Posted on 07/04/2015 8:04:58 AM PDT by dayglored
That, and the really painful process of installing all the patches. Now, I have no problem with there being a bunch of patches. Hell, download a copy of Fedora 21. You'll find a crapload there. However, there is a big difference in how they are managed. With Fedora, you install the OS and whatever extra programs you want that aren't installed by default by the package manager. THen once it's done, you let the automatic updates apply. Once that's complete, you reboot, and you're good to go.
Not so with windows. I did the basic install, installed firefox and putty, and then let it go get its updates. Cool. Simple, and easy right? Wrong. Once all the updates had finally finished downloading and installing, it wanted to reboot. Fair enough, says I. So, after the reboot, it says, "hey by the way you have a bunch more critital updates". So I download and install them, then reboot. Then it says "Hey, there are still some critical updates". So you download, install, reboot. Then it tells you to install more updates, which you download, install, then reboot. Finally After hours of downloading, installing and reboot (I didn't baby-sit the thing. I went on to do other work, and checked back on it when I thought about it), it eventually said "you're up to date".
Incredible.
Nice!
Wikipedia offers this explanation:
"The Siphonaptera" is a nursery rhyme, sometimes referred to as Fleas.
Big bugs have little bugs,
Upon their backs to bite 'em,
And little bugs have lesser bugs,
and so, ad infinitum.
Windows Updates are kinda like that. It's mainly because the updates themselves get patched, and you can't patch the update until it's installed and rebooted... As far as administrative users, Windows doesn't have a TRUE "sudo" so the initial user has to be administrative. "Run-As-Administrator" is a false flag operation -- it's not really what it says, because there are system and application programs that in fact require you to log out and then log in as THE ADMINISTRATOR to make them operate correctly -- simply being a member of "Administrators" group doesn't do it, and doing "Run-As" with the Administrator password doesn't do it.
Windows is still, alas, a toy operating system in a few very fundamental ways. It can't escape its past, for reasons of back compatibility.
I think the way Linux packages are managed is smarter by far. Yum and Apt are excellent package management systems, which handle far more than Microsoft can even manage with their clunky update system for just their OS, and whatever MS software you buy. (I don't know if it all can be updated with the update system, as I don't actually have anything other than the OS itself. Since they control all the software, you'd think they could figure out, with their billions of dollars how to tell their update manager, that "this patch superceeds that one. Install it instead".
Windows is still, alas, a toy operating system in a few very fundamental ways. It can't escape its past, for reasons of back compatibility.
I'd have to agree with that. The only reason I even got it, was because there is no Linux package for itunes so I could back up my phone, or get music from it. So, now a I have VM. What's really nice about the VM is that with Workstation, you can snapshot it if you want, then have the VM return to that snapshot every time it boots. That is =nice=. There is nothing you can do to the running VM to completely hose it because you can always return to the snapshot. In fact, it's just as easy to back up the entire virtual computer into a zip or tar archive. If something bad happens in the VM, you just delete the directory that contains it and unzip/untar your archive.
I really wish you could buy an OSX VM from Apple. I understand that Apple wants to keep things easier to manage by limiting the amount of hardware they support. A Virtualized OSX would not deviate from this IMO. From a support standpoint, what can be more controllable than a VM? You have standard hardware emulation built into the entire concept. Oh well. It is unfortunate that they don't listen to me. Maybe they'll reconsider the idea now that Jobs is gone.
Well, FWIW, you can run OS-X in a VM on Apple hardware, using VMware Fusion (the Mac version of VMware Workstation). I think the versions of OS-X you can run in the VM are limited, it used to be only server versions of Snow Leopard, but that was years ago. I haven't had occasion to do it myself, so I can't give you up-to-date info. The Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VMware_Fusion appears out of date.
In any event, once you've bought Apple's hardware, they don't much care how many copies of OS-X you run on it.
Of course, trying to run OS-X on non-Apple hardware, virtual or metal, is a whole 'nother story. :-)
You're not kidding. I had an OSX VM several years ago. The network stack was broken unfortunately, and I never could convince it to function correctly. Like I said, I'd be perfectly willing to pay cold cash for an officially sanctioned copy of OSX. I may need to look into trying to get a Fusion VM to run on Workstation. I don't know if they work. Wife has a Mac with fusion.
Generally the Tools installations can be backed out and re-installed if necessary. But I don't think you can back out the changes when you "Upgrade" the guest VM itself (to the next higher version of VMware support). I think the upgrade adds features which confuse the versions prior to the features' introduction.
My IT dep’t is trying to talk me into moving from Win 7 to 8.1
I’m resisting with every fiber of my being.
Windows 7 is a growing thing, just as XP has been for a long time.
Yeah, in fact I would say that Win7 has the potential for hanging in there, that could make even XP’s record-breaking run look pale by comparison. I suspect Microsoft is going to have to nuke it from orbit to ever stop people from using it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.