Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 12th Apr 2006 18:30 UTC
Microsoft's dominant Internet Explorer browser has undergone a major security makeover to plug 10 vulnerabilities that puts millions at risk of PC takeover, address bar spoofing and information disclosure attacks. The monster IE update includes a fix for the 'createTextRange()' code execution flaw that caused zero-day drive-by downloads and a significant modification to the way the browser renders certain ActiveX controls. In all, Microsoft shipped five bulletins with patches for 14 different vulnerabilities in a range of Windows products. At the same time Microsoft has begun requesting that users upgrade their ME/98 machines because support ends July 11th, 2006.
Thread beginning with comment 114389
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: A linux user gives credit to Microsoft
by Windows Sucks on Thu 13th Apr 2006 12:44
in reply to "RE: A linux user gives credit to Microsoft"
Member since:2005-11-10
Remember MS doesn’t actually give away patches for old OS's for free, they still support older OS's ONLY because they have enterprise customers who still use them! So they make patches for problems they fix for customers that pay for support and then they give the patches to everyone. If the business customers didn't use 98/ME and still pay for support (Which is waning now) you would not still be getting patches as home users.
And you wonder who is still using 98/ME. I work for the US government and the agency I worked for just went to Windows 2000 two years ago, and would not have done that if it wasn't for security problems with 95/98/ME. They were very happy with 95/98/ME and still have a few 98 machines in the environment!
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-11-11
"WOW! That is about 9 years of free upgrades. How well supported is a 1997/98 version of RedHat, SUSE, or whatever? Microsoft has two things that impress me - long support for a product for free, and binaries from ages ago still run on a recent version of Windows. Many old Dos executables can still run under XP (granted, many don't). Go grab an early Redhat executable and run it on a recent kernel. Glib, what?? "
It cost money to upgrade from one Windows version to the next.
OTOH for Linux, I have upgraded versions countless times for no charge. None.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding (or a deliberate misrepresentation - I'm not sure which) of the situation here.
There is no need whatsoever for a binary executable from circa 1995 to still run on a recent kernel if there is either:
(1) an up-to-date compiled version available from repositories for no charge, or
(2) source code from the early version available (even if it is no longer being actively supported).
For "early Redhat executables" normally both (1) and (2) are readily available. Even then most old binaries will still run on a recent kernel, despite what you claim above ... but if they don't then either option (1) or (2) above should be available (often both are) and the executable is still supported on a recent kernel.
For Windows recent kernels, however, a huge number of binaries from early versions of Windows will not run. And further, in the Windows world, a binary is notmally all that you have for a legacy application, and neither option (1) or (2) above is available.
The real situation is the exact reverse of what you imply. The real situation is that one is far, far more likely to be able to still run an early Linux application on a modern Linux kernel (in one way or another) for no cost than one is able to run an early Windows (or even worse, DOS) application on a modern Windows kernel - for any price.