Ladies and Gentlemen,
Do we have this list for debating about Microsoft products or how frequently
it released patches or to discuss about the *internet and related issues*?
Regards,
M.Venkateswar Reddy
--
Huawei Technologies,
I think Microsoft does not give enough
emphasis into security in their products. They do a hell of a job on
marketing their products and making them seem flashy and
attractive, ...
From all the mail on this list it appears that Microsoft did
also do a hell of a job by giving people a
Keith writes:
until they get burned, that is.
then they blame the network for their problems.
They are more likely to blame their OS vendor, in my experience. Microsoft is a
particularly tempting target because so many people feel compelled to bash
anyone who has done better than they have,
Randy writes:
oh you mean 98% of microsoft's customer base.
yup, that's they. and ms loves to sell to the naive.
All vendors try to sell to as many customers as possible. And today, 98% of all
customers are technically unsophisticated. So any vendor that wants to seel to
the average person
Melinda writes:
It would be refreshing if someone stepped forward
and said This is my problem. I will try to fix it.
I'll say it, at least with respect to machines under my control. I just avoid
opening suspicious attachments, actually. That works really well.
At the moment, in the case of
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Venkateswar Reddy Melachervu wrote:
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Do we have this list for debating about Microsoft products or how frequently
it released patches or to discuss about the *internet and related issues*?
And what you makes say this is not related to the internet?
Jamal writes:
MS is producing inferior products which are using
the internet to create havoc.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Do you have any?
--On Wednesday, 25 July, 2001 08:10 -0400 Robert Moskowitz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 08:42 PM 7/24/2001 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the other hand, I could live with the filtering of active
content and executables (which is what the *real* problem is,
right?)
any attachments.
Works nicely. Seems that there may be active content in the templates
used. Check
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q288/2/66.ASP
Robert Moskowitz wrote:
At 08:42 PM 7/24/2001 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the other hand, I could live with the filtering of active
From: John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
As has been said many times before, text attachments are both
useful and reasonably safe. ...
I could live with prohibiting almost anything else, but banning
multiple-body-part MIME messages where all of the terminal body
parts are plain text
Jamal writes:
I dont see anything extraordinary in those claims.
You don't substantiate them, either. This being so, they serve no purpose, as
rants against Microsoft are a dime a dozen on the Net--just about every young
male who isn't rich or has failed to get an instant offer from MS after
hi,
this mail is in continuation of the thread started by Steinar Haug in
which he wrote that he hadn't ever seen or heard of any product use 802.3
LLC frame format to carry IP Packet in.
i am confused . what did he mean to say ?
Did he mean to say that all the recent implementations of
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Jamal writes:
MS is producing inferior products which are using
the internet to create havoc.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Do you have any?
I dont see anything extraordinary in those claims.
in regards to inferior
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Jamal writes:
BoDs at airports and ATM machines when you try
to get some cash at 3am?
I've never seen one,
Maybe this will help (and yes ive seen a few, i wish i had a camera)
http://www.daimyo.org/bsod/
Those going to the IETF: Heathrow
this mail is in continuation of the thread started by Steinar Haug in
which he wrote that he hadn't ever seen or heard of any product use 802.3
LLC frame format to carry IP Packet in.
You're digging up a rather old thread, but okay. I don't believe I said
what you claim here, I *did* say on
--On Wednesday, August 01, 2001 8:38 AM -0600 Vernon Schryver
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
As has been said many times before, text attachments are both
useful and reasonably safe. ...
I could live with prohibiting almost anything else, but
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 01:45:01PM -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
Personally, I tend to agree -- on logical, moral, and technical
grounds and without needing to appeal to amateur lawyering or
copyright hair-splitting. Any given submission should either go
through or be diverted, not improved
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 03:06:49PM +0200, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Jamal writes:
MS is producing inferior products which are using
the internet to create havoc.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Do you have any?
How about several megabytes of data sent to the IETF
From: John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
Ok, would you support rejecting any submissions containing
non-text attachments?
Personally, I probably would, although I can see a case for a
few other forms. On the other hand, the one that would probably
end up on the list right after text
vjs writes:
| 1. reach consensus that some binary formats should be filtered,
s/some/all/
How hard is it to add a URL instead of a MIME attachment?
I wonder how that fits in with the first two letters of IETF's acronym...
I think vjs's point is a good one to take up at the IESG plenary
[Sorry for the noise folks]
At 16:43 8/1/2001 -0700, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
There's the opportunity picket outside the US Embassy...
protests against the imprisonment of Dmitry Sklyarov, starts at the Hyde
Park tube stop (blue line so you can go direct from heathrow ;)) at 12:30
and marches to the
Well,
U know my friend every thing in the universe is relative and hence connected
to each other. So do we discuss in this list about all issues like how MS
Office or outlook injects bugs when connected to Internet just because U see
the term Internet in the sentence?
Regards,
M.Venkateswar Reddy
Yes but to follow that analogy and again show things are usually near
black or white, in the US the Government on behalf of consumers forced car
manufacturers to install seat belts starting back in the '60's. It then
took a decade or more to convince consumers to wear them. But they
evolved and
Keith writes:
perhaps because they are shipped that way?
Microsoft ships servers with most security features set to low security, because
customers whine and complain otherwise. Customers buy on the basis of features
and ease-of-use, not security, no matter what they might claim to the
24 matches
Mail list logo
