It's time to virtualize Microsoft Exchange (but not with Hyper-V)
Microsoft isn't accustomed to being in second place in any market, but that's the situation it has had to accept as it challenges VMware for supremacy in the x86 virtualization world.
Microsoft has undoubtedly made significant progress in the last couple of years, bolstering its virtualization and management capabilities with Hyper-V and System Center Virtual Machine Manager. Microsoft thinks it offers enterprises everything they need to virtualize mission-critical workloads, but not everyone agrees.
Microsoft's 2010 software presents "most complicated lock-in decision in years"
At the Burton Group Catalyst conference this week, analysts told an audience of IT pros that they should be virtualizing Microsoft Exchange - but not with Hyper-V. The recommendation isn't likely to sit well with Microsoft, whose officials have already disputed the Burton Group's claim that Hyper-V is not enterprise-ready. But the analysts are standing firm.
VMware and Citrix are the only two virtualization vendors that meet every one of the Burton Group's criteria for running enterprise workloads. The analyst firm has more than two dozen requirements, and Microsoft has steadily been meeting more and more of them, including the ability to perform live migration of virtual machines across physical servers.
But there is still one feature missing in the area of disaster recovery. Hyper-V does not let IT pros assign priority status specifying which virtual machines get restored first in the wake of a hardware failure.
"The most critical workloads should restart first following a physical server outage, and the Hyper-V R2 platform has no way to prioritize VM restarts," explains Burton Group analyst Bill Pray.
Many customers have decided they can live with this limitation, and expect Microsoft to fix it eventually, and so have gone ahead and virtualized Exchange with Hyper-V anyway. But Burton Group analysts recommend that only VMware and Citrix be used for Exchange and other mission-critical apps.
This is becoming a more important issue, because new features in Exchange 2010, as well as advances in hypervisors and hardware, make virtualization more viable and cost-effective. Exchange 2010 does a better job handling I/O performance, making it possible for customers to virtualize without sacrificing speed, and even letting them make do with cheap storage systems.
"One of the things we did as a big investment in the latest version of Exchange is to move to an environment where you don't need high-end storage for the underlying storage subsystem," says Mike Neil, general manager of Microsoft's server virtualization and Windows Server division.
In the past, Exchange performance on virtual servers "drove some customers crazy," Pray said. The high I/O performance required by email still makes it important to "supersize the server," he notes. But IT should now consider virtualization of Exchange the default option, he said.
"Now the technology is in place," he said. "You should be moving your Exchange server to virtualized environments to get those benefits."
The question of which hypervisor to use remains a source of dispute between Burton Group and Microsoft.
Although Hyper-V doesn't include the exact disaster recovery feature the Burton Group considers necessary, Windows Server 2008 R2's failover clustering has settings that "address some of the scenarios that assignable restart priority addresses," a Microsoft spokesman says.
For example, Microsoft's "VM Auto Start" setting lets customers decide which VMs will automatically restart after failures and which will not. Secondly, a "persistent nodes" feature "will attempt to place a VM back on the node that it last ran on and if not feasible place the VM on other nodes."
Neil said he was surprised the Burton Group recommended against using Hyper-V, and argued that the higher price of VMware's products are not justified by the VMware feature set, especially after the various improvements made to Hyper-V.
Microsoft did not say when it will add the one "missing" feature, but Microsoft customers seem to be confident that the functionality will be added sooner or later.
"That feature has not stopped our clients from deploying the product," said Burton Group analyst Chris Wolf.
Read the views of online Certification Experts, which provide the real questions and correct answer and explanation for the students / professionals who are seeking or enhancing their level of expertise. more at certkingdom.com
August 27, 2010
Microsoft leaks Internet Explorer 9 screenshot
Microsoft leaks Internet Explorer 9 screenshot
Microsoft has given web users a sneak peak of what Internet Explorer 9 will look like ahead of the launch of an IE9 beta on September 15.
According to ZDNet blogger Mary Jo Foley, a screenshot of the new web browser was posted on Microsoft's Russian Press site yesterday.
IE9 appears to feature a more minimalistic design than its predecessors and while the Back button and a combined URL and search box remain, Foley pointed out that there's no menu items including 'Favorites' and 'Suggested Sites'.
According to the text that accompanied the screenshot, Microsoft said the menu items have "been consolidated into one". "Now the user sees only what you need to navigate."
Microsoft is also thought to have built on the Windows 7 Aero Snap feature. 'Tear-off tabs' will allow users to drag a tab into a new window, ensuring they can be compared next to each other in the same screen.
Microsoft has given web users a sneak peak of what Internet Explorer 9 will look like ahead of the launch of an IE9 beta on September 15.
According to ZDNet blogger Mary Jo Foley, a screenshot of the new web browser was posted on Microsoft's Russian Press site yesterday.
IE9 appears to feature a more minimalistic design than its predecessors and while the Back button and a combined URL and search box remain, Foley pointed out that there's no menu items including 'Favorites' and 'Suggested Sites'.
According to the text that accompanied the screenshot, Microsoft said the menu items have "been consolidated into one". "Now the user sees only what you need to navigate."
Microsoft is also thought to have built on the Windows 7 Aero Snap feature. 'Tear-off tabs' will allow users to drag a tab into a new window, ensuring they can be compared next to each other in the same screen.
August 21, 2010
Microsoft Visual Studio users get lab management
Microsoft Visual Studio users get lab management
Offering aid to quality assurance labs, Microsoft MCTS Training this week began offering Visual Studio Lab Management for Visual Studio 2010 users, enabling automation of the build-deploy-test process for software development while maintaining visibility into the process itself.
Managing a quality assurance lab can be challenging, said S. Somasegar, senior vice president of the Microsoft Developer Division, in a blog post.
Free trial: Diskeeper 2010 Server Edition: View now
[ Get the scoop on Visual Studio 2010 in the InfoWorld Test Center review. | Keep up with app dev issues and trends with InfoWorld's Fatal Exception blog and Developer Central newsletter. ]
"A dizzying number of machines need to be set up, torn down, or restored to a particular snapshot so the software team can work at maximum efficiency. Daily builds need to be available on schedule. Multiple virtual machine environments need to be managed. Managing a lab efficiently can be a significant task," Somasegar said.
Visual Studio Lab Management leverages Microsoft Hyper-V virtualization, enabling an integrated Hyper-V-based test lab.
"Getting an environment configured correctly just to reproduce a bug can take significant time and effort," Somasegar said. "Lab Management allows testers to provide a link to a virtual machine snapshot directly in a bug report so developers can see exactly what testers see. Developers can spend more time debugging and less time installing, configuring, and deploying."
Users can store, manage, and deploy to known configurations and test environments using Microsoft's System Center Virtual Machine Manager.
A preconfigured VHD (Virtual Hard Disk) of Visual Studio 2010 Lab Management is available at Microsoft's website.
Visual Studio Lab Management is offered for MSDN-based customers of Visual Studio Test Professional 2010 and Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate.
This article, "Microsoft MCITP Certification Visual Studio users get lab management," was originally published at InfoWorld.com. Follow the latest developments in business technology news and get a digest of the key stories each day in the InfoWorld Daily newsletter.
Offering aid to quality assurance labs, Microsoft MCTS Training this week began offering Visual Studio Lab Management for Visual Studio 2010 users, enabling automation of the build-deploy-test process for software development while maintaining visibility into the process itself.
Managing a quality assurance lab can be challenging, said S. Somasegar, senior vice president of the Microsoft Developer Division, in a blog post.
Free trial: Diskeeper 2010 Server Edition: View now
[ Get the scoop on Visual Studio 2010 in the InfoWorld Test Center review. | Keep up with app dev issues and trends with InfoWorld's Fatal Exception blog and Developer Central newsletter. ]
"A dizzying number of machines need to be set up, torn down, or restored to a particular snapshot so the software team can work at maximum efficiency. Daily builds need to be available on schedule. Multiple virtual machine environments need to be managed. Managing a lab efficiently can be a significant task," Somasegar said.
Visual Studio Lab Management leverages Microsoft Hyper-V virtualization, enabling an integrated Hyper-V-based test lab.
"Getting an environment configured correctly just to reproduce a bug can take significant time and effort," Somasegar said. "Lab Management allows testers to provide a link to a virtual machine snapshot directly in a bug report so developers can see exactly what testers see. Developers can spend more time debugging and less time installing, configuring, and deploying."
Users can store, manage, and deploy to known configurations and test environments using Microsoft's System Center Virtual Machine Manager.
A preconfigured VHD (Virtual Hard Disk) of Visual Studio 2010 Lab Management is available at Microsoft's website.
Visual Studio Lab Management is offered for MSDN-based customers of Visual Studio Test Professional 2010 and Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate.
This article, "Microsoft MCITP Certification Visual Studio users get lab management," was originally published at InfoWorld.com. Follow the latest developments in business technology news and get a digest of the key stories each day in the InfoWorld Daily newsletter.
Microsoft Visual Studio users get lab management
Microsoft Visual Studio users get lab management
Offering aid to quality assurance labs, Microsoft MCTS Training this week began offering Visual Studio Lab Management for Visual Studio 2010 users, enabling automation of the build-deploy-test process for software development while maintaining visibility into the process itself.
Managing a quality assurance lab can be challenging, said S. Somasegar, senior vice president of the Microsoft Developer Division, in a blog post.
Free trial: Diskeeper 2010 Server Edition: View now
[ Get the scoop on Visual Studio 2010 in the InfoWorld Test Center review. | Keep up with app dev issues and trends with InfoWorld's Fatal Exception blog and Developer Central newsletter. ]
"A dizzying number of machines need to be set up, torn down, or restored to a particular snapshot so the software team can work at maximum efficiency. Daily builds need to be available on schedule. Multiple virtual machine environments need to be managed. Managing a lab efficiently can be a significant task," Somasegar said.
Visual Studio Lab Management leverages Microsoft Hyper-V virtualization, enabling an integrated Hyper-V-based test lab.
