Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:How to avoid trashing your Vista system (Score 1) 10

I said "fully understand". There are for example COM registrations in the registry where multiple parts link to other parts, and it's very easy even for a COM developer to mess up manually trying to set or reset a configuration. As someone who created installs for a while and worked on an organization's installer package before that, you haven't the foggiest how to safely clean up after a POS app fails it, because you don't know what configuration the installer did.

Ah. Good point.

The bottom line is don't run dodgy software, like A/V or open source or other known generally unprofessionally-done categories of things, on a system you care about.

Some would argue that A/V software is unnecessary or even questionable. For a Windows system anymore, though, it has become more of a necessity, not because Windows is any less secure but because Windows is far and away the biggest target. Purposely not running A/V software on a Windows box is just asking for trouble unless you never go online and never load in external media like CDs or USB storage devices.

What registry cleaners are for is people who don't treat their system sensibly.

On this point I disagree with you. Every piece of software I have installed under Windows, from open source freeware to applications costing several hundred dollars, never removes everything it dumps into the registry. There are always traces left behind, usually stupid stuff like file associations but often more important things like DLL associations. This is not limited to little fly-by-night companies either - I have traces of Microsoft stuff in the registry that is no longer on my system.

And, what about all the OEM junkware that comes with a new system out of the box? The registry is already full of crap before the system even gets powered on.

There is another choice.

There are always choices. Windows is what I use for recreational computing (surfing, gaming, writing, etc.) but my serious stuff happens on my Linux installation.

Because I use Windows to access the internet, I use A/V software. I received a version of BitDefender with a 2-year license to evaluate. I was unaware that the uninstall is even more unclean than most, though the crown probably goes to Norton as the most difficult to clean out. NIS is famous for preventing other packages from installing, even after a full uninstall, which is the reason I will *never* install it.

Comment Re:How to avoid trashing your Vista system (Score 1) 10

1) Don't screw with the registry in ways you don't fully understand.

The registry is something I do understand and I have (obviously) no problem getting in there and cleaning up. I think in this case there was some key that was necessary but not related to my AV program, yet still popped in the search. Not misunderstanding but more along the lines of being unobservant. *shrug* No worries, that's what registry cleaners are for anyway.

2) Don't install anti-virus and other such categories of poorly-programmed, poorly-tested crapware.

Except for this issue, BitDefender has been very good to my computer. Apparently it doesn't clean up after itself, though.

Comment Re:Hey there! (Score 1) 10

Sorry to hear about kiloing the registry. I've only used AVG and MacAfee, so I know nothing about BitDefender, but it sounds nasty.

BitDefender isn't bad, really. It just apparently does not know how to properly clean up after itself.

On a side note, i made some bread recently and was thiking about you. I made Farmhouse French Bread from the Wooden Spoon Cookbook which turned out pretty darn good. I might be making some again soon.

Another good loaf from that same book is Cut Vienna Loaf, which is a type I have made over and over. I swap out two egg whites for every egg, as I don't like how the yolk changes the flavor of the finished loaf.

And the Tomato Bread in the baker's dozen section is almost like bread sticks dipped in pizza sauce without the mess... :-o

Until recently I've had little time to make bread. I finally made some just before Thanksgiving, and I am pleased with how it turned out. I made a new kind for friends and while they loved it I was not pleased. It was ok, but it was not as good as I know it could be so I am making more tomorrow.

How's things?

Swamped. I am gearing up for travel again this Sunday for a short but very intense time in Washington (will try to call while I am out that way). Kids stuff. Thanksgiving. Christmas. Computer acting up. Etc. You get the idea.

Comment Re:sorry (Score 1) 10

Actually, this is the first bit of issue I have had with BitDefender. I suspect I need to run a *proper* registry cleaner to get everything wiped out.

To be sure, I like BitDefender and still run it on the other machine in the house. I will likely run it again. But it apparently isn't nice about cleaning up after itself.

User Journal

Journal Journal: [geek] How to trash your Vista registry 10

I work quite a bit with different security suites for Windows. On my current laptop which runs Vista, I started with Panda, moved to McAfee, tried a different version of McAfee, switched to BitDefender, Trend, BitDefender, PCTools, BitDefender, McAfee, and finally (this week) AVG. In all cases I did a full uninstall before installing the next package.

Before loading up AVG, I unloaded McAfee and rebooted.

Comment Possibly... (Score 1) 5 could be a "testing" message to see if it's working before sending the real stuff. Sending "test" would be more pleasant, but when have spammers been known to play nice?

Comment Re:My heart goes out to those researchers. (Score 0, Flamebait) 882

You have partial email chains. That's it. You have people taking things out of context and making mountains out of mole-hills.

Raw data? Sure. Which raw data are you referring to? Would that be the raw data where you have several weather stations reporting -999C temperatures? Or the glacial ice core sample that was contaminated? Or the raw data series that shows a divergence but it's the only data series showing divergence when compared to dozens of others? The raw data with the bad satellite pass showing a 1000ft increase in vertical height of the Greenland Ice Shelf?

And what would you portend to due with the raw data? Cherry pick only the things you want instead of using the entire suite of corrected data sets?

Mann released that information ages ago. It's not that hard to find. Really it isn't. There are also other research papers based on his work that refine it.

It's also impossible to tell what the email deletions were in regards to, or whether or not it was a running joke. Or even what the emails contained. They don't appear in the hacked files.

And you have absolutely no idea what a huge PITA an FOI can be for a government agency. It is not a simple process, and it is not a short process, especially when there are pre-existing contractual obligations on that data. If you are a government agency contracting with a commercial entity, you cannot simply "turn over the data". It doesn't work that way.

