Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 103142	2009-09-13 20:24:00	Unfixable - Quick - Change your O/S	pctek (84)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
809884	2009-09-13 20:24:00	www.stuff.co.nz This annoys me: Sixteen of New Zealand's top 100 computer users, including some banks and government agencies, may be unable to fully protect some of their computers from hackers after Microsoft said it would not patch a fault in the Windows 2000 operating system. Microsoft said it could not patch Windows 2000 without rewriting a significant portion of the operating system. Hackers should not be able to exploit the vulnerability via internet-based threats if computers were sitting behind a firewall, which would be standard practice. But companies should consider speeding up upgrades to other operating systems, if they were not already under way, he says. The operating system was not marketed to consumers. Note the important bit: Hackers should not be able to exploit the vulnerability via internet-based threats if computers were sitting behind a firewall, which would be standard practice. And a business probably should upgrade, but there are loads of home users using it.	pctek (84)
809885	2009-09-13 21:17:00	www.stuff.co.nz This annoys me: Sixteen of New Zealand's top 100 computer users, including some banks and government agencies, may be unable to fully protect some of their computers from hackers after Microsoft said it would not patch a fault in the Windows 2000 operating system. Microsoft said it could not patch Windows 2000 without rewriting a significant portion of the operating system. Hackers should not be able to exploit the vulnerability via internet-based threats if computers were sitting behind a firewall, which would be standard practice. But companies should consider speeding up upgrades to other operating systems, if they were not already under way, he says. The operating system was not marketed to consumers. Note the important bit: Hackers should not be able to exploit the vulnerability via internet-based threats if computers were sitting behind a firewall, which would be standard practice. And a business probably should upgrade, but there are loads of home users using it. It's regrettable that we're forced to protect ourselves against such threats, but that's the world we live in unfortunately; I personally don't have much sympathy for anyone at home still using Win 2000, and absolutely none for businesses. If you can't afford XP/Vista, then get a Linux distro. To carry on blithely using a deprecated O/S is just burying your head in the sand IMHO. And telling people they're safe behind a firewall is crazy talk - most home firewalls I see are so open they're not worth the RAM they're sitting on. People get sick of all the nagging pop-ups, so just allow everything full access! :waughh:	nofam (9009)
809886	2009-09-13 22:50:00	^ x2	johcar (6283)
809887	2009-09-13 22:57:00	Noted:- :-) But then I hear it may take a while to upgrade your operating system. A worthwhile read here. computerworld.co.nz	Sweep (90)
809888	2009-09-13 23:09:00	There's still a choice - personally I would rather do the clean install upgrade path. Less hassles, and I get to clear out all the junk that inevitably accumulates over time. I'll be disappointed to lose a couple of useful programs I have downloaded from Giveaway of the Day though - might even go buy them for after the upgrade!!	johcar (6283)
809889	2009-09-13 23:14:00	I too agree that a clean install of a new O/S is the best way rather than an upgrade of the current O/S.	Sweep (90)
809890	2009-09-13 23:15:00	Windows 2000 is a bit like 98SE its now abandonware. I am using G Chrome as a browser and I am hanging out for their os.	prefect (6291)
809891	2009-09-13 23:32:00	To carry on blithely using a deprecated O/S is just burying your head in the sand IMHO. So - that's it for MicroSoft? RIP ;)	R2x1 (4628)
809892	2009-09-14 00:07:00	And telling people they're safe behind a firewall is crazy talk I must be "unprotected" then, because while I do install SPs on my own system I never get the updates. Oh look - no malware or problems on my PC. Gee, how odd.	pctek (84)
809893	2009-09-14 01:02:00	I must be "unprotected" then, because while I do install SPs on my own system I never get the updates . Oh look - no malware or problems on my PC . Gee, how odd . Yes, but you're not exactly clueless about firewalls PCT ;) It's the same reason that Vista's UAC doesn't work; most people just want a PC that's easy and simple to use, so they have a very low tolerance for (annoying) pop-ups . Not to mention that most people wouldn't have a clue about what processes to allow/disallow anyway . I've said before on here that, for the majority of standard users, client-based software firewalls are largely a waste of time and I still stand by that . Fire away . . . . :D	nofam (9009)
1 2