Blue screen of death

Sean Wright said:

I wasn't trying to cause a stir on this one. Really, I wasnt'.

I guess my perspective comes from, trying for a long(er) term fix (to keep the customer from calling back next week with the same problem).

If you have the software and drive space to make an entire image of your drive, it will certainly be much faster.

The definate down side of what I orginally suggested is the time it takes. I forgot to mention how long this process can take. My apologies here.

Click to expand...

C'mon Sean, we all you you just came here to pick a fight.

I do agree with you about the risk of restoring an image of a corrupted system, but that's why I have incremental images at various milestones. To over-simplify, if my system goes south this week, I'll restore last week's (or maybe last month's) image.

I also agree about a lot of folks not knowing how to maintain or fix a system. I've done telephone tech support for our company, so I know how clueless some people can be.

Thinking of Blue Screens, back in the first year or two of Windows NT, we sold a product that replaced several important NT system files with our own version. (Files like NTOSKRNL.EXE, and several others at that level. We were MS source code licensees at the time, so this was done with MIcrosoft's blessing.) Things would work fine until someone installed a Service Pack, then re-installed our software, which would put the old kernel file back in place. At that point the customer had a very dead, very blue system. I got to walk a number of guys through complete WinNT re-installations over the phone. By the time Windows 2000 was released, we and MS had built our hooks into an API, so we no longer had to swap out the kernel for our product.

Frank Fusco said:

My philosophy is that 96% of the PCs in the world use Windows, the other 4% use Mac or some wannabees. I go with the 96%, there have to be reasons beyond marketing.

Click to expand...

well if you really must know it's 92.68%
Windows XP 81.40%
Windows Vista 5.41%
Windows 2000 3.74%
Mac OS 3.36%
MacIntel 2.61%
Windows 98 1.05%
Linux 0.75%
Windows NT 0.64%
Windows ME 0.56%
Nintendo Wii 0.14%
Unknown 0.08%
Windows CE 0.06%
iPhone 0.04%
Pike v7.6 release 92 0.03%
Series60 0.03%

I realize some are locked in to using Windows, Well you think you are anyway.
BUT how many of you have an extra machine laying around? Wheres your biggest risk using a windows Windows machine?
What operating system do hacker and virus writers attack?
What operating system almost always forces you to upgrade your hardware with every new release?

IF you have another PC laying around why not load a version of Linux on it and use it for surfing the web, and email? Broaden your horizons a little bit. I think you will find out the learning curve is not very steep at all.

With the advances made with virtual operating systems you aren't locked into using just windows anymore. I had 3 pc's here for a while, two running Ubuntu and one running XP. The XP machine has gone by by. I now run VMware with an install of xp on it. No dual booting, no extra pc. IF it wasn't for the fact that Segment saver And the wifes Betty crocker cook book program I wouldn't even run a virtual machine.

With a virtual machine you have one file to back up, IF something happens to your virtual machine such as a virus you delete one file and your back to your point of your last backup.

There are options besides just windows, you just have to make the effort. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, if I can figure it out anyone can.

The black bar in the middle is from the screen capture.

I think one of the funniest things I have seen computer wise was the time I was sitting at my computer desk (I spend most of my time on the laptop in the livingroom) and was using Big Mac (My host computer) for a project.
At the time I had a souped up P4 XP machine (I know it was good, I built it ) as well as the Macs. One minute the PC would be on the network and the next it didn't know one existed.
I had two 21" displays one hooked to the Mac the other the PC. I would usually wake both machines, because I could.
Anyway..... I'm sitting there working on the Mac and watching the XP machine get into fights with itself!!! I laughed myself silly.

DT

The whole malware, trojan, virus, hacker thing is what has done it for me, we have recently been infected twice, both times through a security hole in the Windoze XP system, both times took a LOT of time and head scratching, as well as some really, really kind folks on the net on various tech forums to fix the problems, then, the next week, of course MS comes out with a patch

The last time around was a Vundo infection, nasty stuff, and it took some doing to get rid of it, this was a problem with Java, in internet exploder, but still, this is not something that Mac users have to worry about. Then the reappearance of the lsasser worm, etc, etc.

We run Zone Alarm Pro, paid for it, and AVG anti virus software, as well as the router which has it's own built in firewall, but still, someone somewhere finds holes in this stuff.

