Troll Board
If your post ended up here, it was off-topic, uninteresting, unoriginal, unargumented and / or not funny enough. In other words, congratulations, you're a troll.
My own posts that are on this board were kept here to balance the trolling a little.
Let the troll board begin:
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 197033
http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/facts
http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/facts
That URL contains far more bullshit than the Oracle article..
7/26/2004 5:59 AM | nofool
7/26/2004 5:59 AM | nofool
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 197085
Guys, before anyone posts anymore comments here please look at the bottom of this site and see what it's being served on (ASP.NET). That made it more clear to me why there is all of this MicroShaft propaganda on this site.
7/26/2004 7:21 AM | Doesn't matter.
Guys, before anyone posts anymore comments here please look at the bottom of this site and see what it's being served on (ASP.NET). That made it more clear to me why there is all of this MicroShaft propaganda on this site.
7/26/2004 7:21 AM | Doesn't matter.
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 197133
Too funny! Quoting the Get The Facts pages as "proof" of TCO equality is a farce. Obviously, Microsoft funded the TCO study and surprise! it came out in their favour. Who runs Linux on a mainframe for file serving? In any case, you can run PHP on IIS. I know, because I do.
7/26/2004 8:04 AM | General Protection Fault
Too funny! Quoting the Get The Facts pages as "proof" of TCO equality is a farce. Obviously, Microsoft funded the TCO study and surprise! it came out in their favour. Who runs Linux on a mainframe for file serving? In any case, you can run PHP on IIS. I know, because I do.
7/26/2004 8:04 AM | General Protection Fault
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 197699
Just how cynical can you be! Security, to cite one example, has been a problem worth billions for Microsoft customers around the world FOR ABOUT A DECADE NOW. You call that prompt customer support?
7/26/2004 3:58 PM | Anona
Just how cynical can you be! Security, to cite one example, has been a problem worth billions for Microsoft customers around the world FOR ABOUT A DECADE NOW. You call that prompt customer support?
7/26/2004 3:58 PM | Anona
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 197700
Anona: Just how much can you oversimplify this? Security has been a problem worth billions for EVERYONE for more than a decade, not only MS customers. It is also a problem for Apache customers, for Oracle customers, you name it.
Just try the MS customer support. The response during the last virus/worm crises has been amazing. We've been helping countless customers to recover their machines and configure them so that they are properly secured.
Yes, I call /that/ prompt customer support.
7/26/2004 4:04 PM | Bertrand Le Roy
Anona: Just how much can you oversimplify this? Security has been a problem worth billions for EVERYONE for more than a decade, not only MS customers. It is also a problem for Apache customers, for Oracle customers, you name it.
Just try the MS customer support. The response during the last virus/worm crises has been amazing. We've been helping countless customers to recover their machines and configure them so that they are properly secured.
Yes, I call /that/ prompt customer support.
7/26/2004 4:04 PM | Bertrand Le Roy
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 197718
Apesta!!, claro que van a defender a su inche ASP.NET, porque??, porque el sitio esta montado en Windows !! Guacala!.
Apesta!!, claro que van a defender a su inche ASP.NET, porque??, porque el sitio esta montado en Windows !! Guacala!.
Y aunque les duela PHP5 es mejor!!! por donde le busquen!
Viva PHP5!!!!!!!
7/26/2004 4:33 PM | Anonimo
7/26/2004 4:33 PM | Anonimo
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 197720
"Security has been a problem worth billions for EVERYONE for more than a decade, not only MS customers."
"Security has been a problem worth billions for EVERYONE for more than a decade, not only MS customers."
Utter nonsense. During the last decade, I or my Mac-using clients, for example, have NEVER had a virus, trojan, worm, spyware or adware problem. Not once. Did I say, not once? Contrast that to Windows user over the last decade. Are you telling me these are comparable situations? Please. Even your ex-CEO admitted your security problem. I'm not going to let you sweep it under the carpet.
I didn't build Outlook or IE, you did. I didn't make the architectural choices that led to these abominable apps, you did. I didn't create the business model of "features before security", you did. I'm not the one who's trying the convince the computing public this is an acceptable/unavoidable state of affairs, you are.
