Entries for msemack

Re: All your BitLocker are belong to us [Re: All your BitLocker are belong to us]

msemack — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 14:52:21 GMT

shooby wrote:

knowing what I know about NT encryption (reportedly DOES have a backdoor for the NSA)

For the record, there is no proof of an NSA backdoor in EFS. Someone discovered some strings in one of the NT Service Pack binaries with the letters "NSAKEY".

Once the string was discovered, serveral privacy advocates and journalists sounded the alarm, insisting that there we secret back doors in Windows.

Since then, perfectly legitimate explanations for the key have surfaced.

http://yarchive.net/phone/nsakey.html

in reply to Re: All your BitLocker are belong to us

Re: Top 10 Reasons Operation Re-Org Doesnt Matter [Re: Top 10 Reasons Operation Re-Org Doesnt Matter]

msemack — Wed, 21 Sep 2005 13:59:51 GMT

Ehh, what the hell. I'll bite...

shooby wrote:
10. Won't make IE any better, its still old borrowed source code no one wants to work on with a deep coat of pixels and lipstick.

Your assertion that IE is "borrowed source code" has a bit of merit, since the code was origionally licensed from Spyglass. However, you claim that no one wants to work on it. How do you know this?

shooby wrote:
9. Won't make Vista run on a $200 3gHz Pentium IV without a $600 graphics card.

Vista runs without a $600 graphics card. As Larry pointed out, you can run the highest level of Visa Graphics (Aero Glass) on a sub $100 video card.

shooby wrote:
8. Won't make stealing everyone elses innovations seem any more noble, even if you fire those that arent good at it.

That's a really vague assertion. You'll have to explain what "innovations" are "stolen".

shooby wrote:
7. A company based on subterfuge, idea theft, and price gouging can only keep people interested as long as they arent the victims of it.

I don't even understand what that means, asside from some vague accusations (more like a repeat of #8).

shooby wrote:
6. Linux, Firefox, Open Office and all that really good software that doesnt suck, need 8 updates a week, or need a staff of 12 to keep running effectively.

I contest your claim that Open Office is "really good".

Your comments about updates is pure hyperbole. Micosoft releases patches once a month, unless there's something critical.

shooby wrote:
5. Its still a monopoly, and a monopoly doesnt have to run well to succeed, it just has to stay a monopoly, but eventually the wheels start to come off, and the wheels are shaking.

I contest your claim of a monopoly. You already cited examples of viable alternatives (Linux, Firefox, Open Office). No one is forcing you to use Microsoft software. You can certainly go through life avoiding Windows, and probably even be effective at it.

shooby wrote:
4. The company will continue to attract people with a bit of brains, luck, and absolutely no moral character, who leave 6 months after the ink on the business card is dry.

Kindly cite a specific example of this at Microsoft.

shooby wrote:
3. Don Box will continue prosthelitizing stuff he doesnt understand but is convinced he does (you knew I'd work you in here old buddy, now wheres my check?)

What do you think he "doesn't understand but is convinced he does"?

And are you really an "old buddy" with Don Box, or is this just a play on words?

shooby wrote:
2. Corporate america will still look at the cash reserves at microsoft and realize thats from overpriced software they purchased."

Explain your assertion that Microsoft's software is "overpriced". Relatively speaking, I've found Microsoft software tends to be cheaper than it's competitors.

shooby wrote:
1. anyone whos ever spent more than 15 minutes with either Bill G or Steve B knows what the real problem is.

Have you actually spent more than 15 minutes with them? If so when?

in reply to Re: Top 10 Reasons Operation Re-Org Doesnt Matter

Re: End of an Era, Proof [Re: End of an Era, Proof]

msemack — Fri, 15 Apr 2005 14:41:20 GMT

eWEEK doesn't exactly carry a lot of clout. They tend to push sensational stories (often with shaky facts).

Could you provide a link to these "awards"? I see no mention of them on eWEEK's site. I'd be interested to know the categories and the winners.

in reply to Re: End of an Era, Proof

Re: End of an Era, Proof [Re: End of an Era, Proof]

msemack — Fri, 15 Apr 2005 14:41:20 GMT

shooby wrote:

You want a reason for the internet bubble bursting, the economy tanking? Microsoft has killed the entreprenueral portionof the economy

Really, do you have any evidence of this? Please, provide specific examples of dot-com companies that were put under by Microsoft.

If you can provide a specific example, then maybe you have a valid point. If that's the case, we can discuss it further. Otherwise, all you are doing is trolling, which doesn't help anyone.

shooby wrote:
like that former Unix turned NT 'salesman' (note I didnt say architect) that has the 4 parter on 'OS mutual exclusion for really really uneducated people and why I let Microsoft sign my checks'' posted here.)

What do you think makes him a "salesman"?

shooby wrote:
If you want to make a differnce, you cant do it at microsoft

How do you know? Do you work at Microsoft?

shooby wrote:
just stop this monopoly, or we'll all be tweaking XAML for spare change, and even the architects of that mess will tell you how badly that would suck.

Really? Are we all tweaking Win32 or MFC for spare change? I'm not. I doubt you are.

in reply to Re: End of an Era, Proof