Posted by member 117872 on 2004-07-27 16:15:19 link
The problem with that is, LiteStep (unfortunately) does not have the critical mass that forces distributors of software that may\may not be compatible with LS to test and document problems. So someone does- because when things fail, people blame the new element (Litestep), not the old one (trayserver.exe).
This also applies to the malware issues. In this case, it's a Good Thing(tm) that LiteStep exposes these problems, and allows users to retake their computer, but the errors they get may (seem) inexplicable. Which means we need to tell people: when in doubt SCAN YOUR COMPUTER.
I included autorun because it gets recommended alot, in these forums, especially when people have issues with unwanted apps running at boot time. I've used it, and its decent, in fact, it plugs some holes in Microsoft's admin programs.
In the end, they are all issues _related_ to using LS, even if it doesn't actually relate to a flaw in the LiteStep kernel proper. But when was the last time you saw a Linux FAQ for newbies that dealt _only with problems in the kernel_. Most of them don't even deal with kernel issues, because that isn't what the user sees, and that isn't what breaks. It's the modules that are the face of Litestep, not LS proper.
This also applies to the malware issues. In this case, it's a Good Thing(tm) that LiteStep exposes these problems, and allows users to retake their computer, but the errors they get may (seem) inexplicable. Which means we need to tell people: when in doubt SCAN YOUR COMPUTER.
I included autorun because it gets recommended alot, in these forums, especially when people have issues with unwanted apps running at boot time. I've used it, and its decent, in fact, it plugs some holes in Microsoft's admin programs.
In the end, they are all issues _related_ to using LS, even if it doesn't actually relate to a flaw in the LiteStep kernel proper. But when was the last time you saw a Linux FAQ for newbies that dealt _only with problems in the kernel_. Most of them don't even deal with kernel issues, because that isn't what the user sees, and that isn't what breaks. It's the modules that are the face of Litestep, not LS proper.