Guest propman Posted May 21, 2008 Posted May 21, 2008 Dave wrote: <span style="color:blue"> > Here we go again. > You said Vundo 'sucks' . That implies that you have had some experience with this Vundo threat. > I asked you when YOU last saw Vundo have any effect on a Vista installation. > > The Google search you posted contains three separate keywords - vundo vista 2008 > Therefore every page Google finds with these three words on IN ANY ORDER or IN ANY POSITION > will count as a hit.</span> <chuckle> You would think that a poster who has "MS-MVP" as part of his sig, would be more professional than to post results from a Google general search than a Google Advanced search. <span style="color:blue"> > > I read the first few pages of the search results and it is a waste of time trying to find a Vista installation that was > succesfully infected with Vundo.</span> <chuckle>........then why didn't you pop over to Advanced Search and do your own? If you had you would have found entries such as the following: http://www.virtumonde.net/blog/virtumonde/...de-comments-10/ This was the first hit........didn't bother checking out any more of the links 'cause I don't have the time or interest....I'll leave that chore up to your level of interest on the subject. <span style="color:blue"> > > Instead of answering my question you do the usual trick of answering with a useless Google search. > > That tells me you have no knowledge of Vundo on Vista and are just repeating the usual rumours.</span> .............tells me that neither of you rascals took the time to do your research properly.....seems to me that your more interest in participating in a pissing contest than providing real problem solutions. Just ma .02 cents worth. Quote
Guest Shenan Stanley Posted May 21, 2008 Posted May 21, 2008 propman wrote: <snip><span style="color:blue"> > <chuckle> You would think that a poster who has "MS-MVP" as part > of his sig, would be more professional than to post results from a > Google general search than a Google Advanced search.</span> Why? <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> I read the first few pages of the search results and it is a waste >> of time trying to find a Vista installation that was succesfully >> infected with Vundo.</span> > > <chuckle>........then why didn't you pop over to Advanced Search > and do your own? If you had you would have found entries such as > the following: > http://www.virtumonde.net/blog/virtumonde/...de-comments-10/ > > This was the first hit........didn't bother checking out any more > of the links 'cause I don't have the time or interest....I'll leave > that chore up to your level of interest on the subject. > ><span style="color:green"> >> >> Instead of answering my question you do the usual trick of >> answering with a useless Google search. That tells me you have no >> knowledge of Vundo on Vista and are just >> repeating the usual rumours.</span> > > > ............tells me that neither of you rascals took the time to do > your research properly.....seems to me that your more interest in > participating in a pissing contest than providing real problem > solutions. > Just ma .02 cents worth.</span> I believe you should have read my further response before answering. I had nothing to research - so I did none. Whta 'problem' was presented that needed research in this part of the conversation? -- Shenan Stanley MS-MVP -- How To Ask Questions The Smart Way http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html Quote
Guest propman Posted May 21, 2008 Posted May 21, 2008 Shenan Stanley wrote:<span style="color:blue"> > propman wrote: > <snip><span style="color:green"> >> <chuckle> You would think that a poster who has "MS-MVP" as part >> of his sig, would be more professional than to post results from a >> Google general search than a Google Advanced search.</span> > > Why?</span> Duh! <span style="color:blue"> > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> I read the first few pages of the search results and it is a waste >>> of time trying to find a Vista installation that was succesfully >>> infected with Vundo.</span> >> <chuckle>........then why didn't you pop over to Advanced Search >> and do your own? If you had you would have found entries such as >> the following: >> http://www.virtumonde.net/blog/virtumonde/...de-comments-10/ >> >> This was the first hit........didn't bother checking out any more >> of the links 'cause I don't have the time or interest....I'll leave >> that chore up to your level of interest on the subject. >> >><span style="color:darkred"> >>> Instead of answering my question you do the usual trick of >>> answering with a useless Google search. That tells me you have no >>> knowledge of Vundo on Vista and are just >>> repeating the usual rumours.</span> >> >> ............tells me that neither of you rascals took the time to do >> your research properly.....seems to me that your more interest in >> participating in a pissing contest than providing real problem >> solutions. >> Just ma .02 cents worth.</span> > > I believe you should have read my further response before answering. I had > nothing to research - so I did none. > > Whta 'problem' was presented that needed research in this part of the > conversation? > </span> Yeppers....more interested in a pissing contest <plonk> Quote
Guest Shenan Stanley Posted May 21, 2008 Posted May 21, 2008 propman wrote:<span style="color:blue"> > <plonk></span> You use the phrases 'pissing contest' and <chuckle> and I am non-professional? That's ironic - at least. If you are going to accuse someone of being non-professional - it helps to act that way yourself. -- Shenan Stanley MS-MVP -- How To Ask Questions The Smart Way http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html Quote
