
>
> there's always stadia :)

heh, I should have mentioned that the biggest problem I had with
consoles was the use of controllers vs. mouse

[David Brooks]

Thank you, Michael. Apple Support have often mentioned to me the
advantages of running the 'free' version of Malwarebytes for Apple.

It's available here: https://www.malwarebytes.com/mac

Its use is often recommended on the Apple Support Communities (ASC)
forums. So, too, was ClamXav during the years I was monitoring the
forums. No other AV/AM software programmes have ever been recommended to
the best of my knowledge, but that's where I saw it being 'promoted'.

The developer of Adware Medic, Thomas Reed, was a prolific poster on the
ASC forums https://www.thesafemac.com/about/

Not once, though, have I seen a post on the ASC written by Mark Allan,
the developer of ClamXav.
https://www.linkedin.com/company/canimaan-software-ltd/ Perhaps he
posted under a pseudonym.

https://www.linkedin.com/search/results/people/?currentCompany=%5B%2221434422%22%5D&origin=COMPANY_PAGE_CANNED_SEARCH

There is a (dreadful) Facebook page too, here:-
https://www.facebook.com/clamxav

HTH

--
Kind regards,
David

[Sailfish]

Chris graced us with on 6/19/2021 1:09 PM:

Agreed.

[David Brooks]

On 19/06/2021 19:22, nospam wrote:
> In article <sal4aj$iod$2...@hunterbd.eternal-september.org>, David Brooks
> <Dav...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> As an aside ....
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you consider installing and running www.ClamXav.com to be risky?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> that didn't take long for you to try to derail the thread.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> your existence is what's risky.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm asking for your opinion of the wisdom of installing a non-Apple
>>>>>> approved software package onto an Apple computer.
>>>>>
>>>>> no you're not. you're trolling, as you usually do.
>>>>
>>>> No. Not so. I'm seeking an answer - FROM *YOU* - about www.ClamXav.com
>>>>
>>>> (In front of witnesses!)
>>>>
>>>>> this thread is *not* about apple, none of the many groups it's
>>>>> crossposted to are about apple, and your obsession with clamxav is
>>>>> wildly unhealthy, to where you repeatedly ask about it for no apparent
>>>>> reason.
>>>>
>>>> Much easier if you were to simply give your opinion on ClamXav
>>>>
>>>> Have you EVER installed it on YOUR computer(s)?
>>>
>>> you've asked that 18 bazillion times before. probably more.
>>
>> Quote relevant MIDs
>
> don't pretend that you never asked about it before.

You have never provided an answer

>>>>> follow the footsteps of your kid and go away forever.
>>>>
>>>> That comment is in /really/ bad taste. :-(
>>>
>>> yes it is, and intentionally so.
>>
>> Did YOU break this link? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kqytf31a8E
>
> the link is not broken and it's even less relevant than your fucked up
> obsession with clamxav.

The link is posted in the signature of a poster known as Sn!pe

Have you checked that it's not malicious?

[Michael Trew]

Why is that? I haven't worked there since 2016, but it basically solved
any malware/adware issue we found. That was a directive from Apple to
suggest that program. Unless, of course, it's changed in the last 5
years. I'm not a mac person, I don't know.

[Brian Gregory]

On 18/06/2021 18:55, Mark Lloyd wrote:
> On 6/18/21 9:06 AM, Peter Johnson wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> +1 used every version except Win2000 amd don't know why I missed that.
>> None of them have taken more than a few minutes to find the features I
>> think are important or to dispose of the highlighted features I don't
>> intend to use.
>
> At the time I found 2000 to be the best version.
>

I didn't use it much because I never owned a copy myself but yes, W2000
was like a fast lean mean basic version of XP.

--
Brian Gregory (in England).

[David Brooks]

I don't quite understand, Michael.

You appear to be saying that you are NOT a Mac person but never-the-less
worked in Apple Support. Is that correct?

How MANY folk working in Apple Support know nothing about Macs?

