Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #159654 > unrolled thread

Windows 10 forceful update?

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers

Contents

  Windows 10 forceful update? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-02-18 11:25 +0000
    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-02-18 11:52 +0000
      Re: Windows 10 forceful update? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-02-18 12:16 +0000
      Re: Windows 10 forceful update? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 10:27 -0600
        Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-18 11:51 -0500
          Re: Windows 10 forceful update? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 05:42 +1100
    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-18 11:31 +0000
      Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-18 12:01 +0000
        Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-18 16:04 +0000
      Re: Windows 10 forceful update? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 18:02 -0500
    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-18 09:18 -0500
      Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-18 16:43 +0100
        Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-18 11:49 -0500
          Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-18 21:49 +0100
            Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-18 19:53 -0500
              Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-19 10:27 +0100
    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-18 09:08 -0700
      Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-02-18 11:50 -0600
    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-02-18 11:52 -0600
      Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-19 14:04 +0000
        Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-19 15:32 +0100
          Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-19 10:19 -0500
            Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-19 17:40 +0000
              Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-19 19:01 +0100
              Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-19 11:30 -0800
        Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-19 14:57 +0000
        Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-02-19 15:51 +0000
          Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-19 18:42 +0100
            Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-19 13:56 -0600
              Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-19 23:57 +0100
                Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-19 15:17 -0800
                  Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-19 18:27 -0500
                  Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-02-20 00:38 +0100
                  Re: Windows 10 forceful update? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-19 19:41 -0600
                    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 14:46 +1100
                    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-20 15:18 +0000
                      Re: Windows 10 forceful update? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 03:32 +1100
                        Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-20 19:38 +0100
                          Re: Windows 10 forceful update? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 06:04 +1100
                  Re: Windows 10 forceful update? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 14:29 +1100
                  Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-20 06:35 +0000
                  Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-02-20 13:54 -0500
                    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-20 20:51 -0800
                      Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-21 13:43 +0000
            Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-20 09:59 +0000
              Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-02-21 07:46 +0000
                Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-21 13:42 +0000
                  Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-02-22 07:12 +0000
                    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-22 14:27 +0000
                Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-21 16:43 +0100
                Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-21 11:52 -0800
                  Re: Windows 10 forceful update? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-22 11:34 -0800
                    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-22 12:40 -0800
    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 05:47 +1100
    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-18 16:20 -0800
      Re: Windows 10 forceful update? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 13:35 +1100
        Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-18 20:43 -0800
          Re: Windows 10 forceful update? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 05:53 -0500
          Re: Windows 10 forceful update? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 04:28 +1100
      Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-19 10:17 +0100
    Re: Windows 10 forceful update? Jan van den Broek <fortytwo@xs4all.nl> - 2016-02-19 10:06 +0100

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

#159909

On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 15:17:05 -0800 (PST)
Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:57:17 PM UTC-7, Melzzzzz wrote:
> 
> > Hm, recently Raiffeisen bank in my country sent a warning to customers,
> > not to use Windows when accessing their bank account.
> 
> That would seem very strange. That is tantamount to telling people not to
> use a computer to access their bank account.
> 
> Not that Windows isn't hopelessly insecure. But not using Windows is not
> really a feasible answer, instead some technical solution is needed.

	It works for me.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#159969

In article <2a6d17e9-f34f-43a2-b7ed-2bf0634d5890@googlegroups.com>,
 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

> That would seem very strange. That is tantamount to telling people not to use 
> a computer to access their bank account.

Not a bad idea. The banks of course, wouldn't like that.
> 
> Not that Windows isn't hopelessly insecure. But not using Windows is not 
> really a feasible answer, instead some technical solution is needed.
> 
> John Savard

What? Are there no other operating systems??? iOS perhaps?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#160016

On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 11:54:21 AM UTC-7, Walter Bushell wrote:
> In article <2a6d17e9-f34f-43a2-b7ed-2bf0634d5890@googlegroups.com>,
>  Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

> > Not that Windows isn't hopelessly insecure. But not using Windows is not 
> > really a feasible answer, instead some technical solution is needed.
 
> What? Are there no other operating systems??? iOS perhaps?

Run out and buy a bloody new overpriced computer just so I can log into my 
bank? That's some bloody cheek on their part. Easier to change banks.

I was thinking of something like Trusteer Rapport. But recommending people use 
Chrome or Firefox and not IE might even work.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#160034

On 2016-02-21, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 11:54:21 AM UTC-7, Walter Bushell wrote:
>> In article <2a6d17e9-f34f-43a2-b7ed-2bf0634d5890@googlegroups.com>,
>>  Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>> > Not that Windows isn't hopelessly insecure. But not using Windows is not 
>> > really a feasible answer, instead some technical solution is needed.
>  
>> What? Are there no other operating systems??? iOS perhaps?
>
> Run out and buy a bloody new overpriced computer just so I can log into my 
> bank? That's some bloody cheek on their part. Easier to change banks.
>
> I was thinking of something like Trusteer Rapport. 

Please don't. It's a hideous PoS.

-- 
I don't have an attitude problem.  If you have a problem with my
              attitude, that's your problem.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#159916

On 2016-02-19, Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 15:51:28 +0000
> Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> wrote:
>
>> On 19 Feb 2016 14:04:44 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>> >On 2016-02-18, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> wrote:  
>> >> gareth wrote:
>> >>  
>> >>> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the
>> >>> death-knell for MicroSoft and drive all reasonable people onto
>> >>> Linux?  
>> >> Actually, I'm not totally in favor of that.  If everybody ran
>> >> Linux, then the script kiddies would start developing nasty
>> >> malware for it.  yes, it would be harder, but if they try hard
>> >> enough, they would find the vulnerabilities.  
>> >
>> >The problem with that argument is that there are some very juicy
>> >Linux targets out there.  Your bank (and for that matter, everyone
>> >else's bank) for example. And yet, Linux malware is thin on the
>> >ground.  
>> 
>> My bank does not use Linux. They don't use Windows either. 
>
> Oracle+Solaris, that is what banks use...

IME (and I worked in the City of London for 21 years), banks use everything and anything.  But Linux is eating all the proprietary Unixes, and Windows server for anything above a trivial size.


-- 
I don't have an attitude problem.  If you have a problem with my
              attitude, that's your problem.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#160022

in 661162 20160220 095904 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>On 2016-02-19, Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 15:51:28 +0000
>> Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 19 Feb 2016 14:04:44 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On 2016-02-18, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> wrote:
>>> >> gareth wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the
>>> >>> death-knell for MicroSoft and drive all reasonable people onto
>>> >>> Linux?
>>> >> Actually, I'm not totally in favor of that.  If everybody ran
>>> >> Linux, then the script kiddies would start developing nasty
>>> >> malware for it.  yes, it would be harder, but if they try hard
>>> >> enough, they would find the vulnerabilities.
>>> >
>>> >The problem with that argument is that there are some very juicy
>>> >Linux targets out there.  Your bank (and for that matter, everyone
>>> >else's bank) for example. And yet, Linux malware is thin on the
>>> >ground.
>>>
>>> My bank does not use Linux. They don't use Windows either.
>>
>> Oracle+Solaris, that is what banks use...
>
>IME (and I worked in the City of London for 21 years), banks use everything and anything.  But Linux
>is eating all the proprietary Unixes, and Windows server for anything above a trivial size.

All the major banks in London have IBM mainframes running variations of MVS.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#160033

On 2016-02-21, Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> wrote:
> in 661162 20160220 095904 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>On 2016-02-19, Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 15:51:28 +0000
>>> Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 19 Feb 2016 14:04:44 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >On 2016-02-18, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> wrote:
>>>> >> gareth wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the
>>>> >>> death-knell for MicroSoft and drive all reasonable people onto
>>>> >>> Linux?
>>>> >> Actually, I'm not totally in favor of that.  If everybody ran
>>>> >> Linux, then the script kiddies would start developing nasty
>>>> >> malware for it.  yes, it would be harder, but if they try hard
>>>> >> enough, they would find the vulnerabilities.
>>>> >
>>>> >The problem with that argument is that there are some very juicy
>>>> >Linux targets out there.  Your bank (and for that matter, everyone
>>>> >else's bank) for example. And yet, Linux malware is thin on the
>>>> >ground.
>>>>
>>>> My bank does not use Linux. They don't use Windows either.
>>>
>>> Oracle+Solaris, that is what banks use...
>>
>>IME (and I worked in the City of London for 21 years), banks use everything and anything.  But Linux
>>is eating all the proprietary Unixes, and Windows server for anything above a trivial size.
>
> All the major banks in London have IBM mainframes running variations of MVS.