Frankly, the problem is not MS (you do what you do), it's the unbelievably mypoic IT drones for using such sloppy products.
7/26/2004 4:33 PM | Anona
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 197726
Anona: This is getting really tiring. I've read these arguments millions of times. We're not getting anywhere here. Of course there are more worms for Windows than there are for any other platform. It is the most common platform. Just check the numbers on Apache and IIS and you'll see that the perception of security is something completely different from the security itself.
No, I did not write Outlook or IE. And please choose your words carefully. "Abominable"?
For your information, I've been using Microsoft products for about 12 years. Outlook and IE have been my mailer and my browser for as long as I can remember (that is probably for as long as they existed), and I have NEVER had a virus, trojan, spyware or adware problem. Not Once. Did I say, not once? Same thing goes for my wife, who does not have any computer science education. Same thing for my mother, who is 65 and knows nothing about computers. Is my experience relevant? Probably as much as yours with your mac-using clients.
Do not take individual experience for a generality. Things are not as simple as they seem to be in your head. Of course we need to improve on security because we are the leaders on this market, and that's what we're doing everyday.
Anona: This is getting really tiring. I've read these arguments millions of times. We're not getting anywhere here. Of course there are more worms for Windows than there are for any other platform. It is the most common platform. Just check the numbers on Apache and IIS and you'll see that the perception of security is something completely different from the security itself.
No, I did not write Outlook or IE. And please choose your words carefully. "Abominable"?
For your information, I've been using Microsoft products for about 12 years. Outlook and IE have been my mailer and my browser for as long as I can remember (that is probably for as long as they existed), and I have NEVER had a virus, trojan, spyware or adware problem. Not Once. Did I say, not once? Same thing goes for my wife, who does not have any computer science education. Same thing for my mother, who is 65 and knows nothing about computers. Is my experience relevant? Probably as much as yours with your mac-using clients.
Do not take individual experience for a generality. Things are not as simple as they seem to be in your head. Of course we need to improve on security because we are the leaders on this market, and that's what we're doing everyday.
Please go post somewhere else.
7/26/2004 4:46 PM | Bertrand Le Roy
7/26/2004 4:46 PM | Bertrand Le Roy
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 197933
your article is not better than the oracle's one -
your article is not better than the oracle's one -
7/27/2004 12:25 AM | mattia
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 197957
:)
:)
Article sucs! ORACLE sucs too.
Incredible stupid article. :) They know nothing about ASP.NET!
7/27/2004 1:11 AM | BlackTiger
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 198377
Bleroy:
Bleroy:
"I've been using Microsoft products for about 12 years. Outlook and IE have been my mailer and my browser for as long as I can remember (that is probably for as long as they existed), and I have NEVER had a virus, trojan, spyware or adware problem. Not Once. Did I say, not once? Same thing goes for my wife, who does not have any computer science education. Same thing for my mother, who is 65 and knows nothing about computers. Is my experience relevant? Probably as much as yours with your mac-using clients."
A good quote. Perfectly sums up Microsoft's attitude towards security. And pretty much kills your credibility.
7/27/2004 6:21 AM | Bob M.
7/27/2004 6:21 AM | Bob M.
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 198680
"This is getting really tiring"
"This is getting really tiring"
Yes, because you MS people parrot the same argument over and over again: don't blame us.
"Of course there are more worms for Windows than there are for any other platform. It is the most common platform."
How many worms are there for Mac OS? How many have there been in the last decade? Don't evade it, just answer it.
The answer is not "fewer" it's "none."
"And please choose your words carefully. 'Abominable'?"
Any client/browser that has given so much grief to so many for so long couldn't be described otherwise.
"Is my experience relevant? Probably as much as yours with your mac-using clients."
So are you denying that there have been masive security problems with your OS/apps year after year? Has it come to that level of denial?
"Do not take individual experience for a generality. Things are not as simple as they seem to be in your head."
Let's see: Who's affected by the vast majority of security issues out there? MS users. It just doesn't get any simpler than that. What has MS done over the last decade to eradicate this? Not much.
"Of course we need to improve on security because we are the leaders on this market, and that's what we're doing everyday.
Let the record speak for itself.
