On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 04:03:56 +0000, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>__/ [ AZ Nomad ] on Monday 05 February 2007 18:52 \__
>> On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 08:23:54 -0600, chrisv <chrisv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>BearItAll wrote:
>>
>>>>Eventually windows comes up and asked you to enter a username and password
>>>>for the administrator. Now, call me nieve, but I though 'At last MS are
>>>>doing it right', so I said to him to use 'root' as his admin user and a
>>>>decent password, which we wrote into his little book and I gave him the
>>>>shorter ten minute version of how he should only log in as root when the
>>>>system asked him to or for special purposes. I was expecting to get to
>>>>enter normal users next, but it didn't happen. That admin user is the only
>>>>user you start with. sigh.
>>
>>>That is just fscking unbelievable that they STILL do not strongly
>>>encourage the usage of a "user" account.
>>
>>>Are they still hiding file extensions by default? Idiots.
>>
>> I'm surprised too. It only took microsoft fifteen years to embrace 70's
>> technology and get past the FAT file system. I'd expect they would have
>> embraced 60's technology and protected the operating system from its users
>> by now.
>>
>> Guess not: microsoft makes much of their money from people buying new
>> computers to replace systems with a damaged operating system.
>Damaged -- no. Buggy -- yes. Even Microsoft admit this, but not when they do
>the "Wow" show.
>Microsoft admits Vista screwed - report
Damaged as well.
The OS can be trashed by as simple an act as inserting an audio CD,
visiting web pages taking advantage of bugs in the browser, retrieving
email, or just being connected to the internet.
Who's fucking brilliant idea was it that an email client should run
by default with the ability to overwrite the operating system?
|
|
