Can I build a stand-alone system?

[Guest X-Eyed_Bear]

I want to set up a system that will never be on-line and would like some

advice on how to do this.

 

The advantages that I think apply are:

 

1. No malware will ever infect the system

2. I will not need a firewall, any internet-security software or

anti-virus software, meaning that few resident security routines, loaded

at start-up, will be required leading to greater system performance.

3. I will not need to continually install security updates to system and

application software, again resulting in better performance as well as

easier set-up

4. I will not be tempted to load on the latest level of software

'enhancements', most of which are really not useful additions to

software which is already seriously over-bloated to start with (for

example, I doubt whether there are many things in PS CS3 which were not

in PS 6.5 and which are critical to my work). This will mean I spend far

less time maintaining my system, learning new software and battling with

system instabilities.

5. I don't need to move inexorably to newer hardware every 12 months, as

I have been doing for the past 10 years. Ms Word and/or competitive

equivalents ran with acceptable performance and acceptable function 15

years ago on my 120 Mhz, 32 Mb RAM Pentium system.

 

 

But there are problems I can foresee:

 

A. Windows XP will not work without an on-line activation (I suppose I

could revert to Win 2K - that was equally stable, but some of my

software is XP (and later) only). Some apps. are moving (or have moved)

to a similar requirement.

B. I fear some, as yet unspecified, problems with web-browsers (which

are required accessing html help files for example).

C. Some major apps. (like those in MS Office) require on-line

connectivity to provide help support.

D. There is the obvious problem of getting data into and out of this

system. Yes, I could use R/W CD media (a throw back to the old pre-LAN

days of 'sneaker-ware') - but it's not really attractive. IF I have any

LAN connectivity, there is always the risk that malware will migrate

across the LAN - isn't there?

E. I can't do LAN printing or back up data to my in-house 'server'.

 

I'm sure there must be a smart way of meeting my objectives. Can

somebody point me in the right direction?

 

Thanks.

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: Can I build a stand-alone system?

 

You can activate by phone.

 

"X-Eyed_Bear" <gladly528.nospam@ntlworld.ccom> wrote in message

news:WA6Hj.22800$jH5.2664@newsfe3-win.ntli.net...

>I want to set up a system that will never be on-line and would like some

>advice on how to do this.

>

> The advantages that I think apply are:

>

> 1. No malware will ever infect the system

> 2. I will not need a firewall, any internet-security software or

> anti-virus software, meaning that few resident security routines, loaded

> at start-up, will be required leading to greater system performance.

> 3. I will not need to continually install security updates to system and

> application software, again resulting in better performance as well as

> easier set-up

> 4. I will not be tempted to load on the latest level of software

> 'enhancements', most of which are really not useful additions to software

> which is already seriously over-bloated to start with (for example, I

> doubt whether there are many things in PS CS3 which were not in PS 6.5 and

> which are critical to my work). This will mean I spend far less time

> maintaining my system, learning new software and battling with system

> instabilities.

> 5. I don't need to move inexorably to newer hardware every 12 months, as I

> have been doing for the past 10 years. Ms Word and/or competitive

> equivalents ran with acceptable performance and acceptable function 15

> years ago on my 120 Mhz, 32 Mb RAM Pentium system.

>

>

> But there are problems I can foresee:

>

> A. Windows XP will not work without an on-line activation (I suppose I

> could revert to Win 2K - that was equally stable, but some of my software

> is XP (and later) only). Some apps. are moving (or have moved) to a

> similar requirement.

> B. I fear some, as yet unspecified, problems with web-browsers (which are

> required accessing html help files for example).

> C. Some major apps. (like those in MS Office) require on-line connectivity

> to provide help support.

> D. There is the obvious problem of getting data into and out of this

> system. Yes, I could use R/W CD media (a throw back to the old pre-LAN

> days of 'sneaker-ware') - but it's not really attractive. IF I have any

> LAN connectivity, there is always the risk that malware will migrate

> across the LAN - isn't there?

> E. I can't do LAN printing or back up data to my in-house 'server'.

>

> I'm sure there must be a smart way of meeting my objectives. Can somebody

> point me in the right direction?

>

> Thanks.

[Guest Big Al]

Re: Can I build a stand-alone system?

 

X-Eyed_Bear wrote:

> I want to set up a system that will never be on-line and would like some

> advice on how to do this.

>

> The advantages that I think apply are:

>

> 1. No malware will ever infect the system

> 2. I will not need a firewall, any internet-security software or

> anti-virus software, meaning that few resident security routines, loaded

> at start-up, will be required leading to greater system performance.

> 3. I will not need to continually install security updates to system and

> application software, again resulting in better performance as well as

> easier set-up

> 4. I will not be tempted to load on the latest level of software

> 'enhancements', most of which are really not useful additions to

> software which is already seriously over-bloated to start with (for

> example, I doubt whether there are many things in PS CS3 which were not

> in PS 6.5 and which are critical to my work). This will mean I spend far

> less time maintaining my system, learning new software and battling with

> system instabilities.