Like I said, "Everything and anything". You think City banks run everything on one machine? Or even one type of machine? Or even one class of machine? Or even one architecture of machine? The place I worked for before retiring last year had dozens of mainframes, and thousands (no, not an exaggeration. I personally knew of ~9,000 Unixy machines) of mid-range servers, mostly Unix, or Unix-related. Windows Server was a deprecated technology, and projects required dispensation to be allowed to use it. OTOH, the desktop was completely Windows (ca. 300,000 users).

-- 
I don't have an attitude problem.  If you have a problem with my
              attitude, that's your problem.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#160087

in 661279 20160221 134222 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>On 2016-02-21, Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> wrote:
>> in 661162 20160220 095904 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>On 2016-02-19, Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 15:51:28 +0000
>>>> Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 19 Feb 2016 14:04:44 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >On 2016-02-18, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> wrote:
>>>>> >> gareth wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the
>>>>> >>> death-knell for MicroSoft and drive all reasonable people onto
>>>>> >>> Linux?
>>>>> >> Actually, I'm not totally in favor of that.  If everybody ran
>>>>> >> Linux, then the script kiddies would start developing nasty
>>>>> >> malware for it.  yes, it would be harder, but if they try hard
>>>>> >> enough, they would find the vulnerabilities.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >The problem with that argument is that there are some very juicy
>>>>> >Linux targets out there.  Your bank (and for that matter, everyone
>>>>> >else's bank) for example. And yet, Linux malware is thin on the
>>>>> >ground.
>>>>>
>>>>> My bank does not use Linux. They don't use Windows either.
>>>>
>>>> Oracle+Solaris, that is what banks use...
>>>
>>>IME (and I worked in the City of London for 21 years), banks use everything and anything.  But Lin
>ux
>>>is eating all the proprietary Unixes, and Windows server for anything above a trivial size.
>>
>> All the major banks in London have IBM mainframes running variations of MVS.
>
>Like I said, "Everything and anything". You think City banks run everything on one machine? 

Of course not; did I say that?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#160094

On 2016-02-22, Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> wrote:
> in 661279 20160221 134222 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>On 2016-02-21, Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> wrote:
>>> in 661162 20160220 095904 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>>On 2016-02-19, Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 15:51:28 +0000
>>>>> Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 19 Feb 2016 14:04:44 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >On 2016-02-18, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >> gareth wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the
>>>>>> >>> death-knell for MicroSoft and drive all reasonable people onto
>>>>>> >>> Linux?
>>>>>> >> Actually, I'm not totally in favor of that.  If everybody ran
>>>>>> >> Linux, then the script kiddies would start developing nasty
>>>>>> >> malware for it.  yes, it would be harder, but if they try hard
>>>>>> >> enough, they would find the vulnerabilities.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >The problem with that argument is that there are some very juicy
>>>>>> >Linux targets out there.  Your bank (and for that matter, everyone
>>>>>> >else's bank) for example. And yet, Linux malware is thin on the
>>>>>> >ground.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My bank does not use Linux. They don't use Windows either.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oracle+Solaris, that is what banks use...
>>>>
>>>>IME (and I worked in the City of London for 21 years), banks use everything and anything.  But Lin
>>ux
>>>>is eating all the proprietary Unixes, and Windows server for anything above a trivial size.
>>>
>>> All the major banks in London have IBM mainframes running variations of MVS.
>>
>>Like I said, "Everything and anything". You think City banks run everything on one machine? 
>
> Of course not; did I say that?

Half past two.


-- 
Today is Pungenday, the 53rd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3182
                  I don't have an attitude problem.
    If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#160042

In article <dit8a8FcoqU1@mid.individual.net>,
Bob Martin  <bob.martin@excite.com> wrote:
>in 661162 20160220 095904 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>On 2016-02-19, Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 15:51:28 +0000
>>> Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 19 Feb 2016 14:04:44 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >On 2016-02-18, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> wrote:
>>>> >> gareth wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the
>>>> >>> death-knell for MicroSoft and drive all reasonable people onto
>>>> >>> Linux?
>>>> >> Actually, I'm not totally in favor of that.  If everybody ran
>>>> >> Linux, then the script kiddies would start developing nasty
>>>> >> malware for it.  yes, it would be harder, but if they try hard
>>>> >> enough, they would find the vulnerabilities.
>>>> >
>>>> >The problem with that argument is that there are some very juicy
>>>> >Linux targets out there.  Your bank (and for that matter, everyone
>>>> >else's bank) for example. And yet, Linux malware is thin on the
>>>> >ground.
>>>>
>>>> My bank does not use Linux. They don't use Windows either.
>>>
>>> Oracle+Solaris, that is what banks use...
>>
>>IME (and I worked in the City of London for 21 years), banks use everything and anything.  But Linux
>>is eating all the proprietary Unixes, and Windows server for anything above a trivial size.
>
>All the major banks in London have IBM mainframes running variations of MVS.

