Re: IE is far the best browser
From: Road Runner (beepbeep_at_9y.com)
Date: 11/30/04
- Next message: Menno Hershberger: "Re: Old question about NTFS"
- Previous message: Casper: "Re: My system time is never right"
- In reply to: Bruce Chambers: "Re: IE is far the best browser"
- Next in thread: LarryLOOK: "Re: IE is far the best browser"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:48:21 -0500
I totally agree with you B.C.
"Bruce Chambers" <bruce_a_chambers@h0tmail.com> wrote in message
news:%238bDxKo1EHA.3576@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> James wrote:
>>
>> This is just plain silly. It may be fine for the EXPERIENCED user to
>> examine each and every update and determine if it is appropriate but the
>> average user and the novice would have a very difficult if not impossible
>> time determining whether or not to allow the update or deny it. I
>> completely agree with Leythos that automatic updating is the way to go
>> for most users. And I must say that I have yet to find anyone whose box
>> was messed up because of applying automatic updates.
>
> On the contrary, your position is "silly," as well as grossly
> irresponsible. Let me explain:
>
>
> I'm confident that Microsoft does its level best, consonant with the
> regard for cost effectiveness that any successful business must keep in
> mind, to ensure that the patches distributed via Windows Update and the
> Automatic Update mechanism are safe and effective. However, there is no
> humanly possible way for Microsoft to test all these patches under every
> conceivable combination of hardware, other patches, device drivers, and
> applications that exist in the "wild." There is nearly an infinite number
> of diifferent possibilities. The sad truth of the matter, is that,
> despite Microsoft's best efforts, the installation of some of these
> patches will almost invariably results in less secure, unusable, or
> sometimes unbootable computers. People who negligently allow WinXP to
> automatically update itself will have no idea why their computer is
> suddenly malfunctioning. They have no idea that any update, much less
> which specific one(s), has bee installed. But the person who manually
> installs an update, and then sees the resulting problem has a lock on the
> whole "cause and effect" concept. Recovery is much simple when the cause
> of the problem is known. (And the user may be completely "technically
> inexperienced;" he really doesn't need to perfectly understand what a
> patch is doing, he just needs to know which one he installed immediately
> prior to the onset of his problem. This is child's play.)
>
> Additionally, from an individualistic (OK, I'm American, and mostly proud
> of it.) point-of-view, I find it nearly impossible to understand how
> anyone could possibly be comfortable turning over control of their own
> property and personal information to a corporate or government entity.
> Not that I'm accusing Microsoft of spying, but the potential is there.
> Should the Department of Homeland Security (a.k.a. the American gestapo)
> suddenly decide that computer users might somehow, inadvertantly support
> terrorism, pressure might be put upon software manufacturers to provide
> lists of registered users, the software they use, and how it's used.
> Rather like how they're currently trying to get libraries to monitor our
> reading habits. Paranoia aside (VBG), what ever happened to the principle
> of self-reliance?
>
> Finally, people who are too lazy to learn how to safely use their own
> computers shouldn't have computers (or at least shouldn't be allowed to
> connect to the Internet), no more than untrained and unlicensed drivers
> should be allowed to operate motor vehicles on the highways. They are a
> danger to themselves and others. Such "Obliviots" make the Internet all
> that much more dangerous for the rest of us, because they refuse to learn
> how to take the most basic of security precaustions, and help spread
> malware hither and yon.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Bruce Chambers
>
> Help us help you:
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
> both at once. - RAH
- Next message: Menno Hershberger: "Re: Old question about NTFS"
- Previous message: Casper: "Re: My system time is never right"
- In reply to: Bruce Chambers: "Re: IE is far the best browser"
- Next in thread: LarryLOOK: "Re: IE is far the best browser"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
