quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
smschulz, you'd be well-advised to be sitting down before reading this

Thanks, for the warning but I am long past letting others think for me on the subject.
I base my opinions on objective data and experience in the industry for many years.
When you have seen how technology has advanced since the late seventies for me you get an appreciation of where it is today.
From that point of view I have no time for when a seemingly minor issue to me gets blown up to be a major deal.
Yet I know to those little issues are important to those users and I usually just try to resolve their problem and not get emotional about the clients lack of understanding.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
smschulz, you'd be well-advised to be sitting down before reading this

Thanks, for the warning but I am long past letting others think for me on the subject.

I was thinking more of you being floored by me actually coming to the defense of Microsoft

Loosing $5000 an hour in production because yet another security problem patch breaks the drivers is no small problem.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

I was thinking more of you being floored by me actually coming to the defense of Microsoft

I appreciate that.
I also was aware of Marzy's problem, he has told us of it before.
The problems are always big to the ones who have them.
There there are usually solutions other than a blanket condemnation of the OS as it always gets the blame for everything.
The thing is and what I try to do is just solve the problem.
Sometimes we don't like the solutions and it is easier to pass blame than figure out a solution.

quote:

Losing $5000 an hour in production because yet another security problem patch breaks the drivers is no small problem.

If losses can be potentially devastating then the protective step of having (and using) a standalone, in front, test system for incoming new software may be warranted. One must also, at the same time, assure that the real operations system is fully disconnected from such intrusive and damaging invasion. Secure classified shops do this.

quote:

One must also, at the same time, assure that the real operations system is fully disconnected from the Internet, such that they're exposed to intrusive and damaging invasion by Microsoft's Update Servers!

FIFY

quote:

FIFY

Your bowdlerization of Marsy's comment and/or my quotation thereof fixed nothing. I will graciously assume that English is a second language for you.

Software has been imperfect from its binary beginnings and, being written by humans and run upon circuit designs whose origins are human, will likely with few to no exceptions remain so forever. The problem Marsy faces is a probabilistic risk versus gain economic one, common to all manner of endeavors.

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
Loosing $5000 an hour in production because yet another security problem patch breaks the drivers is no small problem.

I'm not making excuses for Microsoft. As I noted: Not a fan. But oft times those drivers break because they were poorly-coded, themselves.

There was once documentation floating around--perhaps even a book?, titled something like "Undocumented Windows <whatever> Features" or something. It contained documentation on ways to do things the official MS-Win APIs did not allow. "Only" problem was: When Microsoft changed things, sometimes as a result of bug fixes, those "undocumented features" would break, thus breaking software using them.

A security patch breaking a driver is a prime example of such a thing. Driver designer finds "Hey, I can do <this>," despite the fact <this> is not documented behavior. So they go ahead and do it, because it makes their product better, their job easier, or whatever. Problem is: Doing that exploits a security vulnerability in the kernel's driver API. Somebody discovers the vulnerability, Microsoft patches it. Driver breaks.

Not. Microsoft's. Fault.

Admittedly, had Microsoft's designers and engineers designed and coded their stuff properly in the first place, those "undocumented features" would never have been present. But people makes mistakes and taking advantage of such things is unwise. I'd argue irresponsible.

I relate this as somebody who had more than a little experience writing device drivers for everything from CP/M (early 8-bit CPU O/S), to Real-Time Operating Systems, to AT&T Unix and SCO Xenix in a professional capacity.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
Loosing $5000 an hour in production because yet another security problem patch breaks the drivers is no small problem.

I'm not making excuses for Microsoft.
As I noted: Not a fan.
But oft times those drivers break because they were poorly-coded, themselves.

Somebody discovers the vulnerability, Microsoft patches it. Driver breaks.

Not Microsoft's Fault.

I would dig even further below the driver issue.
When you have a production device that is critical to your companies income precautions of a responsible IT department should be taken.
That should include:
* Pretesting updates and changes.
* Limiting access from the outside world (Internet) and internal (LAN)
* Disaster Recovery Policies in place with various contingencies.

I know in the past things "just worked" but just like in the past when we could start our cars in the winter, leave the keys in the car and then go inside to have a cup of coffee while it warmed up - times have changed.

I don't know if the machine that "used to work fine on W7" but now breaks with every update is one that W10 was force on by mgt, or if the computer is also used for Web browsing, Quickbooks, Facebook and Porn but there are always solutions to the problem.
We may not like going through them but this is business and you have to do what you need to do to succeed.
It does no good just to blame MS ~ they certainly do not WANT incompatibilities and things to break as that only leads to dissatisfaction.
Sometimes the companies who originally write the drivers just don't keep up ~ it is just as much if not more THEIR responsibility as well.
All in all it can be fixed one way or another.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
When you have a production device that is critical to your companies income precautions of a responsible IT department should be taken.
That should include:
* Pretesting updates and changes.
* Limiting access from the outside world (Internet) and internal (LAN)

In all fairness: Even small businesses, much less one-man shops, are unwilling to have duplicate machines sitting around just waiting to test new software releases or have separate machines for mission-critical processes and Internet access.

In the first instance, dedicated staging machines: Beyond the nearly doubled hardware costs, which may include expensive interface cards or peripherals, there'd be the duplicated software licensing fees.

As for the second scenario: Walked into a small vendor's one day, a couple years ago, for a replacement part. The place was essentially closed. They were letting in only people who'd called in advance. Turned out their sole computer was down because it'd been hijacked by ransomware--which took out their entire inventory system. Told the guy "Going forward: Suggest you not use this computer for email or, other than known suppliers' sites, web browsing. Get a second computer for email and general browsing." He looked at me like I was crazy.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
* Disaster Recovery Policies in place with various contingencies.

