 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
|
Nobody uses Mac OSX, except for those who do not want viruses.
I prefer that the great unwashed don't use OSX. That way all the stupid virus geeks can concentrate on attacking Winblows.
There would be no point in attacking OSX, as no one uses it - your said so.
Finally, there is one point that UNIX of any variety wins on. To execute a program file, the program MUST be marked executable. All reasonable Mail, News and Browsers only download a file with the executable bit turned off. A user MUST take manual action to execute a download - unzip it and then run the unzipped program for example.
This is not true on Windows. Windows can overwrite a file and it will still be executable. This is not possible on Unix.
This makes Unix inherently Virus proof.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999 time: 22:24
|
|
quote: Actually Richard, I transferred from a bloated, private college that was a bureaucratic mess with no job placement program to a fully accredited professional institution that has a 97% job placement for graduates with average starting salaries at $47,000 US.
And despite the fact I work as an IT consultant, build networks and computers in my free time for a substantial part time salary, I have the luxury of working with leaders in the game industry who are my instructors. |

Give me the names of these "leaders" in the game industry that are your instructors.
Hell, even my Uni offers a BSc in compsci with a concentration in game design, and has some of the Bioware PhDs teaching the upper level courses. I'd be interested to hear what your college teaches you. 
---------------
On a side note, I finally got Nvidia drivers working in Linux. For some reason, Nvidia's installer wouldn't install properly to load the kernel module on bootup, so instead of pissing away time finding out the proper way to do it, I added the insmod command at the very top of /etc/init.d/sysklogd, and now it works perfectly. (yay tuxracer).
But the sound is more of a pain in the ass. I've got a SB Audigy sound card, so I downloaded the drivers and tools from Creative's website for Linux, followed the instructions to the letter, compiled all the components, etc. But when it came to running the configuration script, it told me /dev/mixer doesn't exist, and it doesn't do anything.
Anyone know a way around that?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ari Rahikkala
|
 |
Unreported loss of streaming in atomic read operation
Oct 1999 time: 07:24
|
|
quote: On a side note, I finally got Nvidia drivers working in Linux. For some reason, Nvidia's installer wouldn't install properly to load the kernel module on bootup, so instead of pissing away time finding out the proper way to do it, I added the insmod command at the very top of /etc/init.d/sysklogd, and now it works perfectly. (yay tuxracer). |
http://www.debian.org/doc/FAQ/ch-cu...stombootscripts
(Not the most painless way to do this that I've seen, BTW) tells where you should put your custom scripts. /etc/modules is where you should put the names of the modules you want to load at bootup in Debian.
quote: But the sound is more of a pain in the ass. I've got a SB Audigy sound card, so I downloaded the drivers and tools from Creative's website for Linux, followed the instructions to the letter, compiled all the components, etc. But when it came to running the configuration script, it told me /dev/mixer doesn't exist, and it doesn't do anything. |
Audigy is controlled by the emu10k1 drivers, which are in the vanilla kernel tree. All you should need to do is to include support for SB Live! in make (?:|menu|x)config (add "emu10k1" to modules.autoload if you decide to build it as a module) and optionally run audigy-script. But just as a wild guess, try modprobe emu10k1. If that works, the program that you downloaded did build the module succesfully and put it in the right directory but forgot to load it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999 time: 22:24
|
|
Oh my God, how stupid can those "experts" be?
quote: "Trustworthy Computing is failing," Russ Cooper of TruSecure Corp. said of the Microsoft initiative. "I gave it a 'D-minus' at the beginning of the year, and now I'd give it an 'F."' |
Yeah, a product that came out a couple years before "Trustworthy Computing" even existed, and a patch was released to fix the problem back in October.
The problem is people don't patch, for whatever reasons they have, and it has nothing to do with the "trustworthy computing" initiative.
quote: In October Microsoft released a fix for a different SQL Server problem that if installed in the expected manner would have made patched systems vulnerable again, he said. "If I followed their advice I'd have been vulnerable." |
*cough*Bullshit*cough*
Can someone point me to the fix for the problem which makes patched systems vulnerable again...
Pathetic article, dumbass analysts...
Yes, the patching system needs work, and yes, that patching system was completely overhauled for SQL Server 2003 which is due out in a couple of months to replace 2000 (which was affected). Trustworthy computing had zero impact on SQL Server 2000's designs, and when people knock the trustworthy computing stuff and point to difficulty in patching SQL Server 2000, I have to wonder how they can have a job as an industry analyst...
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24. Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|