Is NT 4 dead? Is Microsoft ripping us off?

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by max, Sep 12, 2003.

  1. max

    max Guest

    I run NT 4 on an old Pentium, simply for email and accountiing
    software, and is ideal for this. However due to these recent security
    problems with MS software, I can't use it for connecting to the net
    anymore, due to MS not providing patches for their older software . I
    really do wonder if Microsoft have intentially made their software
    with flaws, so that people are forced to update to newer versions,
    simply to allow them to be patched. I have paid for a full version of
    NT 4 (with no expiry date) , and it should be able to continue to be
    used, and I shouldn't be forced to upgrade my computer due to MS
    software flaws, and them not wanting to help their customers who have
    older software. The fact is the software can't be upgraded to a newer
    version as the computer is old and doesn't have another memory or
    speed to use thenew bloated windows software. I would go to linux, but
    the accounting software doesn' support it. I do believe that MS do
    have a moral obligation to provide patches for their older operating
    systems.
     
    max, Sep 12, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. max

    BTMO Guest

    "max" <> wrote

    > I run NT 4 on an old Pentium, simply for email and accountiing
    > software, and is ideal for this. However due to these recent security
    > problems with MS software, I can't use it for connecting to the net
    > anymore, due to MS not providing patches for their older software . I
    > really do wonder if Microsoft have intentially made their software
    > with flaws, so that people are forced to update to newer versions,
    > simply to allow them to be patched. 3


    Whoa, that's a fine crop of paranoia you have growing there, Max!

    ;-)

    > I have paid for a full version of
    > NT 4 (with no expiry date) , and it should be able to continue to be
    > used, and I shouldn't be forced to upgrade my computer due to MS
    > software flaws, and them not wanting to help their customers who have
    > older software. The fact is the software can't be upgraded to a newer
    > version as the computer is old and doesn't have another memory or
    > speed to use thenew bloated windows software. I would go to linux, but
    > the accounting software doesn' support it. I do believe that MS do
    > have a moral obligation to provide patches for their older operating
    > systems.


    So what you are saying is that you can **phyiscally** no longer connect to
    the internet, yes?

    Or are you really saying "I am scared of the consequences of using this
    software in case I download something, like a virus, or I am subjected to an
    attack by someone exploiting a security hole in my OS, that might take me
    off the air"

    While I feel for you, the nature of business is that tools and plant do go
    out of fashion, out of style, wear out, and all of the rest. That is why you
    can claim depreciation on your capital assets every year - they have a shelf
    life and a use life.

    Given that NT is about 10 years old, and most software goes bellyup (in
    terms of currency and usefulness) in about 3 - 5 years, I would say you have
    well and truly recouped your investment in it. Move on.

    BTW - what happened to the farriers when the automobile was invented? Did
    they all claim GM and Ford was morally obliged to keep them in business by
    buying horseshoes they no longer needed, or did they go out and learn how to
    be motor mechanics?

    Or when cars become computerised, did motor mechanics claim moral obligation
    on carburettor manufacturers to not make electronic ignition systems, or did
    they upskill...

    Cheers,

    Brenton
     
    BTMO, Sep 12, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. max

    Rob King Guest

    "BTMO" <> wrote in message
    news:_Y98b.144905$...
    > "max" <> wrote
    >
    > > I run NT 4 on an old Pentium, simply for email and accountiing
    > > software, and is ideal for this. However due to these recent security
    > > problems with MS software, I can't use it for connecting to the net
    > > anymore, due to MS not providing patches for their older software . I
    > > really do wonder if Microsoft have intentially made their software
    > > with flaws, so that people are forced to update to newer versions,
    > > simply to allow them to be patched. 3

    >
    > Whoa, that's a fine crop of paranoia you have growing there, Max!
    >
    > ;-)


    Ooooh look! A grassy knoll. :)
     
    Rob King, Sep 12, 2003
    #3
  4. max

    Rob Guest

    "Rob King" <> wrote in message
    news:3f612eeb$...
    >
    > "BTMO" <> wrote in message
    > news:_Y98b.144905$...
    > > "max" <> wrote
    > >
    > > > I run NT 4 on an old Pentium, simply for email and accountiing
    > > > software, and is ideal for this. However due to these recent security
    > > > problems with MS software, I can't use it for connecting to the net
    > > > anymore, due to MS not providing patches for their older software . I
    > > > really do wonder if Microsoft have intentially made their software
    > > > with flaws, so that people are forced to update to newer versions,
    > > > simply to allow them to be patched. 3

    > >
    > > Whoa, that's a fine crop of paranoia you have growing there, Max!
    > >
    > > ;-)

    >
    > Ooooh look! A grassy knoll. :)
    >

    Mmmm. Grassy...
     
