Entries for reinux

Vista Sleep mode [Vista Sleep mode]

reinux — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 00:03:24 GMT

I find that the more applications I have open, the longer it takes for my computer to sleep. With nothing open, it takes a few seconds. With 20 Messenger windows open (don't ask why), it takes more than a minute. Similar results with no Messenger windows but a lot of IE/Visual Studio/Word/etc.

Hybrid sleep is off.

What could it be doing with these windows/processes that's making it take so long? Is there any way to speed it up?

in reply to Vista Sleep mode

ReadyDrive laptops [ReadyDrive laptops]

reinux — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 02:57:40 GMT

So I'm shopping for a new laptop/tabletPC, and I can't find the hybrid drive laptops!

I heard they went OEM a couple months ago. Where are they?!

in reply to ReadyDrive laptops

Visual C# Express [Visual C# Express]

reinux — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 21:27:58 GMT

I'm starting to like it more than Visual Studio. It's faster starting, the editor is more tweakable in certain ways, and it seems to do nearly everything Visual Studio does in C# that I ever need it for.

Of course sometimes I need things like Crystal Reports and MSI, but I'm mainly using C# Express now.

Weird, wasn't .NET some evil conspiracy to sell more copies of Visual Studio?

in reply to Visual C# Express

To LINQ or not to LINQ [To LINQ or not to LINQ]

reinux — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 00:51:39 GMT

So my company wants a customer database and I'm trying to decide between using ADO.NET or LINQ for the management and report apps.

I know LINQ's in beta, but in the case that something does go wrong, the damage shouldn't be too bad (unless it somehow eats the database), and I'm willing to take the risk/responsibility.

Usability wise though, how is LINQ's VS2005 integration so far?

Speaking of which, reports and invoices printed in XPS would be sorta cool huh?

in reply to To LINQ or not to LINQ

Petitioning CNET's Vista Upgrade Advisor [Petitioning CNET's Vista Upgrade Advisor]

reinux — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 21:25:02 GMT

So rather than just sit here on the forums fuming all the time, I decided I'm going to start a petitiononline.com petition against CNET to take down or fix their ridiculous Vista Upgrade Advisor. It's time for the Windows side to start speaking up against the FUD.

I could be civil and just email them, but I doubt they'd care or even notice.

Here's the petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/cnetvis/petition.html

Spread the word!

in reply to Petitioning CNET's Vista Upgrade Advisor

This time NIST bans Vista [This time NIST bans Vista]

reinux — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 04:19:13 GMT

http://www.informationweek.com/windows/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=QMMQ4SLNSNR1YQSNDLRCKHSCJUNN2JVN?articleID=198000229

Microsoft Suffers Latest Blow As NIST Bans Windows Vista

Tech staffers at NIST, a part of the Department of Commerce charged with promulgating technology standards, are scheduled to meet on April 10 in Gaithersburg, Md., to discuss their concerns about the new operating system, which Microsoft released to consumers in January amid much fanfare and to businesses in December with lesser flair.

According to the formal agenda for the meeting, NIST technology workers will attend a session entitled "Windows Vista Security" to discuss "the current ban of this operating system on NIST networks." NIST officials weren't immediately available to comment.

Funny how the meeting comes a month after they make the decision. Basically a shoot-first-ask-questions-later sorta deal I guess.

All those FUD campaigns out there sure are working.

in reply to This time NIST bans Vista

New Apple Ad [New Apple Ad]

reinux — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 00:06:12 GMT

http://images.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac/apple-getamac-security_480x376.mov

Enjoy!

in reply to New Apple Ad

mfpmp.exe is annoying the hell out of me [mfpmp.exe is annoying the hell out of me]

reinux — Sat, 10 Mar 2007 06:14:32 GMT

Is there no better way to deal with DRM? mfpmp.exe is sucking up 15% of my CPU time with un-DRM'd music on Windows Media Player.

My fan keeps spinning up just for this crap, and my music often hiccups when I start doing stuff.

in reply to mfpmp.exe is annoying the hell out of me

Vista, IE7 and Office 2007 banned from DOT use [Vista, IE7 and Office 2007 banned from DOT use]

reinux — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 13:07:23 GMT

http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197700789

Among the concerns cited by Mintz are compatibility with software applications currently in use at the department, the cost of an upgrade, and DOT's move to a new headquarters in Washington later this year. "Microsoft Vista, Office 2007, and Internet Explorer [7] may be acquired for testing purposes only, though only on approval by the DOT chief information officer," Mintz writes.

