[THIN] Re: [OT]:RE: Re: Win2k SP4
- From: "Magnus" <magnus@xxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 15:11:52 -0400
One thing that you have to remeber though when you state accountability. If
your Mission critical Exchange server or SQL server goes down even though it
is supposed to be the most stable...blah blah on the market if it goes doen
and cause the ruin of your business There is no way in hell that you would
be able to sue Microsoft (or any other company for that matter) and win.
Just like with PSS there will be finger pointing between Hardware
Manufacturer, Software vendor, Microsoft and the person who installed it and
you will go around in circles and it will do nothing other than waste time
and more money which you do have due to your company going bankrupt due to
this outage
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Lucas Boyken
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 2:57 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: [OT]:RE: Re: Win2k SP4
It is my opinion that accountability has a lot to do with what companies
pick. Usually a more accountable software manufacturer is one that has been
tested, proven and around for a while...i.e. the Novell's, MS's, etc. Now,
accountability isn't everything, you have name recognition, realibility,
cost, etc. All these things come to bear when a CEO/CIO/CFO's make their
decisions on what to purchase.
Respectfully,
Lucas W. Boyken
Computer Systems Associates
Account Manager / Technical Representative
lboyken@xxxxxxxxx
Company Phone: 800.222.7601
Office Phone: 515.332.2751
Fax: 515.332.5687
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Jarrett-Norton [mailto:bjarrett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 1:47 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: [OT]:RE: Re: Win2k SP4
As much as I would like to agree with this line of logic I cannot. The
reason is that the reason for using product X v. product Y is not totally
dependant on accountability. If product X was truly proven, all though with
a few bumps and burses, and is widely accepted in my field ( being it
banking, aeronautics, government ect.) and economically the TCO sound for me
to use why not. If product Y was cheaper , can deliver the same ease of
usability , the same acceptance in my field and the TOC is economically
sound then I might choose that. Just to say that, "America loves someone to
blame..." and that is why they choose one over the other is not feasible.
I know many people who just like to pass the "buck" in the IT field, M$ says
it is a hardware issue, Dell says it is a Network issue, Cisco says it is a
software comp ability issue, ect. but at some point some one needs to make a
decision to go with X v. Y and most of the time, that I have seen, no matter
how much the IT manager sells it the CEO who signs the check makes that
decision.
Bruce Jarrett-Norton
-----Original Message-----
From: Lucas Boyken [mailto:lboyken@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 1:50 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: [OT]:RE: Re: Win2k SP4
Another thing, in addition of our things to keep in mind, is that corporate
America loves someone to blame. They like, with Windows, having someone to
hold accountable if everything goes tits up. I.E. if the system takes a
large dump, corporate America can always sue Microsoft for any number of
reasons, one being not making a safe, usable product. Just like in car
manufacturing, accountability is priceless in America. We are a nation that
loves to sue. In the Open Source world, you have a faceless entity
programing your OS, etc. When I say faceless, I in fact mean that so many
different people work on the program, there is no one point of
contact/blame/responsibility. That makes people nervous and IT Dept. are
exactly eager to take on the full responsibility and like to leave it to a
company like Microsoft, Novell, SCO, NCR, IBM, etc.
Respectfully,
Lucas W. Boyken
Computer Systems Associates
Account Manager / Technical Representative
lboyken@xxxxxxxxx
Company Phone: 800.222.7601
Office Phone: 515.332.2751
Fax: 515.332.5687
-----Original Message-----
From: Magnus [mailto:magnus@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 12:39 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: [OT]:RE: Re: Win2k SP4
Something to keep in mind with that statement is that Redhat is open source
and they do make money, maybe not as much as Bill, but they do make money.
The thing with open source is that although the application is cheaper you
can make modifications to the application or add-ons to the application or
in some instances (like xcnetwork.com) they took 3 open source applications
and combined them into an awesome program that is very stable that you do
have to pay for (per user I beleive)
The advantage of this is that if I wanted to change something or fix
somethig with the applications I could with relative ease (since it is open
source) as with MS I would have to call PSS (microsoft product support
services) pay them $250 and hope that they can fix the problem with a
private hot fix. Which if you ever dealt with PSS sometimes this can take
over a month which in my opinion is unacceptable especially if it is mission
critical.