[David Brooks]

Has /anyone/ reading here any personal experience of using the ClamXav
software?

--
Follow-up set

[Paul]

Let's see.

Newsgroup list has six Windows groups in it. Check.

Drift subtopic wants to discuss a weak AV product for Macintosh computers. Check.

When there are at least eight entries in Virustotal that need discussion.

OK, then. Did the Canimaan dude ban you from some forum ???

Seems the most logical explanation.

If this query had been placed in comp.sys.mac.misc, I bet
it would have been ignored.

Believe it or not, the other AV scanners in an ecosystem,
the staff do have to be paying attention to what each
other are doing. There will be "cloud submissions" if
a jiggler is set off by the product in question. And the other
AV products will not make an exception for the product, without
checking the behavior first. That does not mean that every
obscure product on the face of the earth gets tested. But
it does mean, that AV staff somewhere, have had to look at
it, and carve out an exception for it so it does not get
quarantined.

Just like Microsoft at some point, I believe they
notched out the Ask Toolbar :-) Even clever lawyerly
things, that skate on a knifes edge, occasionally get
steamrolled.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/ask-toolbar-considered-high-threat-malware-by-microsoft-1.3111321

The good ole days. Internet Explorer loaded to the scuppers with toolbars.

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-H0ZDGGvQFBw/UrOC-U_rbkI/AAAAAAAAAKw/Bio4vaPvNoQ/s400/2651970411_b210f8f3ac.jpg

Paul

[Shadow]

On Sat, 19 Jun 2021 21:42:18 +0100, David Brooks
<Dav...@nomail.invalid> wrote:

>Thank you, Michael. Apple Support have often mentioned to me the
>advantages of running the 'free' version of Malwarebytes for Apple.

You DO realize you're cross-posting to WINDOWS groups?
Oh! Drunk *AGAIN*?
Still does not explain your behavior.
Just say sorry and go to bed.

------------------------------------
BD: I want people to "get to know me better. I have nothing to
hide".
I'm always here to help, this page was put up at BD's request,
rather, he said "Do it *NOW*!":

<https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php>

87 confirmed #FAKE_NYMS, most used in cybercrimes!
Google "David Brooks Devon"
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

[David Brooks]

Agreed. :-(

> Believe it or not, the other AV scanners in an ecosystem,
> the staff do have to be paying attention to what each
> other are doing. There will be "cloud submissions" if
> a jiggler is set off by the product in question. And the other
> AV products will not make an exception for the product, without
> checking the behavior first. That does not mean that every
> obscure product on the face of the earth gets tested. But
> it does mean, that AV staff somewhere, have had to look at
> it, and carve out an exception for it so it does not get
> quarantined.
>
> Just like Microsoft at some point, I believe they
> notched out the Ask Toolbar :-) Even clever lawyerly
> things, that skate on a knifes edge, occasionally get
> steamrolled.
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/ask-toolbar-considered-high-threat-malware-by-microsoft-1.3111321
>
>
> The good ole days. Internet Explorer loaded to the scuppers with toolbars.
>
> https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-H0ZDGGvQFBw/UrOC-U_rbkI/AAAAAAAAAKw/Bio4vaPvNoQ/s400/2651970411_b210f8f3ac.jpg

Hi Paul

Thank you for taking the time to respond to me.

This thread might help you to understand my concerns:-

https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/protect/forum/all/ramnit-trojan-on-imac-aol-disk-from-2008-false/e18cc0a4-5895-412e-9306-e565d2571849

I had bought and paid for the ClamXav software because I was suspicious
of its method of marketing. I was generally unhappy with answers
provided by Mark Allan on the ‘help’ desk and his unwillingness to use
his ClamXav Facebook page in what I consider a satisfactory manner. Even
now there are only 373 people who ‘like’ the product!

https://www.facebook.com/clamxav

Mark Allan will not discuss my concerns with me directly or on the
product support page https://www.clamxav.com/support/ and has also
blocked me from Facebook and LinkedIn. He took such action only when I
told him that, partially in memory of my deceased son (a guru at ICL) I
was hunting for ‘bad guys’ on the Internet. What I’m after, here, is
evidence. I’d like someone to check and prove my fears groundless!

Not an easy thing to achieve.

David

[Michael Trew]

Haha, that's a funny story. I needed a job, and a friend that I used to
work with told me the call center they work at was hiring. Ever used a
Mac? Nope. Ever used an iPhone? Nope. But I can type on a keyboard
and I had a pulse, plus not on drugs, so they hired me.

See, I worked for a third party vendor site. The first time that I ever
used a Mac (newer than an ancient 90's model) was in 2015 when I started
the job after a few weeks of training. Same applies to an iPhone.
Where I worked, many people were older, had worked on different
telephone campaigns, and knew little about Apple devices.

I learned quickly, but Apple cut the site in 2016, as well as many other
third party vendors for phone support. I'm sure that an actual Apple
call center would be far more selective about specifically employing
"Mac" people.

[Shadow]

On Sun, 20 Jun 2021 18:33:46 +0100, David Brooks
<Dav...@nomail.invalid> wrote:

>Hi Paul
>
>Thank you for taking the time to respond to me.

He wrote "SUBTHREAD ENDED". then politely explained why you
shouldn't be multi-cross-posting in OT groups. A lesser person would
have told you to fsck off.
How drunk are you?

<OT bot-feeding, STALKING and SLIMING snipped>

[Brian Gregory]

On 19/06/2021 18:29, Rene Lamontagne wrote:
> Yeah, I had no problems with ME, always wondered what the hell everyone
> was bellyacking about, Only ever had 1 or 2 blue screens throughout its
> life. :-)

+1

Maybe it depended on what hardware you had?

[David Brooks]

What you tell me is almost unbelievable!!!

Thank you for explaining though. :-D

You've reminded me that it's time to fire-up my Windows10 laptop and
bring it up to date!

NEW QUESTION!

Which of the newsgroups to which I'm posting is THE most active nowadays?

TIA

--
Kind regards,
David B.

[Paul]

David Brooks wrote:

> NEW QUESTION!
>
> Which of the newsgroups to which I'm posting is THE most active nowadays?
>
> TIA

The answer is comp.sys.mac.misc .

Mr. MacOS guy.

If you used Windows once in a while, it would help ya know.

Maybe we could ask the server admin for a new group entitled:

alt.david-brooks.help-my-shoes-are-on-backwards

Paul

[nospam]

In article <saliua$obt$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish

<NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:

> >>>>>> Apple has become with their wall-garden approach.
> >>>>> the only walls are the ones people put up on their own.
> >>>>>
> >>>> heh, the ol' wax-philosophical straw man counter ploy.
> >>> no straw man.
> >>>
> >>> those who say apple is a walled garden are those who don't use it much,
> >>> if at all.
> >>>
> >>> just about anything that can be done with a windows pc and certainly a
> >>> linux box can also be done on a mac.
> >>>
> >> Interesting though that one can't legally run MacOS on either of those
> >> non-Apple platforms, no?
> >
> > so what? the claim was that macs were a walled garden. that is false.
> > they are not.
> >
> I don't recall ever claiming Macs are walled gardens.

you said apple was a walled garden.

macs have no walls and never have.

ios devices are designed to be more secure, which some people
incorrectly call walls, however, it can be bypassed if the user wants.
it's not a good idea, but it's certainly possible.

