« on: September 15, 2012, 03:22 PM »
LOL my favorite part on such posts, comments.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Not nitpicking words, but as everyone has said, is genuinely interested. No one is attempting to attack- it's just that much of what you said is only anecdotal, so the only way to deal with it is to ask you to see how this could have occurred. Everyone here was just trying to help it seems and see things from your perspective- not pick you apart.Actually that's not true. If you check the post from where this started, it started as attack and now it is more of intellectually beating based on variety of experience and with nitpicking of words. We are talking about end of lifecycle OS with problems which was patched along the way. It was even hard to find some of the fixes at that time. I can't say anything but - "take my word for that". Google had very less results at that time. Then again, that is not anecdotal and convincing personal experience for you guys, fair enough.-wraith808 (September 07, 2012, 06:39 AM)
If you've moved past this and don't really have any way to substantiate it by anything that might be other than anecdotal and unwilling to/ don't want to discuss it just say so.
But if you throw out phrases like "Those who are using Visual studio knows Why I am saying this, because microsoft's own programs make the system unusable," or "I hope you remember XP days with regular fixing of broken stuff," that doesn't sound either anecdotal or personal experience, so of course people are going to chime in.
Then if you change course midstream, you can't expect everyone to change course with you so unexpectedly.I am not changing course midstream, I am aware of nitpicking here from the start and I am pointing out that before people keep on assuming something which isnt there.
Are you talking about registry changes, or the TCPIP.SYS patch to increase the maximum half-open connections (which was recommended for p2p uses)? There's a big difference. I've never heard about winsock registry fixes (apart from malware related crap), but I did use TCPIP.SYS patching back in the XP days. Stupid blind patching (that didn't check for correction version) could nuke your driver, which could definitely end up causing BSODs eventually.No. I am talking about this. I used to get IPMON related dll error. That page was not even there when protonic.com guys helped me solve the issue with regfix. That and some of the other fixes that I downloaded from MVP kelly (from site kelly's corner or something). Like this there were plenty of problems related to reg which bugged me and required fixes.-f0dder (September 06, 2012, 02:20 PM)
I'm still not convinced that anything you've put forth stems from problems with the registry or Windows in general - it does sound more and more like there could be some dodgy 3rd-party software involved, though (and by that, I include not just various OS patches, but potentially also drivers, antivirus programs, firewalls, et cetera).Point is not to convince you for something. Point is that I had these problems with windows versions and I suffered, patched or fixed and finally I moved onto other OS which rarely had these issues. Again, if you guys wish to nitpick words and go on about it as if it's religious or political debate, I used "rarely" word here to imply personal experience. Windows has issues, much more than OSX because windows is hardware agnostic and it breaks with every random component not tested during the deployment or testing phase, like modem driver killing something else on the system, reg entries getting corrupted, file copy issue(vista), VS causing issues with other programs and list goes on. These problems makes system less usable compared to other OS, that was my point. Ofcourse, this experience is personal, some people had similar to me and that's why MS KB exists at first place. And some people never had it, so they tend to disagree.-f0dder
I had BSODs on my nforce4 motherboard when trying to use nvidia's "hardware" firewall (which was a retarted piece of crap, requiring a full install of an apache httpd in order to manage settings locally... :rolleyes: ), and I've had BSODs from third-party firewall, VPN and antivirus products. Some of these seem to show winsock as the problem, but that's only if you look just at the top-level driver in the BSOD, not if you study the actual minidump with WinDbg. Also, I've never had filesystme or registry corruption from any of these "normal" BSODs. Got more information on the issue?Not BSOD due to reg but was because of the theme patching and shell related changes. In case of reg issues, most of them were related to the WINSOCK and other network related issues. I can't specifically point to the issue because I used to patch that using the reg fix for Winsock. Without that fix, It was hard to connect to the net. I am not sure if it was because of driver issue or say some malware? For some reason system was not usable without those reg fixes (most of them were released by MVPs), I hope you remember XP days with regular fixing of broken stuff.-f0dder (September 06, 2012, 12:10 PM)
Sure you didn't use some dodgy software to patch uxtheme, which installed malware on your machine? I've had it patched on XP, XP64, Vista64 and Win7-64 without trouble. It would be a very weird cause of BSODs, since it's a usermode DLL.No. I used to play with TGTSoft's uxtheme.dll which was released by them for community. StyleXP isn't alive anymore but I am sure their community themexp.org still has that uxtheme.dll for patching the shell. Without this it was not possible to change themes freely on XP at that time. Had BSOD during these changes.-mahesh2k (September 06, 2012, 10:16 AM)
I still kinda doubt that has anything to do with "the debugger" (unless the 3rd party software software refuses to run on a machine with developer/debugging tools installed) - but it could very well be that the software simply doesn't work with some versions of .NET runtime libraries... whether the particular VS versions upgrade or accidentally downgrade them. If there's one thing I've learned in my years as a developer, it's that you first blame yourself, then 3rd party vendors, and only then start suspecting Microsoft. Often saves your some embarassment :-)Well it worked fine without VS, so I can't take the blame. It worked Okay for sometime with VS installed so 3rd party software can't be blamed until .NET had clashes so surely MS has to be blamed here for this. lol
Are you saying that updates failed to install, or that there were too many updates for your liking?Some updates with KB fixes for .NET and other VS components failed to install and sometimes had startup issues with them as well. Especially on vista, but never had startup related issue on XP with those KB Fix updates.
