Great Little Application...

I have used this app since way before Microsoft purchased the company. It is called Process Explorer and it was originally created by Sysinternals.

Process Explorer v11.04

By Mark Russinovich

Published: November 5, 2007

Introduction

Ever wondered which program has a particular file or directory open? Now you can find out. Process Explorer shows you information about which handles and DLLs processes have opened or loaded.

The Process Explorer display consists of two sub-windows. The top window always shows a list of the currently active processes, including the names of their owning accounts, whereas the information displayed in the bottom window depends on the mode that Process Explorer is in: if it is in handle mode you'll see the handles that the process selected in the top window has opened; if Process Explorer is in DLL mode you'll see the DLLs and memory-mapped files that the process has loaded. Process Explorer also has a powerful search capability that will quickly show you which processes have particular handles opened or DLLs loaded.

The unique capabilities of Process Explorer make it useful for tracking down DLL-version problems or handle leaks, and provide insight into the way Windows and applications work.

Process Explorer works on Windows 9x/Me, Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Server 2003, and 64-bit versions of Windows for x64 and IA64 processors, and Windows Vista.

What's new in Version 11.04:

* New treelist control for better UI responsiveness
* Asynchronous thread symbol resolution on threads tab of process properties
* More flags on groups in security tab and SID display
* Thread IDs on threads tab
* On-line search uses default web browser and search engine
* Vista ASLR column for processes and DLLs
* Vista Process and thread I/O and memory priorities in process and thread properties
* Vista Process and thread I/O and memory columns
* PROCESS_QUERY_LIMITED_INFORMATION support on process permissions on Vista
* Run as limited user runs with low IL on Vista
* Reports information for all object types on Vista
* Show details for all processes elevation menu item on Vista
* Supports replacement of task manager on Vista
* /e to launch elevated
* /s switch to select a process at startup
* Compiled w/ASLR, DEP
* Faster startup
* Miscellaneous bug fixes and minor improveme







What is your opinion?
Blogroll Me!

Microsoft updates Windows without users' consent

I think that this has been going on for a while now. I think that this could get Microsoft is a heap of trouble. I for one, do not run every patch that they put out for their operating systems because in my experiance, so patches cause more problems then they fix. I remember getting up in the morning and my computer has a box open that says "Windows needed to reboot your computer due to a patch that was insatlled" I did not install the patch and it was done during the night without me doing anything.

Windows Secrets
By Scott Dunn

Microsoft has begun patching files on Windows XP and Vista without users' knowledge, even when the users have turned off auto-updates. Many companies require testing of patches before they are widely installed, and businesses in this situation are objecting to the stealth patching.

Files changed with no notice to users In recent days, Windows Update (WU) started altering files on users' systems without displaying any dialog box to request permission. The only files that have been reportedly altered to date are nine small executables on XP and nine on Vista that are used by WU itself. Microsoft is patching these files silently, even if auto-updates have been disabled on a particular PC.It's surprising that these files can be changed without the user's knowledge.

The Automatic Updates dialog box in the Control Panel can be set to prevent updates from being installed automatically. However, with Microsoft's latest stealth move, updates to the WU executables seem to be installed regardless of the settings — without notifying users.When users launch Windows Update, Microsoft's online service can check the version of its executables on the PC and update them if necessary. What's unusual is that people are reporting changes in these files although WU wasn't authorized to install anything.This isn't the first time Microsoft has pushed updates out to users who prefer to test and install their updates manually.

Not long ago, another Windows component, svchost.exe, was causing problems with Windows Update, as last reported on June 21 in the Windows Secrets Newsletter. In that case, however, the Windows Update site notified users that updated software had to be installed before the patching process could proceed. This time, such a notice never appears.

For users who elect not to have updates installed automatically, the issue of consent is crucial. Microsoft has apparently decided, however, that it doesn't need permission to patch Windows Updates files, even if you've set your preferences to require it.

Microsoft provides no tech information — yet
To make matters even stranger, a search on Microsoft's Web site reveals no information at all on the stealth updates. Let's say you wished to voluntarily download and install the new WU executable files when you were, for example, reinstalling a system. You'd be hard-pressed to find the updated files in order to download them. At this writing, you either get a stealth install or nothing.A few Web forums have already started to discuss the updated files, which bear the version number 7.0.6000.381. The only explanation found at Microsoft's site comes from a user identified as Dean-Dean on a Microsoft Communities forum. In reply to a question, he states:

"Windows Update Software 7.0.6000.381 is an update to Windows Update itself. It is an update for both Windows XP and Windows Vista. Unless the update is installed, Windows Update won't work, at least in terms of searching for further updates. Normal use of Windows Update, in other words, is blocked until this update is installed."

Windows Secrets contributing editor Susan Bradley contacted Microsoft Partner Support about the update and received this short reply:

"7.0.6000.381 is a consumer only release that addresses some specific issues found after .374 was released. It will not be available via WSUS [Windows Server Update Services]. A standalone installer and the redist will be available soon, I will keep an eye on it and notify you when it is available."Unfortunately, this reply does not explain why the stealth patching began with so little information provided to customers. Nor does it provide any details on the "specific issues" that the update supposedly addresses.

System logs confirm stealth installs
In his forum post, Dean-Dean names several files that are changed on XP and Vista. The patching process updates several Windows\System32 executables (with the extensions .exe, .dll, and .cpl) to version 7.0.6000.381, according to the post.
In Vista, the following files are updated:
1. wuapi.dll
2. wuapp.exe
3. wuauclt.exe
4. wuaueng.dll
5. wucltux.dll
6. wudriver.dll
7. wups.dll
8. wups2.dll
9. wuwebv.dll
In XP, the following files are updated:
1. cdm.dll
2. wuapi.dl
l3. wuauclt.exe
4. wuaucpl.cpl
5. wuaueng.dll
6. wucltui.dll
7. wups.dll
8. wups2.dll
9. wuweb.dll
These files are by no means viruses, and Microsoft appears to have no malicious intent in patching them. However, writing files to a user's PC without notice (when auto-updating has been turned off) is behavior that's usually associated with hacker Web sites. The question being raised in discussion forums is, "Why is Microsoft operating in this way?"

How to check which version your PC has
If a system has been patched in the past few months, the nine executables in Windows\System32 will either show an earlier version number, 7.0.6000.374, or the stealth patch: 7.0.6000.381. (The version numbers can be seen by right-clicking a file and choosing Properties. In XP, click the Version tab and then select File Version. In Vista, click the Details tab.)

In addition, PCs that received the update will have new executables in subfolders named 7.0.6000.381 under the following folders:c:\Windows\System32\SoftwareDistribution\Setup\ServiceStartup\wups.dllc:\Windows\System32\SoftwareDistribution\Setup\ServiceStartup\wups2.dllUsers can also verify whether patching occurred by checking Windows' Event Log:
Step 1. In XP, click Start, Run.
Step 2. Type eventvwr.msc and press Enter.
Step 3. In the tree pane on the left, select System.
Step 4. The right pane displays events and several details about them.

Event types such as "Installation" are labeled in the Category column. "Windows Update Agent" is the event typically listed in the Source column for system patches.On systems that were checked recently by Windows Secrets readers, the Event Log shows two installation events on Aug. 24. The files were stealth-updated in the early morning hours. (The time stamp will vary, of course, on machines that received the patch on other dates.)

To investigate further, you can open the Event Log's properties for each event. Normally, when a Windows update event occurs, the properties dialog box shows an associated KB number, enabling you to find more information at Microsoft's Web site. Mysteriously, no KB number is given for the WU updates that began in August. The description merely reads, "Installation Successful: Windows successfully installed the following update: Automatic Updates."

