greetings roger and tim.
On 02/12/2014 02:40 PM, Tim wrote:
Allegedly, on or about 12 February 2014, Roger sent:
A friend who is not computer literate at all has a Dell 1520 laptop
which when new, Dell required it have xp installed.
As has already been said, XP support dies very soon. It's not safe
> to use XP on the net after then. It was never particularly safe
> when XP was being supported, anyway...
basically, i would agree and main variation has to do with what oos
has for anti virus/malware and internet security.
i get a lot of flack when i talk about symantec/norton, but i have
found that norton internet security software can be set up as tight
as a linux firewall.
*all* oos progs can be blocked from accessing internet, including the
notorious 'messenger'. only time to enable anything is when there is
a new service pack, forget name of prog, and when it does "it's thing",
block it again.
most hackers that get into an oos, do so because of the progs that are
set to monitor incoming traffic. if _all_ oos progs are blocked, there
is relative nothing that can happen, because...
norton internet security can also be set up to only respond to traffic
that has been originated from oos.
so, therefore, i recommend and install symantec/norton. of all the oos
systems that i have installed symantec/norton, all are still running
and connecting to internet. none have been broken into.
along with symantec/norton, i install mozilla firefox and thunderbird.
my most recent oos setup with symantec/norton and mozilla, is with an
hp that had xp installed. it is running as a dual boot with _centos_
as 'default' and _oos_ as second choice. and, yes, i changed label
from 'other' to 'oos'. ;-)
<>
It's not just XP, itself, that becomes unsupported. It software
> that can be run on XP, as *those* other coders abandon the abandoned
Windows XP over time. Though it's probably quite likely that some
> anti-virus vendors will continue to produce anti-virus software for
> an out-of-date XP for some time, long after Microsoft abandons XP.
> That's been the trend with even older versions of Windows. Some
> do recognise that users are stuck with using old OSs, for whatever
> reason (e.g. workplace computers might be un-upgradable).
i agree 100% on that from experience with symantec/norton and some
w98 boxes. one of which is still running w95 because there is a
special program on it that is needed and authors have gone out of
business. they still connect to internet, are on a local network
that has boxes with w2k and w7 and everything is fine.
If they are going to continue using XP, go through all the Windows
updates, now, let it update all the bug fixes that can be done, and
that'll take care of internet explorer, at the same time. Then stop
using internet explorer, except for browsing the Microsoft site.
> Use other, safer, browsers for the www.
+1.
mozilla firefox and thunderbird.
But it's not new, now, is it? So the Dell *requirement* of having
> XP isn't really so concrete, and that requirement is surely going
> to have to change when XP is killed. If they must use Windows,
find out the latest version that can be installed on the hardware,
> then install it. Though you may have something so old that it can't
> support newer releases.
about 15 or so years ago, i installed w98b on a laptop that was no
longer supported by oem. problem with install of w98 was that w98b did
not have drivers for some of the 'custom' hardware. solution was to
pull drivers from w98-1 cd and manually install them. worked great.
<<>>
>
If you feel so inclined, and both of your internet is fast enough,
> you can take remote control of her PC, and fix it for her yourself,
+1
There are tools that give you summaries of the installation, and the
"about this computer" option can reveal the service pack installed,
> at least. You'd need to try Windows update to see how many other
> things its out-of-date with.
"about this computer" _should_ show info. if updating is needed, be
sure that system has a good internet security program running and
is updated.
in fact, updating of security program should be done before any attempt
to run sp updates. cyoa.
But I abandoned helping friends with Windows, long ago.
i also, except for those willing to dual boot with linux until they
can ween themselves from oos. and then it is with agreement that oos
is used for games only and it does not connect to internet. :-)
I would like to run her through installing one of the Linux systems
>> on the second partition but am worried that on installing it may
overwrite the windows MBR making her windows files, folders, etc
useless,
<<>>
such will not happen. that is unless system is already hacked and there
is something on it that check new progs and boot sector.
<>
Yes, it takes over the MBR, but the grub bootloader takes care of
booting up Linux or Windows, so that doesn't really matter.
this is most true.
It might be worth you trying out doing a multi-boot install at your
> own end, to familiarise yourself with it. It doesn't have to be a
Linux/Windows dual-boot, if you don't have a Windows install to play
with. Make it two different Linux installations.
if keeping oos and making a dual boot, be sure to run a defrag prog
that will move oos 'locked' files down into defraged area.
such can be done with norton defrag, and 'locked' files can be checked
for name. when found, copy file/s to "lockedfn.tmp", then delete
original locked files. rename "lockedfn.tmp" to "lockedfn" and you
are ready to repartition drive.
[i know, you _requested_ dual partitions,
but do you know that such was done?]
This person has no confidence with computers. Over the years I have
talked her through windows problems but now I am lost as to how to
tackle this one.
Explain carefully and strongly that XP will not be supported within
about a month, that they really need to abandon it.
abandon and install linux if games are not to still be played, and if
so, _do_not_ put it back on internet.
I think the best linux option would be ubuntu 12.04LTS so she
>> doesn't have to update the OS.
Could be... Or CentOS, if you're more familiar with solving problems
similar to Fedora, than dealing with Ubuntu issues.
i vote centos/redhat as it does have a good support group. [tho i have
listed a couple of good problems and not gotten replies]
I would have to set aside 3-4 hours on the phone to walk her through
>> a basic install before the file system updates, which can also take
hours.
I know your pain. But a clean Linux install shouldn't take that long.
Only an update-install, which is based on what was previously
> installed (and has to churn through assessing it and all the updates
> that will be needed), should take that long to run.
agreed. centos with a default install is very easy to talk someone thru.
once installed, remote console can be setup and "good to go" thereafter.
roger, if you have any concern or feelings for girl that you are
wanting, consider this, she may be a "just a friend" now, but if
you do show her consideration in helping her, you never know. ;-)
--
peace out.
in a world with out fences, who needs gates.
tc.hago.
g
.
--
users mailing list
users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
