The Promise--And Problems--Of The New Windows Update

TechWeb - InformationWeek ^ | July 12, 2004 | Fred Langa

[ThinkDifferent]

For example, if Mac ported it's OS to the x86 processor; I would expect them to take marketshare by storm.

Microsoft would respond by immediately discontinuing Office for the Mac. That's a battle neither Apple nor MS wants at this time.

I (personally) have witnessed the Mac OS running on x86 processors in the early 90's.

Ah, Star Trek. Never saw that, but I did run Rhapsody (which became the first version Mac OS X Server) on a PC and it was quite good. (I also ran it in Virtual PC on Mac OS 9, just to see if it would work, which it did).

[Bush2000]

I've seen the list. It's a yawner - except for the NX support. That is the most interesting technical development.

The issue isn't whether you find the update boring, HAL. Clearly, based on that list, it contains a lot of major new functionality. People can run your comments through the usual "expunge-Microsoft-hatred" filter and draw their own conclusions. As for me, I'm glad that I don't have to open my wallet to Jobs just to get security updates and wrapping that fish along with a few apps that Apple acquired by buying some shmoe company.

[Bush2000]

That's specific to your situation, and should be treated as such each and every time.

I only pointed it out because it contradicted your previous statement:

" That may be true for windows boxes, but there is no reason to ignore patching a linux box. There is not the risk of breakage that exists with windows patches."

[HipShot]

I used examples to point out that you are indeed correct about the nature of some patches, but they can be managed.

Windows patches, OTOH, often break entirely unrelated things and often introduce new security issues.

[alexandria]

Microsoft does not charge for any updates whatsoever.

Excuse please, you did not pay for your upgrade to Windows XP from say Windows 2000 or ME?
Apple is the same as Microsoft in the respect that you pay for "system" upgrades but not updates.

[Eagle9]

I do like that IE blocks popups now, but for most of my work, I use Firefox.

Same here. I use Firefox, almost exclusively.

[HAL9000]

Clearly, based on that list, it contains a lot of major new functionality.

Congratulations on getting some new features in Windows that shipped in Mac OS X years ago.

As for me, I'm glad that I don't have to open my wallet to Jobs just to get security updates and wrapping that fish along with a few apps that Apple acquired by buying some shmoe company.

The last major update Apple charged for was in 2003, and the next one will be in 2005. That is a reasonable interval. It's not mandatory to purchase updates - many users are happy with the older versions - but the latest version (Panther) has a very high adoption rate with Mac users.

Mac OS X now has 12 million users, and seems to be well on the way to 20 million in the future.

[Eagle9]

That has to be a real headache. I wish that I could help ....

[Musket]

Thanks. I'm gonna Google around on it when I get some time.

[Bush2000]

Congratulations on getting some new features in Windows that shipped in Mac OS X years ago.

Congratulations to Apple for repackaging BSD features. /SARCASM

The last major update Apple charged for was in 2003, and the next one will be in 2005. That is a reasonable interval. It's not mandatory to purchase updates - many users are happy with the older versions - but the latest version (Panther) has a very high adoption rate with Mac users.

Keep your wallet handy.

Mac OS X now has 12 million users, and seems to be well on the way to 20 million in the future.

No way, there aren't that many metrosexuals...

[N3WBI3]

umm no,

The difference between OS10.1 and OS10.2 is equivelant to the Difference betwenn NT5 and NT5.1 or have they started making XP a free update to 2000?

[N3WBI3]

Call it a corporate line if you want, but that doesn't change the fact that I've received every update for Win2000 since Feb 2000, major and minor, free of charge.

Ok and this differs from Linux how? I have never paid for a Linux update..

Red Hat only offered support on any given distribution for one year.

Gee I better call them and tell them the patches I am getting from the legacy project should be taken off the site because you say they only give them out a year.

A couple of problems with that statement.

1) Redhat is not *Linux* its a company that sells Linus Products, like Suse..

2) Its just plain wrong, Redhat offers one year of helpdesk support, the produce the updates going back to RedHat 7.2 which is more than three years old.

3) In addition to this the YUM servers receive updates directly from the projects (like FireFox) so if there is an update you get it.

4) Finally Major updates (like the new versions) are Free.

After that, they force you to upgrade to the next version. And that's even for their paying customers, like me.

Again that Bunk Im running AS2.1 servers that are still being updated through RHN and will be for the next three years (at least).

Of course, we know how they dumped their desktop line OS altogether, leaving many left in the lurch

Oh yea, no desktop edition of Redhat Nothing to see here move along. They may have change their pricing model (which did tick me off) but they still offer a desktop edition. In addition to this there is Fedora Which is a redhat offering for free, and which picked up where redhat 9 left off.

Dont know too much about Mac but my Mother and Wife seem to get updates for free...