No need to roll back the updated files
Again, it's important to note that there's nothing harmful about the updated files themselves. There are no reports of software conflicts and no reason to remove the files (which WU apparently needs in order to access the latest patches). The only concern is the mechanism Microsoft is using to perform its patching, and how this mechanism might be used by the software giant in the future.

I'd like to thank reader Angus Scott-Fleming for his help in researching this topic. He recommends that advanced Windows users monitor changes to their systems' Registry settings via a free program by Olivier Lombart called Tiny Watcher. Scott-Fleming will receive a gift certificate for a book, CD, or DVD of his choice for sending in a comment we printed.

I'll report further on this story when I'm able to find more information on the policies and techniques behind Windows Update's silent patches. Send me your tips on this subject via the Windows Secrets contact page.Scott Dunn is associate editor of the Windows Secrets Newsletter. He is also a contributing editor of PC World Magazine, where he has written a monthly column since 1992, and co-author of 101 Windows Tips & Tricks (Peachpit) with Jesse Berst and Charles Bermant.

What is your opinion?
Blogroll Me!

The Death of Windows XP :-(

Well, we all knew that this was going to happen. Microsoft announced that as of January 31, 2008 No more copies of Windows Xp Pro or Home edition will be sold in any store.

According to an article that I read:

"Microsoft has confirmed that from 31 January 2008 large PC makers, such as Dell, HP and Toshiba, will no longer be able to buy licenses for the software so they can install it on new machines.

However, a poll released in early April suggests that Vista has yet to win over significant numbers of potential customers. The study of 2,223 web-using Americans found that although 87% had heard of the operating system only 12% of those who knew of it were planning to install it.

Microsoft is keen for consumers to start using Vista While the survey did find that some people waited for Vista before buying a PC, 60% said its appearance had no effect on their spending plans. It also found that 79% of those questioned were using Windows XP on their home PC."

According the article, Microsoft will support XP for several years longer. This comes as no surprise to me. Microsoft is trying to force the consumer and Industry to migrate to the new Vista Operating system. The main problem is that many will not want to have to upgrade their hardware to meet Vista’s minimum requirements that are much higher that those of Xp’s.


To compare the system requirements:

XP Professional:
PC with 300 megahertz or higher processor clock speed recommended; 233 MHz minimum required (single or dual processor system);* Intel Pentium/Celeron family, or AMD K6/Athlon/Duron family, or compatible processor recommended
128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher recommended (64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features)
1.5 gigabytes (GB) of available hard disk space*
Super VGA (800 x 600) or higher-resolution video adapter and monitor
CD-ROM or DVD drive
Keyboard and Microsoft Mouse or compatible pointing device




Vista Requirements:
Home Premium / Business / Ultimate
1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
1 GB of system memory
40 GB hard drive with at least 15 GB of available space
Support for DirectX 9 graphics with:
WDDM Driver
128 MB of graphics memory (minimum)
Pixel Shader 2.0 in hardware
32 bits per pixel
DVD-ROM drive
Audio Output
Internet access (fees may apply)
Additional Requirements
Actual requirements and product functionality may vary based on your system configuration. Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor can help you determine which features and edition of Windows Vista will run on your computer.
While all editions of Windows Vista can support multiple core CPUs, only Windows Vista Business, Ultimate, and Enterprise can support dual processors.
Home Premium / Ultimate
TV tuner card required for TV functionality (compatible remote control optional).
Home Premium / Business / Ultimate
Windows Tablet and Touch Technology requires a Tablet PC or a touch screen.
Ultimate
Windows BitLocker Drive Encryption requires a USB Flash Drive and a system with a TPM 1.2 chip.

As you can see, it takes much more of a base computer to run the Vista package as compared to the XP Pro computer.



Tell Me What You Think...

Federal agency bans Microsoft Vista...

Well I for one knew that this was going to happen!!! No one wants to have to go to the new Vista Operating System. The American people are speaking out and are tired of being bullied by Microsoft. Most people are "happy" with their home computers and have way more power to do what they need to be able to do at home. Think about it, New MOBO, MORE RAM, NEW VIDEO CARD, NEW MONITOR...About $1200 for a baseline system.

