Sebastian Gottschalk wrote: [Microsoft Windows]
This is something else - and I'm not sure about what you're meaning with "desktop context" or "windowstation context".
A window is not "in a device context" or something like that. A window is an object in a desktop object in a window-station object. Usually, for example the client area of a window can have a device context.
Or, to be specific: a window is nothing which is in GDI - it's in USER. Device contexts are objects in GDI.
Yours, VB.
Well, I was gonna suggest a couple but shee-it! I don't wanna be jumped all over. LOL!
Yeah, right. lol
I did a google search for the part number, don't have time to redo it right now, and the manual matched the part number in the post.
ROFL, you said "lol".
Could that be because they're loaded with malware but Symantec just doesn't detect it? :-)
Panda has also had a lot of problems with making Windows unstable, and also not uninstalling cleanly.
Panda gave me a free one year subscription to their product and I stopped using it within a few weeks and paid for NOD32.
I'm not thrilled with their software, and even less thrilled with the company itself.
PIXs are horrible to manage though. I'd rather spend the extra and get something like a Nokia IP45.
Before any resident is permitted to install a PC on the house network their machines are brought to US, we go onsite and setup a secure network, and we can them with several AV products. The machines that have valid/updated Symantec or Norton AV are never found to contain any Viruses of any type. Yes, ones that have expired subscriptions have been found to be infected.
We've installed AVG on their personal laptops, but after the first year we stopped doing this as it didn't protect their computer from malware while browsing, while doing IM, while doing P2P, etc...
The same functions didn't seem to cause a problem for the Symantec users or the Panda users. Of a few McAfee users, only one was compromised over
3 years of monitoring.The University provides a site license for CA's av software and we install it, but it's not simple/intuitive for the residents, but we've also not had any reports/detected compromised machines while they run it.
We're limited to a few AV solutions due to DOD compliance and such, but I'm not recommending AVG any more.
Hi Ben,
You may wish to investigate the Refurbished Cisco PIX Firewall Guide:
Brad Reese BradReese.Com - Cisco Repair
"Jason Edwards" wrote in news:4i4t15F2629sU1 @individual.net:
Jason, shut up.
Kyle
Leythos wrote in news:twbvg.30103$vl5.15183 @tornado.ohiordc.rr.com:
Now there's an intelligent question-as-response.
Leythos, I'm sure he's running a multi-site corporate network, and that's why he posted his question to this newsgroup.
Kyle
Kyle, when you get older you will learn to never assume anything about a question asked in groups. In fact, you will learn that most questions asked leave out a LARGER question that the person is trying to resolve but has not asked in the first post.
If you have nothing productive to contribute why are you posting?
Leythos,
it is worse when things get missed out and everybody is affected. Like when your posts disappear from google's archive, causing the useful information you provide to be lost, and worse than that, destroying the whole discussion of the thread in the archive. So on googling, it's of little benefit to people, and many peoples' contributions suffer.
Maybe you don't rely on or benefit from google's archives of information. But many others do use it, and you're ruining that.
Google is not the only archive and I don't need my posts archived in order to help. Before Google took over, I also did XNA and it was honored. Many places don't honor XNA, that's their right, but, like anything, most information has a limited life span and there is no point in leaving all my posts out there.
If you need help, what worked last year may not work this year.
Leythos
by your reasoning, archives are not very useful, and don't matter very much. And furthermore, you think that belief justifies partially screwing them up.
You mention archives that don't honour XNA. Are you suggesting that now people should pay to read your posts and avoid the damage you've done to the archives
And by your statements you believe that nothing got done/resolved before archives.
Leythos -
of course, there are many ways to resolve problems , but usenet archives are one of them.
maybe it's not so helpful for you, but it is for others.
discussion/debate between security experts is very enlightening. Much of what was true a year ago, is true today, especially the principles. The misconceptions posted on usenet, and corrected, last month, or 5 years ago, are very useful.
Of course you don't have to answer this, but for what raeson do you not archive your posts? If for security reasons - to protect yourself. Then didn't you yourself say, that some archives don't honour XNA, + you post anonymously. So a cracker persistent enough to target you, would pay or have the funds, to get access to a usenet archive that does archive your posts.
Perhaps you don't realise how useful your posta are? or the posts of others, like Volker. I know that you and Volker disagree sometimes, but only one side is available for later reading.
what would you use to do so?
Nothing, as I would not do so. My apps only connect as a direct or indirect, but fully intended result of user interaction and/or configuration. Dunno why so many people are stupid enough to run untrusted applications and therefore demand such features.
Most likely because they'd interfere and only implement the very same functions.
if a system is compromised by a malicious client app then wouldn't you want to know which process is transmitting out? For a start, so you know it is compromised.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required