Bill is a marketing genius in my opinion and Micorosft does make some really
good products but they sacrifice stability for market presence which I think
is a bad idea
Magnus
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Lucas Boyken
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 1:21 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: [OT]:RE: Re: Win2k SP4
If they were open source, Bill Gates wouldn't be the richest man in the
world. The problem, and I think you might have hit the nail with the hammer
on your last response, is that Microsoft is programing for the monetary
gain. Open Source, in my mind, is a more noble quest than what Microsoft is
doing. Thus, you will get what they put out. A product that is at the
cheapest cost (cheapest possible), works well enough to get it out the door,
and has a high mark up in the market place. They are trying to make money
with this thing, and if that means rushing it to market...than so be it.
Many other companies, industries, etc. do the same, but don't face the same
ridicule as Microsoft. <-- This might not be an apples to apples comparison
either. Logical or intellectual material is hard to put physical or real
world rules upon. You might say that Microsoft only puts out a program, a
peice of software, and that is it...similar to a car, or whatever you might
want. However, others might say that Microsoft, due to the nature of what
they do and provide to their user base, has a greater responsibility than
manufacturers like car makers. There are more car makers than one or two
giants struggling for market domination. Maybe what we lack is a "good"
choice in this instance. However, that can also be a falable arguement
because you have OS's like Windows, Unix, Linux, Novell, DOS, etc. I don't
know, maybe it is just the human condition and the American way comming out
here. We in America strive to reach the top, and once someone has reached
the top...we in America strive to tear them down.
Respectfully,
Lucas W. Boyken
Computer Systems Associates
Account Manager / Technical Representative
lboyken@xxxxxxxxx
Company Phone: 800.222.7601
Office Phone: 515.332.2751
Fax: 515.332.5687
-----Original Message-----
From: Magnus [mailto:magnus@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 12:10 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: [OT]:RE: Re: Win2k SP4
They do hack linux in order to find its flaws before it is a production
release or RTM which microsoft doesnot that is the whole problem they do not
do enough testing which makes there OS and server applications less stable.
Some might say they do it for monetary reasons and that is understandable
but if they were open source they would have alot more people testing and
fixing there code for a far less monetary expense
Magnus
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Bruce Jarrett-Norton
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 12:57 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] [OT]:RE: Re: Win2k SP4
But look at who is using and trying to "break" the systems. Why would
hackers try to hack Linux and find its flaws? I mean it is the same as
saying that GroupWise is more Secure than Exchange. Exchange is more widely
used that GW and thus has a larger % of people trying to break it. GW and
Lotus Notes both work on MS Windows platforms. Why are these left out of
the argument that Linux is better? No matter how you look at it there is
not and will not be, as far as I can see, a good apples to apples comparison
for Linux v. MS v. Novell. This is just the nature of the beast and each
side will defend their side to the "death".
Bruce Jarrett-Norton
-----Original Message-----
From: Magnus [mailto:magnus@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 12:38 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Win2k SP4
In my own experience with MS exchange and a Linux Open Source Email server
(that has the same functionality as exchange ) I have had 458 days of
uptime with the Linux version with no issues, bugs, security flaws(exploits,
holes...etc) as with the exchange server I am patching it every 2 to 4 weeks
and their are more security issues with exchange (Exchange 2000 with sp2
installed their are at least 20 security exploits and bugs with it right now
according to CERT and SANS)
That is why I stated that Linux is more stable. Although the hard data is
from our own deployment of both
Magnus
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Lucas Boyken
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 12:25 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Win2k SP4
The comment you made about Linux being more stable than Windows is
subjective. Unless hard data is available, an apples to apples comparison,
I cannot hold this statement to be either true or false. Windows has a
larger market share and is used for more applications at this point in time
than Linux. Open source, I will conceed, is a great way to work as a
community to solve problems. However, the old adage that too many cooks in
a kitchen only spoils the reciepe might apply in this case. Of course you
are bound to see some changes in how the code works, what it can do, etc.