> >> Also, to design iOS apps, one must use a Mac
> >> for development.
> >
> > false. there are cross-platform options, plus apple just announced
> > support for writing ios apps on an ipad.
> >
> True. wrt to the requirements Apple forces developers to use Mac XCODE
> to develop native apps on iPhones.

no they don't, and apple doesn't force anyone to do anything.

xcode is the preferred method, but not the only method.

ios app developers can use visual studio:
<https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/vs/features/mobile-app-development/>
Build cloud-connected cross platform mobile apps and games for
iOS, Android, and Windows

<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/visualstudio/cross-platform/cross-plat
form-mobile-development-in-visual-studio?view=vs-2019>
You can build apps for Android, iOS, and Windows devices by using
Visual Studio. As you design your app, use tools in Visual Studio to
easily add connected services such as Microsoft 365, Azure App
Service, and Application Insights.

another option for ios app development is on an ipad.

the preferred ide for android app development is android studio. there
are alternatives there too, including visual studio.

> Oh, how magnanimous of them! Allowing one to develop native apps on
> another one of their expensive devices. What next, them opening it up
> for developing native apps on an Apple Watch?

i'll ignore the last quip, but macs aren't expensive. that's yet
another myth.

prices are similar for similar specs, and in many cases, macs are less
expensive.

> > it also doesn't matter. using a mac is the least of anyone's problems
> > in writing apps. if money is a problem, then a used mac is more than
> > sufficient. if the app is any good, the mac will pay for itself in
> > short order, regardless of how much the mac cost, which can be used for
> > windows development too, along with just about everything else.
> >
> It does matter and is at the heart of what a walled garden is all about.
> Whether it be paying 30% to the OS owners, or closed systems or forcing
> developers to use competitor's software for web access, it all
> anti-competitive turning the outside developers into working in a
> company-owned environment where innovations are stymied and consumers
> are over-priced.

you haven't done any app development, have you?

30% is cheap for the many benefits it brings, especially for indie
developers, who would end up paying more than 30% if they did it on
their own.

they can always sell their apps outside of the app store if they want,
either at the same time or instead of.

> >> If one cannot easily sideload apps, then the system is, by design,
> >> behind a walled garden.
> >
> > nope. the walls have many doors. they're normally closed, but it's not
> > difficult to open one.
> >
> If the doors are not "normally" opened then the possibility to monetize
> their software in any meaningful way will never happen.

those are two entirely unrelated things.

app developers set the prices of their apps.

most apps are free, where apple/google/microsoft makes *nothing*,
despite hosting the app and offering bandwidth for free.

> >>>>> also, mobile devices have a lot more personal data on them, making them
> >>>>> a *much* higher value target.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Sure, though, not sure that was Jobs thought at the time.
> >>> jobs was there throughout the design of the iphone and ipad.
> >>>
> >> Near the end, with cancer ravaging his body, it's questionable how
> >> in-tuned he was with the details of their development. I honestly don't
> >> know how knowledgeable he was with the full ramifications of the privacy
> >> monetization aspects. I'd be interested in reading a credible article
> >> about it is you have one.
> >
> > jobs was on top of things right up until the last few months, about the
> > time he resigned as ceo.
> >
> About that article? I'm still interested. Not a taunt, simply intrigued.

jobs died october, 2011, so look for news stories leading up to that
time.

one such story was in june, 2011 just four months prior to his death,
where he gave a presentation to the cupertino city council about what
is now apple's spaceship campus, previously hewlett-packard:
<https://www.mercurynews.com/2011/06/08/apples-steve-jobs-appears-at-cup
ertino-city-council-meeting-to-pitch-huge-campus-expansion-2/>
Apple (AAPL) CEO Steve Jobs made a surprise appearance at the
Cupertino City Council last night to announce Apple零 plans for a
spaceshiplike circular building in Cupertino that will house 12,000
workers on the site of what is now a Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) campus.

you can watch it here:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtuz5OmOh_M>

he is quite thin (and likely weak), but that's about it. his brain is
fine.

