Re: file downloads
- From: "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 18:51:57 -0400
You do mean, of course, that you BOUGHT WinRar, then installed. It IS NOT
free.
I think that is exactly what the O/P has done. He got a file from a warez
site and now he doesn't know what to do with it! Serves him right!
--
Regards,
Richard Urban
aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard :-)
If you knew as much as you thought you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
"Stephen Harris" <cyberguard1048-usenet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:UrW8e.462$Xb4.221@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Gordon" <gordonbp1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:e17ZUIFRFHA.2972@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Stephen Harris wrote:
>>> The mature, intelligent, experienced, and competent provider of
>>> computer services to the public realizes that the public's questions
>>> require interpretation and education rather than ridicule.
>>
>> Well I for one would NEVER download a file that I didn't know how to
>> open.
>>
>> --
>> Gordon Burgess-Parker
>> Interim Systems and Management Accounting
>> www.gbpcomputing.co.uk
>
> That is your right to decide that policy. But, why would you think you
> should recommend that policy to somebody else, much less ridicule
> somebody else who uses a sensible policy??
>
> I'll give you a recent example. I wanted to use Xemacs which is a super
> editor that has been ported from linux to windows xp. There are two
> versions, a native and one which uses cygwin. The advantage is that it
> is free and is excellent with rendering math equations (better than Word).
>
> I've downloaded other linux ports from respectable distributors and
> they often use a .gz extension for compression. I used Winzip to open
> the files. Now at either the cygwin site or xemacs site, there was a
> current port of Xemacs to win xp. The file extension was .tgz , so I
> didn't know winzip would open it. But I think the correct policy is
> to cross that bridge when you come to it, not to decide to "NEVER"
> download the file because one isn't sure how it is opened. You seem
> to assume that there is a risk that you can't open a file, that this is
> the
> same as a risk that the file is contaminated. I think to implement an
> efficient policy, one just needs to be fairly certain that the file is
> secure.
>
> Winzip failed to decompress the .tgz file.
> So I could have looked up the ".tgz" extension and seen that Winrar
> would open it on some enclyclopedia of file extensions. Instead I
> just downloaded Winrar because I figured it was likely to handle
> .tgz compression. And Winrar worked.
>
> File downloads, the term, is not like email attachments where you
> don't know the source of the attachement or it is more risky.
> File downloads from a reliable source do not require knowing that
> you can open the file format. It is inefficient to research this before
> downloading a file from a reputable source. It is not even worth the
> time to see what the default file extensions for win xp are. It is
> quite safe to open files from trusted sites without knowing what
> program is going to open it or even that it might require another
> program to read that file. An unknown file type is not the same thing
> as a file with a mysterious origin. Crackers put their virus in known
> file types like .dbx not .crk unless they have your level of expertise.
>
>
.
- References:
- file downloads
- From: Richard Mahan Sr
- Re: file downloads
- From: Haggis
- Re: file downloads
- From: Gordon
- Re: file downloads
- From: Stephen Harris
- Re: file downloads
- From: Gordon
- Re: file downloads
- From: Stephen Harris
- file downloads
- Prev by Date: Re: Installation of New Software
- Next by Date: RE: Usb Mp3 trouble
- Previous by thread: Re: file downloads
- Next by thread: Re: file downloads
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