However, with open source does come problems that you don't have in a closed
environment that Microsoft enjoys. We must remain objective, that is all
that I am stressing. When sweeping comments charge that one is better than
the other without any hard data, that is when we get into battles of opinion
instead of battles of fact.
Respectfully,
Lucas W. Boyken
Computer Systems Associates
Account Manager / Technical Representative
lboyken@xxxxxxxxx
Company Phone: 800.222.7601
Office Phone: 515.332.2751
Fax: 515.332.5687
-----Original Message-----
From: Magnus [mailto:magnus@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 11:21 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Win2k SP4
Just food for thought
If Microsoft went to Open source we would have alot less problems, That is
why Linux is alot more stable than Windows would be. Also the fact that 3rd
party software vendors do not adhere to OS programming standards doesnt
suprise me when 30 to 45% of the time Microsoft's own programmers do not
adhere to those standards.
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Lucas Boyken
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 11:50 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Win2k SP4
Neil,
After a while, you will see that I enjoy the discussion more so than the
actual position that I take in that discussion. I hope this leaves no hard
feelings between us. At the end of the day, I like learning about what
makes people tick, why they choose the positions they take, etc.
Respectfully,
Lucas W. Boyken
Computer Systems Associates
Account Manager / Technical Representative
lboyken@xxxxxxxxx
Company Phone: 800.222.7601
Office Phone: 515.332.2751
Fax: 515.332.5687
-----Original Message-----
From: Braebaum, Neil [mailto:Neil.Braebaum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 10:45 AM
To: 'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: [THIN] Re: Win2k SP4
You do realise the irony of your perspective, now, is almost a U-turn from
the one you were arguing against me, regarding Microsoft and their software
quality-control? ;-)
Neil
-----Original Message-----
From: Lucas Boyken [mailto:lboyken@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 02 July 2003 16:35
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Win2k SP4
Importance: High
Slow down. SP4, and a majority of the service packs released, work fine
with Microsoft products. Simply because you have chosen a third party piece
of software, you cannot blame Microsoft for all the adverse reactions that
it has to new updates. Microsoft can only control the code that they put
into their products. They cannot control, to a large degree, the code that
third party vendors put into their products. We have had this discussion
before on this board, and it just dawned on me why I have suffered so few
errors with service packs compared to many of the responses I have recieved.
Could it be, and this is just a suggestion, but could it be because a
majority of you are using Citrix that this is the cause of many of your
headaches and not Microsoft. Let me make a point, Microsoft develops and
manufactures software, and this software is the only code that they have
direct control over. If a third party vendor/manufacturer decides to code a
program and doesn't follow the guidelines set out in the OS's whitepapers,
etc. any errors or problems should not automatically be assigned to
Microsoft. We must look at the total picture and realize that there is a
lot in play here. Very possibly it could be that Citrix has not be coding
correctly or to the standards that Microsoft has put out.
Respectfully,
Lucas W. Boyken
Computer Systems Associates
Account Manager / Technical Representative
lboyken@xxxxxxxxx
Company Phone: 800.222.7601
Office Phone: 515.332.2751
Fax: 515.332.5687
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Murphy [mailto:brian_murphy@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 6:10 PM
To: 'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: [THIN] Re: Win2k SP4
Importance: High
Gee. Sounds exactly like my issue a few posts back....
"Post SP4 Issue - Desktop Login"
How hard is it to create a Service Pack that doesn't screw everything up?
I could understand the first, 2nd, and maybe the 3rd SP but come on guys.
This is the 4th SP.
Luckily, I have not deployed this to any production systems yet but this is
still ridiculous.
Frank,
Just curious. What type of Hardware was this deployed on and were any other
updates applied other than the Service Pack during the same time frame?
Thanks.
***********************************************************************
This e-mail and its attachments are confidential and are intended for
the above named recipient only. If this has come to you in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete this email from your
system. You must take no action based on this, nor must you copy or
disclose it or any part of its contents to any person or organisation.
Statements and opinions contained in this email may not necessarily
represent those of Littlewoods. Please note that email communications
may be monitored.
The registered office of Littlewoods Limited and its subsidiaries
is 100 Old Hall Street, Liverpool, L70 1AB.
Registered number of Littlewoods Limited is 262152
***********************************************************************
Other related posts:
