SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the some-folks-don't-need-flexibility,-apparently dept.
The Register reports
Redmond kicks off the era of the force-fed security update
Microsoft is kicking off a controversial new security program this month by packaging all of its security updates into a single payload.
The October security release introduces Redmond's new policy of bundling all security bulletins as one download. While more convenient for end users, who now get just one bundle, the move will irk many administrators, who had preferred to individually test and apply each patch to avoid compatibility problems.
Krebs on Security notes
Microsoft: No More Pick-and-Choose Patching
Starting this month, home and business Windows users will no longer be able to pick and choose which updates to install and which to leave for another time. For example, I've often advised home users to hold off on installing .NET updates until all other patches for the month are applied--reasoning that .NET updates are very large and in my experience have frequently been found to be the source of problems when applying huge numbers of patches simultaneously.
But that cafeteria-style patching goes out the...err...Windows with this month's release.
[...]Microsoft's patch policy changes are slightly different for home versus business customers. Consumers on Windows 7 Service Pack 1 and Windows 8.1 will henceforth receive what Redmond is calling a "Monthly Rollup," which addresses both security issues and reliability issues in a single update. The "Security-only updates" option--intended for enterprises and not available via Windows Update--will only include new security patches that are released for that month.
What this means is that if any part of the patch bundle breaks, the only option is to remove the entire bundle (instead of the offending patch, as was previously possible). I have no doubt this simplifies things for Microsoft and likely saves them a ton of money, but my concern is this will leave end-users unable to apply critical patches simply due to a single patch breaking something.
[...]The smartest option is probably to ditch [Adobe Flash] once and for all and significantly increase the security of your system in the process. I've got more on that approach (as well as slightly less radical solutions) in A Month Without Adobe Flash Player.
[...]Finally, Adobe released security updates that correct a whopping 71 flaws in its PDF Reader and Acrobat products. If you use either of these software packages, please take a moment to update them.
Has this change in method and control altered the thinking of any Soylentils WRT their choices of software supplier?
Now for the biggie: Has anyone convinced his boss to depart the Redmond path?
Previous: Windows 7 and 8.1 Moving to Windows 10’s Cumulative Update Model
(Score: 4, Insightful) by migz on Sunday October 16 2016, @10:30AM
I got off this roller coaster narely 10 years ago. I've wasted enough of my live keeping M$ crap going, and they have made a fortune. But I won't waste my time being paid to deal with their crap. Today I just say "I don't do windows".
Just go linux / osx / bsd , and keep going, even if it means you have to change jobs.
Lead by example, or stop whinging.
(Score: -1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 16 2016, @10:45AM
Just go linux / osx / bsd , and keep going, even if it means you have to change jobs.
Enjoy unemployment, living like RMS, eating your own shit, etc, etc, etc.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Unixnut on Sunday October 16 2016, @11:08AM
I don't know, in 2001 I started doing Linux as well as being a windows admin. By 2003 I was making so much more money being a Linux admin (lots of work migrating NT boxen to Linux for SMEs), that I ended up specialising in Linux/Unix machines, and I "don't do windows" since then.
The last windows I did admin for was 2000/NT, and the last I actually used was windows XP. From what I can see, things have just gone downhill from there in MS land.
I know that I make at least a third more over my windows admin colleagues, primarily because MCSE's are a dime a dozen, as are ".NET developers" round here.
I am sure RMS could make a metric ton of money, if he wanted to. The fact is he chose the life he leads, he values his principles and freedom that much that he won't sacrifice them for cash. I can respect that.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 16 2016, @11:59AM
Congratulations, you've just managed to combine Linux advocacy, Microsoft bashing, celebrity hero worship, and the commonly held belief that the poor are poor because they choose to be poor, all in the same comment.
You're agreeing with every popularly held belief here, dude. It's no wonder a trendy dude like you is swimming in money and pussy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 16 2016, @08:25PM
I make at least a third more over my Windows admin colleagues, primarily because [MCSEs] are a dime a dozen
...and another piece of the zeitgeist:
If your workplace isn't using Free Software *n?x, that place is in a distinct minority.
We've also had some stories here which have mentioned how the world is increasingly embracing openness in document formats and software.
Dave Richards is admin for the City of Largo, Florida.
Early in the century, he started a rapid shift away from M$ and to Linux.
He has the remaining legacy Windoze apps on server(s)[1] (and, one assumes, diligently maintains clones of those boxes, anticipating failure).
Mostly, his servers run Linux and FOSS apps.
Most of the worker bees have thin clients running Linux.