Norway's biggest bank, DnB (the "good bank" from the triage in the 1990s banking
crisis) moved their core transaction engine away from the mainframes and onto
three separate, redundant sun/oracle clusters at three separate locations. (They
had the same with the mainframes, but were a lot more constrained by distance; around
25 km was the max. Now they can have 1000+km separation distance, and they almost 
have).

I got to visit their holiest of server rooms, installing one of the 3 E3s they
had towards the Internet into a firewall. After a few weeks of paperwork for
clearance I finally got to be let in. I had a very senior boss in the IT dept
as my mentor. When I was done, it only took around 15 minutes, he asked if I
had accounts in the bank. Yes, I had. He then said "if you wear this antistat strap
you can touch that cabinet over there. That is the closest you can get to 
actually touching your money.". That IBM iron was the master in their DB
cluster right then, and did indeed keep score of the money.

If the whole room had exploded, it would have taken around 7 seconds before
another cluster had taken over, at a different location. Without losing a single
transaction (although some in progress would have been backed out and the
user would have gotten a "try again" failure).

The core transaction engine had so much cruft from it's life of continous 
operation from 1974 that they had parallell operations of the new cluster with
rewritten, very sanitised code for a period of two years, where it got to
handle all the same transactions. There were some minor discrepancies, and
the new code was deemed correct in all of these.

-- mrr

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#160061

Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> writes:
> All the major banks in London have IBM mainframes running variations
> of MVS.

Lots of overnight Cobol batch settlement systems from the 60s & 70s. In the
late 70s, some of these started to be front-ended with real-time
transactions ... but final settlement was done in the overnight batch.

I've periodically mentioned that in the 90s that billions were spent to
move off overnight Cobol batch settlement to "straight through
processing" with large numbers of "killer micros" (motivated by
globalization both increasing the workload and decreasing the size of
overnight window). Turns out these implementations were using standard
parallization libraries that had 100 times the overhead (compared to
cobol batch). I got to point this out to some large implementations but
was totally ignored. In general they all waited to pilot implementations
before seeing them go down in flames (overhead totally swamped
anticipated throughput improvements with large numbers of killer
micros).

Middle of last decade ... I got involved with some new technology that
involved high level definition of business rules that they generated
fine grain SQL statements that were parallelized by cluster RDBMS
implementations (most RDBMS had done enormous work on efficient cluster
RDBMS parallelization) ... was able to show mirrored transactions as
"straight through processing" from large ibm mainframe operations that
used dozens of max configured mainframe systems doing cobol batch ... in
less elapsed time. These efficient cluster RDBMS implementations
included significant amounts of redundancy and all sorts of recovery.

We took it to major financial industry associations and initially got
lots of positive interest ... then all stopped and hit a brick wall.  We
were finally told that there were still quite a few executives that bore
the scars of the 90s failures and were quite risk adverse ...  it would
take another generation before new attempts would be made.

tribute for somebody I worked with at IBM Research
http://web.archive.org/web/20080616153833/http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/IPRO/JimGrayTribute/pressrelease.html

Gray is known for his groundbreaking work as a programmer, database
expert and Microsoft engineer. Gray's work helped make possible such
technologies as the cash machine, ecommerce, online ticketing, and deep
databases like Google.