I mean reg corruption,not tweaks. Remember WINSOCK issues? Yes. I am talking about some of these reg level corruption of the entries which makes XP or vista unusable. Upto Vista, it's easy to find that problem. As for BSOD, had that problem after patching uxtheme.dll which we need while changing the themes for XP. It has nothing to do with reg but performance issue you wanted to see is there when you do modify shell stuff. To be honest, never had video driver issues, unless ofcourse it was from the hardware of HP (no complaints to MS for that).I did found problems, especially on Win XP and Vista. I had plenty of things broken e.g. TCP/IP reg fix that is available for both XP and vista when net crashes to reg corruption of the entries, I am sure you are aware of it. I can dig out few more reg edit fixes out there, in fact I had one bunch saved as file when I used XP Pro SP2 to use them after fresh installation. I don't have this on Windows 7 because those problems are pretty much solved on 7 but with windows XP SP 2 that problem is still possible to replicate. I don't know how you guys are saying that after Windows 9x, system is much stable in terms of reg performance because it's not for me.I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. Are you saying the registry tweaks (i.e. registry settings that are perceived to improve system performance, while often being snake-oil) that worked on XP no longer work on Vista and Win7? Or does your "net crashes to reg corruption" mean a BSOD causing corruption of the hive-files, and thus a completely broken Windows install.Since installing Win2k (the first NT I've really used), 99% of the BSODs I've seen have been caused by flaky hardware, bad 3rd-party drivers, or myself messing around with kernel-mode debuggers or driver development. I can't recall seeing a BSOD that was caused by MS code, but I'm pretty sure there's been a few. In those 10+ years. While a BSOD does mean losing whatever unsaved open files, I've only seen filesystem corruption in a very few instances - that was with ATI video drivers. Those caused extremely nasty FS corruption, though, bad enough that I had to run filesystem recovery software. Had 3-4 of those before I realized the drivers were insanely lame and couldn't handle LargeSystemCache=1. And as late as June 2012, AMD/ATI video drivers prevented system-wide ASLRBut please do elaborate on the problems you mention above, as I'm genuinely confused as to what you mean.-f0dder (September 06, 2012, 09:56 AM)
I used the Pro edition upto 2010 and after 2010 I used selective VS for web development. Prior to that almost every VS edition used to interfere with the ,NET framework which I updated and patched beyond default VS bundle. e.g. ,NET 3 and onwards. I had debugger closing my programs (this includes treedb, cintanotes and few other programs) bugging every single application and opening debugger for them. Never had this problem on your side? I wonder how you turned off debugger after VS installation to keep it from interfering with other applications and default .NET framework.I've never had the debugger "interfering with other applications". If a program crashes, yes, I'll get the option to attach the debugger and do post-mortem. But that's not the debugger interfering, that's the 3rd-party program crashing, for whatever reason. Rather than blaming VS, perhaps it's the 3rd-party program that's stupidly programmed and making unguaranteed assumptions, and then crashing when implementation details change in a later .NET version? (not that I'm saying .NET is bugfree, though, I've filed a couple of bug reports on it myself. Quite esoteric edge-cases, though.)Here's how I found out debugger issue. I installed the fresh XP and vista on different machines. Then used the typical programs without any problems. And after installation of VS, observed the problem with debugger. It has mostly due to .NET and the debugger issues IMO. So it's definitely not third party issue. Yet to find out how to get over that. But As I am not doing much VC/Sharp development, it's not needed for VS 2010 onwards. Web dev VS doesn't interfere with other programs. Also mind telling me how do you get rid of all reg entries when you install VS PRO? I have yet to figure out complete removal of VS without leaving some traces behind.