Guest jim Posted May 21, 2008 Posted May 21, 2008 "Shenan Stanley" <newshelper@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ee%238KGruIHA.4492@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...<span style="color:blue"> > jim wrote: > <snipped><span style="color:green"> >> Then again, an MS-MVPs would have more to gain by shooting the >> messenger of this topic than by discussing it rationally, wouldn't >> they?</span> > > Let me address this seperately... > > I do not care if Microsoft survives as a business past this second. They > could fade into oblivion for all I care. was granted the award because I > happen to help people in a Microsoft newsgroup. There is nothing > nefarious behind it nor does it keep me from saying anything I desire. > Microsoft sucks in a lot of things they do - and I express this whenever I > feel the need. > > I thought I discussed things quite rationally. I would be interested in > you pointing out where my point-counterpoint approach was irrational if > you feel that way.</span> You stated that PC Tools had something to gain by making accusations that Microsoft's products are insecure. While that is certainly true of any Windows based security software vendor, you inferred that they did so in a less-than -honest manner ("Most percentages/statistics are made up to benefit those making up the numbers. When confronted, it is usually difficult for those who made up the numbers to present concrete facts backing them up and usually easy for someone else to bend/make up numbers of their own to the contrary. This is especially true when dealing with things that are difficult to quantify because of the lack of reliable numbers (like the security of an OS versus an older OS and knowing how prevalent those OSs are and what other protections may already be in place that prevent the supposed issues from ever even reaching the OS...))". IMHO, this is irrational considering the number of firms and people (both in and out of Microsoft's pocket) that would call them on this. To do what you suggested is irrational from a business point of view - considering the stink that would surround the company once exposed. Then, you go on to attack me - insinuating that I (for some reason only known to you) would post articles with a less-than-genuine reason into particular newsgroups. This too is irrational. What would be the purpose? And, what has that got to do with the current post? If the current post's logic or facts are in error, please point those things out without diverting to personal attacks upon the poster. You gave a link that listed many many articles to which I have no connection whatsoever. And, you have given no valid reason that a person would waste his/her time posting false warnings to a newsgroup - much less a reason, that you can back up factually, for me doing so. Please stick to the topic at hand if you want a response. If you would like to start a separate thread concerning my postings to the newsgroup, please do so. Remember, the topic is that PCTools reveals Vista to be less secure than Windows 2000 (but more secure than XP). Best regards, jim Quote
Guest Rojo Habe Posted May 22, 2008 Posted May 22, 2008 "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message news:MD0Zj.478$772.115@bignews2.bellsouth.net...<span style="color:blue"> > > You stated that PC Tools had something to gain by making accusations that > Microsoft's products are insecure. While that is certainly true of any > Windows based security software vendor, you inferred that they did so in a > less-than -honest manner</span> No, you inferred it. I believe the word you were looking for is "implied", and having read this thread I don't feel that he implied anything of the sort. Quote
Guest jim Posted May 22, 2008 Posted May 22, 2008 "Rojo Habe" <noem@iladdres.com> wrote in message news:5AA7AF21-619F-4E2F-AD20-895D5C869CCD@microsoft.com...<span style="color:blue"> > > "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message > news:MD0Zj.478$772.115@bignews2.bellsouth.net...<span style="color:green"> >> >> You stated that PC Tools had something to gain by making accusations that >> Microsoft's products are insecure. While that is certainly true of any >> Windows based security software vendor, you inferred that they did so in >> a less-than -honest manner</span> > > No, you inferred it. I believe the word you were looking for is > "implied", and having read this thread I don't feel that he implied > anything of the sort.</span> So, did you not read.... "Most percentages/statistics are made up to benefit those making up the numbers. When confronted, it is usually difficult for those who made up the numbers to present concrete facts backing them up and usually easy for someone else to bend/make up numbers of their own to the contrary. This is especially true when dealing with things that are difficult to quantify because of the lack of reliable numbers (like the security of an OS versus an older OS and knowing how prevalent those OSes are and what other protections may already be in place that prevent the supposed issues from ever even reaching the OS...)" ...in his post, or did you just prefer to ignore it? jim Quote
Guest Rojo Habe Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message news:I0nZj.13913$hv2.4310@bignews5.bellsouth.net...<span style="color:blue"> ></span> <span style="color:blue"> > So, did you not read.... > > "Most percentages/statistics are made up to benefit those making up the > numbers. When confronted, it is usually difficult for those who made up > the > numbers to present concrete facts backing them up and usually easy for > someone else to bend/make up numbers of their own to the contrary. This > is > especially true when dealing with things that are difficult to quantify > because of the lack of reliable numbers (like the security of an OS versus > an older OS and knowing how prevalent those OSes are and what other > protections may already be in place that prevent the supposed issues from > ever even reaching the OS...)" > > ...in his post, or did you just prefer to ignore it? > > jim > ></span> There's nothing there to imply anybody's being "less than honest". They're just doing what all businesses do and interpreting stats to suit their own ends. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.