Windows Update versus Ubuntu Update
section: windows, for your questions: KezNews forum, 15.7.2008
A few months ago, Steve Ballmer publicly noted that Windows Vista was “a work in progress.” That inspired a predictable outpouring of Vista-bashing.
After all, look how many updates Windows Vista has had since it was first released. Obviously, it was a disaster, or there would have been no need for that many updates, right? Why couldn’t Microsoft get it right the first time?
The reality? All modern operating systems used as mainstream business and consumer platforms are “works in progress” and require frequent updates to fix bugs and resolve security issues (and occasionally to add features). Many of those bugs and security issues don’t surface until the code gets deployed widely, and even then it sometimes takes detective work to figure out where the actual problem is. Presumably, the big issues get worked out within a few months, and the pace of updates drops off (but not to zero).
I thought about this over the weekend when I opened up a Hyper-V virtual machine running Ubuntu Linux 8.04. This was a plain-vanilla install of Ubuntu, with no additional software except what is included with the downloaded distro. I had last used this VM 51 days earlier, at which point the OS release was about a month old. At that time, it was completely current with patches and updates, and I hadn’t reopened it since. (A side note: My Ubuntu and OpenSUSE 11 installations on this Hyper-V server were exceptionally easy and performance is excellent. I’ll be migrating my Fedora installation from Virtual PC 2007 to Hyper-V and adding an OpenBSD machine on this platform as well.)
I expected that I would have to install a few updates. But I was surprised to see how many.
When the system finished resuming from its saved state and landed at the desktop, I clicked the Update button and was greeted with this dialog box:
source:
blogs.zdnet.com
Send link 2 friend | Permalink
MORE RELATED ARTICLES:
An Update For Windows Update || XP SP3: Now on Windows Update || Microsoft Prepares Next Windows Home Server Update || Update on Windows Vista SP1 Prerequisite KB937287 || Why installing Vista SP1 might fail via Windows Update
Comments(4)
basically when there is a kernel upgrade you need to reboot to make use of the newer
features. if it's just programs updating, then you don't. i, for example, installed a
legitimate copy of office 2007 and installed it.. minutes later the windows update dialog
popped up and exploring it i found it was just a few updates for office 2007. i decided to
let them go ahead, figuring i probably won't need to reboot if it's just updating
office. i was wrong. as soon as the first update finished, it required a reboot.
i much prefer linux ways of doing it where you only reboot after a kernel update.
ubuntu is an excellent os and i like that it runs from a disk instead of the hdd very
nice idea! windoze should do a similar project.
the reason ubuntu uses a live cd is so that people can try it before installing, most
people have tried windows so there is no real need for a version for home use.
windows pe is for all intents and purposes what you are suggesting.
uh, the reason you have to restart is because you blindly told it to install a kernel
update, windows update makes you reboot almost every time you install an update, nice job
in trying to understand ubuntu as compared to shit windows
No new comments are allowed for this article.
For your questions use our KezNews Forum
Kernel updates
By xangelo on 16.07.2008 - 00:07