HOME

No14- -Give us XP Professional for professionals By Jason BrookseWEEK November 19, 2001 5:34 AM PT
COMMENTARY-- The thrilling reign of Windows XP is barely a month old, so why am I spending all my time fiddling with a desktop box running Red Hat 7.2? For one thing, the launch of Redmond's newest PC conquistador just happened to coincide with an initiative here at Ziff Davis to provide server-based access to messaging and network resources via a Citrix client. As a result, my key applications now work identically under Windows, Linuxor, for that matter, pretty much any operating system. With those interoperability factors resolved, I suppose I just prefer the, if you will, Linux and KDE eXPerience. Multitasking with a windowing operating system is a much less cluttered affair with multiple virtual desktops, a Linux standby not found in Windows. And while the GUI was a great usability advance, the trusty command line is, in some cases, the best place to get things done. In Linux, the command line is nearer the surface and much more tightly tied to the interface than it is in Windows. Now, the best thing I can say about Windows XP is that it works, and while this may sound like a backhanded compliment, "just working" is the single most important feature of a mass-market product. In its quest to place a licensed copy of Windows into the hands of every man, woman and child in the world, Microsoft has pushed a consistent, hand-holding interface across all its products. The trouble with this appliancelike, "McOperating System" approach is that it leaves the hackers and tweakers of the world looking elsewhere for their OS. These are the people who are socked away inventing the next generation of killer applications, which, through the process of tech-world trickledown, will end up making money for big companies. Windows has a hammerlock on today's most relied-upon applications, but troll the Web, and the ambition and inventiveness now at work in the open-source developer community is palpable. Microsoft has been working to capture the enthusiasm of the world's developers. I suggest that the best way to evangelize to these budding innovators is to put a version of Windows on their desks that doesn't belong alongside a Happy Meal.

That is microsoft for you having
a big party over the Y2K. And they
didn't do a good job at it either.

This page was last updated
on 11/20/2001 at 4:30 PM
EST By Mr BOOTS

No15- -AMD has announced the availability of the Athlon XP 1900+ processor. Running at 1.6 GHz, AMD's flagship chip competes directly with Intel's fastest designs. If high-end computing performance at a great price interests you, read on to see how the Athlon XP 1900+ compares. The testing setup TechTV Labs built an Athlon reference box based around the EPoX EP-8KHA+ motherboard featuring VIA's new Apollo KT266A chipset. We filled the board with 256MB (2x128MB) of double data rate (DDR) memory, a GeForce2 Ultra 64MB (DDR), and a 20GB ATA/100 hard drive (7200 rpm). We ran our benchmarks using the de facto OpenGL benchmark (id software's "Quake III" v1.17) and part of Ziff-Davis Media's 2001 benchmarking suite. All benchmark applications were patched and run at their highest quality and color settings. Each system received a fresh coat of Windows XP Pro and the latest Nvidia reference drivers. Is it the fastest? We already knew that Athlon processors tested well in content creation and business application benchmarks such as BAPCo's SYSmark2001. Currently, SYSmark2001 will not function properly under Windows XP. This left us with ZD's Content Creation and Business Winstone 2001 as our productivity benchmarks. So how does the Athlon XP 1900+ compare to the Pentium 4 2-GHz part? With ZD's Content Creation test, the Athlon outscored the Pentium 87.4 to 65.2 -- a respectable 34 percent. Compared to AMD's 1800 chip, the Athlon XP 1900+ was 8 percent faster using the same motherboard. ZD Media's Business Winstone 2001 results were even more impressive. Again, the 1900+ came out on top 65.5 to 46.1 -- 42 percent faster. Compared to AMD's 1800, the 1900+ was 6 percent faster. Until now, id software's "Quake 3" has been a weak point in the comparison between the Pentium 4 and the Athlon XP series. While not exactly blowing the Pentium 4 out of the water, the Athlon XP 1900+ managed a statistically insignificant frame rate victory at every resolution. In terms of OpenGL performance, AMD and Intel appear to be equal. The Athlon XP 1900+ delivered performance equal to or greater than Intel's fastest, while costing $130 less. Factor in that DDR memory is about half the price of Rambus memory, and workstation-class computing suddenly becomes a norm. Do we want it? Our biggest concern with the AMD platform is compatibility. Improvements in motherboard design have removed much of the agony of Athlon ownership, but issues remain. The Athlon XP 1900+ we received would not function properly with the motherboard that comfortably ran our XP 1800 -- the latest BIOS updates were used. The new motherboard not only ran both processors without a problem, but the updated board offered better performance for "older" AMD processors as well. With the performance crown in hand, TechTV Labs hopes to see continued improvements in the motherboard designs that support AMD processors. The latest main board designs offer the best compatibility we have yet seen and will help encourage users to give the platform a try. Even more performance may be just around the corner once the AMD/Nvidia designed "nForce" motherboards begin shipping later this year. Enhanced DDR memory management and integrated GeForce2 graphics make the upcoming nForce motherboard one to keep on the radar. Summary: AMD's Athlon XP 1900 is the fastest Windows CPU TechTV Labs has ever seen. Pros: Productivity performance; price. Cons: Motherboard issues. Company: Advanced Micro Devices Price: $269 Available: Available now Category: CPU Platform: 32-bit; x86-based Specs: 1.6-GHz, x86-based processor Requirements: VIA KT266A chipset-based motherboard