Among the options the Transportation Department is weighing as a possible alternative or complement to Windows Vista are Novell's Suse Linux and, for a limited group of users, Apple's Macintosh hardware and software, he says.

According to a separate memo, a number of key software applications and utilities in use in various branches of the department aren't Vista compatible . Among them are Aspen 2.8.1, ISS 2.11, ProVu 3.1.1, and Capri 6.5, according to a memo issued by staffers at the DOT's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

Apparently, Aspen and all that run on Linux, and retraining all the staff for Linux is cheaper than getting this software fixed :s

All the anti-Vista FUD sure is paying off.

in reply to Vista, IE7 and Office 2007 banned from DOT use

Vista UI analysis by twitchfingers [Vista UI analysis by twitchfingers]

reinux — Tue, 27 Feb 2007 05:36:37 GMT

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9011819

"Menu latency is the time it takes an operating system to display a menu," said Pfeiffer. "In Windows, it's not immediate. That's not a speed or performance issue, but a design choice."

Does it lag?? Really? I can't see it lag. Not even on my 3.5 year old machine.

The final benchmark of mouse precision, a test crucial to design professionals and photographers, but also of interest to general users who get frustrated trying to nail submenu commands at the first click, also put Vista on the bottom. Pfeiffer's Vista "mouse precision coefficient" was 30% higher than XP's. A higher coefficient means users found it harder to precisely place the mouse.

I don't know how this could possibly have anything to do with an OS. The only situation I found this to be frustrating was when older Apple OS' required you to hold down the mouse when you opened a menu.

But wait, here's the best part:

Microsoft declined to comment on Pfeiffer's Vista user interface research.

in reply to Vista UI analysis by twitchfingers

Another Vista Upgrade Advisor [Another Vista Upgrade Advisor]

reinux — Tue, 27 Feb 2007 03:08:38 GMT

http://www.cnet.com/4520-33_1-6671810-1.html

Some of this is total crap.

I passed the Basic Home User benchmark, but Mainstream User I failed miserably. I'm happily running Vista Business, by the way. Check this out:

I have no idea how my P4 2.4 is somehow not enough. My CPU has never bottlenecked on me on Vista so far.

Why the hell I need 2GB of ram, I don't know. If I had 2GB of ram it'd be nice since Vista makes better use of RAM than XP does, but it's perfectly enough to be running a bajillion applications at the same time.

And how the hell is Shader 3.0 supposed to make Vista run better when Aero only uses 2.0 features?!?!?!

in reply to Another Vista Upgrade Advisor

Exaggeration and FUD [Exaggeration and FUD]

reinux — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 19:43:41 GMT

http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20070220/tc_pcworld/129126;_ylt=AhDJwCDM9TwcJvn5Gjji0wgDW7oF

rrrrrrrrrrip it up! :)

in reply to Exaggeration and FUD

More FUD [More FUD]

reinux — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 05:05:47 GMT

http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2007/02/07/microsoft-slugs-mac-users-with-vista-tax/

Microsoft slugs Mac users with Vista tax
Posted on February 7th, 2007 by John Pospisil

Mac users wanting to run Vista on their Macintosh will have to buy an expensive version of Vista if they want to legally install it on their systems.

It appears Microsoft doesn’t want to make life easy for Mac users

The end-user license agreement for the cheaper versions of Vista (Home Basic and Home Premium) explicitly forbids the use of those versions on virtual machines (ie Macs pretending to be PCs):

“You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system,” the end user license agreement states.

...

With Microsoft being tardy about a new version of Mac Office (apparently it’s coming in 2008), and the feud between Gates and Jobs intensifying in recent weeks, Mac users could be forgiven for thinking that Microsoft is going out of its way to make life difficult.

