Re: [H] IE7 problem

[maccrawj]

Liar, nope! Insane & spewing dangerous BS advice/statement of supposed facts, 
yes!

Ad banners can contain malware, mis-typing a URL can land you on a malware page, 
searching the list goes on & common denominator is thinking you're fine as long 
as you're careful despite walking around with your pants around your ankles & butt 
checks spread. "Here's my ass, I don't get screwed because I only show it to people I 
know won't screw me."




Bino Gopal wrote:

Lol, are you calling me a liar?  If so, name your time and place and I'll
meet you in a duel to the death...with keyboards and browsers! :P


-Original Message-
From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com
[mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of maccrawj
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 2:43 PM
To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com
Subject: Re: [H] IE7 problem

One word:

BULLSHIT!


Bino Gopal wrote:

Been using IE in various versions for last decade or so, and never a
virus/Trojan/explot on any kind from web-browsing.  You just have to know
what you're doing and not go to malware sites or click on the wrong thing
and make sure your security controls are set to the proper levels, etc.

And this is with no personal firewall or AV software installed/running

btw.

I do check occasionally just to verify/sanity-check, but that's just how I
roll! ;P

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[Bryan Seitz]

Lol I usually get 400Mbit on the downloads hehehehehe.

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 04:06:35PM -0800, Bino Gopal wrote:
> DUDE!  WTF?!  WHERE ARE YOU that you're getting those SPEED?!  SLOW?!
> _SLOW?!_  I will come and kill you and hunt you down and steal your access
> for your *slow* speeds! ;P
> 
>   BINO
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com
> [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Bryan Seitz
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 1:33 PM
> To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com
> Subject: Re: [H] Comcast blues
> 
> Yeah I just got it recently, was itching for it for so long but I had
> comcast before.
> 
> What is depressing is my speed test at work ( and this is slow ):
> 
> Download Speed: 163427 kbps (20428.4 KB/sec transfer rate)
> Upload Speed: 33087 kbps (4135.9 KB/sec transfer rate)
> 
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 04:18:32PM -0500, DHSinclair wrote:
> > Bryan,
> > Sometimes you modern FIOS folk could really irritate us that still
> > have to use the old POTS stuff :)
> > LOL!
> > No harm, no foul4-5years to go; and I get a shot at FIOS.
> > Best,
> > Duncan
> >
> > At 15:14 01/28/2009 -0500, you wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:54:50AM -0800, maccrawj wrote:
> >> > Testing a single machine is hardly ruling out anything!
> >> >
> >> > Arg, for christ's sake, it's a standard motorola modem and they all
> work
> >> > the same. It does not take 30min of power off to reset or timeout at
> the
> >> > cable co. Either it's the modem caching or your account is PERMANENTLY
> >>
> >> It certainly does because I've witnessed it many times. It might not take
> >> 15-30 minutes but you definitely have to leave it off for a period of
> time.
> >> Thank god I have FIOS.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Bryan G. Seitz
> 
> -- 
>  
> Bryan G. Seitz

-- 
 
Bryan G. Seitz

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[Al Anger]

Al starts to make popcorn.  :)

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:53:24 -0400
Thane Sherrington  wrote:

> At 08:08 PM 28/01/2009, Bino Gopal wrote:
> >Lol, are you calling me a liar?  If so, name your time and place and I'll
> >meet you in a duel to the death...with keyboards and browsers! :P
> 
> Cool.  Can I watch?
> 
> T 
> 

-- 
Al 

"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" 
-- Sir Arthur C. Clarke 

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[Thane Sherrington]

At 08:08 PM 28/01/2009, Bino Gopal wrote:

Lol, are you calling me a liar?  If so, name your time and place and I'll
meet you in a duel to the death...with keyboards and browsers! :P


Cool.  Can I watch?

T 

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[Bino Gopal]

Lol, are you calling me a liar?  If so, name your time and place and I'll
meet you in a duel to the death...with keyboards and browsers! :P


-Original Message-
From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com
[mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of maccrawj
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 2:43 PM
To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com
Subject: Re: [H] IE7 problem

One word:

BULLSHIT!


Bino Gopal wrote:
> Been using IE in various versions for last decade or so, and never a
> virus/Trojan/explot on any kind from web-browsing.  You just have to know
> what you're doing and not go to malware sites or click on the wrong thing
> and make sure your security controls are set to the proper levels, etc.
> 
> And this is with no personal firewall or AV software installed/running
btw.
> I do check occasionally just to verify/sanity-check, but that's just how I
> roll! ;P

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[Bino Gopal]

DUDE!  WTF?!  WHERE ARE YOU that you're getting those SPEED?!  SLOW?!
_SLOW?!_  I will come and kill you and hunt you down and steal your access
for your *slow* speeds! ;P

BINO


-Original Message-
From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com
[mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Bryan Seitz
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 1:33 PM
To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com
Subject: Re: [H] Comcast blues

Yeah I just got it recently, was itching for it for so long but I had
comcast before.