I look at it this way, a buddy of mine bought a brand new Ducati 998 when they came out (this is a motorcycle ) He bought a racer rep, all the WSB badging and the super nice extras, he had it locked up in his locked garage, to a ground anchor no less, and it was stolen. He got it replace with insurance (minus the $1500 deductible ) and went into town one day, he stopped at an outside cafe to meet his wife for lunch, and while they were sitting there, having lunch, with the bike not 30 feet from them, with an alarm system on the bike, the bike was stolen again

His beeper thing went off, he jumped up, and all he could see was a large van driving away, he got the license number, which turned out to from a stolen van, bye bye bike...... Remember, this is Japan, not some high crime city in the US, and twice in one month he had this bike stolen. He took the insurance money and bought a much less desirable bike.

I rode a Honda VTR 1000F at that time, I could leave it with the key in the ignition, and no one would touch it, it was a great bike, I could ride any rode in the country at the same pace he could, I could park it anywhere, and not worry about it. The neat thing about Mac is that I get the reliability of the Honda, and the coolness factor of the Ducati, without every nutcase hacker tying to destroy the system

Win-Win in my books!

Just my two yen's worth!

I can understand people just wanting a home computer choosing to run a Mac. They just work and the basic software is all there. The problem is that they DONT run the specialised programs that many of us need.

My day job is looking after various small networks for business needs. They
run software for accounting/ payroll/ medical-vet-dental practise, running a timber yard or insurance/realestate sales etc.

Sorry the software just isn't there to do it on a Mac.. or under Linux

Yes Macs are maybe more secure, but it's mostly that they are 3% of the market + the average Mac user isn't moron, so the malware writers dont target them. An up to date Linux box is proably even more secure and can easily be setup to do most of what a Mac can do for 1/2 the price. But Windows is still 90% of the desktop world

The backup question is still just as valid if you are running a Mac. They can be struck by lightening or suffer a dead hard disk just as easy as a Windows PC.

Keep your data backed up, several copies. OK reloading a system can be a hassle, but it's just a few hours time. It's your data that that you cant replace.

Cheers

Ian

Robert said, in part: "IF you have another PC laying around why not load a version of Linux on it and use it for surfing the web, and email? Broaden your horizons a little bit. I think you will find out the learning curve is not very steep at all. "
Are you sure you aren't really my son?
He gives me that lecture every time I see him.
Answer is: I don't want to and I don't need to.
I don't want to broaden any horizons with my computer(s), I just use them as tools to accomplish what I want and need. We do have two computers. The one my wife uses could be classed as obsolete (AMD450, Win Me), but it does have two hard drives and I suppose I could back up on one of those. But, I back up what is critical to me on CDs. If all goes belly-up, I'll format and reinstall XP.
When I wrote my computer advice column it was from the perspective of a 'user' not a techy type. If it works, I don't mess with it.

Ian Abraham said:

I can understand people just wanting a home computer choosing to run a Mac. They just work and the basic software is all there. The problem is that they DONT run the specialised programs that many of us need. ............

Click to expand...

What about this virtual mode, where you load the Windoze OS on top of the Mac OS?

Something else that most of you will NOT consider is that I need my computers to work in BOTH English and Japanese, Windoze does this, but you need the "Pro" version of the software (cha-ching) the Mac, as I saw on a friends computer does it much more seamlessly.

We have our L shop's software running on a Windoze NT platform, they want a TON of money to go to the XP version, and then they will want a TON more to go to the Vista......

We will have to pay for that, one day...........

But you are right, Ian, for home use, the Mac sure looks sweet....

Stuart Ablett said:

What about this virtual mode, where you load the Windoze OS on top of the Mac OS?

Click to expand...

Stu,

The 2 most common options available to run Windows on one of the new Intel based Macs are Apple's Boot Camp and Parallels for Mac. The biggest advantace that both of these options have over previous options (such as Virtual PC) is that Windows is running directly on the hardware, not in an emulation mode. This makes things much much faster.

Apple's Boot Camp (still in Beta, but it works) allows you to install Windows as on your Intel Mac as a Dual Boot System. When you start up the machine, you choose which OS you want to run. This will be a standard feature in the next major OS release 10.5. The cool thing about this, is that when you set it up Apple has all of the Windows drivers for their hardware for you. The other really cool thing is that it is Free The down side is that to switch back to Mac OS you have to reboot the machine.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/


Parallels for Mac is the other option. This is an application that allows you to install Windows on your Intel Mac and run it directly on the Apple's Intel based hardware within a window on the Mac Desktop. No reboot is necessary to use both operating systems. This will allow you to run your Windows only apps, yet do all your surfing/online stuff under the "safer" Mac OS at the same time. The down side to Parallels is that you have to buy it.
http://www.parallels.com/

Both of these options require that you have a Windows install disc.