I don't know which part of my post people are picking up to imply "no security holes on osx". I am just comparing it with windows and on that comparison I had very few complaints on OS X in terms of patching (explained above) and the official updates, where you know how good windows performs.*shrug* - Windows update has (almost) always worked pretty well for me - it really doesn't like running out of disk space, though, but I'm not sure I can really blame it for that. I've had coworkers with bricked systems after OSX updates (to be fair, that was upgrading to a new OSX version rather than just a regular update, but still.)It didn't worked for me upto vista. Patch list and security fixes keeps on increasing once we have VS installed. Windows 7 on the other hand is never showed the upgrade and patching problems.
I did found problems, especially on Win XP and Vista. I had plenty of things broken e.g. TCP/IP reg fix that is available for both XP and vista when net crashes to reg corruption of the entries, I am sure you are aware of it. I can dig out few more reg edit fixes out there, in fact I had one bunch saved as file when I used XP Pro SP2 to use them after fresh installation. I don't have this on Windows 7 because those problems are pretty much solved on 7 but with windows XP SP 2 that problem is still possible to replicate. I don't know how you guys are saying that after Windows 9x, system is much stable in terms of reg performance because it's not for me.Honestly, you don't need crappy windows. I used OSX and Linux and they don't show performance issues like windows. Not even windows 7 solved performance issue problem. More you use windows, less usable it becomes, after you add more data, reg entries and stuff.I personally haven't seen this since I moved away from Win9x. The registry is pretty efficient, definitely a lot more efficient than re-parsing text files all the time - the only problems I've seen have been caused by really badly written 3rd party software, and the cause hasn't been "too much data in the registry", it's been "really broken data" (which just coincidentally happened to be located in the registry).-f0dder (September 06, 2012, 06:54 AM)
Those who are using Visual studio knows Why I am saying this, because microsoft's own programs make the system unusable.I've been running every single version (not every edition, of course!) and service pack of Visual Studio from 6 to 2010 SP1, and will soon be installing 2012. I've even been using VS on Win9x. While the first VS.NET version was pretty crappy and unstable, I've never had VS affect my system stability, and never heard of stories like that from friends or co-workers.I used the Pro edition upto 2010 and after 2010 I used selective VS for web development. Prior to that almost every VS edition used to interfere with the ,NET framework which I updated and patched beyond default VS bundle. e.g. ,NET 3 and onwards. I had debugger closing my programs (this includes treedb, cintanotes and few other programs) bugging every single application and opening debugger for them. Never had this problem on your side? I wonder how you turned off debugger after VS installation to keep it from interfering with other applications and default .NET framework.
On the other hand, OSX based on unix is perfectly fine. Doesn't break or gets crashed with official softwares and upgrades.Most of the developers at my current job are on OSX laptops. A bunch of them started cursing some months ago after installing whatever-cat-named-update because their systems got bogged down (disk paging, beach ball icon, and sometime systems so unresponsive they had to hardboot them) - seems like Apple messed up the memory manager, majorly. Not something you'll see if you're just drinking caffè latte and not using your shiny laptop for facebook and hipstagram - but definitely if you're actually using the machine. And should I mention the funny instances where the battery expands somewhat (natural thing to do because of heat), messing up the touchpad? Or the various data-loss incidents there's been in Finder?Sure, there's some nice things about OSX, and the build quality on some macbooks is better than a lot of non-OSX PCs. But there's plenty of problems as well, and plenty of funny security holes as well :-)I don't know which part of my post people are picking up to imply "no security holes on osx". I am just comparing it with windows and on that comparison I had very few complaints on OS X in terms of patching (explained above) and the official updates, where you know how good windows performs.
@ mahesh2k & tuxman - Umm...could you two maybe start you own thread and take it over there if its going to continue? People are trying to have a conversation here.
Less attacking and more answering my questions ("Why?") would be good for the forum peace too, pal.
Right: just your observation. Live with it.
mahesh2k tried, I asked why, he called me a troll.
I don't hate Linux.
Bullshit. That urban myth is not true anymore since... uhm..Am I supposed to reply to flamebaits? I mean give me one good reason why I should respond to your bigotry towards linux or lurve for windows that comes out because you hate linux and lurve BSD?
why I would need Windows or OSX?