What is depressing is my speed test at work ( and this is slow ):

Download Speed: 163427 kbps (20428.4 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 33087 kbps (4135.9 KB/sec transfer rate)

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 04:18:32PM -0500, DHSinclair wrote:
> Bryan,
> Sometimes you modern FIOS folk could really irritate us that still
> have to use the old POTS stuff :)
> LOL!
> No harm, no foul4-5years to go; and I get a shot at FIOS.
> Best,
> Duncan
>
> At 15:14 01/28/2009 -0500, you wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:54:50AM -0800, maccrawj wrote:
>> > Testing a single machine is hardly ruling out anything!
>> >
>> > Arg, for christ's sake, it's a standard motorola modem and they all
work
>> > the same. It does not take 30min of power off to reset or timeout at
the
>> > cable co. Either it's the modem caching or your account is PERMANENTLY
>>
>> It certainly does because I've witnessed it many times. It might not take
>> 15-30 minutes but you definitely have to leave it off for a period of
time.
>> Thank god I have FIOS.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Bryan G. Seitz

-- 
 
Bryan G. Seitz

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[Thane Sherrington]

At 06:48 PM 28/01/2009, maccrawj wrote:

Time to switch banks if all they support is IE this late in the game!


Ding! Ding! Ding!  Right answer.

More people need to made to switch to FF w/ NoScript at the very 
least because it is the opposite of current thinking. Say it with me 
"Whitelisting makes more sense than blacklisting".


Precisely, but FF with NoScript gives you both.

IE dominates because it ships on every PC made. If you broke it down 
on the Mac side Safari probably tops the list there.


And IE is losing ground every month.  What does that say?

T 

Re: [H] Stupid Question..perhaps?

[maccrawj]

Well we don't do roaming profiles, too much hassle for too little benefit. Apps are 
local installs, my docs get mirrored to server but saved local also so no issues there.


Single DC is an issue but it's easily recovered from regular automated backups. Even 
with 2 DC's if one went down you're still looking at having to bring in a PC tech 
anyway. Only arguable difference is you'd be up working waiting for the tech and that 
can be acomplished by temporarilly enabling local accounts & pointing PC's at the 
router until DC was back up.


Still much less hassle day-2-day & more advantages over managing multiple PC's & 
account outweighs that downside IMO.


Scott Sipe wrote:
I'm not sure, but I guess you could do all of that with group policy 
editor, and manually copying the policy between computers? A 
pain--definitely...


my main problem with domain servers at home would be backups. That is, 
if you're primary domain controller goes down, does the rest of your 
network suffer (logon errors, missing applications, outdated profiles)? 
I don't know how many homes are going to have synced PDCs and BDCs, deal 
with roaming profile, access rights, etc. in a robust and foolproof way.


Maybe one day...

Scott

On Jan 28, 2009, at 12:24 AM, maccrawj wrote:

Ok, so how would you control access to 5 PCs & numerous resources in a 
way where if one child is bad you can lock 'em out or simply limit his 
access to the games, media or key application folders across multiple 
machines? Never mind being in control of house-wide time/location 
login restrictions and after hours forced logout.


If you don't have kids (or roomates) you can quickly dismiss the idea 
but I think soon it will be the norm in households as it is now in 
business.




Scott Sipe wrote:

Hey, meant to reply earlier sorry I didn't...
completely agree with below...
don't think there's really any need for you to have a home domain 
server (adds way more complexity than is needed and desired!) and 
without that, any other old edition of windows is just as good, imho.

Ubuntu Linux could certainly be an adventure if you feel like it :-)
Scott
On Jan 27, 2009, at 5:58 PM, maccrawj wrote:
IMHO if your not running at least domain+DHCP+DNS+NTP from 2K* 
server there is little point to running "server" editions of windows 
at all. There are roles for member servers just running dedicated 
apps such as SQL, Apache, Samba but then what's the point to paying 
top $ to use server stand-alone (vs DC) when it's cheaper to run 
them on tweaked XP Pro or linux? This of course in the context of a 
home setup, business is another ball game.


2K3 vs. 2k3R2 vs. 2k8 I could not tell you pro/con of the choice and 
I too feel 2K is just fine but also feel the itch to move up. At 
some point I still intend to upgrade to 2K3 just because I have it & 
should know my way around it.




DHSinclair wrote:

I truly apologize for this one. I have totally NOT kept up with this.
Sorry.
My server now runs Win2000 Server. It is at SP4.  But, I suspect 
that this level of OS is soon to be no longer supported and/or able 
to be WinUpdate-able. SO,...

{When is goes I will miss itIt runs so well.}
What might I be shopping for?  I have seen mention of  "Server 03" 
and "Server 08."  Yes, I have already read through OUR threads 
about the "SBS" versions of same.  Not thinking I need to do a 
Small Business Server just to come current; and/or support my LAN.
Can I suppose that "Server03?" is at the XP level; and, that the 
"Server08?" business is about Vista-class?

Best,
Duncan

Re: [H] Message format in Outlook 2003

[maccrawj]

This is stupid and akin to destroying evidence as a day-2-day business practice. It 
was my understanding that businesses HAVE TO backup email traffic & maintain the 
archive same as paper just in case legal demand is made for the content.


Steve Tomporowski wrote:

A little bit of searching and I've found out that we're pretty much
screwed.  If we had Word 2003, we could use that as editor and do any
conversion, since we've never upgraded, that's that.

The whole idea of using rtf is to keep the email and attachment
together.  If you save as html, then you have to save the attachment
separately or at least in the screwed up way our system is now.

As for why, it's fit for a dilbert cartoon.  Apparently if the message
is in it's native form, either still in outlook or saved as a .msg
file, our lawyers believe that it is admissible as evidence in court.
As soon as it is changed in form, it's not admissible in court.  It
seems that our lawyers believe that we either are or will in the
future do plenty of stuff to get us into legal trouble, so they want
to cover their buttocks.  Of course, if one of our customers knows
about this, they can screw us over royally by producing emails they
have, but we have long since deleted.  We would have no leg to stand
on.

