____/ The Ghost In The Machine on Wednesday 05 September 2007 16:41 : \____
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
> <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote
> on Wed, 05 Sep 2007 04:50:02 +0100
> <9601132.YlorqA9QdY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> ____/ The Ghost In The Machine on Tuesday 04 September 2007 23:03 : \____
>>
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Mark Kent
>>> <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote
>>> on Tue, 4 Sep 2007 19:01:47 +0100
>>> <b5j0r4-k92.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>>> Britian is a lost case and Gordon Brown helps it. Vista is again rejected
>>>>> however.
>>>>>
>>>>> Edinburgh's Microsoft-based overhaul delivers ROI in 14 months
>>>>>
>>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>>| The two-year overhaul was carried out by BT using Microsoft?s
>>>>>| Infrastructure Optimisation Model and is designed to give the council a
>>>>>| future-proof IT infrastructure, as part of the council?s ?Smart City
>>>>>| Vision? for service improvement.
>>>>> `----
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
http://www.computerworlduk.com/management/it-business/it-organisation/news/index.cfm?newsid=4899
>>>>>
>>>>> And that's what the taxpayers will get (other than waste of money and
>>>>> data leaks):
>>>>
>>>> Hmm, so they've had a 2-year overhaul, and yet are still running 4 year
>>>> old software (XP), how does that work?
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Pedant Point: XP SP2 was released on August 25, 2004.
>>> This makes XP approximately 3 years of age (in a way), and
>>> a modern XP might be newer than that depending on exactly
>>> when the release was cut and how many "Patch Tuesdays"
>>> got into it.
>>>
>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/322389
>>>
>>> Not that it matters. XP is still a piece of crap, old
>>> or new. ;-) It's less crappy than Win95, 98, or Me, but
>>> that's not saying all that much.
>>>
>>> And of course Linux is more than 16 years old, as the
>>> original post was dated August 25, 1991. (A mildly
>>> interesting coincidence.)
>>>
>>> http://www.linux.org/people/linus_post.html
>>
>> Linux distributions and their pertinent packages are
>> updated very regularly. Owing to modularity, unlike
>> Windows, packagers do not require *years* for testing
>> (Vista took about 1 years) and then 2-3 years to iron
>> out the bugs in the final release (RTM -> SP[1-3]).
>>
>
> There is a flip side; Gentoo is subject to occasional
> disruptions if someone upstream makes a major change.
> The biggest one in recent memory is the xorg refactoring;
> that was mildly painful, but ultimately beneficial.
> KDE has also been refactored, though I don't remember how
> recently. The expat rev is probably giving everyone minor
> headaches, but on Gentoo a rebuild is easily enough done.
>
> Presuambly other distros also had to deal with these
> issues, in their own ways.
>
> There are also possible issues with kernel
> incompatiabilities, but these are rare, even
> if one's still on 2.4.
>
> Otherwise, yes; the fact that freeware distro packages
> are easily identifiable tends to make them more easily
> patchable. Certainly the xorg refactoring is a cakewalk
> compared to, reportedly, application and driver issues
> with Vista.
>
> So, uh, why would I want to downgrade to Vista again? ;-)
I have been getting the impression that Gentoo is now associated with tension
and flamewars, but I was pleased to see that there are many Gentoo users...
off the top of my head it would be over 2 million of them (although counting
is impossible). And that's desktops alone, not servers. The Zunbox runs Gentoo
and other embedded devices also... some devices in places like China hide the
fact that they use Linux (and probably violate the GPL).
Gentoo is still quite a hero of security (like Debian) with quite a strong
track record (there was a mild setback recently, but only because of proactive
measures).
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | Every beginning must start somewhere
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