Unfortunatly I can't give any first hand information on these as I have a G4 tower which does not have an Intel processor. That takes both of these options off the table for me.

Thanks Sean, it all sounds better to me!

Besides, I don't mind buying the "Parallels" software, I figure I'll be saving so much money not having to buy all the various firewalls, and anti virus stuff

This question does not have any hidden agenda - it is a request for knowledge.

So if I have a Mac which is connected to the internet through my firewalled router and is running a windows emulation in a VM within the MAC OS, what makes the contents of that windows emulation any safer from hackers than a straightforward windows OS. Or is it just that it is easier to "initialise" the windows environment?

I run Parallels on my iMac and really like it. But....when you run Parallels, you are "borrowing" the Mac hardware (including the Intel processor) to run....Windows! Since you are running....Windows...you are subject to all the holes, moles, bugs and thugs... I run AdAware, AVG and other anti-XXX software, just as if I were on a Dell, HP, Sony, Toshiba or other "PC".

Parallels allows you to use your Mac to run multiple OS's, but does not "isolate" you from the Win problems.




BTW, I have another VM set up for Umbutu(sp?) Linux, but I have done that much with it.

Greg Cook said:

I run Parallels on my iMac and really like it. But....when you run Parallels, you are "borrowing" the Mac hardware (including the Intel processor) to run....Windows! Since you are running....Windows...you are subject to all the holes, moles, bugs and thugs... I run AdAware, AVG and other anti-XXX software, just as if I were on a Dell, HP, Sony, Toshiba or other "PC".

Parallels allows you to use your Mac to run multiple OS's, but does not "isolate" you from the Win problems.




BTW, I have another VM set up for Umbutu(sp?) Linux, but I have done that much with it.

Click to expand...

I second what Gregs says. Your Windows OS and environment isn't any safer when running on a Mac. However the idea is that you use Parallels or Boot Camp to run just the Windows programs you need, and you do everything else under the Mac OS. If you avoid the internet when using windows, it makes that part of your machine a little safer. The other plus to running both systems is that if Windows catches something nasty it usually won't transfer to over to the Mac side. The main exception to this is Macro viruses from Word or Excel. These nasties are cross platform.

--Greg, and I though I had alot of stuff in my Dock! Wow!

Stuart Ablett said:

Thanks Sean, it all sounds better to me!

Besides, I don't mind buying the "Parallels" software, I figure I'll be saving so much money not having to buy all the various firewalls, and anti virus stuff

Click to expand...

Stu,

A lot of folks run Parallels where I work (read: Large UNIX company) as they can run our OS on the Mac that way. I don't need it though, because if I have a Mac, I can just shell into a UNIX server. The wifi works wonderful, and I am always just an ssh away from my server where I can check my mail with pine, a character based mail MUA.

In regards to the Mac, my wife loves it, it's much easier to use than the Windows box she was doing her Japanese corespondents on, no virii so far, and things just work for her. Most of her Japanese friends tend to favor using the Mac over the PC, it's just easier for them to do kanji on. All of our/their milage varies.

In the old days, the Mac was alway popular in Japan, since in the original Mac you could change the ROM to replace it with Japanese. Since that is done at the software layer these days, Windows has become widespread, but when I lived in Japan, NEC had a lock on the PC market in Japan. Things have changed...but the Mac is still a nice machine for them, and hardware wise, Apple hardware is sexy.

What about this virtual mode, where you load the Windoze OS on top of the Mac OS?

Click to expand...

Mostly the cost and extra complexity.
More expensive hardware, and then you have to buy 2 operating systems

One option we are investigating is to run the desktops on linux with Open Office and email/internet, and then connect to a windows terminal services server to run the windows only apps.

This is how many of of our systems are set up now anyway for performance reasons, although we still run windows desktops with all the virus and spyware hijinks.

Cheers

Ian

Ian Abraham said:

I can understand people just wanting a home computer choosing to run a Mac. They just work and the basic software is all there. The problem is that they DONT run the specialised programs that many of us need.

My day job is looking after various small networks for business needs. They
run software for accounting/ payroll/ medical-vet-dental practise, running a timber yard or insurance/realestate sales etc.

Sorry the software just isn't there to do it on a Mac.. or under Linux

Click to expand...

Long time old argument...

All you have to do is research, and there's tons of software for the Mac for a vast number of industries..