"Getting an environment configured correctly just to reproduce a bug can take significant time and effort," Somasegar said. "Lab Management allows testers to provide a link to a virtual machine snapshot directly in a bug report so developers can see exactly what testers see. Developers can spend more time debugging and less time installing, configuring, and deploying."
Users can store, manage, and deploy to known configurations and test environments using Microsoft's System Center Virtual Machine Manager.
A preconfigured VHD (Virtual Hard Disk) of Visual Studio 2010 Lab Management is available at Microsoft's website.
Visual Studio Lab Management is offered for MSDN-based customers of Visual Studio Test Professional 2010 and Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate.
This article, "Microsoft MCITP Certification Visual Studio users get lab management," was originally published at InfoWorld.com. Follow the latest developments in business technology news and get a digest of the key stories each day in the InfoWorld Daily newsletter.
Offering aid to quality assurance labs, Microsoft MCTS Training this week began offering Visual Studio Lab Management for Visual Studio 2010 users, enabling automation of the build-deploy-test process for software development while maintaining visibility into the process itself.
Managing a quality assurance lab can be challenging, said S. Somasegar, senior vice president of the Microsoft Developer Division, in a blog post.
Free trial: Diskeeper 2010 Server Edition: View now
[ Get the scoop on Visual Studio 2010 in the InfoWorld Test Center review. | Keep up with app dev issues and trends with InfoWorld's Fatal Exception blog and Developer Central newsletter. ]
"A dizzying number of machines need to be set up, torn down, or restored to a particular snapshot so the software team can work at maximum efficiency. Daily builds need to be available on schedule. Multiple virtual machine environments need to be managed. Managing a lab efficiently can be a significant task," Somasegar said.
Visual Studio Lab Management leverages Microsoft Hyper-V virtualization, enabling an integrated Hyper-V-based test lab.
"Getting an environment configured correctly just to reproduce a bug can take significant time and effort," Somasegar said. "Lab Management allows testers to provide a link to a virtual machine snapshot directly in a bug report so developers can see exactly what testers see. Developers can spend more time debugging and less time installing, configuring, and deploying."
Users can store, manage, and deploy to known configurations and test environments using Microsoft's System Center Virtual Machine Manager.
A preconfigured VHD (Virtual Hard Disk) of Visual Studio 2010 Lab Management is available at Microsoft's website.
Visual Studio Lab Management is offered for MSDN-based customers of Visual Studio Test Professional 2010 and Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate.
This article, "Microsoft MCITP Certification Visual Studio users get lab management," was originally published at InfoWorld.com. Follow the latest developments in business technology news and get a digest of the key stories each day in the InfoWorld Daily newsletter.
August 15, 2010
Microsoft Cut Privacy Features to Sell Ads in IE8
Microsoft Cut Privacy Features to Sell Ads in IE8
Privacy by default, wouldn't that be a nice change? Microsoft's IE development team had designed innovative privacy features that would have been turned on by default to effectively help users avoid being tracked online. Sadly, as reported by the Wall Street Journal, Microsoft cut the IE8 privacy features to sell ads.
0diggsdigg
In early 2008, the Internet Explorer 8 development team, led by general manager Dean Hachamovitch, had privacy features like InPrivate Subscriptions. According to the WSJ, privacy groups were to compile "black listed" website addresses that would have been automatically blocked by InPrivate Subscriptions. Other privacy features would have limited third parties from easily tracking mouse clicks and other activity. Too bad, so sad for privacy when Microsoft executives found out that designers actually wanted to protect users. Microsoft had spent $6 billion on a Web-ad firm that would help it track and sell targeted ads. This reportedly triggered a heated debate between the two camps within Microsoft, going all the way up to CEO Steve Ballmer.
The WSJ reported, "At a meeting in the spring of 2008, Brian McAndrews, a Microsoft senior vice president who had been chief executive of aQuantive before Microsoft acquired it, complained to the browser planners. Their privacy plan, he argued, would disrupt the selling of Web ads by Microsoft and other companies."
In the end, Microsoft included one feature, called InPrivate Filtering. However, it doubtfully functions as developers had hoped. WSJ stated that users must turned on the privacy settings every time they start up the browser. That is truly unfortunate for users who might expect that when they take the time and effort to setup a program, that the privacy setting would then be maintained by default. What IE8 offers seems to mainly benefit online advertisers and marketers as opposed to users.
In his blog post, Hachamovitch explained the balancing act between the ongoing issue of online privacy and tracking. "Because some of the technologies that can be used for tracking are also essential today for basic functionality, there is no 'Just give me perfect privacy' feature. The way different tracking and anti-tracking technologies interact can read like a Spy vs. Spy comic strip...Part of what makes online privacy tricky is that browsing the web is fundamentally an information exchange. Your web browser offers information in order to get information. That information can identify you. Often, that information is sent automatically for your convenience (like the languages you prefer to read) to tailor the content for you."
Hachamovitch gives other tips for setting up "InPrivate Filtering" and "Block for me" automatic filtering. In a MSDN blog, IEInternals, Eric Law explains cookie controls.
The WSJ noted that Mr. McAndrews is no longer working for Microsoft. The software giant has another opportunity to act less in the interests of advertisers and more in the interest of users by applying default and robust privacy settings in the upcoming IE9. In 2008, the software development team designed software with built-in privacy features which would have served as a model for the rest of the industry. I hope in 2010, these developers (who are in touch with what Internet users actually want) will be allowed to go forward with their designs...instead of having their programs neutered.
IE8 has done some very good things since its launch, like block access to over 560 million sites that it determined were serving malware, or about 3 million blocks per day. Even that was questioned as to how many of those were legit. Microsoft has sued alleged click-fraud scammers. But there are dangers when the same company that makes your web browser also sell the ads you view inside of it. No browser is perfect, but more and more people (and businesses like IBM) are moving away from using IE as their browser and are instead using others like Firefox.
Whether it's true or not, it's said that people love to hate Microsoft. If it is true, IE9 offers a chance for the big M to turn it around and put privacy and security at the forefront by default. It is true that the average user will not take steps to setup privacy. Instead of making that the challenge, how about leaving directions for users to deactivate automatic privacy features if they choose to not want privacy as a defaulted option? It could possibly be as simple as unchecking a box that would otherwise leave the program on by default, much like Remote Assistance.
Will Microsoft choose ad money over privacy features again in IE9? Microsoft, if you set industry standards that privacy is a right by default, then others will follow.
Privacy by default, wouldn't that be a nice change? Microsoft's IE development team had designed innovative privacy features that would have been turned on by default to effectively help users avoid being tracked online. Sadly, as reported by the Wall Street Journal, Microsoft cut the IE8 privacy features to sell ads.
0diggsdigg
In early 2008, the Internet Explorer 8 development team, led by general manager Dean Hachamovitch, had privacy features like InPrivate Subscriptions. According to the WSJ, privacy groups were to compile "black listed" website addresses that would have been automatically blocked by InPrivate Subscriptions. Other privacy features would have limited third parties from easily tracking mouse clicks and other activity. Too bad, so sad for privacy when Microsoft executives found out that designers actually wanted to protect users. Microsoft had spent $6 billion on a Web-ad firm that would help it track and sell targeted ads. This reportedly triggered a heated debate between the two camps within Microsoft, going all the way up to CEO Steve Ballmer.
The WSJ reported, "At a meeting in the spring of 2008, Brian McAndrews, a Microsoft senior vice president who had been chief executive of aQuantive before Microsoft acquired it, complained to the browser planners. Their privacy plan, he argued, would disrupt the selling of Web ads by Microsoft and other companies."
In the end, Microsoft included one feature, called InPrivate Filtering. However, it doubtfully functions as developers had hoped. WSJ stated that users must turned on the privacy settings every time they start up the browser. That is truly unfortunate for users who might expect that when they take the time and effort to setup a program, that the privacy setting would then be maintained by default. What IE8 offers seems to mainly benefit online advertisers and marketers as opposed to users.
In his blog post, Hachamovitch explained the balancing act between the ongoing issue of online privacy and tracking. "Because some of the technologies that can be used for tracking are also essential today for basic functionality, there is no 'Just give me perfect privacy' feature. The way different tracking and anti-tracking technologies interact can read like a Spy vs. Spy comic strip...Part of what makes online privacy tricky is that browsing the web is fundamentally an information exchange. Your web browser offers information in order to get information. That information can identify you. Often, that information is sent automatically for your convenience (like the languages you prefer to read) to tailor the content for you."
Hachamovitch gives other tips for setting up "InPrivate Filtering" and "Block for me" automatic filtering. In a MSDN blog, IEInternals, Eric Law explains cookie controls.
The WSJ noted that Mr. McAndrews is no longer working for Microsoft. The software giant has another opportunity to act less in the interests of advertisers and more in the interest of users by applying default and robust privacy settings in the upcoming IE9. In 2008, the software development team designed software with built-in privacy features which would have served as a model for the rest of the industry. I hope in 2010, these developers (who are in touch with what Internet users actually want) will be allowed to go forward with their designs...instead of having their programs neutered.
IE8 has done some very good things since its launch, like block access to over 560 million sites that it determined were serving malware, or about 3 million blocks per day. Even that was questioned as to how many of those were legit. Microsoft has sued alleged click-fraud scammers. But there are dangers when the same company that makes your web browser also sell the ads you view inside of it. No browser is perfect, but more and more people (and businesses like IBM) are moving away from using IE as their browser and are instead using others like Firefox.
Whether it's true or not, it's said that people love to hate Microsoft. If it is true, IE9 offers a chance for the big M to turn it around and put privacy and security at the forefront by default. It is true that the average user will not take steps to setup privacy. Instead of making that the challenge, how about leaving directions for users to deactivate automatic privacy features if they choose to not want privacy as a defaulted option? It could possibly be as simple as unchecking a box that would otherwise leave the program on by default, much like Remote Assistance.
Will Microsoft choose ad money over privacy features again in IE9? Microsoft, if you set industry standards that privacy is a right by default, then others will follow.
August 13, 2010
Windows XP Common Problems and Gotcha's
Windows XP Common Problems and Gotcha's
I will use this tip to collect gotcha!s and common problems in Windows XP. If you have corrections, additions, or questions, please send them to Wayne Maples .