Steve

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[maccrawj]

Time to switch banks if all they support is IE this late in the game!

There are useragent switchers to masqurade FF also.

More people need to made to switch to FF w/ NoScript at the very least because it is 
the opposite of current thinking. Say it with me "Whitelisting makes more sense than 
blacklisting".


IE dominates because it ships on every PC made. If you broke it down on the Mac side 
Safari probably tops the list there.



Winterlight wrote:


It may be time for MS to exit the browser arena, seeing as FF and 
Chrome seem to be battling for the championship.

T


IE still dominates the browser market by big numbers.  Most users are 
not interested in or even aware of using other browsers unless IT or a 
tech head introduces them to it. I personally use three browsers.  I  
use IE7 for anything to do with banking, or financial matters and I have 
never had a problem. But if something does go south I don't want the 
bank, or the brokerage to tell me that they only support IE. I usually 
have FF 3 running with TV listings and my GMail account, and to look up 
a few things. But my primary browser is Opera.


Firefox is for tech heads who like to tweak every little thing and have 
the ability to run addons. Opera is a fast all in one solution for 
everybody else. Opera even comes with bit torrent support. Opera 
invented Tabs and nobody handles Tabs as well as Opera, plus it has 
speed dial feature that is so addictive I wouldn't want to browse 
without it.


I think the numbers that get put out are misleading because the sources 
are usually FF advocates and Opera has the ability to pretend to be IE 
to get you past those sites at MS that insist that you are IE. I am not 
saying that FF isn't a nice quick browser but after using both for many 
years I think Opera is superior in almost every way and doesn't get the 
credit it should. Probably, because they went through a period of trying 
to sell Opera, which of course didn't work and sent a lot of users to FF.

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[maccrawj]

One word:

BULLSHIT!


Bino Gopal wrote:

Been using IE in various versions for last decade or so, and never a
virus/Trojan/explot on any kind from web-browsing.  You just have to know
what you're doing and not go to malware sites or click on the wrong thing
and make sure your security controls are set to the proper levels, etc.

And this is with no personal firewall or AV software installed/running btw.
I do check occasionally just to verify/sanity-check, but that's just how I
roll! ;P

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[maccrawj]

Browsing by default in IE means you're asking to be bent over as every helper app is 
enabled by default.


Certificate store in FF for me is MORE secure since I have control over the folder & 
the methods of protecting it unlike Windows store. Personally I store my FF profile 
on a TrueCrypt partition and wish I could move more stuff I protect with EFS now to 
there but much of it needs to be there at bootup which I am not getting with TC right 
now.


Deploying FF is a bitch so far as I read for lack of branding apps & yes no GPO's 
unless you write your own.


Greg Sevart wrote:

I use and like both. IE is my default, but I have an "Open in Firefox" menu
item configured in IE. I use FF for any website I consider suspicious. By
the way, IE7 under Vista with UAC enabled has proven invulnerable to a great
number of exploits. FF doesn't have a perfect security record either. That's
the nature of software development.

My biggest problems with Firefox:
1. It doesn't use the native Windows certificate store. On a Windows
platform, maintaining a separate certificate store is absolutely absurd (and
potentially insecure). This is especially a pain on intranet sites using
certificates issued by your own organizational CA. On a Windows domain, the
CA's certificate is automatically added to the computer account's trusted
root store.
2. I can't approve, install, validate, and report on patch status using
WSUS.
3. I can't control settings and values via GPO.

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[maccrawj]

Any browser with full functionality enabled by default is vulnerable since many 
vectors are now the plugins/helpers like Flash & Java.


1st rule of firewalls is DENY all and selectively enable what you need, same should 
be true of browsers!


Thane Sherrington wrote:

At 04:18 PM 26/01/2009, DHSinclair wrote:

Thane,
Thanks for this.  Another black star for IE7!
Perhaps why IE8 is soon to appear LOL!


Heh heh.  Anyone using IE7 over FF3 is crazy, in my experience.  IE7 is 
a vulnerable to almost every every attack out there, has a clunky 
interface out of the box - the only upside to it is that it loads 
quickly because half of it loads when Windows starts.


It may be time for MS to exit the browser arena, seeing as FF and Chrome 
seem to be battling for the championship.


T

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[maccrawj]

FIOS? I can't even get >3Mb service up here and the cable co. moronically caps at 
20GB! Hate DSL & DSL modem BS but it's working mostly except it gets real slow some days.


At to the reset thing, it's local to the modem so power off & allowing for capacitive 
 discharge of a 1 min or 2 at the most should clear it.


As to testing the router, if I missed the part where you were able to cycle through 
machines solely plugged into the modem & all worked but not router then I would be do 
a factory reset on the router.


Bryan Seitz wrote:

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:54:50AM -0800, maccrawj wrote:

Testing a single machine is hardly ruling out anything!

Arg, for christ's sake, it's a standard motorola modem and they all work 
the same. It does not take 30min of power off to reset or timeout at the 
cable co. Either it's the modem caching or your account is PERMANENTLY 


It certainly does because I've witnessed it many times. It might not take
15-30 minutes but you definitely have to leave it off for a period of time.
Thank god I have FIOS.

Re: [H] Can MDAC be removed w/o complete new XPpro?