7/27/2004 10:46 AM | Anona
7/27/2004 10:46 AM | Anona
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 198781
Mattia, Warren, etc.: if you have nothing more constructive to say than "your article suckz, php rulez, MS suckz", please go away.
Mattia, Warren, etc.: if you have nothing more constructive to say than "your article suckz, php rulez, MS suckz", please go away.
Bob: of course, you dropped the main part of the citation, which was that individual cases should not be taken for generalities. I'm only talking about verifiable things, you guys are talking about purely emotional things. I also said that we still had a lot of work to do, but of course, you didn't want to hear that, you only hear what conforts your system of beliefs.
Just compare the number of security issues in IIS 5 and IIS6 and see how much progress we've made in just a few years on this huge code base. We're doing the same kind of work on Windows itself, and this will give XP SP2 and Longhorn.
Just compare the number of security issues in IIS 5 and IIS6 and see how much progress we've made in just a few years on this huge code base. We're doing the same kind of work on Windows itself, and this will give XP SP2 and Longhorn.
Anona: please do your homework before you post such preposterous nonsense. Open a web browser, go to Google, type "mac worm", click on the search button with your single-button mouse and click on the first thing that shows in the many answers:
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/mac.simpsons@mm.html
Oh, it's a worm, and it's for the Mac.
Of course, a worm for MacOS won't get very far as there are so few macs. Like a virus that would target people with Vayron eyes.
Why are there anti-viruses for the Mac by the way?
I also did a search on Apple Mac OSX Server on http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/vendor/ and there are just too many vulnerabilities for me to bother counting. Do the same search on Windows Server 2003: there are 2.
Of course I'm not denying that there have been a lot of problems, but like Bob, you don't want to listen to what I'm saying.
Get me right this time: I'm not denying. What I'm saying is that we've already made a lot of progress (see the numbers for yourself: the record speaks for itself indeed) and that we're still working.
You're saying that we haven't done "much" to solve security problems? How do you explain the numbers on security focus then?
Get real. Get the facts.
And go away.
7/27/2004 11:19 AM | Bertrand Le Roy
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/mac.simpsons@mm.html
Oh, it's a worm, and it's for the Mac.
Of course, a worm for MacOS won't get very far as there are so few macs. Like a virus that would target people with Vayron eyes.
Why are there anti-viruses for the Mac by the way?
I also did a search on Apple Mac OSX Server on http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/vendor/ and there are just too many vulnerabilities for me to bother counting. Do the same search on Windows Server 2003: there are 2.
Of course I'm not denying that there have been a lot of problems, but like Bob, you don't want to listen to what I'm saying.
Get me right this time: I'm not denying. What I'm saying is that we've already made a lot of progress (see the numbers for yourself: the record speaks for itself indeed) and that we're still working.
You're saying that we haven't done "much" to solve security problems? How do you explain the numbers on security focus then?
Get real. Get the facts.
And go away.
7/27/2004 11:19 AM | Bertrand Le Roy
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 198847
"Oh, it's a worm, and it's for the Mac."
"Oh, it's a worm, and it's for the Mac."
No kiddin'. The script can't use Entourage (or Mail.app for that matter) as a vector to send email without user permission, because MacBU people had the good sense to not allow that. Anything is theoretically possible, but in reality, how many sites did it affect? Symantec says, 0-2. Let's repeat that: 0-2 sites. End of story. This is the best you can come up with? Shame on you.
"Of course, a worm for MacOS won't get very far as there are so few macs."
There are more than 25 million Macs around. How many were affected by this worm, which supposely appeared on 0-2 sites? The Mac OS architecture and app policy is not pestilence-friendly like Windows. This is the best FUD you can come up with?
"I'm not denying. What I'm saying is that we've already made a lot of progress..."
When you start with such abysmal numbers you can only go up, I guess. The vast, vast majority of security problems in the last decade took place on Windows. It's still happening on Windows. And it wil still happen on Windows. That's a fact.
"And go away."
Why? The facts are interfering with your FUD?
7/27/2004 11:56 AM | Anona
7/27/2004 11:56 AM | Anona
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 198894
Anona: No, it's not the best I could come up with, I just took the first thing google gave me. I didn't took the time to look at it. The point is just that there ARE worms on the mac, there ARE vulnerabilities (some of them very serious, see securityfocus), and much more than on Windows Server 2003. And of course, no, there are not many worms because 25 million is just a ridiculously small number of machines to attack. It's much more efficient to target unprotected PCs, because yes, there are more unprotected PCs out there than there are Macs.