Probably biggest gotcha! is that Windows XP Pro and Windows XP Home are very different products. Lots is missing in XP Home and it is much less stable than XP Pro.
* Acdsee May Cause an Error Message
* ACPI Troubleshooting
* Admin file ownership in XP Inconsistent
* Admin pw : Cannot Change the Password for the Administrator Account in User Accounts in Control Panel
* Admin can't install updates? Only happens if your workstation is part of domain it has either reg key HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Policies\Explorer\NoWindowsUpdate set and/or has changed full control permission from admin on HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\WindowsUpdate.
* Audit accounts: if you have auditing enabled, users may be prompted for a password even if no password is required. If this happens there is nothing you can do except assign passwords. You could try the current SP to see if it resolves the bug. Its actually an odd situation. What environment would had auditing enable and allow auto logon?
* audio or video files don't play - GSpot Codec Information Appliance will tell you what codec are required
* Backup utility for XP Home - where is it? On the install CD in \VALUEADD\MSFT\NTBACKUP. Double-click the Ntbackup.msi to start the wizard that installs the Backup utility.
* Bandwidth : XP needlessly consumes 20% of available bandwidth. The QoS packet scheduler dialogue box in XP Pro has a default bandwidth limit of 20%. Some interpreted this setting to mean that XP will hold back 20% of your bandwidth even if its packet scheduler was turned off. Not true.
* Blank activate Windows page in the Windows Product Activation Wizard
* Booting
o BootVis.exe Tool - This tool is no longer available - More information
o How to Disable a Service or Device that Prevents Windows from Booting
o "System Has Recovered from a Serious Error" message every reboot (Q317277)
* CD - when you copy files from a CD to your HD, XP copies them read-only. Need to update them? Remove the read only attrib : attrib -r * /s
* CD-R Drive or CD-RW Drive Is Not Recognized As a Recordable Device
* CD-ROM Drive or DVD-ROM Drive Missing After You Install Windows XP
* "Incorrect Function" Error Message When You Access the CD-ROM Drive, DVD-ROM Drive, or CD-RW Drive
* "CD Recording Software Will Cause Windows to Become Unstable" Error Message When You Start Windows
* CD-ROM Access Is Missing and Messages Cite Error Code 31, Code 32, Code 19, or Code 39 After You Remove Easy CD Creator in Windows XP
* CDRom : Limited users can not burn CDs in Windows XP Home
if you have setup limited users and want them to be able to burn CDs, set value HLM\Software\Microsoft\WindowsNT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\AllocateDASD = 2.
* C-Media Cmaudio.ax Driver : Problems When You Are Using an Out-of-Date Version
* Compiling programs take 30-40% longer on XP rather than NT. Solution: Compile on a Windows XP-Based Computer Takes Longer to Complete Than on a Windows NT-based Computer
* Compressed files : XP search treats zips as directories and searches through them. If you have lots of compressed files, this can extend XP search time to hours. Solution: Disable Windows XP's builtin zip support
* Computer Does Not Start After You Change the Active Partition by Using the Disk Management Tool
* Control Panel icons missing after upgrading to XP
delete the HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Control Panel\Don't load key.
* Copying from XP to Windows 2000 SLOWWWWWWWWWW
Q321169: Slow SMB Performance When You Copy Files from Windows XP to a Windows 2000 Domain Controller
* Crashes :
o XP setting crashes dorm networks Bill Brawley, director of user communications at Computing Services, said that the problem begins when a laptop with Windows XP switches between the wireless Internet card and an Ethernet cable connection. "There are two sort of network interfaces then," Brawley said. "The bridge feature is handy on a home network, but on our network it bridges those two devices and sets up a loop in which packets travel between the networks, sort of a feedback loop. This messes up both networks for the whole building." For background on bridging issues:
o XP Bridging and Media Support for Home Networking
* CreativeLabs :
o Audigy registration program causes error message : InetReg.exe has encountered a problem and needs to close. We are sorry for the inconvenience
o Error Message When You Shut Down Computer: DEVLDR Not Responding
* Ctplay2.exe has encountered a problem and needs to close.
Creative SoundBlaster Audigy Audio May Cause an Error
* CPU : Explorer.exe Process Uses Many CPU Cycles When Windows Is Idle
* Desktop Icons gone !!!
This is a setting available in XP. Maybe your buddy is screwing with you. In any case:
o Right-click desktop
o Select Arrange Icons by
o Check/uncheck Show Desktop Icons
* Device conflicts: Troubleshooting Device Conflicts with Device Manager
* Disk Cleanup : Stops Responding when searching for compressed files
Q812248 : caused by incorrect entry in the registry
This can also be caused by a corrupt temporary file. Clear the files from the Temp folder:
o Close all applications
o Start, click Run and type %temp% which opens the Temp folder
o Type Ctrl+A to select all files
o Press Delete
o Close Windows Explorer
o Open the Control Panel Internet Options applet
o Select the General tab, then click Delete Files
o Select the Delete all offline content check box
o Click OK
* DSL : XP kills Verizon DSL
* DVD : Windows 2000 DVD-ROM Drive Cannot Read Windows XP-Formatted DVD
Q304841 Although Win98 can read the XP formatted DVD!
* XP often will not read or write to a floppy formatted by an earlier version of Windows
Keep it in mind. No prob if formatted by XP.
* Hard Disk Performance Is Slower Than You Expect in XP
* IE issues - probably not unique to any particular OS
o IE only saves graphics as BMPs
* Internet Connection Sharing in Windows XP Troubleshooting
* Dial-Up Connection in ICS Does Not Prompt to Disconnect when you quit Microsoft Internet Explorer on an Internet Connection Sharing (ICS) client computer,
* Infrared Data Transfer Slower in Windows XP Than in Windows 2000
workaround
* information about the hardware installed on his computer hangs with message: 'all.part2' is null, or it is not an object
* IIS : can't install IIS web server under XP Home - have to upgrade to XP Pro or use Apache instead
* Language gotcha! : Cannot Upgrade or Install a Different Language Version of Windows XP
* Mail Folders, Address Book, and E-mail Messages Are Missing After You Upgrade to Microsoft Windows XP
* Media Player Info Exposure XP Windows When you play media files, Media Player collects titles, artiles and album art from the Internet. It also leaves behind info about you and your computer. To block Windows Media Player from providing your info: click Tools > Options and go to the Player tab and disable option Allow Internet sites to uniquely identify your player?
* Modem Does Not Work After You Upgrade a Hewlett Packard Pavilion Computer to Windows XP this occurs when you upgrade certain models of the HP Pavilion computer that are equipped with a modem based on the Rockwell chip set.
* Modem, external serial modem can't be installed because XP does not recognize any COM ports except for the LPT port for the printer. Enable com port in BIOS and reboot. Now XP will have serial port available.
* Mouse Pointer Moves Erratically or Does Not Respond with Windows XP
* Netware : Poor Performance with File and Print Services for NetWare
* My Network Places vulnerability
* Outlook Express : can't make it default mail client
you try to set Outlook Express in XP as your default mail client. It resets saying "this is not the default mail client" every time you go into the options menu. Solution: Click Start, Run and enter MSIMN.EXE /REG Then if needed, go to Control Panel, Internet Options, Programs and click the Reset Web Settings Button.
* passwords:
o Admin resets user's password and user loses access to EFS-encrypted files, email and various credentials
No problem if PC is a member of a domain but a real problem for non-domain PCs.
o Admin pw : Cannot Change the Password for the Administrator Account in User Accounts in Control Panel
o No Password Expiration Notice Is Presented During the Logon Process
* Q811493 - Windows XP Security : after applying it, XP systems are SLOW
* Random crashes - causes
o USB hub - got one? XP crashing? Worse - using an unpowered hub? Remove it and see if crashes stop.
what I see more often is that hub works well before upgrading to XP but not under XP.
o memory - my first thought - remove existing memory and replace with known good memory. Sometimes you just need to reseat cards and memory; vibrated ever so slightly loose.
o drivers or bios - always check with vendors - particularly sound cards
o power supply - not as common with modern boxes but if your PC is older, it may literally be underpowered. upgrade to a 400w.
* Recovery Console in Windows XP
'The Password Is Not Valid' Error Message Appears When You Log On to Recovery Console in Windows XP
* Remove programs - can't - get Error 1719
occur when you try to add or remove a program that uses the Windows Installer Microsoft Software Installation (MSI) package file (.msi).
* Restore Point
o Restore Point : Restoration Incomplete occurs when the computer is not shut down properly
o When you start the System Restore tool and view the "Select a Restore Point" page, some of your restore points may be missing : Q301224
o When you run the System Restore tool on a Windows XP-based computer, the calendar on the left side of the "Choose a Restore Point" window is not displayed : Q313853
* "RUNDLL32.EXE - Entry Point Not Found" Error Message When You Start Your Computer Believe it or not, if you get this error, one major cause is older NVIDIA video drivers. Update them.
* Scandisk missing ? XP like NT uses chkdsk.exe. Open a cmd prompt and type in chkdsk.exe /? to checkout the available parameters you may use.
* Search function in WindowsR XP has a known issue of not finding a number of File Types when you do a Search for Files "containing text" or using the "A word or phrase in the file" option. See Using the "A Word or Phrase in the File" Search Criterion May Not Work for Microsoft writeup or Search - Text for an alterative.
* Security Exposure : XP Windows Universal Plug and Play
* Security flaw : IE I can't begin to list the number of security problems found in IE. Use Windows Update often or if you fear it, monitor current security issues and patch when needed. Really Windows Update will save you a world of hassle. I would schedule the updates manually. See Automatic Updates Give XP Users New Headaches.