[maccrawj]

MDAC is at v2.8 for a few years now.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=6c050fe3-c795-4b7d-b037-185d0506396c&displaylang=en

If something needs it, it needs it. Dunno about not installing it being an 
option or not.

DHSinclair wrote:
I seem to have allowed something to be installed on my machinethat I 
may not need... !


The machine seems to run fine, EXCEPTAdvisor tells me that I have a 
problem with MDAC.
Like, I should re-install KB927779.  OK. This could be can do, but, I am 
not so sureanymore.


I did it! Yes, I did it some time back. Believe I now have MDAC v2.5 
running around inside.


Can IT be wrenched out w/o a new re-install?... :)

(a new re-install is not a catastrophe ATM! Really)

Thank you,
Duncan

Re: [H] [Bulk] Re: Comcast blues

[maccrawj]

My take on switches & routers is you're better off buying a $50 switch + a $50 router 
than a $100 integrated.


Dunno about knowing more but I know NAT is not enough and I don't trust ISP managed 
equipment to protect me. OMG the FW in the Westell is terrible & a PITA to maintain! 
DSL & PPoE are a joke give me the simplicity of cable modems any day, sigh...


Stan Zaske wrote:
I guess I'll just have to get a router then. Unfortunately, the gig 
models are pretty close to a hundred bucks which is out of my purchasing 
range at the moment. 10/100 here I come!



DHSinclair wrote:

Stan,
On this subject jmccraw and I completely agree.  J certainly knows 
much more about the gory details of internet security...I do 
trust his judgement; even when I do not follow his suggestions... :)


BTW, the DLink DL-4300 router that I use does have 10/100/1000 ports 
on its' 4-port "switch-side."  (found this out by pleasant accident!)  
I believe the newer DL-4500 does also.  Many of the newer routers I 
have seen all do Gbit on their switch ports.  Some of the newest 
routers also have Gbit on the WAN side also. (My next upgrade; as soon 
as I can force AT&T to publish a hdw compatibility list!)


I understand your plan, but I would only buy-in IF your SurfBoard 
Modem also contains a FireWall of some sort.  My Westell 6100 xdsl 
modem has a FW and has a DHCP server (both of which are disabled 
because I have bridged the modem for "simplicity").


Perhaps some more research is needed.
Best,
Duncan

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[DHSinclair]

BRYAN,
I HATE YOU!! (gently)
LOL!
Duncan

At 16:32 01/28/2009 -0500, you wrote:
Yeah I just got it recently, was itching for it for so long but I had 
comcast before.


What is depressing is my speed test at work ( and this is slow ):

Download Speed: 163427 kbps (20428.4 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 33087 kbps (4135.9 KB/sec transfer rate)

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 04:18:32PM -0500, DHSinclair wrote:
> Bryan,
> Sometimes you modern FIOS folk could really irritate us that still
> have to use the old POTS stuff :)
> LOL!
> No harm, no foul4-5years to go; and I get a shot at FIOS.
> Best,
> Duncan
>
> At 15:14 01/28/2009 -0500, you wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:54:50AM -0800, maccrawj wrote:
>> > Testing a single machine is hardly ruling out anything!
>> >
>> > Arg, for christ's sake, it's a standard motorola modem and they all work
>> > the same. It does not take 30min of power off to reset or timeout at the
>> > cable co. Either it's the modem caching or your account is PERMANENTLY
>>
>> It certainly does because I've witnessed it many times. It might not take
>> 15-30 minutes but you definitely have to leave it off for a period of 
time.

>> Thank god I have FIOS.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Bryan G. Seitz

--

Bryan G. Seitz

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[Bryan Seitz]

Yeah I just got it recently, was itching for it for so long but I had comcast 
before.

What is depressing is my speed test at work ( and this is slow ):

Download Speed: 163427 kbps (20428.4 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 33087 kbps (4135.9 KB/sec transfer rate)

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 04:18:32PM -0500, DHSinclair wrote:
> Bryan,
> Sometimes you modern FIOS folk could really irritate us that still
> have to use the old POTS stuff :)
> LOL!
> No harm, no foul4-5years to go; and I get a shot at FIOS.
> Best,
> Duncan
>
> At 15:14 01/28/2009 -0500, you wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:54:50AM -0800, maccrawj wrote:
>> > Testing a single machine is hardly ruling out anything!
>> >
>> > Arg, for christ's sake, it's a standard motorola modem and they all work
>> > the same. It does not take 30min of power off to reset or timeout at the
>> > cable co. Either it's the modem caching or your account is PERMANENTLY
>>
>> It certainly does because I've witnessed it many times. It might not take
>> 15-30 minutes but you definitely have to leave it off for a period of time.
>> Thank god I have FIOS.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Bryan G. Seitz

-- 
 
Bryan G. Seitz

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[DHSinclair]

Bryan,
Sometimes you modern FIOS folk could really irritate us that still
have to use the old POTS stuff :)
LOL!
No harm, no foul4-5years to go; and I get a shot at FIOS.
Best,
Duncan

At 15:14 01/28/2009 -0500, you wrote:

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:54:50AM -0800, maccrawj wrote:
> Testing a single machine is hardly ruling out anything!
>
> Arg, for christ's sake, it's a standard motorola modem and they all work
> the same. It does not take 30min of power off to reset or timeout at the
> cable co. Either it's the modem caching or your account is PERMANENTLY

It certainly does because I've witnessed it many times. It might not take
15-30 minutes but you definitely have to leave it off for a period of time.
Thank god I have FIOS.


