[THIN] Re: Win2k SP4
- From: "Magnus" <magnus@xxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:19:43 -0400
I dont believe that though. With most of the newer Open Source applications
that are written (Such as Qmail) the installation and configuration
documentation is very thorough and very easy to read and understand that I
believe even the most inexperienced admin could install it and secure it to
a point that they would rarely have issues. I state this due to experience
of installing the product 2 years ago when Linux was very very new to me.
and it has been running since with out fail.
As far as Corporate setting I believe that Notes and Groupwise are more
widely usedd although Exchange is breaking through but for Corporations that
are using CRM/ERP applications for calendaring...etc you will notice that
they donot use either and opt for a very basic email system like sendmail or
if they are using Exchange they are not using it to its full potentail
Dont get me wrong I think products like exhange are good products if they
were used to its full potential and it would be an even better product if
they made it Open source
Magnus
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Lucas Boyken
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 1:04 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Win2k SP4
With that being said, I would surmise that a great percentage of Sysadmins
out there would be unable to manipulate code to their needs to overcome
problems. Most businesses, small business that make up a majority of the
businesses here in the U.S., cannot pay an IT Dept. to have the expertise
that would be needed for this. Therefore, we would still have a problem.
You will forever in a day have the have's and the have not's.
As far as Microsoft and email. Yes, Unix has a bigger percentage if you are
going on "sendmail" and the like. However, in the corporate setting, I
believe that more businesses use Microsoft Exchange than Linux. If you
through the entire umbrella of Unix in the mix, than a different picture
emerges. Of course, my impression the market place is somewhat limited and
I cannot make any blanket statements...and if I have, I retract them.
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 11:56 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Win2k SP4
I dont think that MS Exchange is more widely used than email systmes like
Sendmail, Qmail, and Notes. Microsoft just has a bigger marketing budget to
get the name out (which is a very good business move) like Wyse did with
Terminals or Xerox did with copiers while they might be flawed and not have
market share their name is synomous with copiers (Xerox for example).
You also have to keep in mind that their are more viruses written to attack
MS products due to its flawed nature as well as not letting the sysadmin
tighten or fix these flaws them selves like you can do with Open Source
products and Open Source operating systems.
It is like buying a car and having the hood welded shut
Magnus
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Lucas Boyken
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 12:41 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Win2k SP4
I stand corrected, you make a very intriguing point. However, if I might be
allowed to make one retort. Microsoft might be forced to create more
patches/security updates simply because it is a more widely used system. If
this primis were to hold true, it would also be acceptable to say that
Microsoft has a great visability on the Internet than Linux does, thus it
has become a bigger target. If you have the world looking at your product,
using it, and then attacking it...you are bound to find holes upon holes.
However, my arguement might be flawed. What do you think?
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 11:38 AM
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:
