Prev: Help with Remote Assistance
Next: WinXP 64-bit on my ProBook 4510s
From: Rob Moir on 14 May 2010 13:35
"Jeff Gaines" <jgaines_newsid(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xn0gu3mo9c6fnww004(a)msnews.microsoft.com...
> On 13/05/2010 in message
> <1E1BB0B9-3499-46D4-B4FC-21B553C400FF(a)microsoft.com> Rob Moir wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"Jeff Gaines" <jgaines_newsid(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:xn0gtza0m7pdm4r002(a)msnews.microsoft.com...
>>
>>
>>>They are MSFT private groups which MSFT disseminate to the world at
>>>large. If MSFT turn them off they will disappear.
>>
>>Which brings us back to people not understanding how newsgroups work quite
>>nicely.
>>
>>Not any more, and no they won't, in reply to your two statements.
>
> I think your are wrong :-)

Which brings me back, as I was just saying, to people not understanding how
newsgroups and usenet work.

> MSFT said:
> Which Newsgroups Are Affected by this Shutdown?
> All public newsgroups will eventually be closed between June 1, 2010 and
> October 1, 2010. Microsoft will be closing newsgroups in a phased
> approach,
> starting with the least active newsgroups and moving eventually to more
> active ones throughout the course of the next six months.
>
> Whilst I fully accept that MSFT don't understand Usenet (nor the Internet)
> they are private MSFT groups.

No they are not. The groups are peered (note *peered*, not "copied" which
might imply the presence of a 'master server') with public NNTP servers. As
this is a peer to peer relationship, Microsoft removing their NNTP server
will not automagically kill the groups. Even if they issue newsgroup kill
commands for each newsgroup, which is an instruction to news servers to
remove a newsgroup, this instruction is routinely ignored by a lot of news
servers for security reasons.

From: Jeff Gaines on 14 May 2010 13:58
On 14/05/2010 in message
<3638F89F-8072-45D2-BA8C-050F45B7E339(a)microsoft.com> Rob Moir wrote:

>Even if they issue newsgroup kill commands for each newsgroup, which is an
>instruction to news servers to remove a newsgroup, this instruction is
>routinely ignored by a lot of news servers for security reasons.

It seems pretty clear they will. Despite all the comments I expect them
all to disappear over the next few months, if that's what MSFT want it
will probably happen.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his friends for his
life.
(Jeremy Thorpe, 1962)
From: Dave Warren on 14 May 2010 19:46
In message <3638F89F-8072-45D2-BA8C-050F45B7E339(a)microsoft.com> "Rob
Moir" <robspamtrap(a)gmail.com> was claimed to have wrote:

>Even if they issue newsgroup kill
>commands for each newsgroup, which is an instruction to news servers to
>remove a newsgroup, this instruction is routinely ignored by a lot of news
>servers for security reasons.

Ironically Microsoft actually could remove the groups if they'd ever
bothered to send control messages and properly manage their hierarchy in
the first place.

However, despite peering with many usenet providers Microsoft never
actually sent a control message in their entire usenet peering lifetime.

As a result, they have no established trusted method to send a rmgroup
control message at this point.
From: Tony Harding on 17 May 2010 23:27
On 05/08/10 19:39, TOM7601 wrote:
> TMA wrote:
>
> Snips...
>
>> And my questions are:
>> What is M$ wanting? To discontinue online free qualified support to
>> their users?
>> What if these users decide to no longer support M$ and discontinue
>> Windows platforms?
>
> The idea must be to steer us toward paid support. One school of thought
> is that if your OS trouble isn't bad enough to pay for help, then it
> must not be a problem. However, some of us work and don't have time to
> sit on hold for a couple of hours or maybe we have a simple question,
> one of those nice to know type requests that, in real life, we can live
> without.

'course, if you're working, you may have an IT Support Group at work you
can run things by.
From: Jeff Gaines on 31 May 2010 09:41
On 31/05/2010 in message <4C0395DD.634B996C(a)concentric.net> John Turco
wrote:

>So, why couldn't somebody "set up" an "alt.windows7.general" Usenet
>newsgroup? Microsoft can't prevent such an action...right?

There is already:
alt.windows7.general

I was wondering about:
alt.os.windows64bit

If this group disappears.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his friends for his
life.
(Jeremy Thorpe, 1962)
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Help with Remote Assistance
Next: WinXP 64-bit on my ProBook 4510s