Jump to content

Hpoonis

Members
  • Content Count

    69
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
    U.K.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The original poster should get some translating assistance as all of this appears to be extremely confounding. It would help others to assist you in this issue. For example, mentioning Microsoft surface tablet 2005 when they clearly didn't start with that device until 2011/2012...and how does that even relate to the original issue?
  2. With every iteration of ms software, it bloats and bloats but fails to really improve. User functionality is reduced at the expense of adding extra garbage that could be eliminated. As for exchange, the end-user couldn't give a toss, they use the mailtool outlook and ANYTHING could be sitting behind that. Since switching to win10 (3 months), I have had 2 instances where my raid1 is re-synchronising. Previously, win7, I had 2 raid1 volumes and no re-synch in 4 years! Currently, it has been running re-synch since 8pm last night (13+ hours). Previously, I removed the mirror and recreated the volumes which was much faster. LVM on Linux synchs WAY faster. Windows and microfart are a closed-system blight on the tech world and the sooner it is up against the wall the better.
  3. Probably about time the world steered away from microspasm anyway.
  4. I don't get it. If the patch has gone last month, presumably this has closed the hole. In which case, how can these systems be exploited if patched?
  5. Specs: (sadly) win10, Ryzen7 3700, 32Gb DDR4, RX3700 (8GB), 1 x 512Gb PCIe4 SSD, 1 x 1TB PCIe4 SSD, 2 x 480GB SSD, 2 x 8TB HDD, 850W PSU, 32" 4K monitor... OS-less, I7 4700K, 16GB DDR3, 240GB SSD, 750GB HDD, 4 x 3TB HDD, R9 370... Sorry, were we comparing genitalia?
  6. I have a local account. I do not use online anytihng for this win10 debacle. I have SHUTUP switch off almost everything. I have no one drive, I have no microsoft accounts. microspasm have, over the years, clearly demonstrated their mistrust, disgust and lack of customer service for the very people who made them the global garbage patch they now are. As for a Linux recommendation, clearly, the front runner for new folk is Ubuntu. The GUI has evolved vastly over the years, it is stable, useful and easy to get to grips with. The standard desktop version contains all the workable software you would likely need. Installing more software is a doddle and there is a world of passionate, dedicated expert-like folk who will gladly offer any free assistance. There is NO activating online. There is (almost) no snooping - firefox, etc will have crash report info sent off but these things can easily be disabled. Almost everything you could want will be available as Open Source or GPL, etc so no worries about purchasing things. Virtualisation runs far better on the Linux platform than windows via KVM/QEMU. The only caveat that I have encountered is that cut/paste between host/guest and shared folders are a bit trickier to set up than would be the case with a windows setup. However, if you don't want a more hardware-centric virtualisation then you can still employ virtualbox which operates as well as virtualbox does anywhere. Software development tools do NOT require 10Gb or more of install as one gets with visual studio. By the same token, no registration is required such as microspasm force one into so they can spy on more of your activities. If one is a non-gaming user, Linux is ideal. If one is a business user, it could also be ideal but for the fact that the bulk of businesses use BackOffice tools - especially exchange/outlook; the latter of which has been altered so it is not so user-friendly any longer. I was weaned on UNIX (SYSV) and have been a ms/windows tech-type since MSDOS 3.x and windows 3. With every subsequent release, I have disliked windows less and UNIX-like more. The day windows is history will be a glorious day for the whole world! P.S. Once you feel confident enough you can even recompile your Linux kernel to streamline it to your tastes and speed-up your boot times. Personally, I have not recompiled a kernel since using Slakware but it is fun to try and would take far less time today than the 4-7 hours it used to take using pre-pentium intel chips back in 1993.
  7. Therein lies the strength of UNIX-like. If a thing is harder to get working, when it craps itself you know where to look and, more often, how to fix it. With microspasm, all you do is click click click and when it goes tits-up there is little or no way for end-users to fix it. There is a world of difference between treating the end-user like a responsible adult and treating the end-user like moronic cash-cow.
  8. Microsoft are intent on relegating the desktop PC into a -poor child of their crappy surface tablet. There is little or no point in promoting all this geoloating twaddle on a PC which is, for the most part, quite static in its movements. Laptops are not that mobile really, except for business types. Windows 10 is dire, intrusive, bland. If Linux could offer me better gaming options I'd blow windows out the door and not waste a minute more on it.
  9. Actually, you would. I said REPETITIVE. If the software has blocked an address there is absolutely NO reason to be notified that it blocked the same address again and again. If the address has indeed been blocked, what use for notifications? Repeated and similar notifications are redundant, annoying and intrusive. I fail to see the point in reinforcing previous postings just for the sake of posting.
  10. I think this may be the same request as I posted a couple of weeks back: excessive pop-ups regading the same addresses. Whatever you may say, it WOULD be most useful fo the end-user to be able to limit repetitive notifications for a specific, or base address.
  11. I had a power outage at home and when power was restored my bios clock had reset. The date difference causes Smart Security, etc to flag all websites, certificates, etc as invalid. It took me some clicks to realise it was the clock that was the problem. However, now a few sites do not show images or comments, etc as I had blocked a few things which looked suspicious and ESET declared were invalid/unknown certificates but were not. It would be a good idea to clearly indicate that the clock may be the problem (time synchronisation). This surely cannot be a problem to achieve if the ESET software can figure out that a datestamp for a certificate may be out of synch. As an aside, how do I now fix the blocked links I previously clicked?
×
×
  • Create New...