Gotta love how somehow now because you can't run Vista Home on VMs it's magically a "tax" against Mac users.

in reply to More FUD

Evangelists/marketers/web editors/press: why not promote the Vista Upgrade Advisor? [Evangelists/marketers/web editors/press: why not promote the Vista Upgrade Advisor?]

reinux — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 23:14:06 GMT

If you guys are on the forums lately:

Everyone's still confused about what sort of machine you need to upgrade to Vista.

There's a Vista Upgrade Advisor. It's what I used when I made my decision to upgrade my 3.5 year old $800 machine. Why not promote it more?

I see the press and all the naysayers blasting Windows for its minimum specs. Most people don't even know about the advisor.

in reply to Evangelists/marketers/web editors/press: why not promote the Vista Upgrade Advisor?

Apple adds spamming to their smearing campaign arsenal [Apple adds spamming to their smearing campaign arsenal]

reinux — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 22:10:26 GMT

Beautiful.

----- Original Message -----

From: Apple
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:58 AM

Subject: Upgrading to Vista? Think Mac.



It's time to get a Mac. If you're thinking of upgrading to Vista, you'll probably need a new computer. Why not get a Mac? It's simpler, more secure, and way more fun. And it works with the stuff you already have, like printers and cameras. So before you upgrade anything, you owe it to yourself to check out a Mac.

in reply to Apple adds spamming to their smearing campaign arsenal

Pillars of Longhorn [Pillars of Longhorn]

reinux — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 21:01:11 GMT

Minus WinFS, they're still there. Aren't they?

As crazy as it sounds, I wish they'd have taken WinFX away from XP/2003, at least initially, because the biggest complaint with Vista right now is its lack of innovative features. Supposedly.

I think they shot themselves in the foot when they backported WinFX to XP/2003. I understand it being somewhat of a necessary move for devs both internally and externally, but externally, I wouldn't have minded waiting for Vista if I was getting WinFX with it. Internally they could have continued using their own preliminary WinFX builds for XP/2003.

WinFX was probably the killer app for Vista, but they made it a free download for XP and 2003. Then to make it worse they duct taped it together with the .NET Framework. So now no one perceives WinFX as being a Windows thing, and Windows has been stripped of one of its biggest bragging rights.

I think what would have worked best is if they released WinFX as an XP/2003 download after Vista was released. Then they wouldn't have had gotten so much bad press about Vista's lack of benefits.

There would still be people asking "then why did I bother to upgrade to Vista?" but that would have become a relatively minor point in the face of the XP/2003 users having been given a large portion of the Vista API for free.

Just some thoughts.

in reply to Pillars of Longhorn

Microsoft's advertising -- is it effective? [Microsoft's advertising -- is it effective?]

reinux — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:43:57 GMT

Apple's advertising, Microsoft's advertising: which is more repulsive? At first glance you'd think Apple's -- simply because they're so insulting.

But like Apple even mentioned in one of their ads, Microsoft's advertising reeks of sales pitch. At least Apple's advertising communicates some things, even though they're offensive: Apple is better. They say that on every one of their ads. When necessary they'll even pretend to prove it.

But what about Microsoft's ads? Just corporate rhetoric everywhere, showing off features that are either way too ahead of its time or way behind (speech recognition). Security, yeah, but isn't security a given?

The end result is that nowadays, Apple advertisements are effective whilst not being as offensive as they sound, hence loveable; Microsoft's advertisements sound more like politicians' election campaigns where political correctness is an absolute must.

And generally speaking, is it politically correct right now to even praise Microsoft? Every time I see someone saying anything good about Microsoft it's candy coated with some apologetic crap like "I have to admit". I say some nice things about Vista and people jump on me going "are you trying to advertise Microsoft? Are you getting paid?"

Microsoft can't even hire a person to revise Wikipedia articles about its own products without it getting shot down and reverted. Meanwhile Apple readily has product placement everywhere on the news, in movies and in pop culture in general, and no one complains.

No, I don't think Microsoft should lower itself to Apple or Sony's level and start fighting back at all the crap that rivals fling at them. But Microsoft does need to start speaking up for itself. In its silence Micrsoft is acknowledging all of the (I need to watch my language) that people fling at them.

How about, say, applying some of C9's strategies in the mainstream? Get some Microsoft developers to comment on the projects they're working on. Have some cultural references in there.