* Security tab missing in XP If your hard drive is formatted NTFS, you can set permissions on files if you right-click file and choose properties. If your XP workstation is standalone or part of a workgroup, the security tab will be hidden. To have it show,
o Open Windows Explorer
o Choose Folder Options from the Tools menu
o On the View tab, scroll to the bottom of the Advanced Settings
o Clear the check box next to "Use Simple File Sharing."
o Click OK to apply the change
* Serious privacy problems in Windows Media Player for Windows XP
* Services : disable service with services.msc rather than msconfig
msconfig will allow you to disable any service including required services - services.msc will not allow you to do that kind of damage.
* Sony MovieShaker : "This Application Cannot Use This File as a Clip"
error message appears after an upgrade to Windows XP on a Sony VAIO PCV-R553DS computer that runs Windows 98 Second Edition and has MovieShaker version 1.1 installed. this version of Sony MovieShaker is not compatible with Windows XP
* Shutdown : Resources to Help Troubleshoot Shutdown Problems in Windows XP
* Startup : Resources for Troubleshooting Startup Problems in Windows XP
* STOP errors:
o STOP 0x00000073 CONFIG_LIST_FAILED Error Message in Windows XP
one of the core Windows system hives (the SAM hive, the SECURITY hive, the SOFTWARE hive, or the DEFAULT hive) cannot be linked in the Windows registry. However, this error does not mean that the hive is damaged or that it was not loaded successfully.
o STOP 0x00000074 BAD_SYSTEM_CONFIG_INFO Error Message in Windows XP
caused by having one or more RAM sticks that are either damaged or not placed into the computer correctly. turn off the computer and double check the RAM seating. If the memory is seated correctly, it could be that you have a bad DIMM. Try swapping out the DIMMs one at a time.
o STOP 0x0000009C MACHINE_CHECK_EXCEPTION Error Message in Windows XP
processor detected an unrecoverable hardware error and reported it to Windows XP
o "Stop 0x000000A5" Error When You Are Installing Windows XP
Windows has detected that the BIOS in the computer is not fully compliant with Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI).
o Stop 0x000000C2 error in Windows XP
kernel-mode process or driver incorrectly attempted to perform a memory operation. This error message is typically caused by a faulty device driver or software.
o Stop 0x000000D1 Error Message When You Turn Your Computer Off
the OHCI endpoint is unable to find the transfer descriptor in the list of USB devices attached
o Stop 0xc0000135 Damaged Registry Repair and Recovery in Windows XP
Registry damage often occurs when programs with access to the registry do not cleanly remove temporary items that they store in the registry. This problem may also be caused if a program is terminated or experiences a user-mode fault.
*
o System restore points taking up LOTS of space. This can consume several gigs. Solution is to set maximum space allocated to System Restore In the System Restore tab of the system applet in the Control Panel, click on settings and reduce the amount of space allotted to System Restore. This will remove older restore points using space not allocated and it will prevent System Restore from getting too large in the future.
o System Restore Tool Displays a Blank Calendar in Windows XP
* Taskbar Is Missing When You Logon
* Upgrade gotcha!:
o "Setupapi.dll File Appears to be Corrupt" Error Message When You Try to Upgrade to Windows XP
o Existing Computers Are Not Updated to the DNS-Style Domain Name After You Upgrade the Domain to Active Directory
o User Profiles May Not Be Migrated During Windows XP Upgrade
o Missing Third-Party Control Panel Icons After Upgrade to Windows XP
* Video Drivers : How to Determine Which Video Driver Is Loading in Windows XP
* Webfolders : Cannot Add FQDN Web Folders that Require Basic Authentication to "My Network Places"
* Windows XP Stops Responding at the Welcome Screen
System restart has been paused : computer enters into the Hibernate mode and accesses a corrupted memory snapshot
* XP SP1 Problems
o SP1 : 100 Percent CPU Usage May Occur Under Some Battery Conditions
o SP1 : Network File Errors Occur After You Install Windows XP SP1
August 10, 2010
TO MAKE MONEY WITHOUT SPENDING MONEY AND TIME IS TO HAVE THE
TO MAKE MONEY WITHOUT SPENDING MONEY AND TIME IS TO HAVE THE KNOWELRDGE! LEARN HOW TO …… FROM THE BEST EXPERT.
He, the Marketing Rebel, reveals the secrets behind the most successful and profitable ads in advertising history.
John Reese is expert in traffic generation and conversion.
Jeff Mulligan is the king of Clickbank. Microsoft MCITP Certification
Jill Whalen provides free advice and expert search engine optimization, SEO copywriting, search marketing consulting, and SEO seminars.
Jim Daniels is the best of the best in the complicated internet marketing universe.
Jim Edwards specializes in helping small, internet-based businesses find, use and profit from new and existing marketing and automation tools.
Jonathan Mizel is a well known and respected internet marketing expert. He is the acknowledged expert on targeted opt-in e-mail.
Ken Evoy is the creator of the revolutionary Web site-building system.
Dr Kevin Nunley helps small and mid-sized businesses build effective marketing.
Kevin Wilke is the master of automation – which is one of the goals of all marketers, so he or she can keep an income active while maintaining now product development and new activities. He is one of the best copywriters in the world. Microsoft MCTS Training
Lorrie Morgan-Ferrero is one of the most sought-after copywriting experts.
Lynn Terry is expert in: Internet Business Development & Start-up.
Dr Mani is webmaster and an expert commentator on Ezine Publishing and Marketing.
He, the Marketing Rebel, reveals the secrets behind the most successful and profitable ads in advertising history.
John Reese is expert in traffic generation and conversion.
Jeff Mulligan is the king of Clickbank. Microsoft MCITP Certification
Jill Whalen provides free advice and expert search engine optimization, SEO copywriting, search marketing consulting, and SEO seminars.
Jim Daniels is the best of the best in the complicated internet marketing universe.
Jim Edwards specializes in helping small, internet-based businesses find, use and profit from new and existing marketing and automation tools.
Jonathan Mizel is a well known and respected internet marketing expert. He is the acknowledged expert on targeted opt-in e-mail.
Ken Evoy is the creator of the revolutionary Web site-building system.
Dr Kevin Nunley helps small and mid-sized businesses build effective marketing.
Kevin Wilke is the master of automation – which is one of the goals of all marketers, so he or she can keep an income active while maintaining now product development and new activities. He is one of the best copywriters in the world. Microsoft MCTS Training
Lorrie Morgan-Ferrero is one of the most sought-after copywriting experts.
Lynn Terry is expert in: Internet Business Development & Start-up.
Dr Mani is webmaster and an expert commentator on Ezine Publishing and Marketing.
August 9, 2010
Is Microsoft SQL Server really cheaper than Oracle?
Is SQL Server really cheaper than Oracle? That’s a question that the vendors themselves have manipulated back and forth for many years now. However, there’s really no debate because the short answer is, Damn right it is. Oracle can spin the numbers any way they want, but the truth on the ground is that Microsoft MCTS Training kills Oracle in pricing. At work I manage both the SQL Server and the Oracle DBAs so I deal with licensing on both sides and the quotes we get from Oracle are always considerably more than the ones we get from Microsoft MCITP Certification.
I recently wrote a piece on the new release of SQL Server 2008 R2 (R2 for short) where I chastised MS for their cut-off point for Enterprise vs. Datacenter. In that piece I said that I was completely against them cutting Enterprise edition off at 8 CPUs because there are plenty of enterprises out there with boxes with more CPUs than that. And I stand by that statement because currently they’ve got more customers running Enterprise edition than they’ll ever have upgrading to R2 under the new SKU division. The reason is simple… barring the price increase of going to R2, nobody is going to also do a SKU upgrade to Datacenter just to get a few BI enhancements. And btw, R2 has also picked up some bugs that weren’t present in the previous version so it can also be a dangerous upgrade if you’re not careful. So anyway though back to the topic at hand. There’s no way MS is gonna get people to shell out the 60K/CPU for Datacenter just for the bragging rights of being on R2 because you can’t upgrade from Enterprise to Enterprise R2 if you’ve got more than 8 CPUs.
That said though, I do think MS is setting up pricing for the future. I was at TechEd recently talking to one of the MS guys and he pointed out to me that while he agrees that currently the SKU-point is a little low, we’re starting to see 16 and 32 core CPUs on the market which will definitely help offset the cost because SQL Server is still licensed per physical CPU. I’ll also add that R2 supports 256 physical CPUs. So a little bit of math shows us that if you paid list price for R2 Datacenter on a completely maxed-out box with 256 CPUs, you’d pay $15,360,000. For those of you who aren’t that good with commas, that’s 15million and change. Sounds like a lot of money huh? Well it is, but if you compare it with Oracle’s licensing which is about $45K/core, you get something completely different. Let’s take that same 256-CPU scenario and apply it to Oracle Enterprise.
If you’ve got 256 CPUs each with 2 cores, that’s 512 cores total so the math works out to a total of $23,040,000. So that’s 24 million, right? Ok, but let’s take a look at the future and throw in one of those 16-core CPUs. Let’s say that you’ve got a 256 16-core box. Now the sticker price is $184,320,000. Yes, that’s 184 million! Now the 15 million for SQL Server isn’t looking too bad is it? I’ll let you do the math on the 32-core CPUs.
So to even try to compare Oracle with SQL Server in price is just ridiculous. There are some very limited instances where Oracle can beat MS in pricing, but it’s rarely anything you’d ever see in the wild. So it’s really time for all you Oracle guys out there to stop bending the numbers so much by throwing in these ridiculous parameters that make Oracle seem less expensive. And trying to justify the cost with features doesn’t work either cause all of those features you tout (Advanced Data Guard, etc) are 3% features that hardly anybody uses. There’s no argument that Oracle beats SQL Server in rich features. P-SQL has more features than T-SQL and Oracle simply has better high-end features for HA and DR. That said, most people don’t need a lot of those features especially when you see how expensive they are.
And you SQL Server guys out there complaining that MS raised the price for R2… well, they haven’t raised the price of SQL Server since 2005 that I know of and the cost of living has gone up considerably since then so a price hike was inevitable wasn’t it?