[nospam]

In article <salgrf$bct$1...@dont-email.me>, Sailfish

<NIXCAPS...@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:


> >>>>>> What I suspect is that they will make significant
> >>>>>> infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall,
> >>>>>> just
> >>>>>> like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.
> >>>>> Apple haven't done anything like the sort.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Yes, they have with iOS devices.
> >>> no they haven't.
> >>>
> >> le sigh:
> >> REF:
> >>
> >>
> >> https://www.zdnet.com/article/tim-cook-claims-sideloading-apps-would-destro
> >> y-s
> >> ecurity-and-privacy-of-ios/
> >>
> >> [excerpt quote=\"
> >> Tim Cook has claimed in an interview with Brut that if Apple was forced
> >> to allow sideloading of apps, as Android does, it would destroy security
> >> and privacy of iOS.
> >> \" /]
> >
> > once again, you don't understand the context.
> >
> And, oddly, you refused to refute my legitimate response with
> clarification. Instead, simply skirting away.

i explained it already. you even mentioned enterprise distribution
before i did. there are also other options.

you're also ignoring that also in that interview, tim said that android
has 47 times as much malware as ios. while the exact amount is
debatable, it's clear that sideloading on ios would cause a drastic
increase in malware.

customers don't want malware.

> > nobody is forcing anyone, and the privacy issues are outside of webkit
> > anyway.
> >
> Wrong. If they disallow direct web access, they are forcing anyone and
> everyone.

who is disallowing direct web access??

> Also, they who control the data that is being transfered on
> the web control the competition.

who does that?

> Do you think the developers of Brave or
> Firefox or even Edge wouldn't prefer to use a fork of the same webkit
> for their browsers?

brave and edge are chromium-based, aka blink, a fork of webkit.

firefox is gecko.

edge was originally trident, but microsoft quickly learned that writing
their own rendering engine was not worth the trouble, so they switched
to chromium. there's no reason to reinvent the wheel when there's a
very good wheel available for free.

> > webkit is open source, add/remove whatever you want.
> >
> Not on iOS it isn't.

webkit is open source. full stop.

<https://webkit.org>
A fast, open source web browser engine

> REF:
>
> https://www.wired.com/story/firefox-launched-a-new-android-app-to-lure-users-f

> rom-chrome/
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> Apple¹s closed ecosystem requires that all browsers, including Chrome,
> use WebKit as their underlying engines.
> \" /]

that's about ios, not webkit.

what you're ignoring is that ios has *significantly* less malware than
android. this is a good thing.

ios browsers are limited to webkit for security and performance
reasons. not only is apple's webkit more secure, but it is also highly
optimized for their own hardware.

other rendering engines would be slower, less secure and drain the
battery more rapidly. customers don't find that to be a benefit.

> > webkit is also very good, which is why so many companies use it.
> >
> It is very good and the main reason Google fork'd it for their use.
> Mainly so they could move Blink in a more competitive way to meet their
> needs.

yep.

> Of course, they could do that since, well, they also created their own
> smartphone by reverse-engineering Apple's Java modules but keeping
> compatibility the modules argument lists.

the iphone doesn't have any java modules.

ios is fully native. it's os x running on a pocket-size device.

android uses a virtual machine (dalvik, now art) with apps originally
written in java, now mostly kotlin.

> The simple fact is that Apple AND Alphabet have an iron-fist hold on the
> competition with their stores, guaranteeing that they'll always get 30%
> of every sale. This is obviously detrimental to consumers since the
> competitors will simply pass most of that 30% tax onto the hapless
> consumers.

it's not a tax, no matter how many times you claim it is, nor is it an
iron-fist hold.

there is a significant benefit to developers for the 30% cut, including
internet hosting, download bandwidth, discoverability, payment
processing, local and international taxes, currency conversions,
handling fraud and chargeback, accounting and quite a bit more.

for an indie developer to do all of that on their own, it would cost
much more than 30% of their revenue. web hosting and credit card fees
are not free. creating a good web site is very much not free.

when software was sold in computer stores, the cut was 50-70%. this is
*less*. much less.

end users are also *far* more likely to buy an app from a microsoft,
apple or google store than some random website, where they have to
enter in their payment information (additional hassle) and hope it
isn't just collecting card numbers (legitimate fear). there are also
gift cards for those who don't want to use a credit card or don't have
one at all, which are also great for kids.

