>>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.

Reply via email to