Get some people to throw some more technical pitches, like the

http://www.petitiononline.com/winfx/petition.html

I've listed reasons there so, read up.

in reply to WinFX and the ".NET 3.0" misnomer

What can I use for scripting in .NET? [What can I use for scripting in .NET?]

reinux — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 03:43:16 GMT

I'm trying to allow scripting for my application, but I can't find anything that I can use for .NET.

MSH/Powershell is good, but most people don't know the language yet, and honestly, the syntax is insane. Not to mention, I don't think I can put the DLLs in my installer under the EULA.

I guess I could use IronPython, but I'd like to provide some alternatives as well.

Is there no way I could use Javascript. It's the de facto scripting langauge. Why is VSA deprecated?

in reply to What can I use for scripting in .NET?

MSH syntax and code sharing [MSH syntax and code sharing]

reinux — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 01:02:46 GMT

So I've been playing with MSH, and even though it's awesome, unless I'm wrong, it has some fatal problems. I really don't want to see MSH go down the drain.

I'm not too sure where to take my suggestions for MSH, so it'd be nice if someone could give me a few pointers. Or maybe someone could just tell me if I'm mistaken in one way or another.

Two things: code sharing and consistency of syntax. ~~I'll start with code sharing.~~
Edit: since the code sharing problem seems to be harder to understand than the syntax one (at least the way I've written it), I'll start with syntax instead.

Syntax: From what I understand, MSH is built with the idea of being easy to learn for anyone "1337"; that is, anyone with some UNIX shell knowledge or some programming (specifically .NET) knowledge. Which is pretty evident in the expressiveness, and which I appreciate.

On the other hand, this seems to cause some really awkward side effects. One that really bothers me is the function invocation syntax.

Suppose I have a function defined as follows:
function Pow($var, $exp) { [Math]::Pow($var, $exp) }

Coming from C#, I try to use Pow like this:
Pow(2, 8) + 3;

It throws an exception, telling me that the value can't be converted from System.Object[] to System.Double. What happened here is that 2, 8 was tokenized as an array of two objects, rather than two arguments to Pow.

The correct way to use Pow is not
Pow(2, 8) + 3; (results in an exception)

nor is it
Pow 2 8 + 3; (result is 256)

but it's
(Pow 2 8) + 3 (result is 259)

The correct way to use [Math]::Pow is not
[Math]::Pow 2 8 + 3 (results in an exception)

but it's
[Math]::Pow(2, 8) + 3 (result is 259)

Apparently the only difference is that Math.Pow is invoked through .NET, whereas Pow is a function defined in MSH. Intrinsically both are identical, yet the correct syntax is totally different. When invoking a .NET method, x, y means "two parameters: x and y", whereas when invoking a MSH function, x, y means "an array of two objects: x and y".

A function like Sqrt($val), which would only take one argument, works fine with the normal C-like call expression. Anything else and it starts getting funky.

Two things that bug me about this:
1. The call Pow 2 8 + 3 throws no error, but the result is 256. Because MSH never complained, I wouldn't have known. This sort of thing is extremely dangerous, especially considering MSH is intended to be used casually for file manipulation.
2. Learning MSH is like learning two languages at the same time. I could learn through trial and error, which is just asking for bugs, or I could learn by studying it intensely -- which defeats MSH's purpose as a quick-to-learn language.

The solution would be, quite simply, to either make Foo 3 5 the only valid syntax, or to ditch instantiating arrays by just CSVing objects. Really, 3; 5 and {3, 5} are good enough. 3, 5 just isn't necessary.

Code sharing: One of the cool things about MSH is that you can share code on a function or script file level. If you have a cool function, you just paste it on your blog or on a forum or what not. The trouble begins when you have scripts that span multiple functions or reference other scripts.

Say Foo is a function that you want to share on your blog. Foo makes a call to Bar, which you also created. You post Foo on your blog, but a reader complains that he needs Bar for Foo to run. So a couple days later, when you're not too busy, you give them Bar. But they already have their own version of Bar, which just got overrided by Bar (for the MSH instance in which it's run). So their version of Bar suddenly doesn't do what they'd expect it to (Edit: okay, this seems to be true only if you have something defined in $profile, since that goes public).

