Mame - better performance on Xbox 2 or PS3?

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

You know it will happen sooner or later...maybe 2 years after they're
released..possibly a lot sooner. Someone will develop Mame for either of these
two platforms. I am curious if anyone sees one system over another as being
able to handle Mame's delicate code with more efficiency. Would the PS3's 4.6
ghz processor be able to run Crusin USA at decent speeds? Or...would the Xbox
2 be more programmer friendly in regards to emus?

http://news.spong.com/detail/news.asp?prid=8309

"At the International Solid State Circuits Conference (ISSCC) today, the
PlayStation 3-powering Cell processor developed jointly by IBM, Sony and
Toshiba was finally shown to an expectant crowd.

The unveiling has been a long time coming, with most estimates putting Cell
development around 12 months behind schedule.

And down to business. The first point of note is that the PlayStation 3,
arguably the Cell’s flagship host, will receive a prototype of the processor,
hinting at Sony’s strong desire to expedite the launch of its next home
console. The version to power the PS3 will have a 221mm² die and use 234
million transistors, made using ‘Holy Grail’ 90nm process technology.

It will contain eight 64-bit floating point processors, referred to as
synergistic processor elements (SPEs), running along side a 64-bit Power
processor capable of running two threads. The SPEs take will 128-bit operands
and split them into four 32-bit words. Up to 128 operands can be stored in the
Cell register file.

"Today, we are very proud to share with you the first development of the Cell
project, initiated with aspirations by the joint team of IBM, Sony Group and
Toshiba in March 2001," said Ken Kutaragi, executive deputy president and COO,
Sony Corporation, and president and Group CEO, Sony Computer Entertainment
Inc. "With Cell opening a doorway, a new chapter in computer science is about
to begin."

Initial production of Cell microprocessors is expected to begin at IBM's 300mm
wafer fabrication facility in East Fishkill, N.Y., followed by Sony Group's
Nagasaki Fab plant, later this year.

So we are left with the question, now that the Cell is more than a vapourware
dream (various dies were shown at the event as pictured) where does this leave
the PlayStation 3 and its launch? SPOnG considers it unlikely that the East
Fishkill will manufacture PlayStation 3 chips, with that being left to Sony’s
Nagasaki facility. Production there, as outlined above, commences at an
unspecificed point this year. So essentially, the PlayStation 3 could be on
shelves within 2005 though of course, that’s wildly unlikely.

What is more likely is first-generation hardware dev kits shipping in time for
Christmas, replacing the high-end PC with port guidelines adopted by studios
across the world. SPOnG then estimates that Sony could realistically see a
PlayStation 3 launch in time for Easter 2006. Although software would be very
thin on the ground, SCEI has never seen this as an obstacle to launching a
home machine. Option two would be to launch the PS3 late 2006 in time for the
holiday period, though with Microsoft already racking up a year of Xbox 2 by
then, timeframes may have to overpower a credible launch line-up.

And of course, Sony still has its Dreamcast-killing trick up its sleeve. The
dark horse of ‘wait and see’ which worked with lethal efficiency at the dawn
of the current generation of platforms.
27 answers Last reply
More about mame performance xbox
  1. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    xch@aol.com (Windsong) wrote in frenzy of gak fuelled meyhem
    news:19wOd.1360938$B07.197108@news.easynews.com:

    <snipped a long winded post consisting mostly of wishes & dreams>

    perhaps when they release ACTUAL hardware would all the specs be worth
    while..

    plus, The Cell, what a wonder of advertising & PR..
  2. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    El Rossi wrote:
    > xch@aol.com (Windsong) wrote in frenzy of gak fuelled meyhem
    > news:19wOd.1360938$B07.197108@news.easynews.com:
    >
    > <snipped a long winded post consisting mostly of wishes & dreams>
    >
    > perhaps when they release ACTUAL hardware would all the specs be worth
    > while..
    >
    > plus, The Cell, what a wonder of advertising & PR..
    >

    This is /unbelievable/! Here is a site ( http://tinyurl.com/3kdu ) for
    those who want to discuss emulating the PS3 *RIGHT NOW*!