I recently wrote a piece on the new release of SQL Server 2008 R2 (R2 for short) where I chastised MS for their cut-off point for Enterprise vs. Datacenter. In that piece I said that I was completely against them cutting Enterprise edition off at 8 CPUs because there are plenty of enterprises out there with boxes with more CPUs than that. And I stand by that statement because currently they’ve got more customers running Enterprise edition than they’ll ever have upgrading to R2 under the new SKU division. The reason is simple… barring the price increase of going to R2, nobody is going to also do a SKU upgrade to Datacenter just to get a few BI enhancements. And btw, R2 has also picked up some bugs that weren’t present in the previous version so it can also be a dangerous upgrade if you’re not careful. So anyway though back to the topic at hand. There’s no way MS is gonna get people to shell out the 60K/CPU for Datacenter just for the bragging rights of being on R2 because you can’t upgrade from Enterprise to Enterprise R2 if you’ve got more than 8 CPUs.
That said though, I do think MS is setting up pricing for the future. I was at TechEd recently talking to one of the MS guys and he pointed out to me that while he agrees that currently the SKU-point is a little low, we’re starting to see 16 and 32 core CPUs on the market which will definitely help offset the cost because SQL Server is still licensed per physical CPU. I’ll also add that R2 supports 256 physical CPUs. So a little bit of math shows us that if you paid list price for R2 Datacenter on a completely maxed-out box with 256 CPUs, you’d pay $15,360,000. For those of you who aren’t that good with commas, that’s 15million and change. Sounds like a lot of money huh? Well it is, but if you compare it with Oracle’s licensing which is about $45K/core, you get something completely different. Let’s take that same 256-CPU scenario and apply it to Oracle Enterprise.
If you’ve got 256 CPUs each with 2 cores, that’s 512 cores total so the math works out to a total of $23,040,000. So that’s 24 million, right? Ok, but let’s take a look at the future and throw in one of those 16-core CPUs. Let’s say that you’ve got a 256 16-core box. Now the sticker price is $184,320,000. Yes, that’s 184 million! Now the 15 million for SQL Server isn’t looking too bad is it? I’ll let you do the math on the 32-core CPUs.
So to even try to compare Oracle with SQL Server in price is just ridiculous. There are some very limited instances where Oracle can beat MS in pricing, but it’s rarely anything you’d ever see in the wild. So it’s really time for all you Oracle guys out there to stop bending the numbers so much by throwing in these ridiculous parameters that make Oracle seem less expensive. And trying to justify the cost with features doesn’t work either cause all of those features you tout (Advanced Data Guard, etc) are 3% features that hardly anybody uses. There’s no argument that Oracle beats SQL Server in rich features. P-SQL has more features than T-SQL and Oracle simply has better high-end features for HA and DR. That said, most people don’t need a lot of those features especially when you see how expensive they are.
And you SQL Server guys out there complaining that MS raised the price for R2… well, they haven’t raised the price of SQL Server since 2005 that I know of and the cost of living has gone up considerably since then so a price hike was inevitable wasn’t it?
August 5, 2010
Rogue Security Researchers vs Microsoft Karma Is Brutal
Rogue Security Researchers vs Microsoft Karma Is Brutal
What happens when a giant software company ticks off a group of security researchers? Microsoft is finding out. A group of rogue security researchers calling itself MSRC (Microsoft-Spurned Researcher Collective) announced it will publicize any Windows vulnerabilities it finds, as opposed to quietly reporting them to Microsoft for the company to patch. MSRC anonymous security researchers are not to be confused with the Microsoft MCTS Training Security Response Center, also MSRC, the group within Microsoft responsible for investigating vulnerabilities. Yesterday, another MS exploit was released.
Their declaration against Microsoft was posted on the Full Disclosure security mailing list.
Due to hostility toward security researchers, the most recent example being of Tavis Ormandy, a number of us from the industry (and some not from the industry) have come together to form MSRC: the Microsoft-Spurned Researcher Collective. MSRC will fully disclose vulnerability information discovered in our free time, free from retaliation against us or any inferred employer.
"We at MSRC would like to help you, the users, work around this issue, but PatchGuard will not allow us ;-("
484diggsdigg
MSRC added the workaround as: "Microsoft can workaround these advisories by locating the following registry key: HKCU\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Security and changing the "OurJob" boolean value to FALSE."
The term PatchGaurd refers to Kernel Patch Protection (KPP), a feature of x64 editions of Microsoft Windows that prevents patching the kernel. It was first introduced in 2005 with the x64 editions of Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1, according to Wikipedia.
Microsoft replied that it is investigating that bug, but that the risk to users was minimal. Secunia, a Danish vulnerability tracking firm agreed with Microsoft, stating that the bug would only affect fully patched versions of Windows Vista Business SP1 and Windows Server 2008 Enterprise SP1 and SP2.
On Monday, Secunia published an advisory that outlined a "moderately critical" bug in Windows 2000 and Windows XP that could be used to hijack PCs.
On Tuesday, however, the Microsoft-Spurned Researcher Collective hit MS a bit harder. MusntLive released a "serious Microsoft MS SQL advisory" along with a note to "Free Travis!" According to the disclosure, this exploitable MS SQL data execution prevention violation is, "Up for sale to highest bidder (serious replies only) 6 0-day PoC's in MS SQL."
Microsoft declined to comment when I emailed them for quote regarding the new full-disclosure.
What escalated the tension between Microsoft and security researchers who, in their free time and for free, find security vulnerabilities in MS products and report them in confidentiality to MS, was the case of Tavis Ormandy.
Ormandy found a security vulnerability in Windows XP's Help and Support Center and then he gave Microsoft five days heads-up, while communicating with MS about a patch, before publishing the proof-of-concept code that demonstrates how to exploit it. Ormandy was a Swiss Google employee, but working for Google had nothing to do with it. Microsoft-Spurned Researcher Collective seems very displeased that Ormandy's employer was mentioned. It hit the fan in security circles, the right or wrong of public disclosure and responsible or irresponsible disclosure of security exploits. Microsoft reported that it has tracked more than 10,000 separate attacks that used the Windows XP zero-day exploit.
Sophos Senior Security Advisor Chester Wisniewski said on his firm's blog last week, "While these attacks are very serious, it strikes me as some classic PR on Microsoft's part to release a statistic like this while trying to blame Google for Tavis's 'irresponsible disclosure.' Has Microsoft commented on the hundreds of thousands of Windows PCs infected with the ZBot Trojan? How about malicious PDFs? It seems that Microsoft is putting on the full court press to make a point about how they want vulnerability disclosures to be handled."
Disclosing vulnerabilities into the wild is a hotbed of contention. The ethical gray area is justified by some if they feel that the discovered flaw needs to be patched sooner instead of later. Some security and IT professionals back Microsoft and "responsible disclosure," stating that any vendor needs 60 days minimum to examine the vulnerabilities before coming up with a patch. Other security professionals believe public pressure from end-users will force Microsoft to close the exploit instead of being tempted to ignore it. Still others consider zero-day disclosures something done only by cyber security vigilantes. The other side of that coin is that freelance security researchers who point out problems to be patched are tired of the private reporting mechanism and apparent games by Microsoft. Perhaps the biggest winners here are the hackers who exploit the disclosed holes using the various Microsoft products.
That means the biggest losers are the enterprises, whose networks fall prey to hackers while the so-called white hats squabble.
Microsoft-Spurned Researcher Collective claims to be recruiting and checks to ensure no Microsoft employees infiltrate their ranks. "If you wish to responsibly disclose a vulnerability through full disclosure or want to join our team, fire off an email to: msrc-disclosure () hushmail com," the statement reads. This war seems to be heating up, with zero-day vulnerabilities being fully disclosed right and left.
Well
By h0h0 rux (not verified) on Wed, 07/07/2010 - 11:10pm.
You know, full disclosure is almost as bad as reporting the problem to the vendor. So your PoC is wild and that introduces the sect of lamer we like to refer to as the "script kiddie".
Let's talk about real security:
- Support non-disclosure!
- Do not distribute your 0dayz.
- Trust nobody.
- Stay thirsty, friends
Microsoft's Fault...
By DDayDawg (not verified) on Wed, 07/07/2010 - 11:34pm.
If Microsoft would treat these people properly it wouldn't be happening. You have people willing to give of their own free time to help your company find security holes in your software and you treat them like crap?
Of course, this is hardly surprising considering how Microsoft has been run since that clown was put in charge. Why in the hell anyone would trust Ballmer with a company is beyond me. He proves over and over that he is unfit to lead.
you are a moron. This is
By Anon (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 12:23pm.
you are a moron. This is the most ignorant act I have ever seen anyone take against a company. and the reason its ignorant is because windows USERS are the ones that are going to get the shit end of the stick here. Microsoft might be a bunch of dicks, but in this case I'm going to have to side with them, as opposed to this group of elitest assholes that would rather fuck over the average every day windows user cause they can't clearly think through their actions. anyone who disagrees with this statement can go shove their elitest dicks in a toaster and set it on high.
Wow
By Jo Dean (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 12:46am.
OK, that makes a lot of sense now dude.
Lou
www.web-anonymity.au.tc
Selfish
By JoshuaQ (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 1:31am.
Its not Microsoft that suffers, its the consumers who realistically lack choice. A decent product in Windows, a bad one in Apple, and a good one but hard for most consumers to use in Linux? Publishing these outside of Microsoft only makes it easier to exploit.
LOL...
By Anon (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 1:35am.
A 0-day exploit does not mean that it is newly discovered, it only means that it has been in the wild for less than a day... If your company is receiving help from anon users than you should embrace it fully. If you do not and prosecute the person for disclosing it to you... do I need to add that your retarded?
re:Lol
By Anon (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 8:46pm.
0-day does NOT mean that it is in the wild for less that a day. also the guy ws not prosecuted, he was publicly called a dick for doing the absolute wrong thing - not giving reasonable time for the software vendor to patch their product. Travis and these MSRC clowns are doing this to get their rocks off .period. and MS is the biggest target. look in the CERT Vul reports for php vulns, they are a penny a dozen none get the hype to get their rocks off. all software venders respect resonable disclosure. for ms to investigate the issue across all client and server releases is a time consuming task, let alone an assessement of the impact, creating patches for all flavors of the OSes, and testing.
you really don't want them rushing out patches, it will be a much bigger mess.