This, OTOH, is both doable and necessary.

Yes, it's a PITA to do--especially if you end up having to do a full restore, from the metal, if something goes wrong, but it's the only way to be sure.

Funny how the proprietary Unix system never breaks. Or the Mac even.

Like I said, I was working on the linearization of a piece of equipment when the workstation decided it needed a restart because of some latent "update". IT had no time to test if the update would break anything. Their fault for for not turning off the automatic updates, however, MS should send out update info for the vendors in plenty of time to test if it will break a driver that requires outside communications.

MS problem 100% if the vendor has no idea that there's yet ANOTHER security hole amongst the last few million in their shitty excuse for an OS.

If you have a mission critical piece of hardware that requires Win10, why not install the free hyper visor that comes with Pro and run your work from an isolated virtual machine that has no internet access? You’d be immune from updates and malware, and recovery would be simply to restore and earlier state of the VM.

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
Funny how the proprietary Unix system never breaks. Or the Mac even.

Like I said, I was working on the linearization of a piece of equipment when the workstation decided it needed a restart because of some latent "update". IT had no time to test if the update would break anything. Their fault for for not turning off the automatic updates, however, MS should send out update info for the vendors in plenty of time to test if it will break a driver that requires outside communications.

MS problem 100% if the vendor has no idea that there's yet ANOTHER security hole amongst the last few million in their shitty excuse for an OS.

Funny you aren't using them then.
Maybe it's just a shitty APP.
I would say it's 100% your problem (I said problem not fault, btw).
If it is really important just solve the problem whatever the solution may be.
I stand by original assessment.

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
If you have a mission critical piece of hardware that requires Win10, why not install the free hyper visor that comes with Pro and run your work from an isolated virtual machine that has no internet access? You’d be immune from updates and malware, and recovery would be simply to restore and earlier state of the VM.

That is too obvious a solution.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
Funny how the proprietary Unix system never breaks. Or the Mac even.

Funny you aren't using them then.

Perhaps he's not, but I did. Still do.

I spec'd, acquired, installed, configured, maintained, and admin'd SCO Xenix and Unix; AT&T System IV Unix; Sun Microsystems BSD Unix and Solaris; Red Hat, Ubuntu, and Mint Linux', and FreeBSD Unix systems over the course of my thirty plus years as a software designer and systems admin. (Twenty-five of those as a dedicated SysAdmin.) Multiple installations across as many as five facilities across N. America. Both servers and desktops.

I also did the same for Microsoft Windows NT 4 (one install at one facility), and everything from MS-Windows 3.x through MS-Windows 7. (Except Vista. Dodged that bullet.)

The 'nix boxen weren't all sweetness and light, but the MS-Windows' systems were, far and away, far more trouble than any of my 'nix systems ever were. So far and away it wasn't even a remotely close competition.

As a result, my antipathy towards MS-Windows became so great that, had my employer decided to switch to MS-Windows for servers I would have resigned my position. (I always said "I'd rather ride the back of a garbage truck for a living than admin an MS-Win network." I wasn't kidding.) And, in fact, when my employer switched their proprietary business system to an MS-Win-based solution it put the final nail in my retirement date. They knew it, and, when they made that decision was when they finally became serious about finding a replacement for me.

(I dodged a bullet again. Last time I talked to him, my replacement was spending more time assisting the individual they hired just to admin the MS-Win server and business system software on it than he was all five or so 'nix systems and the entire network infrastructure.)

I have never, for the life of me, understood why anybody, particularly businesses, tolerates MS-Windows.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:


I have never, for the life of me, understood why anybody, particularly businesses, tolerates MS-Windows.

{meh}
You are entitled to an opinion.
I feel the same way you do about MS for Apple.

Well might as well toss my MS gripe in the pool.

For the past year since upgrading, meaning forced to upgrade, (hardware and software) from 7 to 10, we've had a few issues, the main one is that Win10 will at any time it likes, reset the default PDF reader program from Adobe Reader to Microsoft Edge.

Doesn't matter what's being done, when or how, it's happing on it's own inside the MSFT system. One minute Adobe is the default app, next, MS Edge, again you don't have to be doing anything for this to happen, Win10 does it on it's own.

Yes I know how to set a program as a default in MS10, in fact that's how we get it set back to open documents in Adobe. IT's a major PIA because all documents we get in and send out are PDF.

Microsoft says it's Adobe, Adobe Says its MSFT, it's well documented on the web, and none of the reported "fixes" meaning reset the default app work. Yes I reported it to both companies, they know about it, nobody is fixing it.

The default will reset, but soon, in minutes, hours or a day it will return to MSFT without warning, you know because the Icon on PDF's change from Adobes PDF icon to MSFT Edge.

There's been many MSFT updates as well as Adobe since win10 intro, none fix the issue.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
I feel the same way you do about MS for Apple.

I have exceedingly little experience with OS X. There was a laptop I used for a while for a development project. Had to use either OS X or MS-Win. OS X seemed ok. I didn't love it. I think it was mainly the UI (Aqua?) and the one-button mouse I disliked most. The machine, itself, seemed reliable.

May get a lot more experience. My wife's desktop is in need of replacement. Linux suits her for everything except support for her GPS, for which she needs either MS-Win or OS X. OS X it'll be.

If I like it well enough, my current Linux server/desktop will move to a server-only role and I'll have an OS X desktop machine of some kind.

I will not, in any event, be minding an MS-Win10 box. Period.

can't complain here.

easier on work life and personal as well.

solid imo.

Win 10 worse then Microsoft Vista?