    --

    Thnik about it!
    Dead_Dad
  3. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    FSogol wrote:
    > Hellmark wrote:
    >
    > >>This is /unbelievable/! Here is a site ( http://tinyurl.com/3kdu )
    for
    > >>those who want to discuss emulating the PS3 *RIGHT NOW*!
    > >
    > > They obviously have no clue. P3's specs have not really been
    released, of
    > > that which have been, no one in the public knows anything about,
    and there
    > > is no software available to emulate even if you could make an
    emulator.
    >
    > LOL, Classic. You better check out the link.
    > --
    > FSogol


    Yep, the person who posted about a console that isn't even out yet
    deserves this link. My money is still on the xbox considering it is
    running an x86 type processor.


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

    z3row0rm wrote:
    > Dead_Dad <XXXspamtrap007@yahoo.comXXX> wrote in news:420B5572.1080104
    > @yahoo.comXXX:
    >
    > > El Rossi wrote:
    > >> xch@aol.com (Windsong) wrote in frenzy of gak fuelled meyhem
    > >> news:19wOd.1360938$B07.197108@news.easynews.com:
    > >>
    > >> <snipped a long winded post consisting mostly of wishes & dreams>
    > >>
    > >> perhaps when they release ACTUAL hardware would all the specs be
    worth
    > >> while..
    > >>
    > >> plus, The Cell, what a wonder of advertising & PR..
    > >>
    > >
    > > This is /unbelievable/! Here is a site for ( htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu
    )
    > > those who want to discuss emulating the PS3 *RIGHT NOW*!
    > >
    >
    >
    > That link it to a virus you morons! ( htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu )


    Oh yea? which virus? give me the name of the virus!

    If you can't then "you are an idiot!"

    do a google search next time moron!

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

    Dead_Dad's last words before the Sword of Azrial plunged through his body
    were:
    > El Rossi wrote:
    >> xch@aol.com (Windsong) wrote in frenzy of gak fuelled meyhem
    >> news:19wOd.1360938$B07.197108@news.easynews.com:
    >> <snipped a long winded post consisting mostly of wishes & dreams>
    >> perhaps when they release ACTUAL hardware would all the specs be worth
    >> while..
    >> plus, The Cell, what a wonder of advertising & PR..
    > This is /unbelievable/! Here is a site ( http://tinyurl.com/3kdu ) for
    > those who want to discuss emulating the PS3 *RIGHT NOW*!

    They obviously have no clue. P3's specs have not really been released, of
    that which have been, no one in the public knows anything about, and there
    is no software available to emulate even if you could make an emulator.
  6. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    Hellmark wrote:

    >>This is /unbelievable/! Here is a site ( http://tinyurl.com/3kdu ) for
    >>those who want to discuss emulating the PS3 *RIGHT NOW*!
    >
    > They obviously have no clue. P3's specs have not really been released, of
    > that which have been, no one in the public knows anything about, and there
    > is no software available to emulate even if you could make an emulator.

    LOL, Classic. You better check out the link.
    --
    FSogol
  7. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    <izwalker@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:1108085902.828092.226200@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
    >
    > z3row0rm wrote:
    >> Dead_Dad <XXXspamtrap007@yahoo.comXXX>
    >> wrote in news:420B5572.1080104
    >> @yahoo.comXXX:
    >>
    >> > El Rossi wrote:
    >> >> xch@aol.com (Windsong) wrote in frenzy
    >> >> of gak fuelled meyhem
    >> >> news:19wOd.1360938$B07.197108@news.easynews.com:
    >> >>
    >> >> <snipped a long winded post consisting
    >> >> mostly of wishes & dreams>
    >> >>
    >> >> perhaps when they release ACTUAL
    >> >> hardware would all the specs be
    > worth
    >> >> while..
    >> >>
    >> >> plus, The Cell, what a wonder of
    >> >> advertising & PR..
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> > This is /unbelievable/! Here is a site
    >> > for ( htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu
    > )
    >> > those who want to discuss emulating the
    >> > PS3 *RIGHT NOW*!
    >> >
    >>
    >>
    >> That link it to a virus you morons! (
    >> htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu )
    >
    >
    > Oh yea? which virus? give me the name of
    > the virus!
    >
    > If you can't then "you are an idiot!"
    >
    > do a google search next time moron!
    >
    > -isaac
    >