... snip ...

i.e. DBMS ACID properties gave auditors increased assurance that they
could trust computer records.
http://www.tpc.org/information/who/gray.asp

lots past posts mentioning moving off overnight batch failures:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003j.html#51 Transactions for Industrial Strength Programming
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006s.html#40 Ranking of non-IBM mainframe builders?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#31 Quote from comp.object
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007l.html#15 John W. Backus, 82, Fortran developer, dies
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007l.html#20 John W. Backus, 82, Fortran developer, dies
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007m.html#36 Future of System/360 architecture?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007u.html#19 Distributed Computing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007u.html#21 Distributed Computing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007u.html#37 folklore indeed
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007u.html#44 Distributed Computing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007u.html#61 folklore indeed
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007v.html#19 Education ranking
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007v.html#27 folklore indeed
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007v.html#64 folklore indeed
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007v.html#69 Controlling COBOL DDs named SYSOUT
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007v.html#72 whats the world going to do when all the baby boomers retire
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007v.html#81 Tap and faucet and spellcheckers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008b.html#74 Too much change opens up financial fault lines
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008c.html#92 CPU time differences for the same job
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#30 Toyota Sales for 2007 May Surpass GM
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#31 Toyota Sales for 2007 May Surpass GM
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#73 Price of CPU seconds
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#87 Berkeley researcher describes parallel path
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#89 Berkeley researcher describes parallel path
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008g.html#55 performance of hardware dynamic scheduling
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008h.html#50 Microsoft versus Digital Equipment Corporation
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008h.html#56 Long running Batch programs keep IMS databases offline
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008p.html#26 What is the biggest IT myth of all time?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008p.html#30 Automation is still not accepted to streamline the business processes... why organizations are not accepting newer technolgies?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008r.html#7 If you had a massively parallel computing architecture, what unsolved problem would you set out to solve?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009.html#87 Cleaning Up Spaghetti Code vs. Getting Rid of It
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009c.html#43 Business process re-engineering
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009d.html#14 Legacy clearing threat to OTC derivatives warns State Street
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009f.html#55 Cobol hits 50 and keeps counting
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009h.html#1 z/Journal Does it Again
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009h.html#2 z/Journal Does it Again
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009i.html#21 Why are z/OS people reluctant to use z/OS UNIX?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009i.html#23 Why are z/OS people reluctant to use z/OS UNIX? (Are settlements a good argument for overnight batch COBOL ?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009i.html#26 Why are z/OS people reluctant to use z/OS UNIX?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009i.html#30 Why are z/OS people reluctant to use z/OS UNIX?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009i.html#38 Why are z/OS people reluctant to use z/OS UNIX?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009i.html#43 Why are z/OS people reluctant to use z/OS UNIX? (Are settlements a good argument for overnight batch COBOL ?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009i.html#60 In the USA "financial regulator seeks power to curb excess speculation."
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009l.html#57 IBM halves mainframe Linux engine prices
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009m.html#81 A Faster Way to the Cloud
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009n.html#13 UK issues Turning apology (and about time, too)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009o.html#81 big iron mainframe vs. x86 servers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009p.html#57 MasPar compiler and simulator
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009q.html#67 Now is time for banks to replace core system according to Accenture
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009r.html#35 70 Years of ATM Innovation
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009r.html#47 70 Years of ATM Innovation
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010.html#77 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not back)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010b.html#16 How long for IBM System/360 architecture and its descendants?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010b.html#19 STEM crisis
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010e.html#77 Madoff Whistleblower Book
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010f.html#56 Handling multicore CPUs; what the competition is thinking
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010g.html#37 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010h.html#47 COBOL - no longer being taught - is a problem
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010h.html#78 Software that breaks computer hardware( was:IBM 029 service manual )
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010i.html#41 Idiotic programming style edicts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010k.html#3 Assembler programs was Re: Delete all members of a PDS that is allocated
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010l.html#14 Age
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010m.html#13 Is the ATM still the banking industry's single greatest innovation?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010m.html#37 A Bright Future for Big Iron?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010o.html#71 They always think we don't understand
