Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the "nefarious" means they are simply using APIs like WriteProcessMemory/ VirtualProtectEx/CreateRemoteThreadEx to modify the memory of runing programs or use SetWindowsHookEx to install global hooks (which inject your dll into every process for the non low-level events)
Is this any different than what a virus would do?
A jump into the middle of an instruction from nowhere (2023)
41–50 of 112 posts
Re: A jump into the middle of an instruction from nowhere (2023)
#42Seeing the title and the domain I instantly knew whose blog post this is...
Re: A jump into the middle of an instruction from nowhere (2023)
#43There is an interview with Raymond Chen where he is trying to defend the reason why they crippled the taskbar with Windows 11 [1]. Watching that I was just thinking NO NO NO - it worked fine for the last 25 years and there can be absolutely no reason why they had to destroy the taskbar now. He deserves every headache he gets with these support requests. Or to quote this comment of the linked article: > There wouldn’t…
Re: A jump into the middle of an instruction from nowhere (2023)
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a lot of money and time to spend on supporting someone else's bug-riddled software. You can't test literally all software that exists before you release a security patch. Just imagine testing every single solitary Windows application that exists, or has every existed, just to see if one of them crashes due to intentionally doing the wrong thing. What are they supposed to do, fix the 3rd party software? Delay f…
That's a lot of money and time to spend on supporting someone else's bug-riddled software. Consider that it's money and time that MS spent to get into their position today. They built their empire on "back-compat is king", and betraying that principle gives far less reason for their customers to continue using their software instead of moving to alternatives.
Re: A jump into the middle of an instruction from nowhere (2023)
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a lot of money and time to spend on supporting someone else's bug-riddled software. You can't test literally all software that exists before you release a security patch. Just imagine testing every single solitary Windows application that exists, or has every existed, just to see if one of them crashes due to intentionally doing the wrong thing. What are they supposed to do, fix the 3rd party software? Delay f…
That's a lot of money and time to spend on supporting someone else's bug-riddled software. Consider that it's money and time that MS spent to get into their position today. They built their empire on "back-compat is king", and betraying that principle gives far less reason for their customers to continue using their software instead of moving to alternatives.
At least Apple straight up tells you "we support for about 3 years, then you're boned".
Re: A jump into the middle of an instruction from nowhere (2023)
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the "nefarious" means they are simply using APIs like WriteProcessMemory/ VirtualProtectEx/CreateRemoteThreadEx to modify the memory of runing programs or use SetWindowsHookEx to install global hooks (which inject your dll into every process for the non low-level events)
Is this any different than what a virus would do?
Re: A jump into the middle of an instruction from nowhere (2023)
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this any different than what a virus would do?
Is these APIs are only used by viruses, why do they exist?
Re: A jump into the middle of an instruction from nowhere (2023)
#48There is an interview with Raymond Chen where he is trying to defend the reason why they crippled the taskbar with Windows 11 [1]. Watching that I was just thinking NO NO NO - it worked fine for the last 25 years and there can be absolutely no reason why they had to destroy the taskbar now. He deserves every headache he gets with these support requests. Or to quote this comment of the linked article: > There wouldn’t…
Unfortunately it's the designers that are screwing up the UI/UX of Windows, not the programmers. If you give more time to the designers then you're just going to get more of a clone of OSX rather than something useful.
Re: A jump into the middle of an instruction from nowhere (2023)
#49There is an interview with Raymond Chen where he is trying to defend the reason why they crippled the taskbar with Windows 11 [1]. Watching that I was just thinking NO NO NO - it worked fine for the last 25 years and there can be absolutely no reason why they had to destroy the taskbar now. He deserves every headache he gets with these support requests. Or to quote this comment of the linked article: > There wouldn’t…
To add a bit to this rant, here is a script that mostly solves the problem: https://github.com/CrypticButter/ButteryTaskbar
It isn't 100% reliable but it's good enough for me. Now I hope to find something that prevents Windows 11 from dimming my screen when on battery after a few seconds of inactivity. Pretty please?
Re: A jump into the middle of an instruction from nowhere (2023)
#50Frankly, it is really annoying when developers working at one of the large closed-source platform oligopolists blame their users for trying to work around the deficiencies (or even outright hostile "business model" optimizations) in their software by whatever scant means are left to them: maybe if Microsoft didn't keep removing good functionality and stopped forcing bad "features" on everyone, fewer people would see…
The fact this is possible is the clowniest thing! Why would a major system component allow "extensions" to run without a sandbox and modify its code?