    Norton's does kick out a trojan warning.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    Mame Burner Dave in GA wrote:
    > <izwalker@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:1108085902.828092.226200@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
    > >
    > > z3row0rm wrote:
    > >> Dead_Dad <XXXspamtrap007@yahoo.comXXX>
    > >> wrote in news:420B5572.1080104
    > >> @yahoo.comXXX:
    > >>
    > >> > El Rossi wrote:
    > >> >> xch@aol.com (Windsong) wrote in frenzy
    > >> >> of gak fuelled meyhem
    > >> >> news:19wOd.1360938$B07.197108@news.easynews.com:
    > >> >>
    > >> >> <snipped a long winded post consisting
    > >> >> mostly of wishes & dreams>
    > >> >>
    > >> >> perhaps when they release ACTUAL
    > >> >> hardware would all the specs be
    > > worth
    > >> >> while..
    > >> >>
    > >> >> plus, The Cell, what a wonder of
    > >> >> advertising & PR..
    > >> >>
    > >> >
    > >> > This is /unbelievable/! Here is a site
    > >> > for ( htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu
    > > )
    > >> > those who want to discuss emulating the
    > >> > PS3 *RIGHT NOW*!
    > >> >
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> That link it to a virus you morons! (
    > >> htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu )
    > >
    > >
    > > Oh yea? which virus? give me the name of
    > > the virus!
    > >
    > > If you can't then "you are an idiot!"
    > >
    > > do a google search next time moron!
    > >
    > > -isaac
    > >
    >
    > Norton's does kick out a trojan warning.


    I guess i am an idiot.. lol
    http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare.php

    This one is un-infected origional.
    (or should be)

    im still curious how serious that on is. It looks more like something
    that triggers unauthorized javascript functions which sets off norton,
    still its not cool.

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

    Mame Burner Dave in GA wrote:
    > <izwalker@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:1108085902.828092.226200@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
    > >
    > > z3row0rm wrote:
    > >> Dead_Dad <XXXspamtrap007@yahoo.comXXX>
    > >> wrote in news:420B5572.1080104
    > >> @yahoo.comXXX:
    > >>
    > >> > El Rossi wrote:
    > >> >> xch@aol.com (Windsong) wrote in frenzy
    > >> >> of gak fuelled meyhem
    > >> >> news:19wOd.1360938$B07.197108@news.easynews.com:
    > >> >>
    > >> >> <snipped a long winded post consisting
    > >> >> mostly of wishes & dreams>
    > >> >>
    > >> >> perhaps when they release ACTUAL
    > >> >> hardware would all the specs be
    > > worth
    > >> >> while..
    > >> >>
    > >> >> plus, The Cell, what a wonder of
    > >> >> advertising & PR..
    > >> >>
    > >> >
    > >> > This is /unbelievable/! Here is a site
    > >> > for ( htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu
    > > )
    > >> > those who want to discuss emulating the
    > >> > PS3 *RIGHT NOW*!
    > >> >
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> That link it to a virus you morons! (
    > >> htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu )
    > >
    > >
    > > Oh yea? which virus? give me the name of
    > > the virus!
    > >
    > > If you can't then "you are an idiot!"
    > >
    > > do a google search next time moron!
    > >
    > > -isaac
    > >
    >
    > Norton's does kick out a trojan warning.


    I guess i am an idiot.. lol
    http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare.php

    This one is un-infected origional.
    (or should be)

    im still curious how serious that on is. It looks more like something
    that triggers unauthorized javascript functions which sets off norton,
    still its not cool.

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

    FSogol's last words before the Sword of Azrial plunged through his body
    were:
    > Hellmark wrote:
    >>>This is /unbelievable/! Here is a site ( http://tinyurl.com/3kdu ) for
    >>>those who want to discuss emulating the PS3 *RIGHT NOW*!
    >>
    >> They obviously have no clue. P3's specs have not really been released, of
    >> that which have been, no one in the public knows anything about, and there
    >> is no software available to emulate even if you could make an emulator.
    >
    > LOL, Classic. You better check out the link.

