(July 23, 2015 at 5:40 pm)pocaracas Wrote: On windows, most updates don't require a reboot... but some do... and it's pretty much abusive towards that requirement.
But that's windows for work or home computers...
There are windows for servers that work differently... Also windows embedded can work for years without a reboot...
Windows servers don't really work that differently when it comes to updates. If the updates affect the kernel or stuff that's not in user space, more often than not the server needs to be restarted. The problem Microsoft has is that it loves to put stuff in the kernel, rather than in user space. The main reason they do it is for performance reasons, but if you want a good example, look at the clusterfuck that was MS15-034 early this year. Crash Windows by sending a single GET request to IIS? Yup. All because they shoved some of the web caching code into the kernel.
Quote:No, that is also incorrect... you got a DVD with windows 7, not a CD!
True.
(July 23, 2015 at 7:37 pm)JuliaL Wrote: What trouble did you have in mind?
Security trouble. XP is now vulnerable to zero-day attacks which will never be patched. Also, eventually (as happened with Windows 2000), the antivirus software companies will just stop making updates for their products. Unless you are a business with legacy systems that you've been forced by management to keep on XP, there is no sensible reason not to upgrade.
Quote:Most of the problems I've had with Windows have come from the disk bloating backups resulting from update. One machine I recently purchased (from a local school system) had an 80Gbyte drive 35Gbytes of which was taken up with crap accumulated via Windows update. I have every confidence that that was why they ditched it, it ran out of room for applications. How big is your %windir%\Installer directory?
Once the updates are installed, you can delete the update files with no issues. Windows Disk Cleanup will do it all for you. Updates aren't a bad thing; they can be annoying, but they serve a purpose, which is to fix flaws and make the system more secure.
Quote:The computer that I cannot afford to have compromised runs Linux, is fully current and spends ~99% of the time powered off and physically disconnected from the network. If that can be hacked, I'd like to know how.
Every computer can be hacked in some way. If you can exploit USB, you can do plenty of things. Linux is more secure that most operating systems, but don't forget that Shellshock happened not so long ago, and the fiasco with OpenSSL (Heartbleed) was mostly a Linux issue.
Quote:If you are suggesting that Microsoft spends any time worrying about providing me with reliable software or protecting my data, all I can do is laugh. I'm not worried about XP not being updated.
I am suggesting exactly that. If they didn't spend any time worrying about that sort of stuff, why do you think they release so many updates each month? You should worry about XP not being updated. You're using a system which is just a big target with the word "infect me" written on it, and the target is getting bigger each day.
(July 23, 2015 at 7:46 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: No joke. We have servers at work that have years of continuous uptime, and that number would be pushing a decade if it weren't for kernel updates.
I think with the old AF server we reached a year and half before I decided I should probably install some kernel updates.