--

Bryan G. Seitz

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[DHSinclair]

Stan,
In your given model; each time you move the cable to a different PC (for 
test), the Modem must be shut off before the cable swap.  The modem will 
NOT change the MAC is has cached (previous PC) otherwise.  Well, this is 
what I've come to learn from the Collective.. :)
Still do not think your router is broke; other than its' LAN ports are not 
fast enough ATM... ;)

Best,
Duncan

At 14:10 01/28/2009 -0600, you wrote:
When I reset the modem and connect the cable to another PC bypassing the 
router it will then connect. But when I transfer the cable to another box 
they will not connect. Thus the reason I feel the router is malfunctioning 
despite the LAN portion still functioning. Thanks!



maccrawj wrote:

Testing a single machine is hardly ruling out anything!

Arg, for christ's sake, it's a standard motorola modem and they all work 
the same. It does not take 30min of power off to reset or timeout at the 
cable co. Either it's the modem caching or your account is PERMANENTLY 
(barring phone call to CATV co or MAC clone on router) tied to the CPE MAC.


1. connect modem into CPE
2. power modem up
3. power CPE up
4. Modem learns CPE's MAC address
5. Modem requests IP lease from the head-end.

Changing the CPE requires:
1. unplug the modem long enough to loose power (< 1min)
2. unplug old CPE
3. follow above list using new CPE

This procedure works every time, I did it many times over 5 years on 
Comcast in NJ. If somehow your area falls into the permanent MAC method 
than simply cloning the MAC of PC1 to the router solves that issue. In 
fact you could simply do that and not have to mess with power cycling 
anything but the router.


Stan Zaske wrote:
I am reminded again how much I liked Insight before Comcast bought them. 
As much trouble as I've had since then I suspected foul play. I'm pretty 
sure my router is bad because past experience tells me it should work 
without any user config from me. Too bad my modem doesn't serve any DHCP 
or it would have worked plugged into  my LAN. Until a couple days ago 
extending all the way back to when I first installed this router (1996) 
all my boxes connected to the Internet and that includes the one running 
PCLinuxOS Tiny Me. Since my modem is working and not caching the MAC 
addy it must be a router malf. Thanks again.

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[DHSinclair]

J,
You could be right.  I read what you sent, but frankly I understand very 
little of it.  Sorry; I could be a browser-noob still :)  But, 
even though I do not use tabs in FF, I still do like how FF operates.


I do need to go back in my records and see when I did start using FF.  It 
could very well be that I had the problem with "tabs" EARLY when still 
using the old Barton 2500+.  Now, that I use a C2D, I have not gone back to 
play with "tabs"again.   Good project for the next weekThanks.


I sure will investigate the TabMixPlus suggestion you sent. Thanks.
Best,
Duncan

At 12:09 01/28/2009 -0800, you wrote:
Why Duncan? TESTING! If it's doing something screwy then it's time to 
test! Create a shortcut to you firefox like this: "firefox.exe 
-profilemanager", then create a new acccount to test with. In the end you 
can switch accounts the same way. New account = no improvement then the 
only choice is backup FF & you profile(s), and do a clean install of FF w/ 
new profile.


How would using a "new browser window" and not using tabs = lower cpu or 
ram usage? If anything this would mean greater usage on both.


Another tip is TabMixPlus which gives better control over how tabs work.



DHSinclair wrote:


I am still having trouble with "tabs" for some reason.  If "tabs" are 
enabled, the FF3 browser just grinds to a halt quickly; like right after 
the 2d "tab".  If I disable "tabs" and us "open in a new browser page," 
FF3 works great; just like IE.  This is my current run choice.
I know that problem is here locally.  I just have not found it and killed 
it! LOL!
Several have suggested that I just kill/erase the current FF install and 
start fresh. An option, perhaps, but I am still wondering why?  I started 
w/FF3.01 and am not at FF3.05 (using NoScript and CSLite).

Whatever. Not an operational issue for me ATM.
Best,
Duncan

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[Bryan Seitz]

LOL there is a benefit to living in the sticks, and a benfit to living in a 
large metro area ;)

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 02:32:41PM -0600, Stan Zaske wrote:
> I've personally emailed Verizon asking them to bring FIOS to the central  
> Illinois area but having to lay all that fiber will probably take years.  
> Wish I had FIOS!
>
>
> Bryan Seitz wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:54:50AM -0800, maccrawj wrote:
>>   
>>> Testing a single machine is hardly ruling out anything!
>>>
>>> Arg, for christ's sake, it's a standard motorola modem and they all 
>>> work the same. It does not take 30min of power off to reset or 
>>> timeout at the cable co. Either it's the modem caching or your 
>>> account is PERMANENTLY 
>>
>> It certainly does because I've witnessed it many times. It might not take
>> 15-30 minutes but you definitely have to leave it off for a period of time.
>> Thank god I have FIOS.
>>
>>
>>   

-- 
 
Bryan G. Seitz

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[Stan Zaske]

I've personally emailed Verizon asking them to bring FIOS to the central 
Illinois area but having to lay all that fiber will probably take years. 
Wish I had FIOS!



Bryan Seitz wrote:

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:54:50AM -0800, maccrawj wrote:
  

Testing a single machine is hardly ruling out anything!

Arg, for christ's sake, it's a standard motorola modem and they all work 
the same. It does not take 30min of power off to reset or timeout at the 
cable co. Either it's the modem caching or your account is PERMANENTLY 



It certainly does because I've witnessed it many times. It might not take
15-30 minutes but you definitely have to leave it off for a period of time.
Thank god I have FIOS.


