3 ms·
This is an anti-enterprise play. There are significant costs to OS updates, including retraining, downtime, and legacy (working) software compatibility. Most en
by macspoofing 12y ago
This is an anti-enterprise play. There are significant costs to OS updates, including retraining, downtime, and legacy (working) software compatibility. Most enterprises are pretty good at applying security patches but rightly balk at full OS upgrades.
>This is also a huge win for not having the need to support super old OSes
Who wins?
- golergka 12y agoTraditional Windows version updates, as in, from 95 to 98, from 98 to XP, etc — yes. But that's exactly what they're trying to eliminate, and use a modern update mechanism that is supposed to be easier than applying patches.
- raverbashing 12y agoSo this means enterprise IT will actually have to hire knowledgeable people, and not buy "enterprise solutions" that only bring new computers to a halt, cost an arm and a leg and bring negligible benefit. Move the workflow into the web, ditch "office suits", don't touch ANY sw crap by IBM. About 90% of your workforce can do with an Ubuntu workstation.