Re: How to make Win XP home smaller? For Dell Mini 9



In news:go7pl7$4qt$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Ben Myers typed on Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:19:50 -0500:
BillW50 wrote:
In news:go71ig$tfs$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Ben Myers typed on Thu, 26 Feb 2009 16:28:48 -0500:
BillW50 wrote:
In news:qardq4t2aem5g8t4vp5vkdqg2i87mti5l9@xxxxxxx,
me@xxxxxxxxxxx typed on Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:30:21 -0600:
I have a Dell Mini 9 with 8 gig solid state drive in
it

I'm running out of space and wondering the best way to
remove components of Win XP Home so as to gain space
back

Example..... I do NOT use Internet Explorer..... so can
it be removed?

Best way is to remove parts of Windows is with an install disc and
nLite (free). Although it requires a total reinstallation. Plus if
you remove IE, some parts of Windows will no longer work. Since
parts of IE are actually part of the OS.

Another example of the less than brilliant design of the the Windows
XP OS.

Question: Why integrate something close to the OS when you don't
have to?
Answer: Because we (Microsoft) can. Or in the words of Eric
Cartman: "I'll do what I want."

Never mind that it violates all sensible principles of software
design. See earlier versions of Windows... Ben Myers

Unlike you Ben, I believe application integration is a great idea. As
wouldn't it be nice to have autocorrect from Word to be in every
application you run? Or from your other favorite application? Years
from now this is going to be the norm. It won't work now as too many
dumb people are against the idea. But in the future, people will
indeed wise up.

Well, duh! Let's look at reality. Without any application
integration at all, bits and pieces of software would never work
together. That is not the issue. The problem is what to integrate
and how to integrate it. Perhaps I did not state this clearly the
first time, leading to your implication that I am stupid.

By integrating IE TIGHTLY into its OS, Microsoft opened up still more
possibilities for security breaches, at least a few of which have come
to pass. What I take away from this misguided Microsoft effort is
that there have to be well considered design decisions about what
becomes part of the OS and what does not (as there were when I worked
in and around the development of smaller and older operating
systems). This statement is diametrically opposed to the Microsoft
view that the operating system is whatever they decide is in it,
allowing the OS to grow borg-like, which it sure has done. The
consequence here is that Windows lacks a tight and relatively secure
kernel, and that the OS itself can be more easily compromised.

Actually I have found no evidence for this belief whatsoever. So if you
can provide evidence for your belief that would be great. In fact, what
I have found Linux is actually less secure than Windows or UNIX. UNIX is
actually fairly secure, but it is all or none. Which is pretty worthless
for use in a desktop environment IMHO.

Now get off you goddam high horse and stop implying that other people
are stupid because they do not agree with you! ... Ben Myers

High horse? Actually no! The truth is I know you are biased and often
provide misleading misinformation over the years that I have to question
everything you claim (and I feel everybody else should too). So no high
horse from me, as I am merely calling your bluff.

--
Bill
2 Gateway MX6124 - Windows XP SP2
3 Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
2 Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 1GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
Windows XP SP2 ~ Xandros Linux - Puppy - Ubuntu


.



Relevant Pages

  • RE: Religion... was RE: [Full-Disclosure] Re: January 15 is Personal Firewall Day, help the cause
    ... there is no A/V software for Linux that protects ... Of course, many of them do run A/V software, but it's to protect Windows ... In today's environment, software *must* be secure first, with usability added ... Microsoft systems take the opposite approach, ...
    (Full-Disclosure)
  • Re: The Myth of the secure Mac
    ... >>> secure than Home. ... Though this really has nothing to do with security. ... >>> I, on the other hand, was speaking about overall Windows security, not ... I do believe that Microsoft could adjust their prices for the ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: The Myth of the secure Mac
    ... OEM Windows XP Home goes for a bit under $100. ... >> secure than Home. ... Though this really has nothing to do with security. ... Microsoft counts on third-party developers to provide more ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: VISTA most secure OS on planet
    ... Vista today, post-Service Pack 2, which is now in the ... safest and most secure OS on the planet today. ... Windows 7 will be successful is because of the pain we took ... You would expect Microsoft to say anything less than this? ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: VISTA most secure OS on planet
    ... Vista today, post-Service Pack 2, which is now in the ... safest and most secure OS on the planet today. ... Windows 7 will be successful is because of the pain we took ... You would expect Microsoft to say anything less than this? ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)