Google ditches Windows on security concerns

[YosemiteSam]

Save your credentials for someone who gives a ****. Are you going to post your resume next? Nobody is here to pat you on the back.

You said that upgrading to IE7 broke at least 3 applications at your last company. That would imply to me that not much testing took place beforehand, and it would also imply that you had some involvement in the process since you're in IT.

How does testing *FIX* an incompatibility? It doesn't.

I'm get the feeling you are the IT guy for a SOHO at best.

 

[Kilyin]

How does testing *FIX* an incompatibility? It doesn't.

I'm get the feeling you are the IT guy for a SOHO at best.

I guess I have to spell everything out for you. It finds the incompatibility *BEFORE* it's actually deployed into a live environment where Joe User finds out he can't open his internets anymore. Then you find out if you can *FIX* the incompatibility before it actually affects any of your users. Pretty cool huh?

 

[YosemiteSam]

I guess I have to spell everything out for you. It finds the incompatibility *BEFORE* it's actually deployed into a live environment where Joe User finds out he can't open his internets anymore. Then you find out if you can *FIX* the incompatibility before it actually affects any of your users. Pretty cool huh?

Umm we did. Why do you think we rolled out and trained everyone on WSFTP before upgrading?

Wow.

 

[Kilyin]

Umm we did. Why do you think we rolled out and trained everyone on WSFTP before upgrading?

Wow.

Contradict yourself much?

Just the way IE handles FTP broke at least 3 applications in my last company in an attempted switch from IE6->IE7.) Many applications written to support these things aren't cheap to replace or "update". (we replaced IE's FTP with WSFTP client, that required re-training of all 350 people at my old company, that wasn't cheap!

'In an attempted switch' sounds like you were hustling to get a break fix in for your mistake.

So you intentionally rolled something out knowing it would break your applications, that you'd have to retrain 350 people, and in the process cost your company money? I guess that's why it was your 'last company'.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I guess I have to spell everything out for you. It finds the incompatibility *BEFORE* it's actually deployed into a live environment where Joe User finds out he can't open his internets anymore. Then you find out if you can *FIX* the incompatibility before it actually affects any of your users. Pretty cool huh?

So you are going to test multiple computers with different OS, with different Service Packs on them, with other various other software on it, before you send it out to all.

Because when you are dealing with a large amount of computers and workers it is rare that you will find that all of them have the same bios, motherboards, memory amounts, chip sets, operating systems, service pack or other updates, other software and any other thing that could potentially screw up a new software introduced to all of these computers.

Not to mention any computers where for whatever reason the user is stuck in an update loop where they can no longer do their critical updates because they will download but will not install and you can not get them to understand how to fix it over the phone so they either just let it be or turn off all automatic updates.

And again it does not take into account any users who have downloaded software they should not have and they wind up having active viruses or trojans on their computers. Or they have too many virus, adaware type prevention programs that screw up with some of the other software that causes issues.

Doing a test run on a computer and saying...hey it works so let's deploy it to all and then expecting it to be the same for every computer IN A LARGE NETWORK of computers is kind of naive at best.

And this does not even take into account the users on the other end with their cart load of IDTENT errors.

In a regular world, where everyone on the network has everything the same it will work. And that does work for many places because they are mostly smaller groups of computers and users.

But when you are dealing with a larger network...chances are you are going to find problems with it.

Heck even if you don't do things over the network, even if you have all the same computers and hardware and you just ghost one hard drive to another so everything is the same...you can still run into a computer or two wigging out for whatever reason even though everything, in theory, is the same...and that is not even doing it over a network.

 

[Kangaroo]

You two should meet in real life so you can pat yourselves on the back. I don't think you understand the concept of a lab environment broseph. Nobody said to 'VM the desktops'. Maybe you need to learn how to read?

No what you fail to comprehend is labs do not and will not ever catch every possible thing you have no freakin clue. I know what VM ware is I know what a freakin lab is. I understand all that and you still fail to grasp the simple logic of working at a large company.

Lets take just the desktop not even the servers yet I worked for several top 100 companies and guess what we averaged over a 1000 identified applications yes you read that correctly 1k that was just desktop installs that did not account for any back end ties to sql databases, oracle servers etc etc.

In one company we went through 1k in application got rid of overlap we went down to 800 and guess what 3-4 years later we where back up to 1k again.

You have no clue how much you will never discover in a lab we have had updates role out tested 4-5 even 6 times not one dam error we push it to 5000 pc's and all of a sudden you have 500 not working correctly because it failed to install because the customers profile was corrupted, bad hard drive out of space and everything else. Like I said you have no clue if you think a lab will figure out everything wrong

 

[YosemiteSam]

Contradict yourself much?