No16- - Windows XP urban legends and myths--debunked! David Coursey,Executive Editor, AnchorDeskWednesday, October 24, 2001 Hello from New York City, where the Marriott Marquis theater will host tomorrow's formal introduction of Windows XP. Amid tightened security--make sure you have two photo IDs--Microsoft is doing its best to whip the media, especially the non-tech media, into a Starbucks-quality foam. And just in case Microsoft can't do it alone, they've hired recording artist Sting to do a concert on Thursday immediately following the XP introduction event. THOUGH WINDOWS XP isn't even in stores yet--excepting the hardware on which it's been preinstalled--it's already spawned an urban legend or two. Urban legends are scary or cautionary tales with some basis in fact upon which an elaborate fiction is built. Not surprisingly, Microsoft's Windows XP product activation--an unpopular and controversial means of cracking down on casual software piracy--is the basis for one of these legends, which also draws on Microsoft's plan to sell software on a subscription basis at some time in the future. I generally receive this urban legend as a question: "Can Microsoft 'turn off' my software? Will they disable Windows XP when I'm ready to upgrade to something else?" Or as a bewildered statement: "I've heard Windows XP expires at some point and you'll force me to buy new software." AS IT STANDS, Microsoft has ended support for some older software. As a result, the user fear boils down to this: If (and when) Microsoft decides to create the successor to XP, they might either (1) turn off the XP I'm already using in an effort to force me to upgrade, or (2) stop providing activation codes to XP users, essentially rendering it unusable. Microsoft says it's a baseless fear--they can't and won't do the things described. But just as some urban legends are hard to absolutely disprove, I guess we will never be sure about this one until Microsoft is ready to phase out Windows XP, the way it already has with Windows 3.x and Windows 95. Since Microsoft's End-User License Agreement doesn't provide for this, I can't imagine it happening. Still, I've gone to Microsoft for the official word, here presented by Mark Croft, a lead product manager on the XP team. According to Croft, Windows Product Activation has a 30-day grace period during which the user must activate that copy of Windows. If the user hasn't activated by the 30th day, they'll be able to boot their PC but won't be able to launch Windows without first calling to activate their copy of the product. If users activate XP prior to the 30th day, they may do so online or via phone, said Croft. "Also," said Croft, "there is no mechanism for Microsoft to 'reach out' and turn off (or otherwise change) user's Windows installations. The activation period is simply a local counter on the installed PC." Here are some more activation-related questions, with answers also provided by Microsoft's Croft. I work in corporate IS. How does activation affect me? Do I need a separate install disk for each computer? "No. Beginning with a minimum of five PCs, corporate customers may take advantage of Microsoft's volume licensing programs. For these customers, Microsoft will provide a Volume License Product Key that allows users to bypass product activation. Customers can then use Microsoft's documented deployment tools, such as Custom Installation Wizard (CIW) in Office XP and unattended setup in Windows XP, to automate product key entry into network and custom CD install images, so that end users are never prompted to