Why is that? Not because Windows is unsafe in its current version: activate the built-in firewall, auto-update, and install an anti-virus, that's all there is to it. No, this is so because people don't patch their machines (yes, you have to patch any system, because security and attacks evolve, it's not a static thing, take integer overflows for example) and do stupid things. We have to educate our users as much as we have to make the system safer overall. Both are very important.
You just won't listen. Is TWO an abysmal number? Just look at your own numbers. You're citing the Mac? Get a grip, just check the numbers, this is currently an unsafe system.
Windows Server 2003 has had close to zero serious security problems. No other OS can show that kind of results (even FreeBSD 5).
Anona: No, it's not the best I could come up with, I just took the first thing google gave me. I didn't took the time to look at it. The point is just that there ARE worms on the mac, there ARE vulnerabilities (some of them very serious, see securityfocus), and much more than on Windows Server 2003. And of course, no, there are not many worms because 25 million is just a ridiculously small number of machines to attack. It's much more efficient to target unprotected PCs, because yes, there are more unprotected PCs out there than there are Macs.
Why is that? Not because Windows is unsafe in its current version: activate the built-in firewall, auto-update, and install an anti-virus, that's all there is to it. No, this is so because people don't patch their machines (yes, you have to patch any system, because security and attacks evolve, it's not a static thing, take integer overflows for example) and do stupid things. We have to educate our users as much as we have to make the system safer overall. Both are very important.
You just won't listen. Is TWO an abysmal number? Just look at your own numbers. You're citing the Mac? Get a grip, just check the numbers, this is currently an unsafe system.
Windows Server 2003 has had close to zero serious security problems. No other OS can show that kind of results (even FreeBSD 5).
Go away because:
1. This is my blog
2. I don't want you here
3. You're off-topic
4. What you have to say has been said and answered a million times
5. You're answering emotionally to verifiable facts
6. I have better things to do than answer your messages (which I won't do any more from now on)
7/27/2004 12:31 PM | Bertrand Le Roy
1. This is my blog
2. I don't want you here
3. You're off-topic
4. What you have to say has been said and answered a million times
5. You're answering emotionally to verifiable facts
6. I have better things to do than answer your messages (which I won't do any more from now on)
7/27/2004 12:31 PM | Bertrand Le Roy
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 198921
"No, it's not the best I could come up with, I just took the first thing google gave me. I didn't took the time to look at it."
"No, it's not the best I could come up with, I just took the first thing google gave me. I didn't took the time to look at it."
In other words, you didn't do your homework, something you emotionally accused me of.
"The point is just that there ARE worms on the mac..."
Where?
It's ironic that today, this very day, the Net is under attack from a MyDoom variant. Is this happening on the Mac?
"It's much more efficient to target unprotected PCs.."
I wonder why!! Is it because Microsoft has been shipping an unsecure-by-default OS called Windows for years?
"Why is that? Not because Windows is unsafe in its current version: activate the built-in firewall, auto-update, and install an anti-virus, that's all there is to it."
Make the user do the dirty work?
"No, this is so because people don't patch their machines"
Finally, finally, the ultimate excuse: blame the user!
'Nuff said.
7/27/2004 12:43 PM | Anona
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 198929
Not blaming the user: I said that we had to educate the users, if you paid attention.
The firewall and automatic patching are now activated by default.
I don't have to do YOUR homework.
Not blaming the user: I said that we had to educate the users, if you paid attention.
The firewall and automatic patching are now activated by default.
I don't have to do YOUR homework.
Go away.
7/27/2004 12:48 PM | Bertrand Le Roy
7/27/2004 12:48 PM | Bertrand Le Roy
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 198954
"I said that we had to educate the users"
"I said that we had to educate the users"
Users don't need education, Microsoft does. Users haven't been shipping an unsecure-by-default OS/email cleint/browser, for years. Users don't need to be "educated" about the moronic security architecure of, say, ActiveX. Users haven't made those structural choices, you did.
