blobjim comments on Microsoft patches Windows and Excel – breaks audio, remote access, and paste

technology

24,469 readers

1,422 active

185 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

1. Obviously abide by the sitewide code of conduct. Bigotry will be met with an immediate ban
2. This community is about technology. Offtopic is permitted as long as it is kept in the comment sections
3. Although this is not /c/libre, FOSS related posting is tolerated, and even welcome in the case of effort posts
4. We believe technology should be liberating. As such, avoid promoting proprietary and/or bourgeois technology
5. Explanatory posts to correct the potential mistakes a comrade made in a post of their own are allowed, as long as they remain respectful
6. No crypto (Bitcoin, NFT, etc.) speculation, unless it is purely informative and not too cringe
7. Absolutely no tech bro shit. If you have a good opinion of Silicon Valley billionaires please manifest yourself so we can ban you.

founded 6 years ago

moderators

[–] blobjim@hexbear.net 1 point 1 day ago* (2 children)

I think at a societal level that is a bad business model. It makes no sense to maintain old software just to delay the work of upgrading (which only becomes harder over time). Software isn't a car or a building, there's almost no cost to frequent updates and modifications.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] space_comrade@hexbear.net 2 points 1 day ago (1 child)

there's almost no cost to frequent updates and modifications.

That's absolutely not true at all for the vast majority of domains. For example there's a reason a lot of financial computer infrastructure still runs shitty old COBOL code and it's not just laziness and lethargy, there is real cost to rewriting it and then extensively testing the rewrite.

Sure maybe you're right, maybe the risks and upfront work would pay out in the future but it's not like being conservative with these things is highly unreasonable and just a result of laziness.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] blobjim@hexbear.net 1 point 1 day ago*

I guess I was mostly thinking about it from the user side of software, not in-house software. If it's in-house there's a cost to any kind of software changes. But keeping someone else's software up-to-date usually involves running some backups and migrations, updating configuration, planning out deployments and so on. Still takes work and planning, but the more frequent the updates, the less work it is. Of course, things become end-of-life and then you have to potentially have to make "in-house" changes that take a lot of work. But it seems like a lot of companies are on LTS versions of things just because they didn't take the time to plan how they were going to do upgrades. So because they don't have the processes in place themselves, they outsource that to Microsoft to maintain the existing versions indefinitely.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent