DevilsPGD wrote:[color=blue]
> In message <fggsc7$8tj$1@aioe.org> The poster formerly known as 'The
> Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy' <none@none.not> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> IMO, with vista it seems like they are trying to hoist all of the
>> responsibility for security on the user instead of trying to actually
>> fix the problems. It's like they are using the wrong kind of bandaid
>> fix for it.[/color]
>
> Unfortunately, the user *IS* the problem. Out of the box, XP SP2 is
> more or less fully secure to sit on the internet, and once you turn on
> automatic updates and run as a limited user, you're more or less secure
> as well.
>
> The problem is that users don't do that, they run attachments from
> unknown/untrusted sources, install ActiveX controls at a whim, run as
> full administrator, and then act surprised when their PC gets
> compromised.
>[/color]

MS could still use a better method than only to try to heap it all on
the user.

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
[url]http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html[/url]

"Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on
free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of the
creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country. Consumer
rights in the digital age are not frivolous."
- Maura Corbett