[1] M$ licensing and needing multiple servers to comply with those just absolutely sucks.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by BK on Sunday October 16 2016, @01:31PM
I get linux and bsd, but MS is really just converting to the OSX model. Why wouldn't you be a proponent? Or is this just (well deserved) reflex MS bashing?
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 3, Offtopic) by Nerdfest on Sunday October 16 2016, @02:30PM
I was going to say something similar. It's thanks to Apple that the current "renting" of hardware to users is now palatable? They have to "approve" all software you install in iOS? Microsoft has been working towards that now since Windows 8 now that it's considered acceptable. Giving money to Apple is funding the loss of your freedom to use your hardware as you wish.
(Score: 1) by lcklspckl on Sunday October 16 2016, @04:49PM
I agree with what you say about iOS. I do not use Apple phones. However, I have Windows 10 installed on my MacBook Pro for work and in light of that, thinking of putting a Linux on there too. What you say may be true for iOS, but it's certainly not for OSX. I install third party software, Windows emulation software, compiled by me on the machine itself software. Although I do have to "clear" third-party software since more than a couple versions ago. I like the extra block/check, if not just to keep me on my toes. Anyway, holding up iOS as evidence of the walled-garden is pointing to its poster-child, and giving money to Apple indeed funds this. However, it also funds my ability to install whatever "app" I damn well choose on their OSX side and the command line is also very useful. This is what the original poster wrote as well and it bears repeating that iOS is not the entirety of Apple.
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Sunday October 16 2016, @05:21PM
It's still funding and rewarding the company that's doing it. I hate to pull a Godwin, but it's like saying "Yeah, Hitler's an evil, racist bastard and all, but he makes the trains run on time so he's okay".
(Score: 1) by lcklspckl on Sunday October 16 2016, @06:34PM
I don't know about any of that other stuff, but it's high time our trains ran right. Completely agree.
(Score: 2) by BK on Sunday October 16 2016, @10:47PM
I for one just want a final solution to the trains thing. And by Godwin, I declare this thread closed.
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Monday October 17 2016, @05:03AM
[...] MS is really just converting to the OSX model.
I'm not seeing much similarity. Is there a Microsoft analogue to Darwin?
(Score: 3, Informative) by SDRefugee on Sunday October 16 2016, @03:57PM
I'd used/supported MS products for close to 20 years, up till I retired in 2010. At that time, my home systems were dual-boot with Win7/Linux. I decided I was done with *my* computer being dictated to by MS. So, like pulling a festering tooth from my jaw, I deleted the Win7 partition and haven't looked back.. I'm torn between feeling sorry for those who are still stuck using MS products (or just *think* they have to use MS products) AND laughing my damn ass off at the crap MS pulls now on those who *still* use their crap....
America should be proud of Edward Snowden, the hero, whether they know it or not..
(Score: 2) by srobert on Sunday October 16 2016, @04:26PM
"Just go linux / osx / bsd , and keep going, even if it means you have to change jobs."
I got off Windows for my personal computing over 20 years ago. But as for my work, I'm stuck with it. The applications that are critical in my profession are only available in MS Windows. I wish more could be done to persuade the software vendors to port their work to other platforms but unless that happens, any employer I'd be qualified to work for will be using Windows.
(Score: 2) by migz on Sunday October 16 2016, @05:13PM
What's your profession? What are the applications?
(Score: 2) by el_oscuro on Monday October 17 2016, @12:33AM
I did the switch back in about 2003 at home. I basically was building a new bare-bones box and didn't want a warez copy of Windows. So I went to Micro Center, and right next to the $199 Windows 2000 professional was $49 Red Hat workstation 7. I had played a bit with Linux before and loved Unix, so why not? Security was a big concern then too with new Windows boxes getting pwned before their owners had even used them.
There weren’t many games, and some other things were a PITA or impossible, but even then pretty much everything I needed to do, I could on Linux. And when I migrated Ubuntu with it's package manager a few years later, I have never looked back.
Meanwhile at work our large enterprise was 100% based on Windows. No exceptions, not even for critical applications like Oracle that were native Linux, none at all. After working there about 10 years, a small chink in the armour. I had been pushing for Linux (or some other Unix like Solaris) to run our large scale databases for many years, and finally management agreed to let us test it, if I could write a good enough justification. So I spent the next several weeks writing it, and got approval for a test. Still not sure we had complete approval, I installed our enterprise's first Linux system, and the rest was history. Now we have over 1,000 Linux servers and entire groups managing them.
SoylentNews is Bacon! [nueskes.com]