"The firewall and automatic patching are now activated by default."
Thanks, for the admission of guilt. Unfortunately, this comes after having created untold numbers of unprotected PCs out there that are impacting untold millions of non-Windows users as well. We all have to suffer Microsoft's incompetence.
7/27/2004 12:57 PM | Anona
7/27/2004 12:57 PM | Anona
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 198980
Yes, users need education, because some choices are not obvious and keeping a system safe requires a little care from the user. Some things can't be automatic. For example, you still want to be able to install software on your computer. Some software that you may want to install may be dangerous. The system can warn you, but there is a point where it is your responsibility. Not rejecting the responsibility, just stating obvious stuff.
We did release some code that had security problems, of course I'm not denying that, but so have absolutely every other software company in the world. We have an obligation to be better than anyone else, though, because we are the leaders. And that's precisely what we're doing, and the results we have show that we are successful at that. But you don't want to face the facts.
Yes, users need education, because some choices are not obvious and keeping a system safe requires a little care from the user. Some things can't be automatic. For example, you still want to be able to install software on your computer. Some software that you may want to install may be dangerous. The system can warn you, but there is a point where it is your responsibility. Not rejecting the responsibility, just stating obvious stuff.
We did release some code that had security problems, of course I'm not denying that, but so have absolutely every other software company in the world. We have an obligation to be better than anyone else, though, because we are the leaders. And that's precisely what we're doing, and the results we have show that we are successful at that. But you don't want to face the facts.
Where are we today in terms of security when compared to the competition?
Did I say all that already? Yes, but you won't listen.
If you have nothing original to say, go away. Otherwise, be done with it and say it.
7/27/2004 1:10 PM | Bertrand Le Roy
If you have nothing original to say, go away. Otherwise, be done with it and say it.
7/27/2004 1:10 PM | Bertrand Le Roy
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 198999
"We did release some code that had security problems, of course I'm not denying that, but so have absolutely every other software company in the world."
"We did release some code that had security problems, of course I'm not denying that, but so have absolutely every other software company in the world."
That's like a 500 lb person saying he had a few extra donuts and who has not.
When was the last time tens of thousands of Mac machines around the world were shut down by a worm or a virus? This seems to happen with monthly regularity these days for Windows users. And you call this "some code that had security problems"?
"We have an obligation to be better than anyone else, though, because we are the leaders."
Leaders in what? Security? You are actually claiming leadership in security? Man, I thought 1984 was a fiction book!
7/27/2004 1:23 PM | Anona
7/27/2004 1:23 PM | Anona
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 199003
Yes, we are currently leaders in OS market shares and in security techonlogy. Look at the freaking numbers and compare.
I've already explained (as well as many other people) why a worm can't propagate efficiently on MacOS, but you won't listen.
You're a troll, go away.
7/27/2004 1:26 PM | Bertrand Le Roy
Yes, we are currently leaders in OS market shares and in security techonlogy. Look at the freaking numbers and compare.
I've already explained (as well as many other people) why a worm can't propagate efficiently on MacOS, but you won't listen.
You're a troll, go away.
7/27/2004 1:26 PM | Bertrand Le Roy
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 199013
"Yes, we are currently leaders in OS market shares and in security techonlogy. Look at the freaking numbers and compare."
"Yes, we are currently leaders in OS market shares and in security techonlogy. Look at the freaking numbers and compare."
Yes, I'm looking at the number of PCs beset by security problems and comparing them to Mac machines. It turns out the "security technology" provide by the vendor (Microsoft) is shamefully ineffective in protecting the OS and the apps. After you put way all the FUD, mombo jumbo and blame-the-user stuff, the fact remains that Windows machines are less secure and more infected than any other platform, in absolute or in proportional numbers.
That's some mighty leadership!
7/27/2004 1:35 PM | Anona
7/27/2004 1:35 PM | Anona
# re: Some comments on Oracle's comparison of PHP and ASP.NET Remove Comment 199100
"This is my technical / professional blog"
"This is my technical / professional blog"
There has got to be a better use of your time, rather than writing so much just about yourself and your opinions.
7/27/2004 3:19 PM | Shaq
7/27/2004 3:19 PM | Shaq
Sure thing!
Me