Two problems arise in this example: In sharing anything more than a simple bit of code, you'll easily lose track of which methods, aliases, vars etc you need to provide; and in doing so, you risk a conflict between their existing code and your code. This can be expected to happen very often, since you're essentially relying on luck to avoid name conflicts.

In sharing anything more than a simple bit of code, you'll easily lose track of which methods, aliases, vars etc you need to provide.

A solution to the first problem would be to provide some sort of dependency check mechanism which sharers could run to make sure their audience is given everything they need. ~~A solution to the second problem would be to use some form of namespacing.~~

Which ever the case, this needs to be fixed ASAP, or MSH will immediately lose its value as an easily shareable language.

I'd get these issues fixed by the first release even if it means breaking CTP code. Otherwise MSH is going to be so bug-prone that it'll be abandoned.

(MSH needs Anders :)

in reply to MSH syntax and code sharing

Messenger 8 Beta feedback [Messenger 8 Beta feedback]

reinux — Sun, 08 Jan 2006 06:50:03 GMT

Messenger 8 Beta has a "send feedback" button, but it just has a bunch of multiple choice answers to irrelevant questions.

Even though I posted on their blog, it's so full of unrealistic feature suggestions and chatter that the critical suggestions are probably drowned out, so I figure this might be a better place to talk about feedback.

What sort of suggestions do you guys have?

Here's what I posted on their blog so far:

reinux wrote:

****Conversation window aesthetics
-Colorized title bars waste of space, defeats purpose of collapsible title/menu bars. At least put the conversation name/email address there, or just get rid of it.
-Just use custom colored wallpapers for the default wallpaper instead, like Windows Media Player.
-Automatically reduce buttons and collapse toolbars upon shrinking a conversation window.
-Space between "Send" and "Search waste of space.
-Image border is ugly; the left and right sides need more spacing.
-Ads at bottom of conversation windows should be left aligned.
-"Last message sent 2006/..." should be left or center aligned.
-Ignore button is in an area too crowded; I find myself clicking it by accident often.
-Clicking on own image in conversation window should bring up display icon menu; sudden change causes confusion.
-Send button should be visibly enabled when typing a message.
-Indicate the time of the last message from the logs as well.
-Send normal file request to users with older clients automatically, otherwise they don't see them.
-Title bar bottom looks ugly with black background.
-The "voice memo" button is the only one that doesn't set the mouse cursor to "link". Personally I prefer using the normal arrow cursor since it's a Windows button, not a Web button.
-Resizable border between input box and output box is bigger than the actual draggable size.

****Logging (IMPORTANT)
-Conversation logs should be saved progressively even if it takes the effort of not using an xml document object, because:
1. it defeats half the purpose of logging if the messages don't get saved upon crashing.
2. saving xml all at once is excruciatingly slow; closing a window is often so slow that it feels like it's crashed.
-Logging should start once logging is enabled in the options, NOT on the next time the conversation windows are opened.

****Buddy list window aesthetics
-Ad space needs to be SMALLER.
-PLEASE no Flash ads. GIF I can tolerate.
-Margins need to be SMALLER.
-Top bar with name/self icon etc should be collapsible.
-Mouse over user should bring up contact's email address.
-Display by display name should show user names, NOT nicknames, because people often have important messages in their user names, and it's way too late to change that habit now.
-Need a way to go shuffle through users' edit profile windows really quick; otherwise the search bar at the top is inconvenient to use.
-(Online) (Away) (Do not Disturb) need to be put back in.
-Use old 16x16 icons -- green/light green makes no sense; even though it's easier to see from a distance, it's useless to the colorblind and nearly defeats the purpose of having numerous away states.
-I can only fit 19 users on a 1152x864 monitor with the window maximized. This window REALLY needs to be cleaned up.

****Bugs
-Send dies at 2kb before end.
-Multiple user conversation crashed MSN a couple times already. No idea how to repro except to keep trying it.

****Performance on a P4 2.4 HT with 1gb of RAM.
-Unbelievably slow performance -- 3 hours total CPU time running for just over a day (probably due to a few animated emoticons, but still inexcusable).
-Scrolling through buddy list window NEEDS TO BE OPTIMIZED.
-Start the log window on a separate thread.