Where as Xp with 2 gigs of ram will work wonderfully, Vista requires a minimum of 2 gigs to start with and if you go with the Vista 64 bit version, expect to need about 4 gigs of ram to start with. The only reason to upgrade to Vista is if your are a total gamer. The next version of Direct X being DX10 will only run on Vista, but if you are not a gamer and like your computer which uses Direct X 9.0c, then do not upgrade until you truly have to. I, for one, am not switching to Vista until I have to, or when they stop supporting Xp. They have plans to stop supporting Windows 2000 by 2008 and that will hurt a lot of companies. Our company uses 2000 for most of its applications...

DOT executive wary of software and labor costs, compatibility issues.
"WASHINGTON - At least two federal government agencies are refusing to upgrade their computers with Microsoft Corp.'s Windows Vista operating system, citing concern over costs and compatibility issues.In a Jan. 19 memo to staff, Dan Mintz, the Transportation Department's chief information officer, imposed an "indefinite moratorium" on upgrading desktop and laptop computers with the new operating system, Office 2007 and Internet Explorer 7."

Vista will bring most "current" machines to a crawl due to the new graphical interface and RAM requirements. Let’s take my machine for example. I have an AMD 3000+ Processor(2.12ghz) and 1.2gigs of RAM(366fsb) GeForce 6200(128 VRAM 8xAGP) I am VISTA compatible, but I would not be able to run the "FULL" Vista Media version because my video card will not support DX10. SO, why go to the "Next Best Thing" when I would reap none of the benefits? I did however upgrade to Internet Explorer 7, and Office 2007 which both I like. IE7 has some good new features as well as Office 2007. IE7 is a free upgrade, Office 2007 is not. It is well worth the money for the Office 2007 upgrade.

Tell Me What You Think...

Hardware stuff...

I went out yesterday and i purchased a new keyboard. I have used an ergonomic keyboard for the last 5 years and i really like them. The other day at work, i saw a keyboard that one of the engineers had, it was new and from Microsoft.

I saw that it was also an ergonomic one. I picked it up to see what the model was and it was the Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000. My very first keyboard was the Microsoft Natural Pro.

Here is a review of the 4000. It is taking a few days to get used to the slant and the feel of the one as it is totally different from the other one i had.

This is the Natural Pro:

This is the Keyboard 4000:


The 4000 is very different in style and feel. I like it, but it is very different from the other one. This has many new function keys such as Favorite(5), Volume, a built in Search Function, A Zoom bar that works well, as well as the Mail and Web features. The leather cushion to rest your palms is very nice to feel. Unlike the Natural Pro, this board is slanted from back to front. It does not have any USB ports like the Natural Pro did, but the would be had to use with the slant that the 4000 has. The color of the 4000 is GREAT!! Silver and Black instead of the light Tan of the Pro. The 4000 fits better with my color scheme. Everything that i have is Black, Gray and Silver, so a perfect fit.

IF you are worried about Repetitive Motion Injuries, this keyboard will be a very good purchase in that case. I use my hands for my work as a technician and also as a drummer, so, any help i can get in that department helps.

Tell Me What You Think...

Windows XP Flight Feature Flawed...

This is a very funny article for those of you that are of the Techie nature!! I wanted to pass this on as i am sure that some of you have not read this before! I was laughing the whole time i read this!

Windows XP Flight Feature Flawed
By Tom Condon


Redmond, WA - One of the most acclaimed features of the new Microsoft Windows XP release is its ability to enable users to fly without the aid of any mechanical assistance whatsoever. As the Microsoft commercials vividly display, users of XP can fly simply by spreading their arms. This is made possible by the new flight feature of Windows XP, called MSFlight. "The flight feature is something that we have been working on for some time," said Bill Gates, CEO of Microsoft. "Today's mobile executives need the ability to fly, and we feel that MSFlight's capabilities are far superior to those offered by Linux or Apple."