Sample:

http://guide.apple.com/uscategories/business.lasso


There are also lots of developers that can taylor a program to your needs, if you want.

Greg Cook said:

Long time old argument...

Click to expand...

Well, for the sake of friendly argument...

Are these available for the Mac?

RoboHelp (Help authoring software)
Flare (Help authoring software)
Visual Studio (Granted, it's a Microsoft product)
Outlook on an Exchange server (May well be possible, but I don't know)

The company I work for is firmly attached at the hip to Microsoft, so we use their products. Since I've got to stay in sync with my office (for communication and data exchange), it's unlikely I'll be going to the Mac in the near future.

I've got a spare machine or two, and I did install one of the Mandrake Linux distros on one of them a few years ago, and although I got it running and connected to the net, I dropped it after playing with it a bit, since I didn't feel like searching for all the things it still needed. Yes, I know there's all sorts of things available, I just didn't want to mess with it. I tend to get frustrated by poor instructions and non-intuitive naming conventions.
I haven't had the time or inclination to try setting up another Linux box. I'd rather spend the time in the shop. (I get my fill of computers with my day job as it is.)

Vaughn,

I'm not saying that each and every Windows software is also available in a "Mac version", but there are lots of similar programs available for many applications that are written for, or will also run on, the Macintosh.

One from your list, after just a quick check gives this for writing Help applications. I know nothing of the program...maybe you do, so I can't say how it compares to what you are using. The end user would have to evaluate the Mac software, as is normal.

http://www.ebutterfly.com/helplogic/index.php

The link I provided above has lots of software listings...

The old argument that the Mac has no "real" software just ain't so...

I'd not seen the HelpLogic product. Looks like it would be workable for some things, but I don't see any indication that it supports double-byte languages. (In my case, Simplified and Traditional Chinese, and Japanese.) The price is pretty good though...about 10% of what I've been paying for the others. (OTOH, they are on version 1.0, and apparently have been there for three years or so.)

I agree that there are a ton of software titles available for the Mac, but if they're not compatible with what my colleagues and contractors are using, then they're not workable.

I don't want to seem like I'm anti-Mac. I think it's a great platform...just not for me at this time.

Lets not get into a war over this.

As I suspect is the case with Vaughn and many others, I want to find the easiest, most comprehensive solution to applying computing to specific tasks. I too used to be a tech support wonk and have done some help authoring and written some database systems and been a DBA of sorts. I thank my lucky stars for being able to write that sentence in the past tense. I have tried Linux but it all started to feel a bit too much like being my own tech support dept for my current tastes and needs.

My own finding is that for most of what I want to do a Windows based system is the one which gives me the widest choice of hardware, vendors and alternative solutions. 99.9% of the time it works absolutely fine. I have twice (in about 15 years) had a machine that died suddenly and on both occasions it was a hard disc failure. I try and do an orderly replacement when a machine is 4 years old or so and the machine that I replace has almost always been hardware upgraded during that lifetime.

I have business applications that I have written in bits and pieces over the last 10 years for my own use which is firmly rooted in windows applications. On the basis that a VM on Mac is as susceptible to "attack" as a native windows machine it feels to me like I would just be adding a layer of abstraction for uncertain benefit. I am pretty sure that I would be paying more to buy apple hardware at the same level of capability as the generic stuff that I use now and have in the past. I am also pretty sure that my options for running upgrades would be narrower in the mac world than they are in the windows world.

But I equally accept that somebody with a different level of interest and/or different reuirements may make very different choices. I am delighted for them that the range of choices exist.

No war here...

I've used, and still use, Windows (Vista on a Sony notebook at present), and I've used Macs...from my first 9" screen 512KE and it's OS through the latest upgrade of OS X on a dual processor Power Mac.. I have run multi-platform accounting programs...and I will say I'm lucky that I haven't had to run Windows to be compatible with others. My MS Office docs I make in one OS do work with the other. I'm learning Dreamweaver and FileMaker Pro, which are compatible with either (I actually got dual program discs and run them on both machines.)

Before Vista (Aqua?), I even disliked working with a Windows program just for the ragged graphics, compared to the Mac OS. Vista is better, but still not quite there, IMO.

To each his own, and what he has to do. My point is only that there is a ton of Mac software that will probably do anything a program will do in Windows, if you look. The kind of programs that won't, will be so specialized as to not be of need or interest to the vast majority of most users...again, IMO.

The "Mac has no real software" cliche' is the focus of my post.