At 09:18 AM 5/2/2013 -0500, you wrote:
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Kurt Wendt <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hey Stephen - I agree with Ken - in regards to the Stability. I used
> Win2000
> Pro for Years on this one desktop of mine. And, when I would tell people
> what OS I was running - they looked at me like I had a 3rd Eye in the
> middle
> of my forehead! But, alas - I kept running W2K - because it was stable -
> and
> I was running the Pro version - because I was using 3D CG SW. And, because
> of this stability factor - I could see why Ken would like to still be
> running it.
>
> Vista was a Nightmare - causing problems on my laptop a LOT - and also
> making my wife's Dell PC desktop unstable from day one!
> ----------
M$ stated that it was unsafe on the web. XP was great. Vista was a
drivers issue, 7 had that covered. 8 is user and lack of software issue.
They are hoping to get that fixed. hehehehe
But back to the point that it was unsafe on the web.
First, that's completely bogus. The older an OS is, the SAFER it is on the
web, because the vast majority of malware writers target the "latest and
greatest", and the junk that is dangerous to older OSes drops out of
circulation.
But for the sake of argument, let's assume that this claim is not a
bald-faced lie concocted solely for marketing purposes.
Who made it unsafe on the web? MS. Why should I be responsible for
replacing a defective product? MS should have been held responsible for
making it safe.
When was the last time any auto manufacturer got away with telling people
they have to junk their cars and buy new ones because they are unsafe?
The problem is that the tech industry has been able to wave its flag of
"unbelievable technical complexity that you poor government officials don't
understand" for way too long. Because of this, they have been able to put
out shoddy buggy stuff, and they have "educated" the public to expect and
accept this. Although US common law establishes that no person can sign
away their legal rights, one of which is that every product sold comes with
an implied guarantee of usability, these people continue to get away with
EULA clauses that absolve the manufacturers of liability for defects. And
they are actually allowed to get away with requiring customers to pay them
(for "upgrades") to fix their defective products. So almost nobody
complains to consumer protection agencies or their elected representatives
about buggy software.
Software is just like any other product. It can be regulated, and the
manufacturers can comply with the regulations and still make a profit. Cars
with defects are recalled and repaired for free. The same requirements can
be applied to software. But software manufacturere certainly will not make
any effort to make the products safer or longer-lasting, or accept
responsiblity for their quality, unless and until they are forced to.
Ken Dibble
www.stic-cil.org
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