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010p.html#48 WikiLeaks' Wall Street Bombshell
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011.html#19 zLinux OR Linux on zEnterprise Blade Extension???
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011.html#42 Looking for a real Fortran-66 compatible PC compiler (CP/M or DOSor Windows
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011c.html#35 If IBM Hadn't Bet the Company
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011e.html#15 At least two decades back, some gurus predicted that mainframes would disappear in future and it still has not happened
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011e.html#19 At least two decades back, some gurus predicted that mainframes would disappear in future and it still has not happened
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011e.html#91 Mainframe Fresher
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011e.html#93 Itanium at ISSCC
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011f.html#32 At least two decades back, some gurus predicted that mainframes would disappear
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011h.html#5 Home prices may drop another 25%, Shiller predicts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011h.html#8 At least two decades back, some gurus predicted that mainframes would disappear in future and it still has not happened
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011i.html#25 Happy 100th Birthday, IBM!
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011i.html#52 At least two decades back, some gurus predicted that mainframes would disappear in future and it still has not happened
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011k.html#15 Is the SEC Covering Up Wall Street Crimes?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011k.html#70 New IBM Redbooks residency experience in Poughkeepsie, NY
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#71 Don't Dump the Volcker Rule Just Because It's Not Perfect
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#1 Banks Awash in Cash, Which Isn't Good News
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#10 Has anyone successfully migrated off mainframes?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#23 Why are organizations sticking with mainframes?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011o.html#9 John R. Opel, RIP
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011o.html#79 Why are organizations sticking with mainframes?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011p.html#8 Why are organizations sticking with mainframes?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011p.html#12 Why are organizations sticking with mainframes?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012.html#49 No internet in 1984
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012c.html#13 Study links ultrafast machine trading with risk of crash
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012c.html#25 Goldman Sachs P.R. Chief's Accidental Exit Interview
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012e.html#49 US payments system failing to meet the needs of the digital economy
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012f.html#0 Burroughs B5000, B5500, B6500 videos
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012f.html#24 Time to competency for new software language?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012j.html#69 Monopoly/ Cartons of Punch Cards
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012j.html#77 Monopoly/ Cartons of Punch Cards
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012l.html#19 X86 server
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012l.html#31 X86 server
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012l.html#47 I.B.M. Mainframe Evolves to Serve the Digital World
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012n.html#18 System/360--50 years--the future?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012n.html#24 System/360--50 years--the future?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013.html#42 Professor Coffee Hits a Nerve at SEC
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013b.html#42 COBOL will outlive us all
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013c.html#84 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013f.html#57 The cloud is killing traditional hardware and software
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013f.html#64 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#6 The cloud is killing traditional hardware and software
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#50 The cloud is killing traditional hardware and software
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013h.html#30 'Big four' accountants 'use knowledge of Treasury to help rich avoid tax'
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013h.html#42 The Mainframe is "Alive and Kicking"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#49 Internet Mainframe Forums Considered Harmful
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013m.html#35 Why is the mainframe so expensive?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013o.html#80 "Death of the mainframe"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#29 Royal Pardon for credit unions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#81 CPU time
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#83 CPU time
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014c.html#22 US Federal Reserve pushes ahead with Faster Payments planning
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014c.html#90 Why do bank IT systems keep failing ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014e.html#10 Can the mainframe remain relevant in the cloud and mobile era?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014f.html#69 Is end of mainframe near ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014f.html#78 Over in the Mainframe Experts Network LinkedIn group
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014g.html#14 Is end of mainframe near ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014j.html#38 Meet Cobol's hard core fans
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014l.html#76 This Was the Very First Website In the US
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#71 Decimation of the valuation of IBM
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#119 Holy Grail for parallel programming language
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#170 IBM Continues To Crumble
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015.html#78 Is there an Inventory of the Inalled Mainframe Systems Worldwide
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015c.html#65 A New Performance Model ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#2 More "ageing mainframe" (bad) press
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#112 Is there a source for detailed, instruction-level performance info?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016.html#25 1976 vs. 2016?

