>>Sounds to me like it all comes down to managed computing---how much >>influence/control do you want the OS maker to have on your daily computing life? Some want M$ to handle all of it; others don't want anyone else's hands in the mix but their own. There are different kinds of users, obviously.<<
Agreed Michael, but as users we all have choice over accepting and not accepting updates to the OS. Same with upgrades. I just want the choice to be extended longer than what we get today with respect to patches to existing operating systems moving forward. The reality in the business world is a machine's useful life is way longer than what operating system manufacturers are supporting from a security patch perspective. The built in obsolescence is not hardware, it is the OS, and it is not that the OS is not working and providing hardware services, it is security patches the operating system providers are stopping. Don't get me wrong. I believe businesses need to move along to bigger and better hardware and operating systems in general, but I also know it is not always practical or appropriate. Rick White Light Computing, Inc. www.whitelightcomputing.com www.rickschummer.com 586.254.2530 - office 586.254.2539 - fax _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