> 5. I don't need to move inexorably to newer hardware every 12 months, as

> I have been doing for the past 10 years. Ms Word and/or competitive

> equivalents ran with acceptable performance and acceptable function 15

> years ago on my 120 Mhz, 32 Mb RAM Pentium system.

>

>

> But there are problems I can foresee:

>

> A. Windows XP will not work without an on-line activation (I suppose I

> could revert to Win 2K - that was equally stable, but some of my

> software is XP (and later) only). Some apps. are moving (or have moved)

> to a similar requirement.

> B. I fear some, as yet unspecified, problems with web-browsers (which

> are required accessing html help files for example).

> C. Some major apps. (like those in MS Office) require on-line

> connectivity to provide help support.

> D. There is the obvious problem of getting data into and out of this

> system. Yes, I could use R/W CD media (a throw back to the old pre-LAN

> days of 'sneaker-ware') - but it's not really attractive. IF I have any

> LAN connectivity, there is always the risk that malware will migrate

> across the LAN - isn't there?

> E. I can't do LAN printing or back up data to my in-house 'server'.

>

> I'm sure there must be a smart way of meeting my objectives. Can

> somebody point me in the right direction?

>

> Thanks.

you can phone in the activation.

Zone Alarm Firewall differentiates between Internet access and Trusted

network for traffic. I'm not going to say it works right, but I can't

see why it would specify the two if there weren't some use for it. IF

it works, you could just block all 'internet' activity.

The other issues, yes, its a bit questionable. I use ZoneAlarm and

block some programs like microsoft help F1, and have no issues with it.

So problem C may not be an issue.

[Guest PD43]

Re: Can I build a stand-alone system?

 

X-Eyed_Bear <gladly528.nospam@ntlworld.ccom> wrote:

>I want to set up a system that will never be on-line and would like some

>advice on how to do this.

>

>The advantages that I think apply are:

>

>1. No malware will ever infect the system

 

I've been online for 18 years... never a malware or virus infestation.

>2. I will not need a firewall, any internet-security software or

>anti-virus software, meaning that few resident security routines, loaded

>at start-up, will be required leading to greater system performance.

 

Using XP firewall here: no hit on performance. If you're running a

very old system, then such a hit might be something to consider, but

not with today's systems.

>3. I will not need to continually install security updates to system and

>application software, again resulting in better performance as well as

>easier set-up

 

Minimal time needed to do the above.

>4. I will not be tempted to load on the latest level of software

>'enhancements',

 

Learn some discipline. Staying offline won't help you there.

>5. I don't need to move inexorably to newer hardware every 12 months, as

> I have been doing for the past 10 years. Ms Word and/or competitive

>equivalents ran with acceptable performance and acceptable function 15

>years ago on my 120 Mhz, 32 Mb RAM Pentium system.

 

Stick with programs that work for you. I'm running a 6 year old

version of Photoshop, MS Office 2002, etc.

 

Again: discipline will help you here.

[Guest Big Al]

Re: Can I build a stand-alone system?

 

PD43 wrote:

> X-Eyed_Bear <gladly528.nospam@ntlworld.ccom> wrote:

>

>> I want to set up a system that will never be on-line and would like some

>> advice on how to do this.

>>

>> The advantages that I think apply are:

>>

>> 1. No malware will ever infect the system

>

> I've been online for 18 years... never a malware or virus infestation.

>

>> 2. I will not need a firewall, any internet-security software or

>> anti-virus software, meaning that few resident security routines, loaded

>> at start-up, will be required leading to greater system performance.

>

> Using XP firewall here: no hit on performance. If you're running a

> very old system, then such a hit might be something to consider, but

> not with today's systems.

>

>> 3. I will not need to continually install security updates to system and

>> application software, again resulting in better performance as well as

>> easier set-up

>

> Minimal time needed to do the above.

>

>> 4. I will not be tempted to load on the latest level of software

>> 'enhancements',

>

> Learn some discipline. Staying offline won't help you there.

>

>> 5. I don't need to move inexorably to newer hardware every 12 months, as

>> I have been doing for the past 10 years. Ms Word and/or competitive

>> equivalents ran with acceptable performance and acceptable function 15

>> years ago on my 120 Mhz, 32 Mb RAM Pentium system.

>

> Stick with programs that work for you. I'm running a 6 year old

> version of Photoshop, MS Office 2002, etc.

>

> Again: discipline will help you here.

I agree with PD43. My AV catches what items I do get, 1 a year. And I

play a lot. On purpose. So if you stopped sticking your finger in the

mud, it won't get dirty.

Browse known good sites, don't download. Like PD43, I use the same ole

programs, some from the 1990's that are old DOS command line I would

love to get into a windows GUI form but heck, I run them 1 time a year

maybe and they work. IF IT WORKS, USE IT. I too like the old

programs, I have Photoshop Elements 2.0 It was simple.