"free travis" - get a life, effin clown shoes...
an easily preventable but fair reaction to microsoft's actions
By dindinchoumeishu (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 10:43am.
never refuse help that is coming from something or someone greater than you. don't worry people, it's not like microsoft MCITP Certification was using the information disclosed to them to patch their crap OS in any sort of hurry anyways.
enlightening
By Anon (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 8:53pm.
"never refuse help that is coming from something or someone greater than you."
so enlightening, must never refuse help from a bunch of clowns seeking to push you down to make themselves look better. that makes sense. i usually call that crap self-righteousness.
now shut up.
smart money says abandon microsoft
By Anon (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 3:42pm.
with this kind of in-fighting developing in the microsoft community, cooler heads might conclude that another platform is in order. Neither party is entirely in the right here, and those who observe that the hackers are the big winners and Windows users are the big losers in this skirmish are spot-on. If MS is going to antagonize the security community to the point that they all go blackhat and start auctioning off exploits, that will hurt every person and every company trying to make a living in the windows platform ecosystem.
At the end of the day, someone has to be the bigger man and do the right thing. Doesn't look like either MS or the security researchers are stepping up, so I guess it'll have to be their collective customers.
What happens when a giant software company ticks off a group of security researchers? Microsoft is finding out. A group of rogue security researchers calling itself MSRC (Microsoft-Spurned Researcher Collective) announced it will publicize any Windows vulnerabilities it finds, as opposed to quietly reporting them to Microsoft for the company to patch. MSRC anonymous security researchers are not to be confused with the Microsoft MCTS Training Security Response Center, also MSRC, the group within Microsoft responsible for investigating vulnerabilities. Yesterday, another MS exploit was released.
Their declaration against Microsoft was posted on the Full Disclosure security mailing list.
Due to hostility toward security researchers, the most recent example being of Tavis Ormandy, a number of us from the industry (and some not from the industry) have come together to form MSRC: the Microsoft-Spurned Researcher Collective. MSRC will fully disclose vulnerability information discovered in our free time, free from retaliation against us or any inferred employer.
"We at MSRC would like to help you, the users, work around this issue, but PatchGuard will not allow us ;-("
484diggsdigg
MSRC added the workaround as: "Microsoft can workaround these advisories by locating the following registry key: HKCU\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Security and changing the "OurJob" boolean value to FALSE."
The term PatchGaurd refers to Kernel Patch Protection (KPP), a feature of x64 editions of Microsoft Windows that prevents patching the kernel. It was first introduced in 2005 with the x64 editions of Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1, according to Wikipedia.
Microsoft replied that it is investigating that bug, but that the risk to users was minimal. Secunia, a Danish vulnerability tracking firm agreed with Microsoft, stating that the bug would only affect fully patched versions of Windows Vista Business SP1 and Windows Server 2008 Enterprise SP1 and SP2.
On Monday, Secunia published an advisory that outlined a "moderately critical" bug in Windows 2000 and Windows XP that could be used to hijack PCs.
On Tuesday, however, the Microsoft-Spurned Researcher Collective hit MS a bit harder. MusntLive released a "serious Microsoft MS SQL advisory" along with a note to "Free Travis!" According to the disclosure, this exploitable MS SQL data execution prevention violation is, "Up for sale to highest bidder (serious replies only) 6 0-day PoC's in MS SQL."
Microsoft declined to comment when I emailed them for quote regarding the new full-disclosure.
What escalated the tension between Microsoft and security researchers who, in their free time and for free, find security vulnerabilities in MS products and report them in confidentiality to MS, was the case of Tavis Ormandy.
Ormandy found a security vulnerability in Windows XP's Help and Support Center and then he gave Microsoft five days heads-up, while communicating with MS about a patch, before publishing the proof-of-concept code that demonstrates how to exploit it. Ormandy was a Swiss Google employee, but working for Google had nothing to do with it. Microsoft-Spurned Researcher Collective seems very displeased that Ormandy's employer was mentioned. It hit the fan in security circles, the right or wrong of public disclosure and responsible or irresponsible disclosure of security exploits. Microsoft reported that it has tracked more than 10,000 separate attacks that used the Windows XP zero-day exploit.
Sophos Senior Security Advisor Chester Wisniewski said on his firm's blog last week, "While these attacks are very serious, it strikes me as some classic PR on Microsoft's part to release a statistic like this while trying to blame Google for Tavis's 'irresponsible disclosure.' Has Microsoft commented on the hundreds of thousands of Windows PCs infected with the ZBot Trojan? How about malicious PDFs? It seems that Microsoft is putting on the full court press to make a point about how they want vulnerability disclosures to be handled."
Disclosing vulnerabilities into the wild is a hotbed of contention. The ethical gray area is justified by some if they feel that the discovered flaw needs to be patched sooner instead of later. Some security and IT professionals back Microsoft and "responsible disclosure," stating that any vendor needs 60 days minimum to examine the vulnerabilities before coming up with a patch. Other security professionals believe public pressure from end-users will force Microsoft to close the exploit instead of being tempted to ignore it. Still others consider zero-day disclosures something done only by cyber security vigilantes. The other side of that coin is that freelance security researchers who point out problems to be patched are tired of the private reporting mechanism and apparent games by Microsoft. Perhaps the biggest winners here are the hackers who exploit the disclosed holes using the various Microsoft products.
That means the biggest losers are the enterprises, whose networks fall prey to hackers while the so-called white hats squabble.
Microsoft-Spurned Researcher Collective claims to be recruiting and checks to ensure no Microsoft employees infiltrate their ranks. "If you wish to responsibly disclose a vulnerability through full disclosure or want to join our team, fire off an email to: msrc-disclosure () hushmail com," the statement reads. This war seems to be heating up, with zero-day vulnerabilities being fully disclosed right and left.
Well
By h0h0 rux (not verified) on Wed, 07/07/2010 - 11:10pm.
You know, full disclosure is almost as bad as reporting the problem to the vendor. So your PoC is wild and that introduces the sect of lamer we like to refer to as the "script kiddie".
Let's talk about real security:
- Support non-disclosure!
- Do not distribute your 0dayz.
- Trust nobody.
- Stay thirsty, friends
Microsoft's Fault...
By DDayDawg (not verified) on Wed, 07/07/2010 - 11:34pm.
If Microsoft would treat these people properly it wouldn't be happening. You have people willing to give of their own free time to help your company find security holes in your software and you treat them like crap?
Of course, this is hardly surprising considering how Microsoft has been run since that clown was put in charge. Why in the hell anyone would trust Ballmer with a company is beyond me. He proves over and over that he is unfit to lead.
you are a moron. This is
By Anon (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 12:23pm.
you are a moron. This is the most ignorant act I have ever seen anyone take against a company. and the reason its ignorant is because windows USERS are the ones that are going to get the shit end of the stick here. Microsoft might be a bunch of dicks, but in this case I'm going to have to side with them, as opposed to this group of elitest assholes that would rather fuck over the average every day windows user cause they can't clearly think through their actions. anyone who disagrees with this statement can go shove their elitest dicks in a toaster and set it on high.
Wow
By Jo Dean (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 12:46am.
OK, that makes a lot of sense now dude.
Lou
www.web-anonymity.au.tc
Selfish
By JoshuaQ (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 1:31am.
Its not Microsoft that suffers, its the consumers who realistically lack choice. A decent product in Windows, a bad one in Apple, and a good one but hard for most consumers to use in Linux? Publishing these outside of Microsoft only makes it easier to exploit.
LOL...
By Anon (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 1:35am.
A 0-day exploit does not mean that it is newly discovered, it only means that it has been in the wild for less than a day... If your company is receiving help from anon users than you should embrace it fully. If you do not and prosecute the person for disclosing it to you... do I need to add that your retarded?
re:Lol
By Anon (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 8:46pm.
0-day does NOT mean that it is in the wild for less that a day. also the guy ws not prosecuted, he was publicly called a dick for doing the absolute wrong thing - not giving reasonable time for the software vendor to patch their product. Travis and these MSRC clowns are doing this to get their rocks off .period. and MS is the biggest target. look in the CERT Vul reports for php vulns, they are a penny a dozen none get the hype to get their rocks off. all software venders respect resonable disclosure. for ms to investigate the issue across all client and server releases is a time consuming task, let alone an assessement of the impact, creating patches for all flavors of the OSes, and testing.
you really don't want them rushing out patches, it will be a much bigger mess.
"free travis" - get a life, effin clown shoes...
an easily preventable but fair reaction to microsoft's actions
By dindinchoumeishu (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 10:43am.
never refuse help that is coming from something or someone greater than you. don't worry people, it's not like microsoft MCITP Certification was using the information disclosed to them to patch their crap OS in any sort of hurry anyways.
enlightening
By Anon (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 8:53pm.
"never refuse help that is coming from something or someone greater than you."
so enlightening, must never refuse help from a bunch of clowns seeking to push you down to make themselves look better. that makes sense. i usually call that crap self-righteousness.
now shut up.
smart money says abandon microsoft
By Anon (not verified) on Thu, 07/08/2010 - 3:42pm.
with this kind of in-fighting developing in the microsoft community, cooler heads might conclude that another platform is in order. Neither party is entirely in the right here, and those who observe that the hackers are the big winners and Windows users are the big losers in this skirmish are spot-on. If MS is going to antagonize the security community to the point that they all go blackhat and start auctioning off exploits, that will hurt every person and every company trying to make a living in the windows platform ecosystem.
At the end of the day, someone has to be the bigger man and do the right thing. Doesn't look like either MS or the security researchers are stepping up, so I guess it'll have to be their collective customers.
August 4, 2010
Microsoft Rushes Unscheduled Patch for Shortcut Flaw
Microsoft Rushes Unscheduled Patch for Shortcut Flaw
Microsoft is issuing an out-of-band patch today to address rising attacks against the Windows shortcut vulnerability discovered last month. The update comes just over a week ahead of the regularly scheduled Patch Tuesday for the month of August, but leaves Windows 2000 and Windows XP SP2 systems to fend for themselves.