enter a product key during product installation." I like to rebuild my computer occasionally--wipe the hard drive and reinstall the OS. Will I have to call Microsoft for an activation code each time? "No. If the hardware remains the same, then Product Activation will generate the same key that will map exactly to the existing key held at the clearinghouse--so users can just use the Web-based activation. No call required. Also, if the PC came with XP pre-installed (via an OEM), then activation only inspects part of the BIOS--so the user can wipe-and-load and change all the hardware (except the BIOS) without needing to call. "If the PC has been upgraded using retail media and hardware gets changed, then the technical market bulletin located here documents the hardware changes that may be made before triggering the need to reactivate. "To summarize, if the PC is not dockable and a network adapter exists and is not changed, six or more of the 10 components (see the link above for the 10 components) must be changed before reactivation is required. If a network adapter existed but is changed (or never existed at all), modifying four or more of the 10 components will result in a need to reactivate. "Microsoft has also recognized that certain users may wish to change components frequently. As a result, Microsoft recently implemented time-based reactivation. Every 120 days, the current configuration of a user's PC will 'reset to zero,' so to speak. Starting from that 120th day, users may swap out hardware components as described above. After another 120 days passes, the PC 'sets to zero' again, and users once again may swap out hardware components. This time-based reactivation is designed to provide users with greater flexibility to change their systems." What happens if my hard drive fails and I need to reinstall the OS? How much questioning will I have to undergo before you let me activate again? "No questioning should be involved, as no call should be required. All you'll need is Web-based reactivation. The new hard drive will mean the activation key has been modified, but it will compare within tolerance with the existing key on the Clearinghouse. Also, if a user does call, Microsoft will always err on the side of the user. If you provide to the support representative a simple explanation of why you need to reactivate, that should suffice." (Back to you, David.) Will Windows XP be compatible with my old software? I am becoming concerned about Windows XP compatibility with older applications, especially games and DOS apps. This is based on some reader feedback I have received from people who find that XP won't work with some of their more ancient--but still important--applications. While Microsoft has done lots of compatibility testing, if you are dependent on some old apps, then I'd want to make sure they really do run under XP before upgrading. And every upgrader should download and run Microsoft's free Upgrade Advisor before spending his or her money for an OS that may still lack drivers for some hardware or not work with certain apps--the Adaptec/Roxio Easy CD Creator is a prime example. Note from David: Join AnchorDesk, ZDNet News, and CNET Radio and Broadband tomorrow for complete coverage of the Microsoft XP announcement. I'll be on the scene in New York and will have a report on the festivities in Friday's edition of AnchorDesk; I'll also be providing some radio reports throughout the day tomorrow. Do you think fears about Windows XP really are urban legends--or are they justified, based on past MS experience? TalkBack to me.

