Linked by Jeremy LaCroix on Wed 13th Aug 2003 16:59 UTC
I am a "Technologist", a Technology enthusiast that is usually the one that is called should a major catastrophe strike an end user. My saga of computer rescues becomes a plot that is ever so thickening, if not only for the fact that's it's becoming incredibly easy for hackers and malicious code writers these days to invade personal property to find, seek, and destroy. Each year, virus and hacker threats increase, and in addition the damage trail left behind is something of a problem. Not to forget, a majority of "PC Panic" cases I've come across are often times the same common, "major" problem.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
On WinInformant, Paul has a nice article blaming the users and exonerating Microsoft. Great logic there.
For such a huge company you'd think they'd have the resources to test things. Case in point, Q823803 a fix for NT servers. After release users found out it stopped RAS from working, MS then had to fix the fix and reissue it. How could they have missed the fact that it stopped RAS from working? This is basic, basic functionality. Inexcusable!
And why oh why when I apply a patch do I have to reboot the friggin server? I mean you can do whole upgrades of Unix kernels without rebooting, but put on the latest IE patch and it's reboot city. Microsoft claims they're a key player in the enterprise.......give me a break. And sadly patching Windows 2003 follows the same pattern (although I have applied 2 patches that didn't need a reboot).
Finally, MS needs to stop releasing Beta software as 'gold'. 'Oh that will be fixed in SP1' Why not fix it before you release it? God forbid you let your much delayed product slip another month or so. Can't wait for the 300+ list of fixes for Office 2003 SP1.