The Microsoft Malware Protection Center noted "Although there have been multiple malware families that have picked up this vector, one in particular caught our attention this week--a family named Sality, and specifically Sality.AT. Sality is a highly virulent strain. It is known to infect other files (making full removal after infection challenging), copy itself to removable media, disable security, and then download other malware. It is also a very large family--one of the most prevalent families this year."
All Clouds Are Not Created Equal: View now
To protect customers against a rising tide of attacks--like Sality--which exploit the LNK flaw in Windows, Microsoft MCITP Certification expedited the release of the patch.
Qualys CTO Wolfgang Kandek points out in a blog post that "Primary attack vectors for the LNK vulnerability are USB sticks and shared drives, the attack depends on a specially crafted LNK file and a custom DLL to function. Remote attacks through e-mail or websites are theoretically possible, but require multiple steps and user interaction."
Kandek explained "Windows 2000 and XP SP2 users will not be covered and are now in a predicament that will become increasingly urgent. Attacks will continue to become more prevalent and their defensive options are limited."
Microsoft does provide advice for a workaround that could mitigate the risk on these legacy platforms in security advisory KB2286198. However, implementing the workaround seriously impedes the usability of the Windows system. All desktop icons are disabled--replaced with a blank white sheet, and network navigation is affected as well.
Many companies face hurdles in migrating to newer operating system platforms. Reliance on archaic legacy applications which are not compatible with a newer OS like Windows 7 for critical business functions means hanging on to outdated Windows platforms. Some companies simply feel that the current environment is working fine and there is no compelling reason to invest the time and money required to upgrade.
Regardless of the justification for clinging to unsupported Windows operating systems, the time has come to seriously evaluate the alternatives to that decision. IT admins managing legacy Windows platforms are already at a disadvantage because Windows 2000 and Windows XP don't have the improved security features included in Windows 7. Now that support for those platforms has expired, IT admins must face new threats and exploits without any patches or updates from Microsoft MCTS Training.
IT admins can provide additional protection against remote attempts to exploit this vulnerability by disabling the SMB and WebDAV protocols for outbound traffic on Internet-facing firewalls.
There are mitigations and workarounds, but IT admins can only stop the damn from breaking for so long. It's time for companies to seriously look at applying SP3 if they are running Windows XP, or simply upgrading the operating system entirely and making the move to Windows 7.
Microsoft is issuing an out-of-band patch today to address rising attacks against the Windows shortcut vulnerability discovered last month. The update comes just over a week ahead of the regularly scheduled Patch Tuesday for the month of August, but leaves Windows 2000 and Windows XP SP2 systems to fend for themselves.
The Microsoft Malware Protection Center noted "Although there have been multiple malware families that have picked up this vector, one in particular caught our attention this week--a family named Sality, and specifically Sality.AT. Sality is a highly virulent strain. It is known to infect other files (making full removal after infection challenging), copy itself to removable media, disable security, and then download other malware. It is also a very large family--one of the most prevalent families this year."
All Clouds Are Not Created Equal: View now
To protect customers against a rising tide of attacks--like Sality--which exploit the LNK flaw in Windows, Microsoft MCITP Certification expedited the release of the patch.
Qualys CTO Wolfgang Kandek points out in a blog post that "Primary attack vectors for the LNK vulnerability are USB sticks and shared drives, the attack depends on a specially crafted LNK file and a custom DLL to function. Remote attacks through e-mail or websites are theoretically possible, but require multiple steps and user interaction."
Kandek explained "Windows 2000 and XP SP2 users will not be covered and are now in a predicament that will become increasingly urgent. Attacks will continue to become more prevalent and their defensive options are limited."
Microsoft does provide advice for a workaround that could mitigate the risk on these legacy platforms in security advisory KB2286198. However, implementing the workaround seriously impedes the usability of the Windows system. All desktop icons are disabled--replaced with a blank white sheet, and network navigation is affected as well.
Many companies face hurdles in migrating to newer operating system platforms. Reliance on archaic legacy applications which are not compatible with a newer OS like Windows 7 for critical business functions means hanging on to outdated Windows platforms. Some companies simply feel that the current environment is working fine and there is no compelling reason to invest the time and money required to upgrade.
Regardless of the justification for clinging to unsupported Windows operating systems, the time has come to seriously evaluate the alternatives to that decision. IT admins managing legacy Windows platforms are already at a disadvantage because Windows 2000 and Windows XP don't have the improved security features included in Windows 7. Now that support for those platforms has expired, IT admins must face new threats and exploits without any patches or updates from Microsoft MCTS Training.
IT admins can provide additional protection against remote attempts to exploit this vulnerability by disabling the SMB and WebDAV protocols for outbound traffic on Internet-facing firewalls.
There are mitigations and workarounds, but IT admins can only stop the damn from breaking for so long. It's time for companies to seriously look at applying SP3 if they are running Windows XP, or simply upgrading the operating system entirely and making the move to Windows 7.
Microsoft Rushes Unscheduled Patch for Shortcut Flaw
Microsoft Rushes Unscheduled Patch for Shortcut Flaw
Microsoft is issuing an out-of-band patch today to address rising attacks against the Windows shortcut vulnerability discovered last month. The update comes just over a week ahead of the regularly scheduled Patch Tuesday for the month of August, but leaves Windows 2000 and Windows XP SP2 systems to fend for themselves.
The Microsoft Malware Protection Center noted "Although there have been multiple malware families that have picked up this vector, one in particular caught our attention this week--a family named Sality, and specifically Sality.AT. Sality is a highly virulent strain. It is known to infect other files (making full removal after infection challenging), copy itself to removable media, disable security, and then download other malware. It is also a very large family--one of the most prevalent families this year."
All Clouds Are Not Created Equal: View now
To protect customers against a rising tide of attacks--like Sality--which exploit the LNK flaw in Windows, Microsoft MCITP Certification expedited the release of the patch.
Qualys CTO Wolfgang Kandek points out in a blog post that "Primary attack vectors for the LNK vulnerability are USB sticks and shared drives, the attack depends on a specially crafted LNK file and a custom DLL to function. Remote attacks through e-mail or websites are theoretically possible, but require multiple steps and user interaction."
Kandek explained "Windows 2000 and XP SP2 users will not be covered and are now in a predicament that will become increasingly urgent. Attacks will continue to become more prevalent and their defensive options are limited."
Microsoft does provide advice for a workaround that could mitigate the risk on these legacy platforms in security advisory KB2286198. However, implementing the workaround seriously impedes the usability of the Windows system. All desktop icons are disabled--replaced with a blank white sheet, and network navigation is affected as well.
Many companies face hurdles in migrating to newer operating system platforms. Reliance on archaic legacy applications which are not compatible with a newer OS like Windows 7 for critical business functions means hanging on to outdated Windows platforms. Some companies simply feel that the current environment is working fine and there is no compelling reason to invest the time and money required to upgrade.
Regardless of the justification for clinging to unsupported Windows operating systems, the time has come to seriously evaluate the alternatives to that decision. IT admins managing legacy Windows platforms are already at a disadvantage because Windows 2000 and Windows XP don't have the improved security features included in Windows 7. Now that support for those platforms has expired, IT admins must face new threats and exploits without any patches or updates from Microsoft MCTS Training.
IT admins can provide additional protection against remote attempts to exploit this vulnerability by disabling the SMB and WebDAV protocols for outbound traffic on Internet-facing firewalls.
There are mitigations and workarounds, but IT admins can only stop the damn from breaking for so long. It's time for companies to seriously look at applying SP3 if they are running Windows XP, or simply upgrading the operating system entirely and making the move to Windows 7.
Microsoft is issuing an out-of-band patch today to address rising attacks against the Windows shortcut vulnerability discovered last month. The update comes just over a week ahead of the regularly scheduled Patch Tuesday for the month of August, but leaves Windows 2000 and Windows XP SP2 systems to fend for themselves.
The Microsoft Malware Protection Center noted "Although there have been multiple malware families that have picked up this vector, one in particular caught our attention this week--a family named Sality, and specifically Sality.AT. Sality is a highly virulent strain. It is known to infect other files (making full removal after infection challenging), copy itself to removable media, disable security, and then download other malware. It is also a very large family--one of the most prevalent families this year."
All Clouds Are Not Created Equal: View now
To protect customers against a rising tide of attacks--like Sality--which exploit the LNK flaw in Windows, Microsoft MCITP Certification expedited the release of the patch.
Qualys CTO Wolfgang Kandek points out in a blog post that "Primary attack vectors for the LNK vulnerability are USB sticks and shared drives, the attack depends on a specially crafted LNK file and a custom DLL to function. Remote attacks through e-mail or websites are theoretically possible, but require multiple steps and user interaction."
Kandek explained "Windows 2000 and XP SP2 users will not be covered and are now in a predicament that will become increasingly urgent. Attacks will continue to become more prevalent and their defensive options are limited."
Microsoft does provide advice for a workaround that could mitigate the risk on these legacy platforms in security advisory KB2286198. However, implementing the workaround seriously impedes the usability of the Windows system. All desktop icons are disabled--replaced with a blank white sheet, and network navigation is affected as well.
Many companies face hurdles in migrating to newer operating system platforms. Reliance on archaic legacy applications which are not compatible with a newer OS like Windows 7 for critical business functions means hanging on to outdated Windows platforms. Some companies simply feel that the current environment is working fine and there is no compelling reason to invest the time and money required to upgrade.
Regardless of the justification for clinging to unsupported Windows operating systems, the time has come to seriously evaluate the alternatives to that decision. IT admins managing legacy Windows platforms are already at a disadvantage because Windows 2000 and Windows XP don't have the improved security features included in Windows 7. Now that support for those platforms has expired, IT admins must face new threats and exploits without any patches or updates from Microsoft MCTS Training.
IT admins can provide additional protection against remote attempts to exploit this vulnerability by disabling the SMB and WebDAV protocols for outbound traffic on Internet-facing firewalls.