    Rob, Sep 12, 2003
    #4
  5. max

    Steven H Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > I run NT 4 on an old Pentium, simply for email and accountiing
    > software


    so you pay for a 7 year old car and am shocked and surprised when its
    manafacturer refuses to give you free tune ups?

    go figure.
    --
    ===================================================
    Steven H
     
    Steven H, Sep 12, 2003
    #5
  6. max

    max Guest

    On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:15:42 +1200, Steven H <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>,
    > says...
    >> I run NT 4 on an old Pentium, simply for email and accountiing
    >> software

    >
    >so you pay for a 7 year old car and am shocked and surprised when its
    >manafacturer refuses to give you free tune ups?
    >
    >go figure.



    Software can't be compared to a car, otherwise I would have crashed or
    the car would have seized up the first day I got it. So many people
    use this comparison, even MS have used it, but really they are like
    chalk and cheese.

    Under the CGA, the product should last a reasonable period of time. I
    purchased NT4 in 98 or 99, and it is now 03, so I don't believe it has
    lasted a reasonable period of time. The fact that I am now restricted
    in its use(due to the chance that it may be compromised if connected
    to the internet), means that the product is defective and not suitable
    for its purpose that it was purchased for.
    I do believe MS do have a moral obligation to provide patches for
    known security flaws when they occur, for a reasonable period of time.
     
    max, Sep 12, 2003
    #6
  7. max

    pass Guest

    Maybe installing a freeware firewall package will be of help.
     
    pass, Sep 12, 2003
    #7
  8. max

    max Guest

    On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:13:17 +1200, "BTMO" <> wrote:

    >Or are you really saying "I am scared of the consequences of using this
    >software in case I download something, like a virus, or I am subjected to an
    >attack by someone exploiting a security hole in my OS, that might take me
    >off the air"
    >

    Yes, and I don't want to be accused of not patching my unpatchable
    computer, when it gets exploited.


    >While I feel for you, the nature of business is that tools and plant do go
    >out of fashion, out of style, wear out, and all of the rest. That is why you
    >can claim depreciation on your capital assets every year - they have a shelf
    >life and a use life.


    I purchased it (software new) in 98 or 99, so I think it should have
    lasted longer than 3-4 years. I don't know when MS stopped seling the
    software but they were still probably selling it when win2000 came
    out, which wasn't really that long ago. NT 4 hasn't been around for 10
    years, more like 7, but was sold for 4-5 years after that.
    It is a home computer so not depreciated, and I don't believe software
    manufacturers should be able to dictate when a computer should need to
    be replaced. The difference between NT4 and Win2000 for my needs is
    almost non existant, and they even use exactly the smae user
    interface.


    >
    >Given that NT is about 10 years old, and most software goes bellyup (in
    >terms of currency and usefulness) in about 3 - 5 years, I would say you have
    >well and truly recouped your investment in it. Move on.
    >
    >BTW - what happened to the farriers when the automobile was invented? Did
    >they all claim GM and Ford was morally obliged to keep them in business by
    >buying horseshoes they no longer needed, or did they go out and learn how to
    >be motor mechanics?
    >
    >Or when cars become computerised, did motor mechanics claim moral obligation
    >on carburettor manufacturers to not make electronic ignition systems, or did
    >they upskill...
    >


    The cars could still be used in the same fashion they were designed
    for. Due to security defects , I can't connect to the web (or fisk
    problems), and the software was designed to connect to the web when I
    purchased it.
     
    max, Sep 12, 2003
    #8
  9. See comments below -

    "BTMO" <> wrote in message
    news:_Y98b.144905$...
    > > I have paid for a full version of
    > > NT 4 (with no expiry date) , and it should be able to continue to be
    > > used, and I shouldn't be forced to upgrade my computer due to MS
    > > software flaws, and them not wanting to help their customers who have
    > > older software. The fact is the software can't be upgraded to a newer
    > > version as the computer is old and doesn't have another memory or
    > > speed to use thenew bloated windows software. I would go to linux, but
    > > the accounting software doesn' support it. I do believe that MS do
    > > have a moral obligation to provide patches for their older operating
    > > systems.