    I did afterwards, didn't realize it was the you are stupid thing.
  11. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    Dead_Dad <XXXspamtrap007@yahoo.comXXX> wrote in news:420B5572.1080104
    @yahoo.comXXX:

    > El Rossi wrote:
    >> xch@aol.com (Windsong) wrote in frenzy of gak fuelled meyhem
    >> news:19wOd.1360938$B07.197108@news.easynews.com:
    >>
    >> <snipped a long winded post consisting mostly of wishes & dreams>
    >>
    >> perhaps when they release ACTUAL hardware would all the specs be worth
    >> while..
    >>
    >> plus, The Cell, what a wonder of advertising & PR..
    >>
    >
    > This is /unbelievable/! Here is a site for ( htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu )
    > those who want to discuss emulating the PS3 *RIGHT NOW*!
    >


    That link it to a virus you morons! ( htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu )
  12. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    izwalker@yahoo.com wrote in news:1108100307.913773.38110
    @o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:

    >
    > Mame Burner Dave in GA wrote:
    >> <izwalker@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >> news:1108085902.828092.226200@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
    >> >
    >> > z3row0rm wrote:
    >> >> Dead_Dad <XXXspamtrap007@yahoo.comXXX>
    >> >> wrote in news:420B5572.1080104
    >> >> @yahoo.comXXX:
    >> >>
    >> >> > El Rossi wrote:
    >> >> >> xch@aol.com (Windsong) wrote in frenzy
    >> >> >> of gak fuelled meyhem
    >> >> >> news:19wOd.1360938$B07.197108@news.easynews.com:
    >> >> >>
    >> >> >> <snipped a long winded post consisting
    >> >> >> mostly of wishes & dreams>
    >> >> >>
    >> >> >> perhaps when they release ACTUAL
    >> >> >> hardware would all the specs be
    >> > worth
    >> >> >> while..
    >> >> >>
    >> >> >> plus, The Cell, what a wonder of
    >> >> >> advertising & PR..
    >> >> >>
    >> >> >
    >> >> > This is /unbelievable/! Here is a site
    >> >> > for ( htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu
    >> > )
    >> >> > those who want to discuss emulating the
    >> >> > PS3 *RIGHT NOW*!
    >> >> >
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >> That link it to a virus you morons! (
    >> >> htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu )
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > Oh yea? which virus? give me the name of
    >> > the virus!
    >> >
    >> > If you can't then "you are an idiot!"
    >> >
    >> > do a google search next time moron!
    >> >
    >> > -isaac
    >> >
    >>
    >> Norton's does kick out a trojan warning.
    >
    >
    > I guess i am an idiot.. lol
    > http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare.php
    >
    > This one is un-infected origional.
    > (or should be)
    >
    > im still curious how serious that on is. It looks more like something
    > that triggers unauthorized javascript functions which sets off norton,
    > still its not cool.
    >
    > -isaac
    >

    From -http://us.mcafee.com/virusInfo/default.asp?id=description&virus_k=
    98753

    ------------------------------------
    Virus Profile: JS/Winbomb
    Risk Assessment
    - Home Users: Low
    - Corporate Users: Low
    Date Discovered: 7/1/2000
    Date Added: 7/31/2000
    Origin: Unknown
    Length: Varies
    Type: Trojan
    SubType: HTML
    DAT Required: 4087

    Virus Characteristics
    This trojan consists of a Javascript function called WindowBomb in an
    HTML file. This trojan will attempt to open an unlimited number of
    browser windows with the URL "http://www.netscape.com" and the title bar
    "CRASHING" in an attempt to exhaust the resources of the system.

    Indications of Infection
    Opening of many browser windows as described above.

    Method of Infection
    Viewing a web page which contains this trojan javascript code creates the
    barrage of windows.
  13. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    z3row0rm <jahfreak5@hotmail.com> wrote in
    news:Xns95FAE7F299B30z3row0rm@198.161.157.145:

    > From
    > -http://us.mcafee.com/virusInfo/default.asp?id=description&virus_k=
    > 98753
    >
    > ------------------------------------
    > Virus Profile: JS/Winbomb
    > Risk Assessment
    > - Home Users: Low
    > - Corporate Users: Low
    > Date Discovered: 7/1/2000
    > Date Added: 7/31/2000
    > Origin: Unknown
    > Length: Varies
    > Type: Trojan
    > SubType: HTML
    > DAT Required: 4087
    >
    > Virus Characteristics
    > This trojan consists of a Javascript function called WindowBomb in an
    > HTML file. This trojan will attempt to open an unlimited number of
    > browser windows with the URL "http://www.netscape.com" and the title
    > bar "CRASHING" in an attempt to exhaust the resources of the system.
    >
    > Indications of Infection
    > Opening of many browser windows as described above.
    >
    > Method of Infection
    > Viewing a web page which contains this trojan javascript code creates
    > the barrage of windows.
    >

    Mmmm... Firefox goodness. No harm no foul on this end.

