Windows Cheaper to Patch Than Open Source? 473
daria42 writes "Is Windows cheaper to patch than open source software? Of course this Microsoft-commissioned report thinks so - but a number of people disagree, including a key Novell Asia-Pac exec, Paul Kangro. Kangro highlights problems with the report including the fact that it refers to problems faced by administrators before 2003: before significant improvements were made to Linux patching tools. 'We didn't have tools like Xen for Linux then,' says Kangro. 'When I patch my Linux box I don't need to bring it up and down any number of times.' Kangro also points out the report doesn't mention costs associated with rebooting systems after a patch is applied."
Xen (Score:5, Informative)
Oh, come on. Practically speaking, we don't have Xen for Linux *now*. Sure it's cool and all (which is why it's slipped into this basically unrelated story) but it's not nearly ready for the Linux mainstream and I'd be surprised if more than a handful of people are using it heavily in production.
apt vs windows update (Score:5, Informative)
Conversely, windows update only updates windows (not my other apps), and takes at least 15 minutes every time i run it.
Can't agree (Score:4, Informative)
.yeah, right... (Score:2, Informative)
SUS, SMS, WUS,
Yeah, a good linux distribution wipes the floor whith the M$ patching goof.
Re:Windows vs Microsoft products (Score:1, Informative)
(oh btw the problem turned out to be that the DPI wasn't set)
Xen or Zen (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.novell.com/products/zenworks/ [novell.com]
Re:Reboots (Score:2, Informative)
Both sets of hardware are about the same, so the cost is a wash.
another cost that is lost in the translation (Score:1, Informative)
For example, when the latest service pack came up for Windows 2003 Server, It took a lot of balls on my part to hit that restart now button. I've had it in the past where it would break something and I'd end up having to do a complete reinstall, costing my company thousands of dollars of just lost productivity.
Sure, I'm suppose to have an identical machine to test these things out on with an identical setup, but realistically how many companies have the money to buy two of everything?
On my linux machines, I only fear things like a dependancy breaking and losing 1 program, for example KDE, but that isn't necessary for a server to work (well it shouldn't be installed on a server
Re:apt vs windows update (Score:2, Informative)
Re:apt vs windows update (Score:5, Informative)
OK. Sound easy. Let's do it.
Clicks Start | All Programs | Windows Update
Hmm.... just sends me to a MS web page. Meanwhile, for some reason I can't shut down the IE window until it finishes "checking" my computer for updated "Update Software"
Clicks Start | All Programs | Accessories | System Tools.
Hmm..... Nothing there for Windows Update.
Left click on the Windows Update icon in the system tray (it's GOTTA be there..)
Up pops a "Ready to Install" update screen.
Whoops, I forgot I should RIGHT-CLICK the icon to get a detailed menu of choices. I right-click
Up pops a "Ready to Install" update screen, no menu
Ah, Control Panel...
Click on Start | Control Panel
Double Click on Automatic Updates
There we go. A window with a green shield and a red shield and 4 radio buttons. Wait, they're all ghosted out!! And I'm logged in as an Administrator. I can't believe I go so far only to be blocked from changing the settings....
apt-get and emerge seems so much easier to use...
Re:Get the facts? (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, you can distibute patches with Linux as well. You can use yum and point it to a local repository with the selected updates/patches or all, then have the yum service running which automatically updates the system for you. (guys, am I incorrect here?)
Re:Get the facts? (Score:2, Informative)
Pretty much any distro with package management can be used this way.
Re:Xen (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Xen (Score:4, Informative)
That said, I think the Novell dude probably meant "Zen". They should probably start calling it "ZenWorks" to avoid this confusion, since they also ship Xen in SuSE 9.3.
Re:apt vs windows update (Score:3, Informative)
Of course, I'll guess that you were running as an administrator -- one of those double edged sword things. It makes administration of the box a little easier for the user, but it also makes administration of the box by ne'er-do-wells easier too.
In general, autoupdate is a bad thing, unless it's implemented as a formal XP service and detached from whatever user happens to be logged on at any given time.
Re:apt vs windows update (Score:4, Informative)
1) Open Control Panel
2) Open Automatic Updates
3) Choose 'Download updates for me, but let me choose when to install them.' (this was the default, by the way!)
4) Done.
Was that so hard? Definately better, though, to teach grandma how to get her syntax exactly right at the command prompt. That's much better.
Re:apt vs windows update (Score:4, Informative)
Or maybe just show her how to use synaptic (a nice graphical front end for apt). Then her applications will be updated as well - and she will be able to search for and install new applications if she pleases.
Re:apt vs windows update (Score:2, Informative)
You can get rid of this by doing "net stop wuauserv" on the command-line.
Re:Well ... Insightful? Hammer geeks unite ! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Get the facts? (Score:3, Informative)
Windows has one distributed patch management system. With Linux/BSD/etc. there are multiple approaches depending on what works best for your organization. Every Linux distro I've used is quite flexible in this regard. In my opinion, the ultimate is diskless workstations running off a fast file server (SCSI RAID, 1000Bt network). (30-40 workstations per server, replicate servers as needed) You can use local hard disks for caching if you like, but the ease of administration is the same.
Advantages:
- workstations are stateless and can be swapped out on the fly with no syncing
- reduced heat, power usage, and noise from workstations
- no need to either leave machines on at night for automated updates or initiate updates upon startup
- guarantee that everyone is using the exact same software
Updates are pretty much as simple as running a package manager on the master shared filesystem root used by the diskless machines:
chroot
apt-get update; apt-get upgrade