gm10 wrote: ⤴
Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:22 am
What a click-bait misleading subject. Well done.
I'm not sure it's misleading, though I will absolutely
grant it is
click-bait. I don't, after all, post threads on this message board so that nobody engages and participates.
Props to Microsoft for providing the extended security updates
for keeping their users secure? Really? I should think that's the very least
Microsoft could do.
even though Win7 is 9 years old, some enterprise or government users cannot always easily make the switch.
Microsoft pushes out new versions of Windows because that's pretty much the only
way they can make "new" money in the operating system platform business.
As to using this to promote Linux? Are you joking? Microsoft is already supporting their releases much longer than Ubuntu. Ubuntu makes you pay for extended support after 5 years already and you can only go another 3 years for a total of 8. Compare that to the 14 years of Windows 7. If anything this promotes Microsoft.
What does any of this have to do with Canonical? There's a lot
of distros to pick from. Moreover, the user experience in GNU+Linux tends to get better with each release. There's no “Oh crap, my [printer / scanner / graphics card / etc.] won't be supported any longer and there's nothing anyone can do about it if I upgrade.”
MintBean wrote: ⤴
Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:33 am
I'm no fan of Microsoft, but what they're doing seems perfectly reasonable. If you want extended support for end-of-life software, you pay a fee.
I'm pretty much on the fence about this. On the one hand, I think any natural person or business should have the capacity
to earn a living and/or turn a profit; therefore, I would never seek for example a law which states such a thing was illegal. On the other, half or more of the updates Microsoft produces is because their platform is and has always been crap, and so they're forever fixing their own problems, mistakes, mis-judgements, etc. I think the forced upgrade is simply a way to shirk their responsibilities tied to the fact that they produce junk, and is otherwise the same thing as smartphone makers and/or cell carriers only supporting or producing updates for those devices while they are new models, and quickly abandoning them after 12-18 months. (At least Alphabet is making an attempt to deal with this to a degree.)
CaptainKirksChair wrote: ⤴
Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:29 am
IT is complex. And that means it can be difficult to keep up with the day-to-day demands of your organization, let alone deliver technological innovation that drives the business forward. In desktop management, this is especially true: the process of creating standard images, deploying devices, testing updates, and providing end user support hasn’t changed much in years. It can be tedious, manual, and time consuming. We’re determined to change that...
- from the MS Blog
I think the thing which disturbs me most here is the last sentence: “We're determined to change that...” Change what
, precisely? Change it so it isn't tedious, manual, and time consuming? Does that mean you folks want to just fly by the seat of your pants with respect to doing updates and fixes? Do you plan to stop creating images, deploying devices, and testing? (Oh, wait: half the time you don't really
test your crap; you leave that up to your unpaid beta testers
customers to do for you.) Or
is it that you don't really want to support your products and instead would rather just shoehorn your customers into the newest shiny thing you've put out?
Why did they need to spend five sentences and seventy words to tell their loyal customers "screw you?" Though in all fairness, the quote above isn't for their customers; it's to justify to themselves that whatever action they take, no matter how much it makes their user-base suffer, is good for the user-base because Microsoft knows what's best for them.
To quote from Babylon 5: “The Corps is Mother. The Corps is Father. Listen. Obey.”
Linux has roughly 18 months to position themselves to take a big chunk of Windows users away from Microsoft.
Huh? Where is this “18 months” comment coming from?
Unfortunately, Apple won't play along because they will never make a Linux version of iTunes. iPhone owners with a Windows home PC will never go anywhere without iTunes; it is one of the top five reasons people won't switch from Windows/macOS to Linux.
smartphone owners own Android OS-based devices, not iOS-based ones. Ergo, I doubt this would present as being as massive an issue as one might think.
However...there is a leverage point here. Practically everything on a newer cell phone is stored "in the cloud." Which means you really don't need iTunes. That's where the GNU/Linux community needs to hit. It needs to be made clear that your photos and music and contacts and such are already backed up. With that said, there does need to be a better connection/interface with iPhones and Linux. With my Android phone, I just plug it in and Mint 19 finds it and opens a window for me to browse my files. This is a requirement if you want to get iPhone/Windows users away from Microsoft. And that is the target "audience."
This may sound counter-intuitive given my previous comment, but cloud-based computing has nothing to do with this. If you're using an iOS-based device, you absolutely do
need iTunes, unless of course the individual in question exclusively listens to streaming content from a non-Apple source, such as Spotify, Pandora, etc. Moreover, it's always
been a greater PITA to access an Android OS-based device in Mac OS X ever since Google switched from USB Mass Storage to Media Transfer Protocol, because of course Apple doesn't build MTP support directly into macOS (heretofore also known as Mac OS X) likely for the same reason they won't natively support NTFS read and write, or EXT2/3/4, etc.: they would rather be petty and snub anything that isn't Apple-platform-centric because otherwise they're giving legitimacy to what is in essence a competitor. Hey, Apple: the 1980s called, and they want their platform war mindset back.
Peoples of the universe, please attend carefully: the message which follows is vital to the future of you all.