Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 2:09 pm
rofl prince charming 
right - and you think companies are just gonna let you test your exe's for viruses on their precious and expensive machines...Kracus wrote:Well if marketed correctly I think it would be quite the revolution and yes jules it would take a lot of expensive computers to run but as in many cases of online websites that seem simple enough the reality is they're usualy multi million dollar enterprises. This woudln't be an exeption, I think there's a market for it though.
But then again, you don't know a thing about what you're talking about.Kracus wrote:Well if marketed correctly I think it would be quite the revolution and yes jules it would take a lot of expensive computers to run but as in many cases of online websites that seem simple enough the reality is they're usualy multi million dollar enterprises. This woudln't be an exeption, I think there's a market for it though.
There's a difference between thinking you know everything and knowing when someone is an idiot.Kracus wrote:As in most things yes I admit I don't know everything there is to know it's just an idea you know a thought, something to talk about, but unlike you at least I'm not stupid enough to think I do know everything because it says so on a piece of paper.
yeah they are but that's just one aspect of things, plus not all virus checkers are up to date, this way you wouldn't need a virus checker since it wouldn't be your system that's affected, on top of that the idea would be to be able to virtualy run it on the website app whatever that would be...[xeno]Julios wrote:btw virus scanners are a great way to test for viruses, eh?
kracus - when you run something virtually on a website, it's actually being run on a computer. It's not as if the website exists in some mysterious nether region of net space.Kracus wrote:yeah they are but that's just one aspect of things, plus not all virus checkers are up to date, this way you wouldn't need a virus checker since it wouldn't be your system that's affected, on top of that the idea would be to be able to virtualy run it on the website app whatever that would be...[xeno]Julios wrote:btw virus scanners are a great way to test for viruses, eh?
lol you don't even know what it is+JuggerNaut+ wrote:you mean like a VMWARE type of product that's web based?Kracus wrote:I wonder if a person could build a website that runs programs, like a downloadable exe program or the like on the website and then VISUALY only, show you what would happen so you could test and see if you had any negative (viruses, trojans, etc...) effects on your pc.
Admitedly the program needed to run such an interface would be a challenge but it's an interesting idea I think. You?
Cause not all prgrams that aren't viruses are programs you would want on your computer. Take Gain for intsance, it's technicly not really a virus (or maybe it is) but it's annoying as hell, if there were a way to see how it would work on a pc before installing it you would get an idea of what to expect once you did install it.[xeno]Julios wrote:kracus - when you run something virtually on a website, it's actually being run on a computer. It's not as if the website exists in some mysterious nether region of net space.Kracus wrote:yeah they are but that's just one aspect of things, plus not all virus checkers are up to date, this way you wouldn't need a virus checker since it wouldn't be your system that's affected, on top of that the idea would be to be able to virtualy run it on the website app whatever that would be...[xeno]Julios wrote:btw virus scanners are a great way to test for viruses, eh?
The idea of running an exe on someone else's box to test for viruses doesn't seem to be a useful one. Why not just update your virus definitions with a free antivirus proggy, and scan the files your interested in yourself?
I still don't get your idea. Maybe i'm missing something, but it seems to make no sense.
Why did the chick on the left only get one tit enhancement? I've always generally thought that if you were going to get fake boobs you should get two. Just sayin.SplishSplash wrote:"danish" is the word you're looking forandyman wrote: they are dirty
vain vengeful woman ITTScooterG wrote: Why did the chick on the left only get one tit enhancement? I've always generally thought that if you were going to get fake boobs you should get two. Just sayin.
It's a matter of taste (no pun intended), but mine aren't plastic.SplishSplash wrote:Like yours are so much better
ye i noticed that after krackass's original post.+JuggerNaut+ wrote:this thread has taken a turn for the worse