'In an attempted switch' sounds like you were hustling to get a break fix in for your mistake.

So you intentionally rolled something out knowing it would break your applications, that you'd have to retrain 350 people, and in the process cost your company money? I guess that's why it was your 'last company'.

We were testing when we found out it broke the applications. You're a n00b. I'm done with you.

 

[vta]

I'm guessing you work with a BOFH. :laugh2:

I wish. This guy sounds like he knows how to liven things up.

 

[Kangaroo]

I wish. This guy sounds like he knows how to liven things up.

Have you ever seen the internet Helpdesk skit from Dead troll that thing is a classic

 

[vta]

Have you ever seen the internet Helpdesk skit from Dead troll that thing is a classic

No I've never even heard of it. I'll have to check that out too.

 

[Kilyin]

You have no clue how much you will never discover in a lab we have had updates role out tested 4-5 even 6 times not one dam error we push it to 5000 pc's and all of a sudden you have 500 not working correctly because it failed to install because the customers profile was corrupted, bad hard drive out of space and everything else. Like I said you have no clue if you think a lab will figure out everything wrong

This will be my last reply, because I can sense the butt hurt meter rising exponentially. If you have Win 2k machines then you have a good reason to still be running IE6, since that's the last version of IE they can legitimately run.

I have rolled out IE7 and 8, and various other software updates at large companies (including one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world) so I'm not just sitting here conjecturing what would happen. Nothing ever goes perfectly, but there are methods to minimize problems/catastrophes. It doesn't matter what you're talking about, if you're dealing with 5000 computers things are going to go wrong whether you're pushing out updates or sitting around with your thumb up your rear playing minesweeper.

Without going into specifics there are ways to have the problematic computers back up and running within minutes if you have your crap together. There are ways to only push out the updates to only the computers that have the same OS and same service packs. A properly setup virtual lab/environment is a lifesaver. If you don't realize that I have to question whether you actually know what you're talking about.

"customers profile was corrupted, bad hard drive out of space and everything else. "

None of which have anything to do with software updates. Those are lingering/separate issues that should have been dealt with. Are you really trying to draw a correlation between a bad hard drive and upgrading a web browser? Holy Christ.

If you have users downloading and installing software they shouldn't be, you aren't doing your job. Plain and simple. If the computers on your network are infested with malware and trojans, you're not doing your job.

If you want your computers to be more susceptible to attacks/malware and less secure because you're using a 10 year old browser and are too scared to update it, more power to you. I'm just telling you not all companies are operating under that mantra.

 

[Kangaroo]

This will be my last reply, because I can sense the butt hurt meter rising exponentially. If you have Win 2k machines then you have a good reason to still be running IE6, since that's the last version of IE they can legitimately run.

I have rolled out IE7 and 8, and various other software updates at large companies (including one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world) so I'm not just sitting here conjecturing what would happen. Nothing ever goes perfectly, but there are methods to minimize problems/catastrophes. It doesn't matter what you're talking about, if you're dealing with 5000 computers things are going to go wrong whether you're pushing out updates or sitting around with your thumb up your rear playing minesweeper.

Without going into specifics there are ways to have the problematic computers back up and running within minutes if you have your crap together. There are ways to only push out the updates to only the computers that have the same OS and same service packs. A properly setup virtual lab/environment is a lifesaver. If you don't realize that I have to question whether you actually know what you're talking about.



None of which have anything to do with software updates. Those are lingering/separate issues that should have been dealt with. Are you really trying to draw a correlation between a bad hard drive and upgrading a web browser? Holy Christ.

If you have users downloading and installing software they shouldn't be, you aren't doing your job. Plain and simple. If the computers on your network are infested with malware and trojans, you're not doing your job.

If you want your computers to be more susceptible to attacks/malware and less secure because you're using a 10 year old browser and are too scared to update it, more power to you. I'm just telling you not all companies are operating under that mantra.

Once again you are the only one but hurt and talking out your arse yes some companies have tight controls and despite your simple minded view it does not work that way in reality. Some companies higher up and people with a lot more political power and that make the money company over rule what IT wants to do. Would we like to lock down every dam workstation you bet but then again we are not allowed could we yes then you would be creating what we call and RGE (resume generating event). You are talking like someone that has no real work experience at big companies. IT does not get to make all the decisions what we say is not always law even if we have prof that it would be the better way to go sometimes we get over trumped by those in power.

