On Mar 1, 9:55 pm, Hadron <hadronqu...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> unionpe...@xxxxxxxxx writes:
> > On Mar 1, 12:41 pm, "DFS" <nospam@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> unionpe...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >> > On Mar 1, 12:16 pm, "DFS" <nospam@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> Vincent wrote:
> >> >>> Evidently it is too much for Microsoft to manage as WHS has some
> >> >>> serious data integrity problems.
> >> >> Prove it.
> >> > You didn't like the link I provided?
> >> > Start here:
> >> >http://www.informationweek.com/news/personal_tech/showArticle.jhtml?a...
> >> > Inside you will see a link to here:
> >> >http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946676/en-us?spid=12624
> >> So the one 'serious data integrity' problem (not problems) was fixed 7
> >> months ago.
> >> You just claimed it still has them. Prove it.
> > Perhaps the timing and location of my post in this thread misled you.
> > I claim that Windows sludgeware is too unreliable to sit quietly out
> > of sight as a closet server. MS products need too many updates. And
> > here you are proudly proclaiming it was updated 7 months ago.
> > I have no numbers on this, but how many updates for the home server
> > have there been? If its more than one, they are stuffing too much
> > functionality into the box. Does it phone home? Is it part of the
> > weekly update cycle that desktops participate in? Will they add DRM
> > to the box? Why on earth should I ever trust them _not_ to?
> Do you have ANY idea how many updates there are for Linux too? Check
> your security updates. You might be surprised.
Yes. I do. And the updates for Linux or Windows is not a big issue
for these mainframes on a desktop that require frequent attention.
That does not cut it for a server in the closet. Do you have ANY idea
how useful, usable, safe a two year old Knoppix CD-ROM is? Even the
huge and overbuilt Linux distros can survive without updates.