This is BubbaBear he is looking for his
Software. Do tell him this is the wrong
kind of software, they are talking about
the software from his computer.

This page was last updated on
12/2/2001 at 11:50 AM EST By
Mr BOOTS

No17- -Q: Windows Media Player security vulnerability found! A: One of the streaming media formats supported by Windows Media Player is Advanced Streaming Format (ASF). A security vulnerability has been discovered in Windows Media Player that allows malicious code to be embedded in an ASF file that could give user level access to a remote user. The affected versions are:Windows Media Player 6.4 Windows Media Player 7 Windows Media Player 7.1 Windows Media Player for Windows XP A patch has been made available by Microsoft that fixes the vulnerablity. Download locations for this patch for Windows Media Player 6.4, 7, or 7.1:http://download.microsoft.com/download/winmediaplayer/Update/308567/WIN98MeXP/EN-US/wm308567.exe For Windows Media Player for Windows XP use http://windowsupdate.com Answered by: Ken Colburn No17- -XP requires load of patches, but beware of automatic updates Nov 5, 2001John McCormick Author's Bio | E-Mail | Archive On Oct 25, 2001, Microsoft pulled out all the stops in launching Windows XP in New York City. The following day, it was announced that around 20 MB of patches and updates for Windows XP Professional (around 12 MB for the Home Edition) were already available for download directly from Microsoft. While these patches are important for XP users, the way in which Microsoft prefers to deliver themusing Windows Updatehas dubious value for IT departments. It is quite easy to download and install these patches using the Windows Update service; however, it is cumbersome and challenging to locate, download, and then install the XP patches on an individual basis. While you may think I am nitpicking, the difference between the former and the latter approach is the difference between a push and a pull update. Im going to show you whats in the XP update, and then Im going to tell you why you should opt for the pull rather than the push method of applying it. What's covered by the update? If you have new PCs with XP installed or have already installed or ordered the OS upgrade for some of your machines, this update is not something to ignore. Although some of the downloads are probably not applicable to businessesfor instance, Windows Movie Maker requires a 3.2-MB download to run properlyother pieces of the update have important security implications. The most important download is a 1.9-MB patch needed to fix a security hole in Internet Explorer 6. There is also a 5.2-MB download that fixes a vulnerability in Microsoft Virtual Machine. Other problems addressed by the downloads include incompatibilities with some UPS units, an upgrade to the CD-R utilities, a 2.2-MB download to improve third-party software compatibility, and several other downloads that are probably necessary for most businesses running XP. Automatic updates may spell trouble Over the past few months, there has been a lot of talk about Windows XPs Product Activation feature, which forces users to lock each XP copy to specific hardware (unless you purchase a corporate volume license). However, with XP, Microsoft is advancing an older but potentially more onerous technology even harder: Windows Update. For business networks, Windows Update means a change from pull to push technology for systems updates and patches. This poses a major threat to both corporate security and to system stability and usability. With Windows Update, Microsoft gives users the option of having their OS automatically find, accept, and install patches and updates downloaded from the Microsoft Windows Update Web site. With Windows XP, this feature is intertwined with the OS even further than in past versions of Windows. In fact, its much more difficult and cumbersome to find and download the needed patches for XP mentioned above than it is to use the Windows Update feature. But in my opinion, relying on Windows Update is a very bad idea. Can any security specialist or IT manager concerned with simplifying system maintenance really trust Microsoft to make automatic patches to their systems? If you have any doubts, just recall that the recent Microsoft bulletin MS01-052 was only the latest example of a Microsoft patch where the cure turned out to be worse than the illness. Reasons not to use Windows Update I can think of four very good reasons why you dont want to choose the Windows Update option: The patch itself may be flawed and may not do what it was intended to do. This was the case with the initial MS01-052 W2K patch, which closed down Terminal Services instead of fixing them. Being quick to download and install that patch (the benefit of Windows Update) was not a good move in this case. Microsoft has a long history of releasing patches (and software) that need more in-house testing. Those who adopt push patching will become inadvertent beta testers, and their systems will suffer. Many updates (Microsoft and otherwise) can result in unknown conflicts with other system services, third-party software, or hardware. It is tough enough to deal with this when you discover it through in-house testing. Now consider how much worse it would be if all of your systems got a bad patch simultaneously, and it brought down a large portion of your mission-critical systems. Someone at Microsoft might intentionally or accidentally insert destructive code or perhaps a back door into a patch that is pushed with Windows Update. Microsoft will say that this is farfetched and that it has many layers of protection designed to prevent this, but recall that Microsoft servers have been compromised internally in the past. Also, remember that just last spring, someone who claimed to work for Microsoft was able to obtain fraudulent digital certificates. Many businesses still dont have broadband Internet connections that are shared across every computer in their company. Even if all my other objections are meaningless, consider how much downtime you will experience with periodic large downloads being forced into your PCs. Many Microsoft patches run into the megabytes. Since the download is a background task, this isnt a problem if you are connected to a T-1 pipe, but a couple of multimegabyte downloads can seriously tie up a low-bandwidth connection. Final analysis In a previous column, I took security personnel to task for failing to patch their servers even after several rounds of attacks by the Code Red worm. Nevertheless, automated push patching from Microsoft is definitely not the answer to this problem, even though many managers who dont think through all the implications may jump to adopt this technologyand not just with Windows XP.

This Page was last updated on
12/07/2001 at 11:10AM EST By
Mt BOOTS

This page was last updated on
12/17/01 at 3:66PM EST By
Mr BOOTS

PC- -HELP #14