****Etc
-Japanese translations need some revision.
-Feedback page only brings up multiple choice answers to irrelevant questions; defeats purpose of beta. Fortunately you guys have a blog :)
-"Has just signed in" boxes are huge, title bars waste of space, but the names are truncated way too early. It's too late to convince people not to use names for messages.
-Volume control on voice chat should not mess with both main volume and wav volume -- it's extremely inconvenient. Muting mutes all sound as well.
-Make display message API available to public; otherwise you might provoke another lawsuit by Real Networks etc.

in reply to Messenger 8 Beta feedback

So are there going to be no more emergency updates? [So are there going to be no more emergency updates?]

reinux — Wed, 04 Jan 2006 08:29:08 GMT

Is it a new policy or something to wait until the monthly update to release a fix?

If a flaw were made public on the 11th of a month and update day is the 10th, would we have to wait for 30 days?

For something as severe was the WMF flaw wouldn't you want to release a fix, and then release a fix under the normal schedule if it turns out to be an incomplete remedy?

I mean sure it's a bit of a nuisance to have to do two Windows Updates in a month, but it'd be even more of a nuisance if I caught something like this...

in reply to So are there going to be no more emergency updates?

This threat's gonna cost Microsoft a whole country sometime [This threat's gonna cost Microsoft a whole country sometime]

reinux — Sat, 29 Oct 2005 22:47:22 GMT

Microsoft: Windows May Be Pulled in Korea

I tend to find a lot if not most of these cases are pretty ridiculous, but Microsoft really tripped a landmine this time...

I'm sure it's just a threat but the damage is irreversible.

Honestly I'm disappointed.

in reply to This threat's gonna cost Microsoft a whole country sometime

I wanna see the Napoleon vs. Bill video! [I wanna see the Napoleon vs. Bill video!]

reinux — Fri, 16 Sep 2005 11:29:59 GMT

Napoleon Dynamite vs. Bill Gates

I didn't get to go to the PDC :(

Anyone know if there's anywhere I can watch this?

in reply to I wanna see the Napoleon vs. Bill video!

Anti-spam security expert sending me spam [Anti-spam security expert sending me spam]

reinux — Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:42:08 GMT

ScanIAm wrote:

X-POP3-Rcpt: ______>; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 03:36:55 -0400
Received: from [220.190.246.119] (helo=204.174.223.74)
by mail2.domainpeople.com with smtp (Exim 4.52)
id 1Dy2tj-00084C-WF
for 842849147324932807458.98t30970tjl@spamis.info>
Received: from 198 by ee6-xa015.hf072.spamis.net with DAV;
Thu, 28 Jul 2005 00:26:16 +0400
Reply-To: "SPAMIS: Strategic Partnership Against Microsoft Illegal Spam" <______>
Subject: MICROSOFT Planning to Purchase World's Largest Spyware Company to Spam 40,000,000+
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:26:16 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="--869589439072434"

As Originally Reported by the NEW YORK TIMES 06/30/05:

BREAKING NEWS:

MICROSOFT PLANS TO BUY THE WORLD'S LARGEST SPYWARE COMPANY IN AN ATTEMPT TO SPAM 40 MILLION+ COMPUTER USERS WITH MICROSOFT ADS

----- ---- --- -- - -

By Ray Everett-Church / eSecurityPLANET
July 18, 2005

Ray Everett-Church is a principal with PrivacyClue LLC, a privacy consultancy. He is a founder of CAUCE, an anti-spam advocacy group, and he is co-author of ''Internet Privacy for Dummies.''

----- ---- --- -- - -

It's been a bad month for Microsoft's efforts to promote their visions of trustworthiness and authentication in Internet commerce.

Just as the ground began to crumble beneath Microsoft's "Sender ID" email authentication proposal, it was discovered that the Redmond, Wa.-based software giant was considering acquiring Claria, one of the world's most notorious adware and spyware companies.

......

Again, is Microsoft just going to sit around and watch?

THIS came in my email this morning. Ray Everett-Church is the outspoken anti Microsoft-Claria guy. The article was apparently published on July 18. It was confirmed that the story was a rumor on the 10th or 11th.

The full article that was sent to me is here.

This is his work: http://www.everett.org/testimony/senate/

What do you say to that?

in reply to Anti-spam security expert sending me spam