Re: How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- From: "smerf" <smerf@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 03:48:32 -0400
"Tim Roberts" <timr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ut01j250k25cafo61a7due357k9ojc44pk@xxxxxxxxxx
"smerf" <smerf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
IMHO, this is just another way that Microsoft is increasing its monopoly
of
the desktop. First, they don't release all of the OS APIs - except to
thier
internal applications developers and "select" Microsoft Partners.
If you have proof of this, you are welcome to file a lawsuit. If not,
then
this is just libel.
I'm looking into it.
Now, they are locking people out of 3rd party methods that help to protect
us (like Spysweeper and AVG).
Without kernel hooking, there is much less NEED for 3rd party methods like
Spysweeper and AVG. I view PatchGuard as an eminently good thing.
May I then assume that you will not be using anti-malware applications with
Vista?
Are you really that confident in Microsoft's kung-fu....or simply kissing up
because your company is a "Microsoft Certified Partner"?
They are also blocking graphics hooks that make apps
like VNC a viable alternative to the Windows-only Remote Desktop (which is
not on all versions of Windows).
Says who? It's true that the new display driver model is so entirely
different that it will take people some time to figure out how to do hooks
like this. However, VNC works perfectly well without a mirror driver, and
that method will continue to work with Vista.
Seeing as how your company pretends to know a little about graphics ("our
forte is Windows hardware and software development and Internetworking, we
enjoy working on a diverse range of projects. We've written graphics
drivers, video codecs, mail programs, benchmarks, debuggers, installation
scripts, and application programs. We've designed award winning graphics
accelerators, video capture cards, ASICs, FPGAs, bit-slice computers, and
test & measurement equipment. "), you should be fired for making such a
plainly false statement in public and attaching your company's name to the
post.
VNC does not "work perfectly well" without a mirror driver. It is kludgy
and slow as hell when compared to running with a mirror driver. Nobody that
I know considers severely reduced performance "perfectly well".
Nope. This is just another example of Microsoft forcing others to use
methods in the OS that offer less performance than say RDP. Its a nice way
to kill off your competition....lock them out of the OS.
Microsoft is taking a page from President Bush here. In the name of safety,
they remove the freedom to innovate from 3rd parties and give themselves
more power than ever (while claiming that right for themselves in courts
around the world). Those that would trade liberty for safety deserve (and
will have) niether.
REALbasic + Linux is looking better and better.
Absolutely nothing is preventing you from following this path right now.
As if I'm not.....
--
- Tim Roberts, timr@xxxxxxxxx
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
You design that webpage yourself there Tim?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- From: Tim Roberts
- Re: How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- From: Alexander Grigoriev
- Re: How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- From: David Jones
- Re: How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- References:
- How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- From: smerf
- Re: How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- From: Don Burn
- Re: How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- From: smerf
- Re: How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- From: Tim Roberts
- How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- Prev by Date: Re: How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- Next by Date: Re: Detours
- Previous by thread: Re: How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- Next by thread: Re: How will PatchGuard change kernel programming?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading