Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 11:08:59 +0000, 7 wrote:
>
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> Open source software - has its time come?
>>>
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>> | If you ask Tom Watson, the UK's minister for digital engagement, the
>>> | answer would be a resounding yes. Recently he issued a rallying cry
>>> for | government to adopt open source technology in far greater volumes
>>> than | it has in the past (and this is despite the fact that 35% of NHS
>>> | organisations already use Linux in the backbone). `----
>>>
>>> http://blog.procurementleaders.com/procurement-blog/2009/4/17
>> open-source-software-has-its-time-come.html
>>
>>
>> I wouldn't be surprised.
>> If micoshaft is involved with their crap in health care the system has a
>> crash a day.
>> Same with any and all government systems.
>>
>> Sheesh!
>
> On another note, MS says that most machines would be immune to conficker,
> at the least, if they'd been updated, but they suggest some 30+% of
> machines haven't been.
>
> Could this be because:
>
> 1) So many copies of Windows are pirated, and people can't - or simply
> won't - update for fear their OS will be "turned off"?
Absolutely!
>
> 2) They've read about Windows Update breaking everything from synctoy to
> zonealarm to windows update itself?
Almost certainly!
>
> 3) They're applying proper IT management, to wit, not rolling out any
> update which hasn't been thoroughly vetted - which is fun with Windows,
> as it seems to love using "stealth updates"?
Definitely!
>
> 4) Some combination of the three?
Very likely!
>
> Or, in other words, is this "a third of machines aren't updated" not
> directly caused by MS first producing an OS with security resembling a
> swiss cheese after a shotgun blast, following this up with security
> updates which break machines, and topping it all off with worries about
> unlicensed machines - and occasionally, properly licensed machines -
> being disabled?
Took the words right out of my mouth :)
--
If we wish to reduce our ignorance, there are people we will
indeed listen to. Trolls are not among those people, as trolls, more or
less by definition, *promote* ignorance.
Kelsey Bjarnason, C.O.L.A. 2008
|
|
