While we often focus on the desktop offerings from Microsoft, the company of course also plays a role in countless other markets. The most prominent of those is probably the server market, where Windows 2000 Server and Windows Server 2003 are now facing a number of support changes - important stuff if you manage Windows servers. The biggest news? There will be no third service pack for Windows Server 2003.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-09-22
Member since:2005-07-06
Jesus. When it comes to Linux, anything goes.
Please at least mention specifically some distribution that actually does not pursue these ridiculously rapid upgrade cycles, constant package updates between upgrade cycles, and little quality assurance.
Amazing how my father and mother have Archlinux setup on their respective computers and hell hasn't broken loose. I don't understand what you're using but if you stick to a decent distribution and do your job as an administrator - there should be no reason for things going pear shaped.
Edited 2009-09-17 06:33 UTC
Member since:2009-05-20
Have you too fallen in this rhetorical "my grandma"-trap?
In this context, "decent" distributions would probably be something like CentOS or Debian. Nevertheless, each and every Linux upgrade (from major version to another ) cycle contains a well-understood risk, which, as you note, can be reduced by proper administration.
(Maybe I am just frustrated at the moment because I just discovered two Fedora bugs to which the developers promptly replied that these will be fixed only in the next release; perfect example of the six-month-hell.)
But take this from the parent comment:
I will have to wade through hundreds of single updates instead of one big one. But hey, why make their OS any easier to use? Just move to Linux.
"Wading through hundreds of single updates" sure brings Linux to my mind.
Member since:2009-08-26
None at all?
ArchLinux update breaks Nvidia driver http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=77131
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2007-09-06
Not for people who don't like updating.. for people who like easy updating.. example:
Boot Windows. Visit Windows Update.. then Adobe.com for flash.. then Firefox update checker.. then java in the control panel.. then quicktime in the control panel.. then XYZ website for another update check.. then Adobe for acrobat and pdf reader.. and on.. and on.. let's not forget the reboots inbetween various stages.
Boot Debian, Mandriva, Suse, Redhat or other Linux based platform (useing Debian for the example); type "aptitude update && aptitude full-upgrade", review the list of updates that will be isntalled, hit Y to continue. Done.. maybe there was a kernel update so reboot once.. done. If your a GUI person, check the task bar icon that says "updates available", click "download and install".. done. All updates vetted by the distribution provider and made available in one place through a centralized update/add/remove manager.
Member since:2006-01-06
Linux would have the same problem as Windows if there were more commercial apps for the platform.
Member since:2006-02-05
Member since:
2009-05-20
Linux? For people who do not like updating? You must be kidding?
Jesus. When it comes to Linux, anything goes.
Please at least mention specifically some distribution that actually does not pursue these ridiculously rapid upgrade cycles, constant package updates between upgrade cycles, and little quality assurance.