Re: Wronghorn
From: Vagabond Software (carlfenley-X-_at_-X-san.rr.com)
Date: 04/05/04
- Next message: McMommy: "Open files with...."
- Previous message: Julian Milano: "Re: Can't write to CDRW."
- In reply to: Sender's name: "Re: Wronghorn"
- Next in thread: David Candy: "Re: Wronghorn"
- Reply: David Candy: "Re: Wronghorn"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 20:55:39 -0700
"Sender's name" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:180c701c41a9d$e3d325f0$a501280a@phx.gbl...
> Forced by security patches. If you want to be able to
> test and apply the M$ security patches for your machine,
> you MUST have SP1 installed. That is not 6 years of
> support for Windows XP (with no service pack) when it
> comes to security. That's more like 3 years. THAT is
> what forces customers to upgrade their proprietary M$
> software.
So, you're saying that because Microsoft does not pre-test and support every
considerable combination of selective update choices, they "force" you to
upgrade to the next premium version of the operating system?
Even that is simply wrong. The Windows Update site and packages are
designed to make it easier for the vast majority of general users to keep
their OS up-to-date. However, I'm sure I don't have to tell you that
experts, such as yourself, that have chosen not to update Windows XP to SP1
or Windows 2000 to SP3, can still download individual security patches from
the Download Center.
For example, you can download the security patch for KB828028 for your
non-SP1 version of Windows XP Gold. So, that is continuing support by
Microsoft. It's just a little less convenient for expert users that have
technical reasons not to use the automatic updates.
Having said all that, I still don't understand how not being able to use
Windows Update "forces" someone into buying the next release of the
Operating System. Also, any IT professional worth his salt does his own
testing of security patches before deploying it to all the workstations in
the network.
> Yes, my point exactly. M$ will make their new stuff
> like .NET compatible with their own old PROPRIETARY
> software, which is not "Windows supporting open standards".
Like I said earlier, there is already a Linux verion of the .NET framework
called mono. You could write a C# app that printed "Hello World" to the
console of a Windows machine, and take that same C# app and have it print
Hello World on a Linux machine.
At any time of their choosing, Apple, Sun, or IBM could implement the ECMA
.standard for the NET Framework on their respective platforms. Microsoft is
already experimenting with OS X and FreeBSD versions of the .NET Framework,
but no one has to wait around for Microsoft to do it. The standard is there
and the crew over at Ximian have done a decent job of implementation on the
Linux platform.
- carl
- Next message: McMommy: "Open files with...."
- Previous message: Julian Milano: "Re: Can't write to CDRW."
- In reply to: Sender's name: "Re: Wronghorn"
- Next in thread: David Candy: "Re: Wronghorn"
- Reply: David Candy: "Re: Wronghorn"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