    --
    ___
    Chuck Whitby - Founder
    East Coast Gaming Expo
    http://www.ecgx.com
    "It's the games"
  14. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    z3row0rm wrote:
    > izwalker@yahoo.com wrote in news:1108100307.913773.38110
    > @o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
    >
    >
    >>Mame Burner Dave in GA wrote:
    >>
    >>><izwalker@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>news:1108085902.828092.226200@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
    >>>
    >>>>z3row0rm wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>Dead_Dad <XXXspamtrap007@yahoo.comXXX>
    >>>>>wrote in news:420B5572.1080104
    >>>>>@yahoo.comXXX:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>El Rossi wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>xch@aol.com (Windsong) wrote in frenzy
    >>>>>>>of gak fuelled meyhem
    >>>>>>>news:19wOd.1360938$B07.197108@news.easynews.com:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>><snipped a long winded post consisting
    >>>>>>>mostly of wishes & dreams>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>perhaps when they release ACTUAL
    >>>>>>>hardware would all the specs be
    >>>>
    >>>>worth
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>while..
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>plus, The Cell, what a wonder of
    >>>>>>>advertising & PR..
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>This is /unbelievable/! Here is a site
    >>>>>>for ( htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu
    >>>>
    >>>>)
    >>>>
    >>>>>>those who want to discuss emulating the
    >>>>>>PS3 *RIGHT NOW*!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>That link it to a virus you morons! (
    >>>>>htp:/tinyurl.com/3kdu )
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Oh yea? which virus? give me the name of
    >>>>the virus!
    >>>>
    >>>>If you can't then "you are an idiot!"
    >>>>
    >>>>do a google search next time moron!
    >>>>
    >>>>-isaac
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>Norton's does kick out a trojan warning.
    >>
    >>
    >>I guess i am an idiot.. lol
    >>http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare.php
    >>
    >>This one is un-infected origional.
    >>(or should be)
    >>
    >>im still curious how serious that on is. It looks more like something
    >>that triggers unauthorized javascript functions which sets off norton,
    >>still its not cool.
    >>
    >>-isaac
    >>
    >
    >
    > From -http://us.mcafee.com/virusInfo/default.asp?id=description&virus_k=
    > 98753
    >
    > ------------------------------------
    > Virus Profile: JS/Winbomb
    > Risk Assessment
    > - Home Users: Low
    > - Corporate Users: Low
    > Date Discovered: 7/1/2000
    > Date Added: 7/31/2000
    > Origin: Unknown
    > Length: Varies
    > Type: Trojan
    > SubType: HTML
    > DAT Required: 4087
    >
    > Virus Characteristics
    > This trojan consists of a Javascript function called WindowBomb in an
    > HTML file. This trojan will attempt to open an unlimited number of
    > browser windows with the URL "http://www.netscape.com" and the title bar
    > "CRASHING" in an attempt to exhaust the resources of the system.
    >
    > Indications of Infection
    > Opening of many browser windows as described above.
    >
    > Method of Infection
    > Viewing a web page which contains this trojan javascript code creates the
    > barrage of windows.

    Sorry guys! I'm running Firefox, so I didn't have a clue.

    --

    Thnik about it!
    Dead_Dad

    P.S. I just realized that I apologized for /not/ running buggy &
    insecure software! ROTFLMAO!
  15. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    WOW...i post a thread just wanting some curious thoughts about the future of
    emulation for Mame (no no..we cant have any of THAT talk can we? That is sheer
    blasphemy!), come back a few days later and see a virus posted.

    Amazing, the number of wankers here.
  16. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    "Yep, the person who posted about a console that isn't even out yet
    deserves this link. My money is still on the xbox considering it is
    running an x86 type processor."

    --Brilliant. In the first sentence you condemn the original poster for asking
    the question and support the posting of viruses to the mame group (or links
    therein) and then you answer the question he asks! Sharp as an orange, you are
    my boy. Sharp as an orange.
  17. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    yth@aol.com (Windsong)after crossing the finish line at the Special
    Olympics proudly proclaimed:

    > WOW...i post a thread just wanting some curious thoughts about the
    > future of emulation for Mame (no no..we cant have any of THAT talk can
    > we? That is sheer blasphemy!), come back a few days later and see a
    > virus posted.
    >
    > Amazing, the number of wankers here.
    >
    Relax. It wasn't a virus. Some virus scanners recognize it as such
    because it activates java scripts. Nothing malicious in this case, but
    it should be a good warning for people whose systems are not secure.

    IIRC your question was on predicting the future, not on emulation. The
    real answer is nobody knows and it is not even possible to speculate.
    Unlike counting the episodes of a tv show, nobody kept track of the
    number of games. Games continue to be developed so the number keeps
    increasing.

    Also, we can have THAT* talk. Anytime.


    * I'm assuming by "THAT" talk you mean: Talk about that dream where
    you are playing games at the locale arcade, but you are in your
    underware. Everyone has that dream, right?

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

    xce@aol.com (Windsong)after crossing the finish line at the Special
    Olympics proudly proclaimed:

    > "Yep, the person who posted about a console that isn't even out yet
    > deserves this link.

    It was a joke that everyone seems to have gotten but you.


    > My money is still on the xbox considering it is
    > running an x86 type processor."
    >
    > --Brilliant. In the first sentence you condemn the original poster for
    > asking the question and support the posting of viruses to the mame
    > group (or links therein) and then you answer the question he asks!
    > Sharp as an orange, you are my boy. Sharp as an orange.

    Haw-haw

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

    FSogol wrote on 13. February 2005:
    >
    > Relax. It wasn't a virus. Some virus scanners recognize it as such
    > because it activates java scripts.

    That's lame.

    I guess some placebos^Wfirewalls notice an harmless iframe and declare it
    as malicious code. :-(
    --
    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/
  20. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
    > FSogol wrote on 13. February 2005:
    >>
    >> Relax. It wasn't a virus. Some virus scanners recognize it as such
    >> because it activates java scripts.
    >
    > That's lame.
    >
    > I guess some placebos^Wfirewalls notice an harmless iframe and
    > declare it as malicious code. :-(

    If you don't have some form of popup blocking, it can kill your system.
    It really depends on your definition of a virus....
  21. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    Quantum Leaper wrote:
    >>>Relax. It wasn't a virus. Some virus scanners recognize it as such
    >>>because it activates java scripts.
    >>
    >>That's lame.
    >>
    >>I guess some placebos^Wfirewalls notice an harmless iframe and
    >>declare it as malicious code. :-(
    >
    >
    > If you don't have some form of popup blocking, it can kill your system.
    > It really depends on your definition of a virus....
    >
    Yeah, I stand chastised. Dumb statement on my part.
    --
    FSogol
  22. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    Quantum Leaper wrote on 14. February 2005:
    >
    > Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
    >> FSogol wrote on 13. February 2005:
    >>>
    >>> Relax. It wasn't a virus. Some virus scanners recognize it as such
    >>> because it activates java scripts.
    >>
    >> That's lame.
    >>
    >> I guess some placebos^Wfirewalls notice an harmless iframe and
    >> declare it as malicious code. :-(
    >
    > If you don't have some form of popup blocking, it can kill your system.

    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.

    > 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.

    What I meant is the typical Microsoft behavor to declare everything evil
    what could do harm to their bugs. Instead of fixing it. :-(

    Next is to declare JPG as evil as it can affect the Microsoft Internet
    Explorer...
    --
    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/
  23. Archived from groups: alt.games.mame (More info?)

    Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
    > Quantum Leaper wrote on 14. February 2005:
    >>
    >> Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
    >>> FSogol wrote on 13. February 2005:
    >>>>
    >>>> Relax. It wasn't a virus. Some virus scanners recognize it as
    >>>> such because it activates java scripts.
    >>>
    >>> That's lame.
    >>>
    >>> I guess some placebos^Wfirewalls notice an harmless iframe and
    >>> declare it as malicious code. :-(
    >>
    >> If you don't have some form of popup blocking, it can kill your
    >> system.
    >
    > 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. 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.

    >> 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.

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

    Quantum Leaper wrote:
    > Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
    >
    >>Quantum Leaper wrote on 14. February 2005:
    >>
    >>>Andreas Kohlbach wrote:

    -----8<-----

    >>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.

    hehehe I can't shake the image of the head of Microsoft Software
    Security sitting in his corner office all day with his eyes closed and
    his fingers in his ears, singing "LALALALALALALA" at the top of his voice.

    --
    Thnik about it!
    Dead_Dad
  25. 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/
  26. 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....
  27. 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/
Ask a new question

Read More

PlayStation Processors Performance Video Games