There are mitigations and workarounds, but IT admins can only stop the damn from breaking for so long. It's time for companies to seriously look at applying SP3 if they are running Windows XP, or simply upgrading the operating system entirely and making the move to Windows 7.
August 2, 2010
Internet Explorer 8 Continues to Lead All Web Browsers
Internet Explorer 8 Continues to Lead All Web Browsers
Net Applications has published the latest monthly browser market share stats. Microsoft's Internet Explorer Web browser rebounded for the second month in a row, as both Firefox and Chrome declined in market share--led by IE8 which continues to have the most growth and remains the single most used browser.
During the month of July, Internet Explorer market share globally grew by 0.42 percent, while Firefox fell almost a full percentage point, and Google's Chrome Web browser declined by 0.08 percent. Internet Explorer 8 increased by 0.98 percent globally, and went up 1.38 percent to 42.16 percent in the United States.
Optimize VMware View VDI Deployments with F5: Download now
Microsoft MCTS Training bashers and opponents of Internet Explorer are fond of trying to connect the dots and claim that Internet Explorer market share is what it is because the browser is automatically included with the Windows operating system.
There are a few flaws in this argument. First, Windows enjoys a virtual monopoly on the desktop operating system market with over 91 percent; however, Internet Explorer has less than 61 percent of the Web browser market. There is not a one-to-one relationship between Windows and Internet Explorer despite the inclusion of the browser with the operating system.
Second, at least in Europe, Windows users are offered a menu of choices during installation. With twelve browsers to choose from, Internet Explorer is not automatically installed with Windows, so the success of Internet Explorer in Europe can not be tied specifically with the Windows operating system.
The third and arguably most relevant flaw in the Windows-IE connection is that Net Applications is measuring browser usage, not browser installation. Personally, I have Internet Explorer, Firefox, and Chrome, but I use Internet Explorer as my primary browser. If Net Applications reports that Internet Explorer share is rising, it is because more users are surfing the Web using the Microsoft browser, not because more users bought Windows and had no choice.
It is also worth noting that IE8--the browser with the most market share of all when broken down by version--had already captured almost 20 percent of the market before Windows 7 even launched. Since the launch of Windows 7--which has sold more than 150 million units--IE8 has only grown another 10 percent.
Microsoft MCITP Certification Ryan Gavin points out in an Exploring IE blog post about the latest market share stats that "usage share is simply one of several ways we measure our progress with Internet Explorer. Ultimately, we know customers have a choice when it comes to the browser they use, and that choice has a lot to do with the good work that developers and our partners do to build a better Web with Internet Explorer."
Companies aren't necessarily going to make business decisions based on these statistics, but the data is worth making note of for IT admins that are considering changing the default browser used on company PCs, as well as for developers trying to determine which browser platforms represent the target audience when creating Web sites and applications.
Net Applications has published the latest monthly browser market share stats. Microsoft's Internet Explorer Web browser rebounded for the second month in a row, as both Firefox and Chrome declined in market share--led by IE8 which continues to have the most growth and remains the single most used browser.
During the month of July, Internet Explorer market share globally grew by 0.42 percent, while Firefox fell almost a full percentage point, and Google's Chrome Web browser declined by 0.08 percent. Internet Explorer 8 increased by 0.98 percent globally, and went up 1.38 percent to 42.16 percent in the United States.
Optimize VMware View VDI Deployments with F5: Download now
Microsoft MCTS Training bashers and opponents of Internet Explorer are fond of trying to connect the dots and claim that Internet Explorer market share is what it is because the browser is automatically included with the Windows operating system.
There are a few flaws in this argument. First, Windows enjoys a virtual monopoly on the desktop operating system market with over 91 percent; however, Internet Explorer has less than 61 percent of the Web browser market. There is not a one-to-one relationship between Windows and Internet Explorer despite the inclusion of the browser with the operating system.
Second, at least in Europe, Windows users are offered a menu of choices during installation. With twelve browsers to choose from, Internet Explorer is not automatically installed with Windows, so the success of Internet Explorer in Europe can not be tied specifically with the Windows operating system.
The third and arguably most relevant flaw in the Windows-IE connection is that Net Applications is measuring browser usage, not browser installation. Personally, I have Internet Explorer, Firefox, and Chrome, but I use Internet Explorer as my primary browser. If Net Applications reports that Internet Explorer share is rising, it is because more users are surfing the Web using the Microsoft browser, not because more users bought Windows and had no choice.
It is also worth noting that IE8--the browser with the most market share of all when broken down by version--had already captured almost 20 percent of the market before Windows 7 even launched. Since the launch of Windows 7--which has sold more than 150 million units--IE8 has only grown another 10 percent.
Microsoft MCITP Certification Ryan Gavin points out in an Exploring IE blog post about the latest market share stats that "usage share is simply one of several ways we measure our progress with Internet Explorer. Ultimately, we know customers have a choice when it comes to the browser they use, and that choice has a lot to do with the good work that developers and our partners do to build a better Web with Internet Explorer."
Companies aren't necessarily going to make business decisions based on these statistics, but the data is worth making note of for IT admins that are considering changing the default browser used on company PCs, as well as for developers trying to determine which browser platforms represent the target audience when creating Web sites and applications.
Internet Explorer 8 Continues to Lead All Web Browsers
Internet Explorer 8 Continues to Lead All Web Browsers
Net Applications has published the latest monthly browser market share stats. Microsoft's Internet Explorer Web browser rebounded for the second month in a row, as both Firefox and Chrome declined in market share--led by IE8 which continues to have the most growth and remains the single most used browser.
During the month of July, Internet Explorer market share globally grew by 0.42 percent, while Firefox fell almost a full percentage point, and Google's Chrome Web browser declined by 0.08 percent. Internet Explorer 8 increased by 0.98 percent globally, and went up 1.38 percent to 42.16 percent in the United States.
Optimize VMware View VDI Deployments with F5: Download now
Microsoft MCTS Training bashers and opponents of Internet Explorer are fond of trying to connect the dots and claim that Internet Explorer market share is what it is because the browser is automatically included with the Windows operating system.
There are a few flaws in this argument. First, Windows enjoys a virtual monopoly on the desktop operating system market with over 91 percent; however, Internet Explorer has less than 61 percent of the Web browser market. There is not a one-to-one relationship between Windows and Internet Explorer despite the inclusion of the browser with the operating system.
Second, at least in Europe, Windows users are offered a menu of choices during installation. With twelve browsers to choose from, Internet Explorer is not automatically installed with Windows, so the success of Internet Explorer in Europe can not be tied specifically with the Windows operating system.
The third and arguably most relevant flaw in the Windows-IE connection is that Net Applications is measuring browser usage, not browser installation. Personally, I have Internet Explorer, Firefox, and Chrome, but I use Internet Explorer as my primary browser. If Net Applications reports that Internet Explorer share is rising, it is because more users are surfing the Web using the Microsoft browser, not because more users bought Windows and had no choice.
It is also worth noting that IE8--the browser with the most market share of all when broken down by version--had already captured almost 20 percent of the market before Windows 7 even launched. Since the launch of Windows 7--which has sold more than 150 million units--IE8 has only grown another 10 percent.
Microsoft MCITP Certification Ryan Gavin points out in an Exploring IE blog post about the latest market share stats that "usage share is simply one of several ways we measure our progress with Internet Explorer. Ultimately, we know customers have a choice when it comes to the browser they use, and that choice has a lot to do with the good work that developers and our partners do to build a better Web with Internet Explorer."
Companies aren't necessarily going to make business decisions based on these statistics, but the data is worth making note of for IT admins that are considering changing the default browser used on company PCs, as well as for developers trying to determine which browser platforms represent the target audience when creating Web sites and applications.
Net Applications has published the latest monthly browser market share stats. Microsoft's Internet Explorer Web browser rebounded for the second month in a row, as both Firefox and Chrome declined in market share--led by IE8 which continues to have the most growth and remains the single most used browser.
During the month of July, Internet Explorer market share globally grew by 0.42 percent, while Firefox fell almost a full percentage point, and Google's Chrome Web browser declined by 0.08 percent. Internet Explorer 8 increased by 0.98 percent globally, and went up 1.38 percent to 42.16 percent in the United States.
Optimize VMware View VDI Deployments with F5: Download now
Microsoft MCTS Training bashers and opponents of Internet Explorer are fond of trying to connect the dots and claim that Internet Explorer market share is what it is because the browser is automatically included with the Windows operating system.
There are a few flaws in this argument. First, Windows enjoys a virtual monopoly on the desktop operating system market with over 91 percent; however, Internet Explorer has less than 61 percent of the Web browser market. There is not a one-to-one relationship between Windows and Internet Explorer despite the inclusion of the browser with the operating system.
Second, at least in Europe, Windows users are offered a menu of choices during installation. With twelve browsers to choose from, Internet Explorer is not automatically installed with Windows, so the success of Internet Explorer in Europe can not be tied specifically with the Windows operating system.
The third and arguably most relevant flaw in the Windows-IE connection is that Net Applications is measuring browser usage, not browser installation. Personally, I have Internet Explorer, Firefox, and Chrome, but I use Internet Explorer as my primary browser. If Net Applications reports that Internet Explorer share is rising, it is because more users are surfing the Web using the Microsoft browser, not because more users bought Windows and had no choice.
It is also worth noting that IE8--the browser with the most market share of all when broken down by version--had already captured almost 20 percent of the market before Windows 7 even launched. Since the launch of Windows 7--which has sold more than 150 million units--IE8 has only grown another 10 percent.
Microsoft MCITP Certification Ryan Gavin points out in an Exploring IE blog post about the latest market share stats that "usage share is simply one of several ways we measure our progress with Internet Explorer. Ultimately, we know customers have a choice when it comes to the browser they use, and that choice has a lot to do with the good work that developers and our partners do to build a better Web with Internet Explorer."
Companies aren't necessarily going to make business decisions based on these statistics, but the data is worth making note of for IT admins that are considering changing the default browser used on company PCs, as well as for developers trying to determine which browser platforms represent the target audience when creating Web sites and applications.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