> > nothing prevents writing something else, which microsoft tried and
> > failed.
> >
> Yes, there is. Microsoft failed for a number of reasons, not the least
> being their fumbling attempts at Win8 and Windows Phone which almost
> completely eroded their trustworthiness to consumers but, more
> importantly, to their enterprise accounts.

that had nothing to do with edge failing.

windows phone was too little, too late, along with orphaning windows
mobile 6 users and developers and then again with windows phone 7. it
offered no benefit over ios or android, so it fizzled and failed.

> They won't enter those waters again anytime soon. However, they are
> wealthy enough that they can plan another line of attack at some point.
>
> Most others aren't ... maybe Amazon, maybe Facebook???

both of those companies tried releasing a smartphone and both of those
failed *hard*.

facebook is supposedly coming out with a smartwatch next year, and
based on rumours so far, is another guaranteed fail.

on the other hand, alexa devices are quite popular.

> > there are chromium-based browsers (aka blink, a webkit fork) with the
> > google-bits stripped out, for example.
>
> No one without an established platform would even bother. There will
> need to be a technology paradigm change. One that separates the service
> from the devices.

what service?

quite a few companies have released their own chromium-based browsers,
some of which are very good.

[nospam]

In article <salt60$lqm$1...@hunterbd.eternal-september.org>, David Brooks

doesn't matter.

> Have you checked that it's not malicious?

no need. it's a youtube video.

the only malicious entity is you.

[nospam]

In article <samvdu$j2u$1...@hunterbd.eternal-september.org>, David Brooks

<Dav...@nomail.invalid> wrote:

> >>>> Much easier if you were to simply give your opinion on ClamXav
> >>>
> >>> I've never heard of it... I used to work for Apple Care tech support,
> >>> and we recommend everyone install a free program, now called
> >>> MalwareBytes for Mac.
> >>
> >> that is bad advice.
> >
> > Why is that?  I haven't worked there since 2016, but it basically solved
> > any malware/adware issue we found.  That was a directive from Apple to
> > suggest that program.  Unless, of course, it's changed in the last 5
> > years.  I'm not a mac person, I don't know.
>
>
> I don't quite understand, Michael.
>
> You appear to be saying that you are NOT a Mac person but never-the-less
> worked in Apple Support. Is that correct?
>
> How MANY folk working in Apple Support know nothing about Macs?

most tech support people know nothing about whatever it is they
support. they just read from a script.

if your problem isn't in the script, they have no idea what to do and
will often say 'try reinstalling' or something generic to get you off
the phone as quickly as possible so they can move on to the next
caller.

[nospam]

In article <samboh$nhf$1...@dont-email.me>, Michael Trew

<mt99...@ymail.com> wrote:

> >>> Much easier if you were to simply give your opinion on ClamXav
> >>
> >> I've never heard of it... I used to work for Apple Care tech support,
> >> and we recommend everyone install a free program, now called
> >> MalwareBytes for Mac.
> >
> > that is bad advice.
>
> Why is that? I haven't worked there since 2016, but it basically solved
> any malware/adware issue we found.

malware is relatively rare on the mac, thus no need to run a utility.

it's mostly browser hijackers and crapware that claims to find malware
when the crapware is actually the malware itself.

mac os itself blocks as much as possible (nothing is 100%), but nothing
can prevent a user from typing in their admin password and installing
what looks like something useful, but actually is not.

> That was a directive from Apple to
> suggest that program. Unless, of course, it's changed in the last 5
> years.

nothing significant.

> I'm not a mac person, I don't know.

how is it you worked for apple care tech support and don't know much
about macs?

never mind i saw your explanation in another post.

[David_B]

Ooooh! You are a card, Paul! :-)

Here am I responding accordingly. Please will you confirm that I'm fully
up-to-date?

Microsoft Windows Version 21H1 (OS Build 19043.1052)

Thank you.

