Re: Wronghorn

From: David Candy (david_at_mvps.org)
Date: 04/05/04

• Next message: frustrated: "Duplicate active programs on Taskbar"
• Previous message: David Candy: "Re: Open files with...."
• In reply to: Vagabond Software: "Re: Wronghorn"
• Next in thread: Vagabond Software: "Re: Wronghorn"
• Reply: Vagabond Software: "Re: Wronghorn"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 14:04:33 +1000

MS only supports the current and previous service pack versions. Once SP2 is released support for gold will stop.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.g2mil.com/Dec2003.htm
"Vagabond Software" <carlfenley-X-@-X-san.rr.com> wrote in message news:OZaXsHsGEHA.3488@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> "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: frustrated: "Duplicate active programs on Taskbar"
• Previous message: David Candy: "Re: Open files with...."
• In reply to: Vagabond Software: "Re: Wronghorn"
• Next in thread: Vagabond Software: "Re: Wronghorn"
• Reply: Vagabond Software: "Re: Wronghorn"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]

• Windows
• Science
• Usenet

• Archive
• About
• Privacy
• Search
• Imprint