Microsoft Users Upset with 'security updates'

eWeek Magazine ^ | Dec 23, 2002 | Dennis Fisher

[Jhoffa_]

I didn't cause any of this trouble!

Don't bring logic into this..

[PatrioticAmerican]

#173 - Not that post, again. Under XP it does nothing. The window can simply be closed.

[PatrioticAmerican]

You obviously don't know much about the Aegis incident.

[PatrioticAmerican]

Any reason why the failure? As with any ocmputer, system large or small, system devices must have apprpriate drivers. NT can detect and continue running with many failures, but not all. You'd be surprised how many failures each day occur without notice by users. NT simply corrects for them.

[sneakypete]

On XP, you can try running the specific application in a compatibility mode.

Thanks,I reload one of them and give that a try when I'm more rested than I am now.

[sneakypete]

check on www.tucows.com

Thanks,I'll check it out. Windows 2000 is a great platform, if you have that handy it may fix all your problems.

Thanks again,but I don't have Win-2000. I still have the Win-98SE THAT I used on my old computer,and the XP-Pro that I bought to load on this new one.

[Quix]

wELLLLL, in the sense that he was laid back, candid etc. vs stiff grey suit, stuffy IBM type--he had MORE charisma.

Yeah, all the other impressions have plenty of validity, I agree.

[Knitebane]

How bloody typical. A quote from the article, but you ignored a quote farther down. For those that might be taken in by your picking and choosing, I'll post it here.

Some outside observers, however, said they are not convinced NT is blameless. “It still boggles the mind that any divide by zero error on NT would cause a system to crash, let alone” 27 end-user terminals, said Gil Young, corporate network engineer for a systems integration firm in Orlando, Fla. “I don’t care what operating system, computer or application I’m using, I should be able to type in a zero and expect the computer not to crash, especially if that zero is to represent a closed valve.”

So even though the captain of the ship (who isn't a software engineer or a computer engineer) thinks everything is ok, others, more qualified, disagree.

The fact of the matter is that a database crashed and the operating system allowed that crash to interfere with the rest of the system. That is Considered Bad in the world of mission critical systems.

And the Navy, having invested millions of dollars in this boondoggle, will not admit that the problems exist. This is not new, I witnessed it personally while serving. The Navy refused to admit that the engines installed in the F-14A were underpowered and had a tendancy to stall near the edge of the flight envelope. This fault was ignored for years, despite several fatal crashes. When an F-14A crashed into a wharehouse near San Diego and the press got involved, the Navy finally took action and contracted for a more powerful and more reliable engine.

Eventually, a NT crash during combat will kill a dozen sailors and the Navy will finally admit that using a Windows OS was a mistake.

And after that happens, I will personally spit on any Microsoft cheerleader that I come across for having had a hand in the deaths of my latter-day shipmates.

[Bush2000]

So even though the captain of the ship (who isn't a software engineer or a computer engineer) thinks everything is ok, others, more qualified, disagree.

News flash: Gil Young isn't qualified to comment on the issues on the ship since he ain't involved and doesn't know what happened. You might as well quote your grandmother. Or Rush Limbaugh.

The fact of the matter is that a database crashed and the operating system allowed that crash to interfere with the rest of the system. That is Considered Bad in the world of mission critical systems.

Nowhere does it say that the OS crashed. Nowhere does it say the OS prevented the application from running. The database server crashed. You (and other uninformed ideologues) blame the OS for something that the database vendor is responsible for. Answer this: If the application is dependent on the database server running -- and the database server crashes -- is it the OS's fault that the application can't function?!? Get real!

And the Navy, having invested millions of dollars in this boondoggle, will not admit that the problems exist.

Non-sequitor. You're asserting that the OS is at fault. You're wrong. The Navy has admitted that their application/database server failed. That is the limit of the problem. Trying to blame the OS is just ridiculous.

This is not new, I witnessed it personally while serving. The Navy refused to admit that the engines installed in the F-14A were underpowered and had a tendancy to stall near the edge of the flight envelope. This fault was ignored for years, despite several fatal crashes. When an F-14A crashed into a wharehouse near San Diego and the press got involved, the Navy finally took action and contracted for a more powerful and more reliable engine.

Irrelevant. Unrelated event A does not impute unrelated event B.

Eventually, a NT crash during combat will kill a dozen sailors and the Navy will finally admit that using a Windows OS was a mistake.

Here we go with the parade of non-sequitors. Dude, do yourself and us a favor: take a basic logic class. If the Navy has a problem to solve, it's in its command-and-control application, not the OS.

And after that happens, I will personally spit on any Microsoft cheerleader that I come across for having had a hand in the deaths of my latter-day shipmates.

Try that with me, pal, and you won't have a mouth to spit with after that.