301–304 of 304 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why free software is necessary. Proprietary software makes you rely on a company to fix everything . It's like driving a car without being able to replace a flat tire.
Assuming these hospitals keep updating and do not get stuck at Ubuntu 10.04.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone can seek help on the open market to support Ubuntu 10.04 forever if they like. You can't go to another company if you don't like the price Microsoft sets for support for Windows XP.
This comment makes my blood boil. Please ask yourself: 1. why would anybody want to keep 10.04 alive? 2. do you think the type of people who stubbornly continue to use 10.04 would know/care enough about security to seek an alternative source for security patches? edit: should maybe add why this pisses me off: just logged into a production server running 12.04, default install apache and updates _turned off_. the owne…
The quote bombshell here, and what hasnt yet gotten much attention since sysadmins the world over are busy dealing with fallout, is that the NSA and therefore the US government is directly responsible for the current global cyber-carnage. We developed the capability, we chose to keep it unpatched, we tried to keep it secret, we lost control of it. This has similarities in type, if not in horror, to the development an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
XP is still in use for 2 reasons: cost and backwards compatibility. For cost, CentOS, on it's own, is free. Support costs you of course, but the updates are coming down from RedHat for which there is enough money flowing in already, so support in this case means a sysadmin who understands CentOS and those are not that rare, not even that expensive. Backwards compability is another topic, especially with the rise of s…
> Backwards compability is another topic, especially with the rise of systemd. User level ABI has had no important incompatibility since the glibc released with the kernel 2.6 (don't remember the version). That was some 15 years ago. Most applications didn't even break at that time, and core libraries promise more stability now. That's nothing similar to the compatibility break between Windows XP and Vista. That tran…
First i hear of this, so MS did a damn good job of papering over it.
The only Windows breakage on the software level i have noticed is the jump from 32-bit to 64-bit, and that has more to do with CPU modes than Windows internals.
But i keep battling crazy dependencies and odd breakages related to desktop software on Linux. Never mind that devs keep reinventing the wheel (how many VFS implementations have Gnome gone through now? 3? 4?).