  

Re: [H] [Bulk] Re: Comcast blues

[Stan Zaske]

I guess I'll just have to get a router then. Unfortunately, the gig 
models are pretty close to a hundred bucks which is out of my purchasing 
range at the moment. 10/100 here I come!



DHSinclair wrote:

Stan,
On this subject jmccraw and I completely agree.  J certainly knows 
much more about the gory details of internet security...I do 
trust his judgement; even when I do not follow his suggestions... :)


BTW, the DLink DL-4300 router that I use does have 10/100/1000 ports 
on its' 4-port "switch-side."  (found this out by pleasant accident!)  
I believe the newer DL-4500 does also.  Many of the newer routers I 
have seen all do Gbit on their switch ports.  Some of the newest 
routers also have Gbit on the WAN side also. (My next upgrade; as soon 
as I can force AT&T to publish a hdw compatibility list!)


I understand your plan, but I would only buy-in IF your SurfBoard 
Modem also contains a FireWall of some sort.  My Westell 6100 xdsl 
modem has a FW and has a DHCP server (both of which are disabled 
because I have bridged the modem for "simplicity").


Perhaps some more research is needed.
Best,
Duncan

At 11:39 01/28/2009 -0800, jmccraw wrote:
NO, because a router/FIREWALL makes more sense than putting any PCs 
directly on the

internet!

Save a few bucks typically means loose a few in the end. You will 
need both router & switch if you want 1GB, unless someone has started 
making routers with 1GB switches. Router wise, look around for 
devices supporting OpenWrt, DD-Wrt, or Tomato:


http://openwrt.org
http://www.dd-wrt.com
http://www.polarcloud.com/tomato

Stan Zaske wrote:
I may just replace my current router if it turns out to be broken. 
Reading the manual on my Motorola Surfboard 5100 it shows a 
connection example of connecting to multiple PC's with a hub or 
switch. So apparently the modem is a DHCP server (if that's the 
right way to say it). Does anybody on the list use a 4 or 5 port 
switch instead of a router? Personally, I'd rather save a few bucks 
and just get a 10/100/1000 switch instead of a 10/100 router.

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[Bryan Seitz]

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:54:50AM -0800, maccrawj wrote:
> Testing a single machine is hardly ruling out anything!
>
> Arg, for christ's sake, it's a standard motorola modem and they all work 
> the same. It does not take 30min of power off to reset or timeout at the 
> cable co. Either it's the modem caching or your account is PERMANENTLY 

It certainly does because I've witnessed it many times. It might not take
15-30 minutes but you definitely have to leave it off for a period of time.
Thank god I have FIOS.


-- 
 
Bryan G. Seitz

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[Stan Zaske]

When I reset the modem and connect the cable to another PC bypassing the 
router it will then connect. But when I transfer the cable to another 
box they will not connect. Thus the reason I feel the router is 
malfunctioning despite the LAN portion still functioning. Thanks!



maccrawj wrote:

Testing a single machine is hardly ruling out anything!

Arg, for christ's sake, it's a standard motorola modem and they all 
work the same. It does not take 30min of power off to reset or timeout 
at the cable co. Either it's the modem caching or your account is 
PERMANENTLY (barring phone call to CATV co or MAC clone on router) 
tied to the CPE MAC.


1. connect modem into CPE
2. power modem up
3. power CPE up
4. Modem learns CPE's MAC address
5. Modem requests IP lease from the head-end.

Changing the CPE requires:
1. unplug the modem long enough to loose power (< 1min)
2. unplug old CPE
3. follow above list using new CPE

This procedure works every time, I did it many times over 5 years on 
Comcast in NJ. If somehow your area falls into the permanent MAC 
method than simply cloning the MAC of PC1 to the router solves that 
issue. In fact you could simply do that and not have to mess with 
power cycling anything but the router.


Stan Zaske wrote:
I am reminded again how much I liked Insight before Comcast bought 
them. As much trouble as I've had since then I suspected foul play. 
I'm pretty sure my router is bad because past experience tells me it 
should work without any user config from me. Too bad my modem doesn't 
serve any DHCP or it would have worked plugged into  my LAN. Until a 
couple days ago extending all the way back to when I first installed 
this router (1996) all my boxes connected to the Internet and that 
includes the one running PCLinuxOS Tiny Me. Since my modem is working 
and not caching the MAC addy it must be a router malf. Thanks again.

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[maccrawj]

Why Duncan? TESTING! If it's doing something screwy then it's time to test! Create a 
shortcut to you firefox like this: "firefox.exe -profilemanager", then create a new 
acccount to test with. In the end you can switch accounts the same way. New account = 
no improvement then the only choice is backup FF & you profile(s), and do a clean 
install of FF w/ new profile.


How would using a "new browser window" and not using tabs = lower cpu or ram usage? 
If anything this would mean greater usage on both.


Another tip is TabMixPlus which gives better control over how tabs work.



DHSinclair wrote:


I am still having trouble with "tabs" for some reason.  If "tabs" are 
enabled, the FF3 browser just grinds to a halt quickly; like right after 
the 2d "tab".  If I disable "tabs" and us "open in a new browser page," 
FF3 works great; just like IE.  This is my current run choice.
I know that problem is here locally.  I just have not found it and 
killed it! LOL!
Several have suggested that I just kill/erase the current FF install and 
start fresh. An option, perhaps, but I am still wondering why?  I 
started w/FF3.01 and am not at FF3.05 (using NoScript and CSLite).