They want to avoid FOI requests because:

1. It's a huge pain in the ass at the best of times. You have to track down the right people, get a bunch of approvals, verification that the data is not a going to be a danger if released to the open. Checking against contractual issues. Checking against licensing issues. Checking against IP issues. Running it through legal. Etc. etc. etc. . This takes a lot of time and resources, and I really don't blame them for not wanting to deal with the hassel.

2. The data being requested may or may not be suitable for use. Much like software, the datasets are being updated regularly. In some of the emails, this is plainly clear (some scientists bitch about inconsistencies in the datasets and such). Errors found. Errors are corrected. Requesting unfinished data is like requesting to use software that hasn't been tested.

3. The people requesting the data are hostile, and the scientist know the data will be misappropriated. Hence why they prefer only releasing the final products since at that point the science has be done and PEER REVIEWED. It's very difficult to do research when you have twenty hostile individuals interfering by making specious claims and generally pointless noise.

An EXAMPLE of GOOD SCIENCE is to let the science be done, THEN CRITICIZE IT. So far, no one has built a falsifiable case that disproves climate change nor refutes that anthropogenic causes are a contributing factor. No one has developed a model that shows the current warming trend is the result of natural variation. No one has been able to refute the science. Finding minor errors does not refute climate change.

Bad science is pointing at places where research might not have been done yet and screaming "SEE! IT"S ALL A HOAX!!" Bad science is finding minor errors and screaming "IT"S A CONSPIRACY!!!"

Bad science is encouraging the masses to disregard science and follow their intuition instead.

The emails largely show that scientists are just as human as anyone else. They get pissed off. They get frustrated. They get tired of refuting the same tired old crap everyday. They get fed up with people who are barely qualified to operate a motor vehicle telling them that they don't know how to do their job.

Or perhaps you'd hold up better under such pressure. But I doubt it. I'm sure if someone were to publish a random selection of your work or private emails that you wouldn't come off so saint-like either.

The main point being is that someone grabbed a bunch files and "randomly" selected what to show the world. How can anyone draw any real conclusions based on that? How about we see ALL the emails so we know the context before jumping to conclusions? I've read through a chunk of them, and there are only a couple that need clarification.

Think of it as someone writes an email with a title "Sex?" and contains "Man I'd like to fuck a sheep!". Now if someone where to release that email, what kind of conclusions would you draw? Probably not a good one. But if you saw the whole email chain about "Revenge of The Nerds", then the email becomes something much less disturbing.

Without the additional contexts to these emails, the only thing you can do is jump to conclusions.


Comment The 11th thing is... (Score 1) 778

Being attached to a piece of technology at the hip where I can still get hampered with 'the-sky-is-falling' on-call calls when I'm *not* on-call, people I don't feel like talking to me can annoying me with phone calls/txts that I have to take the time to silence, my flip/touch-phone device for a bordem-killer to the point that it takes two years off it's design worth, knowing what time is ANY time of the day (it's actually nice not to keep track of time once in a while), yet another device I have to carry around with me besides my netbook/ipod/work-laptop/gps, etc. (unless you're an uber-UBER power phone user, I don't agree WTFA on that one totally), never knowing anyone's phone number anymore (leaves you dead in the water, especially when you leave your cell phone at home by accident), substituting nice, quality memorable photos from a good, quality digital camera for 1MP squashed ones, loosing total track of your walking and ability to dogde solid objects when trying to answer that important txt msg while on run or in the car (I've seen people almost kill themselves to fulfill that 160 character impulse). The list can go on and on... It's a mere trade-off for the extra added stress is causes us IMHO.

Comment Re:A load of BS (Score 1) 778

Computers were supposed to get rid of paper and they didn't.

Yet. Anyone with the smallest foresight can see the trend is towards paper-thin, low power electronic displays. It may be 20+ years before they cost marginally more than paper and start to replace the more mundane uses, but it will. And before anyone starts... of course it will never *completely* replace paper - there will always be some uses that are just more convenient. But look at checks - 15 years ago I was writing 8+ paper checks a month. Now I probably write that many a year. Still a game changer.

Gaming on a phone is awful.

Don't have an iPhone, do you? I have a lot of friends addicted to iPhone games, and there are even a few I have played more than I would like to admit.

If I am going to do work during my commute it will be on a laptop or netbook, not a mobile. I suspect a lot of people feel the same way.

If I am going to do work on my commute I will DEFINITELY use a laptop. The article only mentioned netbooks, which would be insanely painful for programming. Anyone pretending to do "work" on a netbook probably works in marketing and sends emails for a living...

Decent cameras will never go away because a phone will never be able to match the feature set of the camera....even compact ones, imo.

Well, the article only mentioned compacts, not "decent" cameras (though compacts are pretty decent these days!) Again, progression of technology... look at phones now, vs phones of 10+ years ago. If you don't think all of the features of a compact camera can't be added to phones in the near future, you should delete your /. account.

Watches will always exist, if anything, as a fashion accessory.

Yeah, so will codpieces, it doesn't mean they are still useful.

Comment Re:Trying to make your mark, eh? (Score 1) 264

Years ago the Microsoft DNS implementation had a very nasty memory leak and used a lot of cpu - you really did need a dedicated DNS machine for small sites and to reboot it once a week.
I think that's why people are still thinking about putting it in a virtual box so it can't eat all the resources, even for a pile of trivial services that a sparcstation 5 could handle at low load.

Slashdot Top Deals

I judge a religion as being good or bad based on whether its adherents become better people as a result of practicing it. - Joe Mullally, computer salesman