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#160120

On Sunday, February 21, 2016 at 2:52:08 PM UTC-5, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:

> I've periodically mentioned that in the 90s that billions were spent to
> move off overnight Cobol batch settlement to "straight through
> processing" with large numbers of "killer micros" (motivated by
> globalization both increasing the workload and decreasing the size of
> overnight window). Turns out these implementations were using standard
> parallization libraries that had 100 times the overhead (compared to
> cobol batch). I got to point this out to some large implementations but
> was totally ignored. In general they all waited to pilot implementations
> before seeing them go down in flames (overhead totally swamped
> anticipated throughput improvements with large numbers of killer
> micros).

I think I mentioned that back in the 1980s Arthur Andersen & Co. (of
Enron fame) was hired by my employer at the time to rewrite a major
system.  They introduced a 'productivity' framework, "Programmers
Workbench".  Supposedly it sped up coding and made junior programmers
right out of school productive.  But it introduced a lot of overhead
and they had to get a more powerful mainframe to handle the load.  Also,
later on they discovered it wasn't Y2K compatible, and also had some
problems with newer releases of IMS.  In the end, it all had to be scrapped
and a huge bunch of programs rewritten.

When AA collapsed after Enron, it was a shame that a lot of good people
lost their jobs.  But it was hard to feel sorry for AA&Co as they were
extremely arrogant and difficult to deal with.  Management was convinced
they were gods and whatever they said was gospel, even if they were flat
out wrong.  Talented staff members with long experience were ignored
when they pointed out potential problems, and they turned out to be right.

I learned that was common in a lot of organizations--in house staff 
ignored in favor of incompetent 'consultants'.


High level office politics can kill off very good people.  We had someone
who was a whiz at systems programming and performance tuning.  He got
promoted into senior management.  It worked out well for a while, but then
others came in and squeezed him out merely because he was in their way.

In addition, I once worked for a fellow who was an excellent manager and
really improved our site.  But then high management changed and he just
didn't fit in, and got fired (I was no longer there).  It just seemed to
me to such a waste, not to mention unfair to the guy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#160125

hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> I think I mentioned that back in the 1980s Arthur Andersen & Co. (of
> Enron fame) was hired by my employer at the time to rewrite a major
> system.  They introduced a 'productivity' framework, "Programmers
> Workbench".  Supposedly it sped up coding and made junior programmers
> right out of school productive.  But it introduced a lot of overhead
> and they had to get a more powerful mainframe to handle the load.  Also,
> later on they discovered it wasn't Y2K compatible, and also had some
> problems with newer releases of IMS.  In the end, it all had to be scrapped
> and a huge bunch of programs rewritten.
>
> When AA collapsed after Enron, it was a shame that a lot of good people
> lost their jobs.  But it was hard to feel sorry for AA&Co as they were
> extremely arrogant and difficult to deal with.  Management was convinced
> they were gods and whatever they said was gospel, even if they were flat
> out wrong.  Talented staff members with long experience were ignored
> when they pointed out potential problems, and they turned out to be right.

AA had two parts, auditing and consulting.

Long ago and far away, we were brought into consultants to small
client/server startup that wanted to do payment transactions on their
server, they had also invented this technology called "SSL" they wanted
to use, the result is now frequently referred to as "electronic
commerce". The bldg next door was a warehouse and the small
client/server startup had put in cubicles full of AA (consulting)
programmers.

Turn of the century, rhetoric in congress was that Sarbanes-Oxley would
prevent future ENRONs and guarentee that executives (and auditors) did
jailtime ... however it required SEC to do something. Joke at the time
was Sarbanes-Oxley with its increased audit requirements was really a
gift to the audit indusry ... nothing would actually change.  Possibly
because even GAO didn't believe that SEC was doing anything, it starts
doing reports of public company fraudulent financial filings, even
showing the reporting fraud increased after Sarbanes-Oxley goes into
effect.

ENRON posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submisc.html#enron
Sarbanes-Oxley posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submisc.html#sarbanes-oxley
Fraudulent Financial Filing post
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submisc.html#financial.reporting.fraud

#2 on times list of those responsible for the financial mess
http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877330,00.html

GLBA that includes repeal of glass-steagall, posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submisc.html#Pecora&/orGlass-Steagal

However, when the chair of CFTC suggests regulating CDSes (heavily used by
ENRON), the chair is quickly replaced by Gramm's wife, until Gramm can
get legislation passed that prevents regulation of CDSes, then his wife
resigns and joins the ENRON board and audit committee (characterized
as gift to ENRON).

Later of course, the sellers of triple-A rated (that were paid for even
when rating agencies knew they weren't worth triple-A) CDOs go from
not carrying about loan quality and borrower's qualifications to doing
triple-A rated CDOs designed to fail, pay for triple-A, sell to their
victims, and then take out CDS gambling bets that they would fail
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submisc.html#toxic.cdo

Turns out that Sarbanes-Oxley also calls for SEC to do something about
rating agencies, but SEC did about as much about rating agencies as they
did about the public company fraudulent financial filings.

The largest holder of the CDS gambling bets was AIG and is negotiating to
pay off at 50cents on the dollar when the secretary of treasury steps in
and says that they have to sign a document that they can't sue those
making the gambling bets and forced to take TARP funds to pay off the
CDS gambling bets at face value. The largest recipient of TARP funds is
AIG and the largest recipient of face value payoffs is the firm formally
headed by the secretary of treasury.

