Mame - better performance on Xbox 2 or PS3?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

Quantum Leaper wrote on 15. February 2005:
>
> Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>> Quantum Leaper wrote on 14. February 2005:
>>>
>>> Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>>> FSogol wrote on 13. February 2005:
>>
>> All "big" browsers come with popup blockers nowadays, but the Internet
>> Explorer where you have to download a third party tool or use an ad
>> proxy.
>>
> I believe even IE has one now, with XPs SP2.

Not that I knew of.

> I never said anything about
> any browser, I just said any one without it, would be effected. Even with
> the others, not everyone runs the latest and greatest versions.

Why should other browers but IE be affected by exploits especially
designed for the IE?

>>> It really depends on your definition of a virus....
>>
>> Depends on what software you use. The iframe bug currently affects the
>> Internet Explorer only. Don't use it and no "bad iframe" can do any
>> harm. AFAIK the iframe tag was invented by Microsoft and found its
>> way to the W3 consortitium and into HTML. An iframe tag isn't bad per
>> se.
>>
> Yes, all software have bugs, the problem is even when the bug is
> patched,. You still have to get the users to upgrade there software. Which
> can be a big problem.
> Even the others have had nasty bugs in the past.

But some software has less (known) bugs, and isd patched faster.

As it ever mightbe: not using the Internet Explorer and you will have a
more relaxed and confortable life.

Download and install any other browser and you'll see if you don't
believe it.

>> What I meant is the typical Microsoft behavor to declare everything
>> evil what could do harm to their bugs. Instead of fixing it. :-(
>>
> Like I said, ALL software have bugs, just depends on how long it takes to
> patch it and if the user updates the software.
>
>> Next is to declare JPG as evil as it can affect the Microsoft Internet
>> Explorer...
>
> Microsoft didn't declare it a Virus, but the makers of the Virus program
> did, I think there is a difference.

What? Norton and Co. declared <iframe> (Oh God, just just posted an
exploit ;-) and probably JPG soon as attack? Wouldn't really surprise me.
--
By(e) Andreas
Old school arcade classics at http://www.tombstones.org.uk/~ankman/
Linux without installation? http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/index-en.html
OE user? Ease the pain and try the better newsreader http://xnews.newsguy.com/
Registered as user #289125 with the Linux Counter http://counter.li.org/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> Quantum Leaper wrote on 15. February 2005:
>>
>> Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>> Quantum Leaper wrote on 14. February 2005:
>>>>
>>>> Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>>>> FSogol wrote on 13. February 2005:
>>>
>>> All "big" browsers come with popup blockers nowadays, but the
>>> Internet Explorer where you have to download a third party tool or
>>> use an ad proxy.
>>>
>> I believe even IE has one now, with XPs SP2.
>
> Not that I knew of.
>
>> I never said anything about
>> any browser, I just said any one without it, would be effected.
>> Even with the others, not everyone runs the latest and greatest
>> versions.
>
> Why should other browers but IE be affected by exploits especially
> designed for the IE?
>
I wasn't talking about one designed for IE, but one the affects the others.
If IE had the ability to use Unicode as an URL, it would be affected but it
can't, the others have that ability.

>>>> It really depends on your definition of a virus....
>>>
>>> Depends on what software you use. The iframe bug currently affects
>>> the Internet Explorer only. Don't use it and no "bad iframe" can do
>>> any harm. AFAIK the iframe tag was invented by Microsoft and found
>>> its way to the W3 consortitium and into HTML. An iframe tag isn't
>>> bad per se.
>>>
>> Yes, all software have bugs, the problem is even when the bug is
>> patched,. You still have to get the users to upgrade there software.
>> Which can be a big problem.
>> Even the others have had nasty bugs in the past.
>
> But some software has less (known) bugs, and isd patched faster.
>

All software has bugs, it just means you haven't found them yet.
Like I said it doesn't matter if the bug or exploit it patched, you have to
get the end users to install it. I know of companies that wait 3 to 6
month BEFORE they install patches. Not all of them are using MS, some are
using Linux and Novell. I know of two Banks that wait atleast 3 months
before patching their servers.


