re: double context menu
Wednesday, April 22, 2009 at 2:34 am
Windows 98 Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by DanTheMan
(140 messages posted)
lol gee wrote alot
we all hate M$ lol
but i cant say much becasue i never uesd ie or outlook
just always had fire fox and opera
On Tuesday, April 21, 2009 at 3:40 pm, gewg_ wrote:
>gewg_ wrote:
>||Yeech. The WORST email program ever created--certainly the LEAST SECURE.
>
>Ms. Eagle wrote:
>|What a lovely greeting, gewg_. 
>
>Well, it doesn't get said *nearly* enough.
>Folks who are still using M$ products--ESPECIALLY those using Win9x--
>should be constantly reminded / made aware
>that the online products that M$ produces
>are the source of the VAST majority of the infections acquired by computer users.
>
>Folks that use Unix-based systems (e.g. OS X, Linux, BSD, Solaris,...)
>have 0.00000001% of the malware problems that Windoze users do.[1]
>cache of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_computer_viruses
>
>...and even those who still use Windoze but use *online apps* OTHER THAN M$'s,
>suffer MUCH less than their still-TOTALLY-mired-in-M$ brethren.
>
>Of course, the main threat comes from Internet Exploder
>(M$'s highly-insecure non-standards-compliant Web browser
>--which professional Web developers despise)
>and, of course, the versions that will work under Win9x are the WORST of that lot.
>
>IE appears on EVERY list of the world's WORST software,
>for example this one.
>(With its wide proliferation and corresponding swath of damage,
>I don't understand why IE isn't scored WORSE on that list than #8.)
>
>
>The **biggest** problem with Outbreaks In Excess
>is its bindings to Internet Exploder to render HTML.
>Once that happens (and it happens for MANY things
>that folks wouldn't think requires using a browser),
>you have an open wound waiting to be infected.
>...and with IE being deeply integrated into Windoze
>(without due consideration for the security implications),
>THE WHOLE COMPUTER is vulnerable.
>
>There are also other security flaws within Outbreaks In Excess.
>THOSE WILL **NEVER** BE FIXED EITHER
>--especially not for those versions that will run under Win9x.
>
>OTOH, there are zero-cost
>replacements for the M$ apps
>which are MUCH more
>secure than any of the M$ stuff
>--again, ESPECIALLY stuff that will run under Win9x.
>
>There are 2 widely-used suites,
>either of which will replace BOTH of those dangerous M$ apps.
>http://www.seamonkey-project.org[2]
>http://www.opera.com/download/index.dml?platform=windows
>
>These will easily import your data from your old apps
>and you can pick up right where you left off.
>
>There are also individual apps to replace Internet Exploder
>cache of http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/all-older.html
>
>and to replace Outbreaks In Excess
>cache of http://www.mozillamessaging.com/thunderbird/all.html
>
>Again, these will easily import your data from your old app.
>
>NOTE: I have linked to the OLD versions of those Mozilla apps
>because Firefox 3 and Thunderbird 3 (the most-recent versions)
>will NOT work under Windows 98.
>(Well, not without some additional third-party OS tweaks.)
>
>All of these apps are under **active** development
>and QUICKLY receive security dates after any flaws are found.
>There are also NUMEROUS 21st-Century enhancements that make those a joy.
>
>...and that is far from the full list of email apps that will run under Windows
98:
>href="http://google.com/search?q=cache:-JfDm911sKYJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_e-mail_clients+Microsoft.Windows+Thunderbird+GPL+utc+proprietary-*+utc+Opera.Mail+utc+Evolution+utc+Pegasus+SeaMonkey.Mail+utc+utc+utc+utc+Zimbra+utc+utc+utc+Claws#General">
>cache of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_e-mail_clients#General
>(For more details, scroll down to the Operating System Support section.)
>
>
>[1] ...and the old "High-profile" vs "Security Through Obscurity" claim
>for why M$ products are so much less secure than non-M$ software
>has been debunked time and again via exemplars:
>
>The Apache web server software is the most-used Web server software
>and the number of exploits against it
>are DWARFED by the number of exploits against IIS
>(Microsoft's Internet Information Server software).
>
>The Berkely Internet Name Daemon is the most-used DNS server software
>and, again, the number of exploits against BIND
>are DWARFED by the number of exploits against Microsoft's DNS software.
>http://google.com/search?q=site:us-cert.gov+Exploits+Apache+OR+BIND
>
>The problem with Microsoft products is that they are DEFECTIVE BY DESIGN.
>
>I should also mention that both of those most-popular apps are Free Software
>and that having their source code freely available to hack
>*doesn't* adversely affect their security in the real world.
>
>
>[2] SeaMonkey also offers a chat client which can *optionally* be installed
>and an HTML editor that's in there as a bonus (while adding no real bloat).
|
All messages in this thread [show all]
 | | | |  | re: double context menu (DanTheMan: Wed, Apr 22, 2009, 2:34 am) |
|