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#159707

"gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote in message 
news:na49hv$nmq$1@dont-email.me...

> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the death-knell for 
> MicroSoft

No. The move to tablets and phones that don’t use any Win OS might 
eventually do tho.

> and drive all reasonable people onto Linux?

There aren't enough reasonable people to sound the death-knell for 
Microsoft.
 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#159740

On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 4:25:37 AM UTC-7, gareth wrote:
> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the death-knell
> for MicroSoft and drive all reasonable people onto Linux?

The requirement that Windows 10 accept all updates has made me seriously consider switching to Linux when Windows 7 becomes unsupported.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#159750

"Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message 
news:5e2ff092-b8bc-4b90-822c-aa66dbd28893@googlegroups.com...
> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 4:25:37 AM UTC-7, gareth wrote:
>> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the death-knell
>> for MicroSoft and drive all reasonable people onto Linux?
>
> The requirement that Windows 10 accept all updates has made me seriously 
> consider switching to Linux when Windows 7 becomes unsupported.

Makes a lot more sense to disable that in Win10. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#159759

On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 7:35:22 PM UTC-7, hgww wrote:
> "Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message 
> news:5e2ff092-b8bc-4b90-822c-aa66dbd28893@googlegroups.com...
> > On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 4:25:37 AM UTC-7, gareth wrote:
> >> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the death-knell
> >> for MicroSoft and drive all reasonable people onto Linux?

> > The requirement that Windows 10 accept all updates has made me seriously 
> > consider switching to Linux when Windows 7 becomes unsupported.

> Makes a lot more sense to disable that in Win10.

Except for the Enterprise Edition, the only way to do that is to never connect 
to the Internet.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#159775

In article <95e1b906-3395-4afa-b703-c0dc2f60fd39@googlegroups.com>, 
jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says...
> 
> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 7:35:22 PM UTC-7, hgww wrote:
> > "Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message 
> > news:5e2ff092-b8bc-4b90-822c-aa66dbd28893@googlegroups.com...
> > > On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 4:25:37 AM UTC-7, gareth wrote:
> > >> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the death-knell
> > >> for MicroSoft and drive all reasonable people onto Linux?
> 
> > > The requirement that Windows 10 accept all updates has made me seriously 
> > > consider switching to Linux when Windows 7 becomes unsupported.
> 
> > Makes a lot more sense to disable that in Win10.
> 
> Except for the Enterprise Edition, the only way to do that is to never connect 
> to the Internet.

sc config "wuauserv" start= disabled
sc stop "wuauserv"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#159814

"Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message 
news:95e1b906-3395-4afa-b703-c0dc2f60fd39@googlegroups.com...
> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 7:35:22 PM UTC-7, hgww wrote:
>> "Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message
>> news:5e2ff092-b8bc-4b90-822c-aa66dbd28893@googlegroups.com...
>> > On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 4:25:37 AM UTC-7, gareth wrote:
>> >> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the death-knell
>> >> for MicroSoft and drive all reasonable people onto Linux?
>
>> > The requirement that Windows 10 accept all updates has made me 
>> > seriously
>> > consider switching to Linux when Windows 7 becomes unsupported.
>
>> Makes a lot more sense to disable that in Win10.
>
> Except for the Enterprise Edition, the only way to do that is to never 
> connect
> to the Internet.

Bullshit. And it's possible to ensure that it just can't talk to Microsoft 
too. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#159771

In article <5e2ff092-b8bc-4b90-822c-aa66dbd28893@googlegroups.com>,
Quadibloc  <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 4:25:37 AM UTC-7, gareth wrote:
>> Will the attempted forceful update of Windows 10 sound the death-knell
>> for MicroSoft and drive all reasonable people onto Linux?
>
>The requirement that Windows 10 accept all updates has made me seriously consider switching to Linux when
>Windows 7 becomes unsupported.


In which case I would recommend to start some switch-experiments earlier. There
are always some application that stands in the way. I switched ~10 years ago, and
there were a number of applications that could be persuaded to be run under
dosemu or wine. But I ended with two that stuck.

I still run them under XP under parallells on a decade-old mac. I will have
to find a new home for them soon. Or find a new accountant.

-- mrr

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers

csiph-web