Whatever. Not an operational issue for me ATM.
Best,
Duncan

Re: [H] [Bulk] Re: Comcast blues

[Stan Zaske]

Point taken, thanks for the links.


maccrawj wrote:
NO, because a router/FIREWALL makes more sense than putting any PCs 
directly on the

internet!

Save a few bucks typically means loose a few in the end. You will need 
both router & switch if you want 1GB, unless someone has started 
making routers with 1GB switches. Router wise, look around for devices 
supporting OpenWrt, DD-Wrt, or Tomato:


http://openwrt.org
http://www.dd-wrt.com
http://www.polarcloud.com/tomato

Stan Zaske wrote:
I may just replace my current router if it turns out to be broken. 
Reading the manual on my Motorola Surfboard 5100 it shows a 
connection example of connecting to multiple PC's with a hub or 
switch. So apparently the modem is a DHCP server (if that's the right 
way to say it). Does anybody on the list use a 4 or 5 port switch 
instead of a router? Personally, I'd rather save a few bucks and just 
get a 10/100/1000 switch instead of a 10/100 router.

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[DHSinclair]

Stan,
On this subject jmccraw and I completely agree.  J certainly knows much 
more about the gory details of internet security...I do trust his 
judgement; even when I do not follow his suggestions... :)


BTW, the DLink DL-4300 router that I use does have 10/100/1000 ports on 
its' 4-port "switch-side."  (found this out by pleasant accident!)  I 
believe the newer DL-4500 does also.  Many of the newer routers I have seen 
all do Gbit on their switch ports.  Some of the newest routers also have 
Gbit on the WAN side also. (My next upgrade; as soon as I can force AT&T to 
publish a hdw compatibility list!)


I understand your plan, but I would only buy-in IF your SurfBoard Modem 
also contains a FireWall of some sort.  My Westell 6100 xdsl modem has a FW 
and has a DHCP server (both of which are disabled because I have bridged 
the modem for "simplicity").


Perhaps some more research is needed.
Best,
Duncan

At 11:39 01/28/2009 -0800, jmccraw wrote:
NO, because a router/FIREWALL makes more sense than putting any PCs 
directly on the

internet!

Save a few bucks typically means loose a few in the end. You will need 
both router & switch if you want 1GB, unless someone has started making 
routers with 1GB switches. Router wise, look around for devices supporting 
OpenWrt, DD-Wrt, or Tomato:


http://openwrt.org
http://www.dd-wrt.com
http://www.polarcloud.com/tomato

Stan Zaske wrote:
I may just replace my current router if it turns out to be broken. 
Reading the manual on my Motorola Surfboard 5100 it shows a connection 
example of connecting to multiple PC's with a hub or switch. So 
apparently the modem is a DHCP server (if that's the right way to say 
it). Does anybody on the list use a 4 or 5 port switch instead of a 
router? Personally, I'd rather save a few bucks and just get a 
10/100/1000 switch instead of a 10/100 router.

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[maccrawj]

Stop using Flash or invest in Dual/Quad core, LOL.

My 2.4Ghz laptop was 80% usage on userplane and < 10% total on my 2.4Ghz quad 
core.

Flash is just poorly done both engine and apps, period.

Bino Gopal wrote:


That's normal for IE from what I understand.  The other issue is that
opening more than one or two pages with Flash (like YouTube) at once causes
CPU to spike (does on my laptop and even my desktop).  Anyone else run into
this and know a fix?

BINO

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[maccrawj]

Testing a single machine is hardly ruling out anything!

Arg, for christ's sake, it's a standard motorola modem and they all work the same. It 
does not take 30min of power off to reset or timeout at the cable co. Either it's the 
modem caching or your account is PERMANENTLY (barring phone call to CATV co or MAC 
clone on router) tied to the CPE MAC.


1. connect modem into CPE
2. power modem up
3. power CPE up
4. Modem learns CPE's MAC address
5. Modem requests IP lease from the head-end.

Changing the CPE requires:
1. unplug the modem long enough to loose power (< 1min)
2. unplug old CPE
3. follow above list using new CPE

This procedure works every time, I did it many times over 5 years on Comcast in NJ. 
If somehow your area falls into the permanent MAC method than simply cloning the MAC 
of PC1 to the router solves that issue. In fact you could simply do that and not have 
to mess with power cycling anything but the router.


Stan Zaske wrote:
I am reminded again how much I liked Insight before Comcast bought them. 
As much trouble as I've had since then I suspected foul play. I'm pretty 
sure my router is bad because past experience tells me it should work 
without any user config from me. Too bad my modem doesn't serve any DHCP 
or it would have worked plugged into  my LAN. Until a couple days ago 
extending all the way back to when I first installed this router (1996) 
all my boxes connected to the Internet and that includes the one running 
PCLinuxOS Tiny Me. Since my modem is working and not caching the MAC 
addy it must be a router malf. Thanks again.

Re: [H] Comcast blues

[maccrawj]

NO, because a router/FIREWALL makes more sense than putting any PCs directly on 
the
internet!

