Only 3 M$ patches in 2 mths???
Rather than add this to my existing thread about the latest 3 patch bulletins, I wanted to start a new thread to spur a discussion about some concerns I have about M$ and the lack of patches released.
Is anyone else suspicious about M$ only releasing 3 patches in 2 months?
Is this ALL they fixed?
And where are the IE patches to the some odd 30 vulnerabilities discovered by security research groups?
We haven't seen an IE patch for a long time, is M$ giving up on IE?
Wha'd ya think AOers?
--signed: suspicious
M$'s upgrade merry-go-round...
Quote:
Originally posted here by pooh sun tzu
The reasoning behind 2000 slow updates is that 2000 is trying to be phased out. It is a 3 year old (4 almost) operating system that need to step aside for the continuing product. Sure, we could start a flame war about which OS is better, but numbers counter, and so do benchmarks. By upgrading to a newer OS, support and patches will be supported much more often.
I understand your reasoning, as it matches M$ however I disagree with it. It isn't grounded with reality in the corporate world or the home world. While many corporations DO set the life of their PC desktops to 3 years that doesn't mean they necessarily write a blank check to replace it come end of year 3...not to mention the BUSY I/T shop having time to replace all this hardware. And servers are replaced even less frequently for not just monetary reasons...migration of legacy software can be very hard.
I can tell you from discussions with many corporate I/T types ranging from CIOs to system admins: Microsoft must extend the life of their software (not just OS's)...people are getting fed up with the constant upgrades.
Quote:
This would apply to someone running 98 as well. It's time to move foward. MS took no holiday, but is creating longhorn and supporting XP to help surge the users foward towards better, faster, and much more stable operating systems.
And the home base is even worse. What AVERAGE (note: average, not us _power users_ ha ha) user upgrades or even replaces their hardware every 3 years? Very very few, would be my guess given many of my non-technical family members with OS's ranging from 95 to ME. Many reasons for this: too costly, dont care, dont know, yada yada yada. There really isn't a good incentive for them to upgrade except maybe to run new software that only runs on the newer OS's. Hey, even Gore (and myself too) has older OS's running.
Hey, I'm not a M$ basher, I like their products...but I'm a I/T person who has to deal with them on a multitude of levels and am one of those tired of the upgrade merry-go-round.
(Thanks for the good dialogue/discussion.)