Re: Windows XP starts slow.
From: Chuck (none_at_example.net)
Date: 07/01/04
- Next message: Zorbtion: "RE: user account crashes"
- Previous message: Zorbtion: "RE: RAM upgrade"
- In reply to: Gerry Cornell: "Re: Windows XP starts slow."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 30 Jun 2004 20:12:21 -0500
On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 01:27:16 +0100, "Gerry Cornell" <gcjc@btinternet.com> wrote:
>Chuck
>
>I may agree with some of the underlying points you make but the way you put
>your message across in your latest post is not persuasive. You prefer to be
>a participant in newsgroups who adopts anonymity and makes it difficult for
>others to contact them. You think others should follow your example. On the
>other hand, because my priorities and values are different to yours, I have
>taken a decision that I should do the opposite by letting people know who I
>am and how they may contact me. I am not advocating that others should do
>as I do. They need to decide which approach suits their situation. Henry
>Ford decided many years ago that all his customers should have a black car.
>That type of thinking went out of fashion in the 1950s.
>
>I thought I had explained my position in my previous post. However, your
>further message indicates that clarification is needed. I do not think I am
>foolish. I am not sure that you are wise to call someone foolish who you
>wish to persuade to your point of view.
>
>For someone new to computers and the internet what you suggest may help at
>this precise moment in time. However, what makes sense now may not do so in
>3 / 6 months. Many ISPs have introduced spam barriers. After the initial
>settling down period, I assess mine to be something like 95% effective. The
>only problem, if you are getting a lot of incoming spam, is that it takes a
>little longer to scan the content of a wanted folder and trash bin to check
>that each message is in the correct folder. Of course there are many ISPs
>not providing this service. Many more are likely to either change or go out
>of business within 6 months ( a guess on my part ).
>
>I share your concern about the ease with which viruses are spread. However,
>spam is a distraction and a nuisance and not a priority in any campaign to
>control and eliminate the damage viruses cause. The message, which needs to
>be put across to new and less experienced users, is the importance of making
>their system secure, how this can be best achieved and the risks they run if
>they fail to do so.
>
>If you wish to help users to avoid virus infection do so so. If you wish to
>help less experienced users cope with spam do so. If you wish to help users
>avoid / reduce infestation by spyware do so. Each of these causes is worth
>promoting. However, all are complicated, difficult to explain in clear and
>concise terms and difficult for many users to absorb and apply. I think your
>efforts may be more effective if you do not promote more than one cause in
>the same message. You might also give thought about who it is you wish to
>influence. Only once in 6 years has my system been compromised. Give people
>choices. Promoting munging to the exclusion of other solutions may not get
>the best results
>
>A final thought on spam. I am not sure persuading any user to take measures
>to deal with spam is necessary. The need to do so has been well publicised
>and the results of not doing so are so obvious that, if any user has a
>problem, then they are only interested in the most effective of dealing with
>it. The why is not a consideration! In other words deal with the problem
>when the other person is most receptive. The last point would be
>inappropriate with regard to virus protection.
Gerry,
Your points are well made.
As soon as munging becomes no longer necessary (Dear God, may that day come
while I live) I will immediately change that advice. I suspect there are many
others who will do likewise.
Until that time, I will include information about munging, as part of any
technical advice which I may be able to provide, whenever appropriate. Some may
understand, agree with me, and start munging. Others may not.
If you are offended by this strategy, so be it. Some who agree with me may use
more offensive advice still.
Cheers,
Chuck
Paranoia comes from experience - and is not necessarily a bad thing.
- Next message: Zorbtion: "RE: user account crashes"
- Previous message: Zorbtion: "RE: RAM upgrade"
- In reply to: Gerry Cornell: "Re: Windows XP starts slow."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
