Talk:Windows Error Reporting
|WikiProject Microsoft Windows / Computing||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
Criticism of Data Execution Prevention
Don't they suck? Also check here Data Execution Prevention, on how they tried to sell "Software-DEP" as a buffer overflow protection, which was obviously false advertisement.. How can theese lemmings, sit together with government agencies and attempt to decide how trustworthy computing should look, feel and work in the interest of consumers? - Mission Impossible!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy 9 9 9 9 (talk • contribs) 22:50, November 6, 2006
Andy - Thanks for putting up an article on Windows Error Reporting. It's an important technology. I work on the Windows Error Reporting team at Microsoft. Some of the points you made in your article were valid: If the error reporting tool crashes, it cannot send any error reports. However, I know that some of the statements you made were not accurate. Microsoft takes great pains to make sure that error reporting data is only used by the appropriate software engineers. Additionally, I wanted to take the opportunity to talk about some of the positive changes that have come from Windows Error Reporting data. So I made some style and content adjustments to this article. I cited sources both from Microsoft and from mainstream media. Please feel free to edit. Thanks, -- Steve Greenberg, Seattle, WA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 04:34, November 23, 2006
New version of WER?
Apparently on my machine (windows xp home, sp2) after installing the newest version of Windows Defender, Windows Error Reporting seems to have been upgraded: two of the major changes to it is that the technical details are removed from display, as well as the icons being updated to Vista standards. I witnessed this after Windows Live Messenger crashed when I pressed "play" in iTunes, which was more than likely a bug because my friend was testing the "Emoticon Sounds" feature of Messenger Plus! Live.
Unfortunately I didn't get a screen shot when it happened.
Merge of Windows Error Reporting and Dr. Watson (debugger)
No way. Dr. watson is indeed worthy of his own page. When a computer user looks for information on a computer program the user wants a lot of details without having to go through an article like this.
What a bad idea! Why would you want to merge the two. Please remember that Wikipedia is for the people that "Don't Know", if they did know, they wouldn't be looking it up. Keep the two separated!
Don't merge it, just add a link.
No question of merging as one is an error reporting technology while the other is a debugger. Also I would like to bring up the issue on developer names. Do we mention developer names for specific products in other Microsoft/Windows articles on Wikipedia? e.g. someone was the lead developer/someone was the lead manager...then why mention in this article? Others are welcome to state their opinion so that a concensus may be reached. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 15:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)