--
Kind regards,
David B.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Shadow]

On Mon, 21 Jun 2021 11:27:17 -0400, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

<ANY OS>

>blocks as much as possible (nothing is 100%), but nothing
>can prevent a user from typing in their admin password and installing
>what looks like something useful, but actually is not.

So true. And on topic, though you could include the Linux and
Apple groups....
It's why only idiots need resident AVs, although they would
still be vulnerable to zero-days.
It is however good practice to periodically scan your computer
using a USB booted AV rescue disk. That will prevent any malware that
has altered the OS and its defenses from hiding from a scan.
I thought the topic the datamining abomination called Win 11.
Who twisted the thread to AV products?
At a guess, probably someone that NEEDS a resident AV, and
NEEDS to drink less.

[Shadow]

On Sun, 20 Jun 2021 09:49:01 +0100, David Brooks
<Dav...@nomail.invalid> wrote:

>I don't quite understand, <stalking snipped>.

You never do.
Drink less.
HTH

https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php
[]'s.

[Paul]

David_B wrote:
> On 21/06/2021 13:35, Paul wrote:
>> David Brooks wrote:
>>
>>> NEW QUESTION!
>>>
>>> Which of the newsgroups to which I'm posting is THE most active
>>> nowadays?
>>>
>>> TIA
>>
>> The answer is comp.sys.mac.misc .
>>
>> Mr. MacOS guy.
>>
>> If you used Windows once in a while, it would help ya know.
>>
>> Maybe we could ask the server admin for a new group entitled:
>>
>> alt.david-brooks.help-my-shoes-are-on-backwards
>
>
> Ooooh! You are a card, Paul! :-)
>
> Here am I responding accordingly. Please will you confirm that I'm fully
> up-to-date?
>
> Microsoft Windows Version 21H1 (OS Build 19043.1052)
>
> Thank you.
>

The user agent doesn't hint at patchlevel.

The Avast in the signature is a nice touch and
it looks like your Avast is up to date.

Paul

[Sailfish]

nospam graced us with on 6/21/2021 8:27 AM:

Thanks for the YT link, I will listen to it later.

As to the OT non-Windows responses (one I admit starting, as was pointed
out to me earlier), I will no longer continue the discussion here.

[David Brooks]

You really are one of the nicest guys I've met on Usenet! :-D

I checked again later and am now at OS Build 19043.1055

--
Regards,
David (back on iMac!)

[Michael Trew]

Blame the company pushing handle times for call length.

In my experience, several years working on different telephone call
center campaigns (all inbound - both tech support and billing), I've
learned that most folks that call in for support ask very basic
questions. Basically, a pop up ad is stuck in Safari or something. We
teach them how to clear the cashe. Hard reset, or whatever. Worst
case, back up and restore. Very few actual advanced issues came in, and
there is a second tier of support for that.

Honest to goodness, well over half of the calls were elderly folks or
people with very stupid questions. I'd say one in ten times, the issue
was literally something like the device wasn't plugged in... some people
get embarrassed and hang up. Lol. Billing customers for cable and
telephone companies are the VERY worst people.

[Michael Trew]

On 6/21/2021 11:27 AM, nospam wrote:

Agreed, Malware is rare on Macs, but that utility did clean up the
"crapware" as you call it. That utility also cleaned up system files
and junk that most users didn't want to bother with or were not
experienced enough to do. You'll probably see my other post just made
above, but most issues were resolved by clearing the cashe or whatever
to remove the annoying "browser hijack".

For the record, I've had very poor luck with Malwarebytes on Windows...
not recommended. I didn't try the paid subscription however. I
currently use Webroot. It's very light weight, and it found two viruses
on my Windows 7 machine, one that had been there for 5 years, that
Malwarebytes and Norton somehow never managed to find. I would
recommend Webroot so far.

[Michael Trew]

On 6/21/2021 1:50 PM, Shadow wrote:
> Who twisted the thread to AV products?

David Brooks. Sorry, I just went with the flow.