Save a few bucks typically means loose a few in the end. You will need both router & 
switch if you want 1GB, unless someone has started making routers with 1GB switches. 
Router wise, look around for devices supporting OpenWrt, DD-Wrt, or Tomato:


http://openwrt.org
http://www.dd-wrt.com
http://www.polarcloud.com/tomato

Stan Zaske wrote:
I may just replace my current router if it turns out to be broken. 
Reading the manual on my Motorola Surfboard 5100 it shows a connection 
example of connecting to multiple PC's with a hub or switch. So 
apparently the modem is a DHCP server (if that's the right way to say 
it). Does anybody on the list use a 4 or 5 port switch instead of a 
router? Personally, I'd rather save a few bucks and just get a 
10/100/1000 switch instead of a 10/100 router.

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[Rick Glazier]

Didn't they change the name a couple times so no one
will know that still do it? 

   Rick Glazier

From: "Brian Weeden"

Going with Active-X as the method of delivering interaction between the
browser and the OS/user is one of the worst decisions Microsoft ever made.

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[Brian Weeden]

Going with Active-X as the method of delivering interaction between the
browser and the OS/user is one of the worst decisions Microsoft ever made.

---
Brian Weeden
Technical Consultant
Secure World Foundation 
+1 (514) 466-2756 Canada
+1 (202) 683-8534 US


On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Rick Glazier wrote:

> From: "Thane Sherrington"
>
>> Well, yes, but Firefox does a better job of protecting you.  You can't
>> really use your experience since you're knowledgable about computers.  IE7
>> is more vulnerable to attack, and for many people, that's a serious probelm.
>>
>
> When people ask me what I use, I tell them they don't want to know...
> (It starts with FF, and goes on and on and on.)
> My friends could not learn to answer all the prompts and make all
> the run-time decisions I need to make.
> They want: K.I.S.S.
> And some get hacked once in awhile...
>
>Rick Glazier
>

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[Rick Glazier]

From: "Thane Sherrington"
Well, yes, but Firefox does a better job of protecting you.  You 
can't really use your experience since you're knowledgable about 
computers.  IE7 is more vulnerable to attack, and for many people, 
that's a serious probelm.


When people ask me what I use, I tell them they don't want to know...
(It starts with FF, and goes on and on and on.)
My friends could not learn to answer all the prompts and make all
the run-time decisions I need to make.
They want: K.I.S.S.
And some get hacked once in awhile...

Rick Glazier

Re: [H] IE7 problem

[Thane Sherrington]

At 04:32 PM 27/01/2009, Bino Gopal wrote:

Been using IE in various versions for last decade or so, and never a
virus/Trojan/explot on any kind from web-browsing.  You just have to know
what you're doing and not go to malware sites or click on the wrong thing
and make sure your security controls are set to the proper levels, etc.


Well, yes, but Firefox does a better job of protecting you.  You 
can't really use your experience since you're knowledgable about 
computers.  IE7 is more vulnerable to attack, and for many people, 
that's a serious probelm.


T 

Re: [H] Stupid Question..perhaps?

[Scott Sipe]

I'm not sure, but I guess you could do all of that with group policy  
editor, and manually copying the policy between computers? A pain-- 
definitely...


my main problem with domain servers at home would be backups. That is,  
if you're primary domain controller goes down, does the rest of your  
network suffer (logon errors, missing applications, outdated  
profiles)? I don't know how many homes are going to have synced PDCs  
and BDCs, deal with roaming profile, access rights, etc. in a robust  
and foolproof way.


Maybe one day...

Scott

On Jan 28, 2009, at 12:24 AM, maccrawj wrote:

Ok, so how would you control access to 5 PCs & numerous resources in  
a way where if one child is bad you can lock 'em out or simply limit  
his access to the games, media or key application folders across  
multiple machines? Never mind being in control of house-wide time/ 
location login restrictions and after hours forced logout.


If you don't have kids (or roomates) you can quickly dismiss the  
idea but I think soon it will be the norm in households as it is now  
in business.




Scott Sipe wrote:

Hey, meant to reply earlier sorry I didn't...
completely agree with below...
don't think there's really any need for you to have a home domain  
server (adds way more complexity than is needed and desired!) and  
without that, any other old edition of windows is just as good, imho.

Ubuntu Linux could certainly be an adventure if you feel like it :-)
Scott
On Jan 27, 2009, at 5:58 PM, maccrawj wrote:
IMHO if your not running at least domain+DHCP+DNS+NTP from 2K*  
server there is little point to running "server" editions of  
windows at all. There are roles for member servers just running  
dedicated apps such as SQL, Apache, Samba but then what's the  
point to paying top $ to use server stand-alone (vs DC) when it's  
cheaper to run them on tweaked XP Pro or linux? This of course in  
the context of a home setup, business is another ball game.


2K3 vs. 2k3R2 vs. 2k8 I could not tell you pro/con of the choice  
and I too feel 2K is just fine but also feel the itch to move up.  
At some point I still intend to upgrade to 2K3 just because I have  
it & should know my way around it.




DHSinclair wrote:
I truly apologize for this one. I have totally NOT kept up with  
this.

Sorry.
My server now runs Win2000 Server. It is at SP4.  But, I suspect  
that this level of OS is soon to be no longer supported and/or  
able to be WinUpdate-able. SO,...

{When is goes I will miss itIt runs so well.}
What might I be shopping for?  I have seen mention of  "Server  
03" and "Server 08."  Yes, I have already read through OUR  
threads about the "SBS" versions of same.  Not thinking I need to  
do a Small Business Server just to come current; and/or support  
my LAN.
Can I suppose that "Server03?" is at the XP level; and, that the  
"Server08?" business is about Vista-class?

Best,
Duncan