However, as with many Microsoft releases, there have been some problems with the initial releases. Many users are saying that their flying experiences are very different from what is shown on the television commercials.

One example is Martin Feinstein, of Syosset, NY After purchasing Windows XP, he activated the flying feature and immediately levitated in his living room. "At first, it was great, just like in the commercials" he said. However, Mr. Feinstein's computer locked up after only a few minutes, sending him crashing to he ground and fracturing his right clavicle. "My computer crashed, and so did I" said Mr. Feinstein, who purchase an Apple computer the next day.

Another problem is XP's susceptibility to viruses. Janice O'Connor, of Anderson, North Carolina was ejected from her 14th floor apartment after opening an e-mail that contained a virus targeted at Windows XP. The virus, which contains a file aptly named "Flyme2th_moon.exe", initiates the MSFlight feature, adjusts the speed setting to maximum, and then shuts down the computer a few seconds later, ending the user's flight capabilities. Witnesses said that Ms. O'Connor was hurdled through her apartment's balcony plate glass window and flew approximately 200 yards at that altitude before plummeting to her death.

"This certainly gives new meaning to the term 'fatal exception'", said her cousin, Rita O'Reardon, who was injured after opening the virus in an e-mail from Ms. O'Connor and being thrown against her bedroom wall. Apparently the virus uses Microsoft Outlook to e-mail copies of itself to everyone in the victim's contacts list. More than 100 people in O'Connor's contacts list were sent the virus, but only 3, who had purchased Windows XP, were injured. Local Police Chief Clem Waters said, "It is fortunate that sales of XP have been so slow, or this event could have been much worse."

Another Windows XP user flew a little too well. Amy Branston of San Francisco was last seen ascending straight up at an amazing speed, and was tracked by NASA radar moving away from the earth at over 28,000 miles per hour. According to her husband, she had just installed Windows XP, and thought that the MSFlight feature was a flight simulator game. "She turned on the MSFlight feature, and shot up like a rocket," he told BB Spot reporters. Apparently, a glitch in the Windows XP software was responsible for propelling her into outer space. Microsoft officials have commented that Windows XP is not capable of accelerating users to orbital velocity unless they have installed an unlicensed copy of the software.

NASA officials are very concerned about the potential for Microsoft to introduce its customers into an already crowded orbital space. Mr. Hal Clarke, Director of Space Junk for NASA says, "There are tens of thousands of objects already floating in earth orbit, and it is difficult enough to track them now" said Mr. Clarke. "If we're going to have hundreds or thousands of Microsoft users floating around up there, it's going to get pretty messy. It's not just the bodies we're worried about. We have calculated that collisions will produce significant fragmentation, with huge numbers of arms, legs, and other parts." NASA is already contemplating fitting its space shuttles with windshield wipers to help clean off blood and other bodily fluids from collisions with orbiting Microsoft XP users.

The FAA is also concerned about the potential for traffic problems in commercial air space. "If there are going to be thousands of Microsoft XP users flying around in the air, we're going to have a traffic control nightmare on our hands," said FAA spokesman Norman Krazowski. "They are all going to have to file flight plans, and carry anti-collision transponders and flight data recorders just like airplanes. Also, randomly-selected XP users will be selected and required to carry an undercover Air Marshall with them." Microsoft has responded to the FAA by saying that any undercover Air Marshals attached to any flying XP users will also have to purchase a licensed copy of Microsoft XP.

Mr. Gates has stressed the safety of Windows XP, noting that it is far more stable than previous versions of Windows. "I can understand why people would have been hesitant to trust their lives to previous versions of Windows, but XP is far more stable, and users can feel completely secure flying at any altitude while using XP." When asked by a reporter why he chose to arrive in a limousine rather than use the flight feature of Windows XP, Mr. Gates declined to comment.



Tell Me What You Think...