> As it ever mightbe: not using the Internet Explorer and you will have
> a more relaxed and confortable life.
>
> Download and install any other browser and you'll see if you don't
> believe it.
>
You mean like Firefox? I use that to browse the web, I don't like the
mail and newsgroup program that come with it.

>>> What I meant is the typical Microsoft behavor to declare everything
>>> evil what could do harm to their bugs. Instead of fixing it. :-(
>>>
>> Like I said, ALL software have bugs, just depends on how long it
>> takes to patch it and if the user updates the software.
>>
>>> Next is to declare JPG as evil as it can affect the Microsoft
>>> Internet Explorer...
>>
>> Microsoft didn't declare it a Virus, but the makers of the Virus
>> program did, I think there is a difference.
>
> What? Norton and Co. declared <iframe> (Oh God, just just posted an
> exploit ;-) and probably JPG soon as attack? Wouldn't really surprise
> me.

Thats not what I was talking about, if you want to change the subject thats
fine....

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

Quantum Leaper wrote on 16. February 2005:
>
> Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>> Quantum Leaper wrote on 15. February 2005:
>>>
>>> Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>>> Quantum Leaper wrote on 14. February 2005:
>>
>>> I never said anything about
>>> any browser, I just said any one without it, would be effected.
>>> Even with the others, not everyone runs the latest and greatest
>>> versions.
>>
>> Why should other browers but IE be affected by exploits especially
>> designed for the IE?
>>
> I wasn't talking about one designed for IE, but one the affects the others.
> If IE had the ability to use Unicode as an URL, it would be affected but it
> can't, the others have that ability.

Well you can have a plugin for IE that it can UNI Code. ;-)

But I agree that IE is not vulnurable there.

>>> Yes, all software have bugs, the problem is even when the bug is
>>> patched,. You still have to get the users to upgrade there software.
>>> Which can be a big problem.
>>> Even the others have had nasty bugs in the past.
>>
>> But some software has less (known) bugs, and isd patched faster.
>>
>
> All software has bugs, it just means you haven't found them yet.

Yep. And some programmers give you money if you find one. I think it was
TeX or LaTeX which is supposed to be bug free since five years.

> Like I said it doesn't matter if the bug or exploit it patched, you have to
> get the end users to install it.

But endusers who wouldlike to patch stuff can't, if the developper does
not supply a patch.

> I know of companies that wait 3 to 6
> month BEFORE they install patches.

:-O

> Not all of them are using MS, some are
> using Linux and Novell. I know of two Banks that wait atleast 3 months
> before patching their servers.

That's very dangerous and not reasonable. I could understand the risk of
breaking it. So you should do installs on a few systems to see. But not
patching is IMO a bad idea. The risk you get successfully attacked is
much higher than the risk that you break your system by patching.

>> As it ever mightbe: not using the Internet Explorer and you will have
>> a more relaxed and confortable life.
>>
>> Download and install any other browser and you'll see if you don't
>> believe it.
>>
> You mean like Firefox? I use that to browse the web,

🙂

> I don't like the mail and newsgroup program that come with it.

Depends what you are used. I started with Netscape 3 and then 4. Tried OE
just to see why people use it. Was way to complicated to understand for
me, so I never tried after that.

With Linux I had to force myself to use mutt (mailer) and slrn, later
Gnus (newsreaders). Was not used to use them, but heard so good things of
them I decided to force myself to cope with it. And didn't regret it. 🙂

[...]

> Thats not what I was talking about, if you want to change the subject thats
> fine....

It's all off topic here. I sugest f'up poster.
--
By(e) Andreas
Old school arcade classics at http://www.tombstones.org.uk/~ankman/
Linux without installation? http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/index-en.html
OE user? Ease the pain and try the better newsreader http://xnews.newsguy.com/
Registered as user #289125 with the Linux Counter http://counter.li.org/