Re: Thank You - 12 Companies 1 Server

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

From: Bill (Bill_at_microsoft.com)
Date: 11/28/04 

Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:23:38 -0000

Patches should only be necessary in EXTREEM cases - you make it sound
like its a NORMAL thing to do with your examples!

If you have 1 PC and its screwed up.... no big deal (unless you happen to be
guy who owns it)
If you have 5 people or 10 or 20 or 30.... it does become a big deal.

I guess we won't ever agree on that one :-)

To the best of my knowledge I am not Anti-Microsoft or anyone for that
matter
*** LIVE & LET LIVE ***

However, my adventure with Novell's Netware has only just started - I'll
report the negatives too!!
None so far - wait its only been a couple of weeks
I do however feel USB support on Netware is lousey
...and writing to CDRW or DVDRW is not supported - both these are useful.

Yes there are regular patchs - but all the signs are these not as frequent
as MS

I'm here again today because I've got DHCP problems with my SBS.

"Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" <gwdibble@nospam.frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:OAvPXqX1EHA.3336@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> IMO patching is not the big deal it used to be when patches came out all
the
> time, and we didn't have good sources for patching information. At this
> point, the need to patch would not be a factor in my decision to buy or
not
> buy a product. It seems to me that I spend maybe a half hour per week
> reading about the topic, which I would have to do regardless of what
server
> OS I was running. For desktops, I have SUS, which is free and easily
> installed. I spend 5-10 minutes per month on "patch day" approving
updates,
> which are then deployed to the desktops without my further intervention.
I
> also probably spend another minute or two occasionally checking SUS to
make
> sure it hasn't found any mid-month updates that otherwise escaped my
> attention. For servers, I'm aware of the updates because of SUS, and I
> manually apply them to the servers at the end of the workday or on a
> Saturday - maybe an hour per month at most to patch the SBS and two other
> Windows servers.
>
> So I'm guessing I spend a total of 2 hours per month on patching. This is
a
> far cry from the days of going from workstation to workstation logging in
as
> admin and running WU or patching manually. I remember spending a day or
two
> per month trying to keep two dozen workstations up to speed on patches, or
> having a "critical update" release just as I finished deploying the last
> one, but those days are well behind me now. At this point, I view
patching
> as I do oiling the shredder or changing toner - every product in the
office
> takes a certain amount of maintenance. Why should the computers be any
> different? And we get significantly more functionality from our
> well-patched and well-running SBS network than we do from our well-oiled
> shredder.
>
> We're lucky in our SBS-sized networks that patching does not have to be a
> big deal. It's not like we're supporting thousands of desktops, or (most
of
> us) custom business apps that require weeks of testing before a patch can
be
> deployed. We have resources available to us at little or no cost, that
take
> most of the work out of patching.
>
> It seems to me that most of the groaning about patches comes from someone
> with an anti-Microsoft or anti-<whatever product> agenda, rather than from
> any real burden of patching one product over another. I take my vitamins,
> get my oil changed, change the furnace filters, patch the network - no big
> deal.
>
>
>
> "Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]" <sbradcpa@pacbell.net>
> wrote in message news:%235VVmVX1EHA.1192@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Guys/Folks.. the reduced need for patching?
> >
> > Apache?
> > MySQL?
> >
> > Look at the stuff on that box and it's needing as much patching as the
> > next operating system.
> >
> > Guys... if you think that you will need to patch less on an Apache web
> > site, I'm sorry to say that you are not seeing the vulnerability lists
out
> > here.
> >
> > All that I ask is that everyone understands that ALL OS's need patching
> > and maintenance.
> >
> > Richard Throup wrote:
> >> I would like to say Thank you ChriS / Bill for the Posts
> >>
> >> This post caught my eye and decided to do my own investigation.
> >>
> >> I was interested by several comments made:
> >>
> >> (1) Ease of installation
> >> (2) Reduced need for patching
> >> (3) Easy Multi-Server deployment (ie. the ability to split included
> >> applications to multiple boxes)
> >> The included 5 server licenses are just a BONUS
> >>
> >> I am glad I followed up this and did as Chris suggested get an eval
copy
> >>
> >> Almost everything Chris said was true BUT he forgot to mention one or
two
> >> important things
> >>
> >> (1) Novell uses INDUSTRY standards and makes them work on Windows
> >> Microsoft modifyies and Basterdises these for its own gain
> >> I vote for INDUSTRY STANDARDS
> >
> > SMTP RFCs includes some industry standards that are pretty insecure.
RFCs
> > are the "be-all -end all"
> >
> >>
> >> (2) iFolder - this is included as part of Novell Server software (not
> >> just
> >> SBS)
> >> Its a very useful technology enabling Files to co-exist in multiple
> >> locations
> >> We have 60+ users with Notebooks - I'm considering a Novell Server to
> >> "backup" data
> >> automatically for these users will be my first practical use of Novell
> >> Server. (I have notebooks
> >> configured already - takes 2-3 mins each!!!)
> >>
> >
> > It's called roaming profiles in MS.
> >
> >> (3) BranchOffice Appliance - (we have 4 small branch offices)
> >> with this I can turn a simple PC into a "local server" linked to our
main
> >> site for Mail, Backup
> >> The BranchOffice appliance hosts files locally (and synchronises these
> >> files
> >> to the main server),
> >> it also hosts the local PostOffice for mail again linked to the main
site
> >>
> >> I've not fully deployed this yet, but looks excellent.
> >> The applience CD does its stuff almost automatically with only a couple
> >> of
> >> prompts.
> >>
> >> again Thanks Chris for giving me the courage and idea to look at this
> >> Novell
> >> stuff.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > http://www.sbslinks.com/really.htm
> > http://www.msmvps.com/bradley
> > https://www.ecora.com/ecora/jump/pm99.asp
>
>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Patch Management on Critical Servers (Healthcare)
    ... *nix servers patch management is handled at two levels. ... meeting and approved, especially patching. ... change meetings for the hospitals and dates set. ...
    (Focus-Microsoft)
  • Re: rec.bicycles.tech - FAQ?
    ... reserve tube is installed. ... This allows a new patch more time to ... look at a tube you have ridden right after patching. ... patches cannot be pulled off a tube without heat. ...
    (rec.bicycles.tech)
  • Re: Creating patches for source
    ... I'm starting to create patches (diff) ... what command will make the cleanest patch and which ... the full content and then create the file when patching the source? ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Whats the best patch?
    ... The tube was stretched and the patch applied--instant dome. ... Like all my patches, it sat for 24 hours, then went into my spare-tube ... I've been patching tubes for a long time. ...
    (rec.bicycles.tech)
  • RE: patching servers...
    ... > Subject: patching servers... ... > and then let it run with the patch applied for a few days/week before ... I'm an advocate of standard configurations and fast patching. ... server hosed by Windows Updates once, but the way it had been set up ...
    (Focus-Microsoft)