Comments on: Windows shows its BSD heritage

By: Windows bsd | Keizunet

Windows bsd | Keizunet — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 15:33:11 +0000

[...] Windows shows its BSD heritage | fak3rIf you’ve been pointed at this page, then the chances are you’re a relatively new FreeBSD user who’s having some problems making the switch from Windows to … [...]

By: fak3r

fak3r — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 16:37:07 +0000

@Nancy
What version of Windows are you running? I thought I saw it work in XP? Perhaps strings.exe isn’t in your path, try searching for it, then change to that dir and run it from there.

By: fak3r

fak3r — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 16:37:00 +0000

@Nancy
What version of Windows are you running? I thought I saw it work in XP? Perhaps strings.exe isn’t in your path, try searching for it, then change to that dir and run it from there.

By: Nancy

Nancy — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 17:23:58 +0000

I tried to type these commands and got error messeges for both. It says these commands do not work. “‘strings.exe’ is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file”.

By: Nancy

Nancy — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 17:23:00 +0000

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 00:29:59 +0000

FTP would make more sense if it wasn’t such a clumsy protocol – why can’t they decide on an alternative PORT command / PASV response with no IP meaning : just connect to the same ip for the data channel ?

Anyway, you can use SSL over FTP the same way you can use SSL over HTTP, SMTP and so on.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 00:29:00 +0000

Anyway, you can use SSL over FTP the same way you can use SSL over HTTP, SMTP and so on.

By: Sits

Sits — Wed, 21 Jun 2006 03:39:11 +0000

FTP has lower overheard (both CPU and bandwidth) than SSH/SFTP. It makes far more sense for annoymous downloads…

By: Sits

Sits — Wed, 21 Jun 2006 03:39:00 +0000

FTP has lower overheard (both CPU and bandwidth) than SSH/SFTP. It makes far more sense for annoymous downloads…

By: Craig Buchek

Craig Buchek — Wed, 21 Jun 2006 03:38:54 +0000

The Windows FTP client is horrible. It doesn’t even have command-line history. Telnet is really bad too; even had some simple RFC violations until a recent patch. How can you not even meet the RFC requirements for a 20-year old protocol? If you’re looking for a good (GUI) SSH client for Windows, I can recommend PuTTY. It actually does FTP too. No clue why Microsoft has never included an SSH client. Must be because security is their “number 1 priority”. BTW, strings.exe isn’t something that comes standard on Windows.
IP Address: 151.145.63.122