OS Euthenasia
Â
It's a thought we all try to avoid, but when you get to be a certain age, you can't help but become obsessed with thoughts of The End. At some point, those you have known, loved, and worked with bite the dust. While it is possible to lengthen the lives of those slated to die by technological means, most of us take The End as a granted. All that's left are the memories and eulogies, when our favorite program goes off to the big database in the sky. But life goes on. After a computer program's life cycle has ended (I bet you thought I was talking about people!), we buck up and move forward, installing the next latest greatest tool being marketed as the solution to our computing needs.
Â
When they use terms like "software life cycle," manufacturers obviously want to imply that the life of a program or operating system is similar to the life of a human being. There is a period of beta development (youth, in human terms), the "official release" (a Bar Mitzvah?), a period of productivity and support (the career years), and finally, the end of the life cycle, when the product is "outdated."
Â
Â
But isn't staying "up to date" in the software world important? Aren't you missing out on all the nifty new features, as well as setting yourself up for potential "compatibility" problems? Well, it depends; new features are nice, if you're going to use them. But most people still using Office 97 are perfectly happy with the way it works; they don't NEED the extra features in Office 2000 or 2003. Why try to fix it if it ain't broke? Upgrading for many people means spending money, spending time learning how to use the new interface the program is likely to have, and probably spending money buying new memory or other hardware to get the upgrade to run properly!
Â
Â
See, I'm the kind of customer Microsoft doesn't like. I bought my copy of Windows 2000 (as an upgrade, actually), and if my laptop hadn't come preloaded with XP, I would have installed 2000 on that machine as well, because I like 2000 better. In that I'm not alone; more than half of corporate customers are still using 2000, according to studies. And they, like me, are probably perfectly happy with their systems. Microsoft, on the other hand, wants users to upgrade to their new operating systems, both for financial and security reasons. And chances are high that most business, if not home users, will "upgrade," buying new licenses, spending time and effort downloading and installing patches and updates for their systems, and spending money on techs who will be brought in to sort out the knots that always appear when something as major as an operating system upgrade appears.
Â
Â
Microsoft is doing this because it says that previous versions of XP, including SP1, had too many security problems; the fixes in SP2 will create a much more secure computing environment (although security bugs, like the one listed at http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/392354, have been found). The fixes include an upgrade to the Microsoft Firewall, improved mail security, a pop-up blocker, and improved Wi-fi compatibility - features you can already get with a plethora of third party software.
Â
Â
Â
Â
Â
Â
Â
Â