 

[Kangaroo]

This will be my last reply, because I can sense the butt hurt meter rising exponentially. If you have Win 2k machines then you have a good reason to still be running IE6, since that's the last version of IE they can legitimately run.

I have rolled out IE7 and 8, and various other software updates at large companies (including one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world) so I'm not just sitting here conjecturing what would happen. Nothing ever goes perfectly, but there are methods to minimize problems/catastrophes. It doesn't matter what you're talking about, if you're dealing with 5000 computers things are going to go wrong whether you're pushing out updates or sitting around with your thumb up your rear playing minesweeper.

Without going into specifics there are ways to have the problematic computers back up and running within minutes if you have your crap together. There are ways to only push out the updates to only the computers that have the same OS and same service packs. A properly setup virtual lab/environment is a lifesaver. If you don't realize that I have to question whether you actually know what you're talking about.



None of which have anything to do with software updates. Those are lingering/separate issues that should have been dealt with. Are you really trying to draw a correlation between a bad hard drive and upgrading a web browser? Holy Christ.

If you have users downloading and installing software they shouldn't be, you aren't doing your job. Plain and simple. If the computers on your network are infested with malware and trojans, you're not doing your job.

If you want your computers to be more susceptible to attacks/malware and less secure because you're using a 10 year old browser and are too scared to update it, more power to you. I'm just telling you not all companies are operating under that mantra.

No what I said is we have applications that will not run on IE6 and they are not being upgraded until they upgrade these applications we are not rolling out IE7. They are a key application so would IT like to roll out IE7 over IE6 yes but we can't until they spend a ton of money to upgrade several apps we have that will not run in IE7 under any mode

 

[Faerluna]

Once again you are the only one but hurt and talking out your arse yes some companies have tight controls and despite your simple minded view it does not work that way in reality.

That's kinda funny, because that's exactly the way my company works, and we have about 3300 people world-wide.

I think that while you all might work in IT, that there are different types of companies: ones that are progressive and forward-thinking and ones that will continue to do things like they have always been done and think that it's good enough.

It's a shame that you two work for "good enoughs" and we both work for "forward-thinkers." I think our work environments are probably significantly less frustrating.

 

[Kangaroo]

That's kinda funny, because that's exactly the way my company works, and we have about 3300 people world-wide.

I think that while you all might work in IT, that there are different types of companies: ones that are progressive and forward-thinking and ones that will continue to do things like they have always been done and think that it's good enough.

It's a shame that you two work for "good enoughs" and we both work for "forward-thinkers." I think our work environments are probably significantly less frustrating.

I been in booth and we are trying to change it, I helped changed it at one company but it took years and took a new CEO. It takes buy in at the top of the food chain. Trust me their is a lot of things we love to do that we are not allow and with the current state of the economy it is even harder because the budget is getting cut smaller and smaller so we have to delay things and extend things out.

 

[YosemiteSam]

It's a shame that you two work for "good enoughs" and we both work for "forward-thinkers." I think our work environments are probably significantly less frustrating.

You couldn't be more wrong. I work for a technology company. We build technology. If you've seen Google's AJAX work, thats small potatoes compared to what we do and I'm sure you would consider Google as a technology forward company. Our work borders on HTML5, except that it works in IE6. Not because we want it too, but because it HAS TOO.

All our Windows machines (not that we have a lot) all have IE8. Although our users are pretty much ban from using it except on web applications that only work in IE. (whoa, exactly what we are *****ing about!)

I don't know what company, how old it is, or even sector it's in that you work for. I promise you, they aren't all the same. Sometimes a company does want to move forward in some technology, but outside forces prevent it. There are a boatload of applications out there that do not work in IE7+ or Firefox, etc. If that company uses them, they either have to drop it for something else, or stay with what works. Sometimes changing isn't an option and there are a million reason why it might not be an option.

The other guy just doesn't have enough experience in the field to realize that yet. He is going to have a rude awakening.

 

[Faerluna]

I don't know what company, how old it is, or even sector it's in that you work for.

The other guy just doesn't have enough experience in the field to realize that yet. He is going to have a rude awakening.

a) The other guy is my husband, and he knows what he's talking about.

b) In my part of the company, we develop mass market applications to run on people's computers. The only place you'll find IE6 is in a VM environment and our newer projects aren't supporting it at all.

I'm not trying to say that things are black and white. I'm saying this is how things are in my company, a technology-forward company.

Obviously there are too many variables in general to say that your statements about the technology used in companies today is the only right answer.

That's my point. If you can't accept that yours aren't the only right answers, then the issue is greater than IE6.