    >
    > So what you are saying is that you can **phyiscally** no longer connect

    to
    > the internet, yes?
    >
    > Or are you really saying "I am scared of the consequences of using this
    > software in case I download something, like a virus, or I am subjected to

    an
    > attack by someone exploiting a security hole in my OS, that might take me
    > off the air"
    >
    > While I feel for you, the nature of business is that tools and plant do go
    > out of fashion, out of style, wear out, and all of the rest. That is why

    you
    > can claim depreciation on your capital assets every year - they have a

    shelf
    > life and a use life.
    >
    > Given that NT is about 10 years old, and most software goes bellyup (in
    > terms of currency and usefulness) in about 3 - 5 years, I would say you

    have
    > well and truly recouped your investment in it. Move on.


    NT which is being talked about here was released in 1996 and was the current
    NT OS up until Windows 2000 became available in 2000. After that both
    operating systems were available from system manufacturers for a period of
    time.

    That means many users of NT4 have only had 2-3 years use of the product.

    Moving on is not always a solution. Many IT organisations lag behind on
    upgrades so bug fixes can be made etc, they should be given the ongoing
    support they need. Forcing upgrades through increasingly bloated software
    just isn't acceptable IMO. I have an old P166 running as a server... works
    perfectly, I have no need to upgrade it. Why should I be forced to buy new
    hardware to run a new accounting package or other system just because it
    contains more compulsory eye candy, or is dependent on certain OS-specific
    APIs, when it could be written in ANSI C to run on anything, and without a
    bloated interface?

    Yes, context menus are nice, but Microsoft Word 2.0c had these... a 32bit
    bersion was available for NT which most likely contained threading. What has
    Word 95/2000/XP actually added over and above that to justify the additional
    expence, and why does it use so much CPU power to do little more than it did
    ten years ago.

    I certainly don't expect software vendors to continue to support their old
    software indefinately (We do), but users should not be left out just because
    they choose to stick with something that works and meets their needs.
    Software should not be written to require modern hardware. Certainly make
    use of it if it is there, but there is no reason to force eye candy and
    useless features upon those who don't need them. It is a sensible business
    decision on their part to not invest in equipment and software they don't
    need.

    > BTW - what happened to the farriers when the automobile was invented? Did
    > they all claim GM and Ford was morally obliged to keep them in business by
    > buying horseshoes they no longer needed, or did they go out and learn how

    to
    > be motor mechanics?


    Did they all change over night to the new method? No.

    > Or when cars become computerised, did motor mechanics claim moral

    obligation
    > on carburettor manufacturers to not make electronic ignition systems, or

    did
    > they upskill...


    When cars became computerised were end users expected to upgrade their cars?
    No.

    It makes no sense replacing something that works just because something
    theoretically better has come along.

    The Other Guy
     
    The Other Guy, Sep 12, 2003
    #9
  10. max

    BTMO Guest

    "max" <> wrote

    > >Or are you really saying "I am scared of the consequences of using this
    > >software in case I download something, like a virus, or I am subjected to

    an
    > >attack by someone exploiting a security hole in my OS, that might take me
    > >off the air"


    > Yes, and I don't want to be accused of not patching my unpatchable
    > computer, when it gets exploited.


    Ok - I understand where you are coming from now.

    > >While I feel for you, the nature of business is that tools and plant do

    go
    > >out of fashion, out of style, wear out, and all of the rest. That is why

    you
    > >can claim depreciation on your capital assets every year - they have a

    shelf
    > >life and a use life.

    >
    > I purchased it (software new) in 98 or 99, so I think it should have
    > lasted longer than 3-4 years. I don't know when MS stopped seling the
    > software but they were still probably selling it when win2000 came
    > out, which wasn't really that long ago. NT 4 hasn't been around for 10
    > years, more like 7, but was sold for 4-5 years after that.
    > It is a home computer so not depreciated, and I don't believe software
    > manufacturers should be able to dictate when a computer should need to
    > be replaced. The difference between NT4 and Win2000 for my needs is
    > almost non existant, and they even use exactly the smae user
    > interface.


    Work started on NT in 1989. NT 3 shipped in 1993, NT 4 in 1996. Lets split
    the difference and say it is (nearly) eight years old.

    But NT will do just what it was designed to do in 1989, or 1993, or 1996. It
    won't do what it wasn't designed to in 2003.

    Point taken re: home computers being loaned to small business - hey, I do
    that myself, but I am also transferring ownership of any assets the business
    uses more than I use personally, because it makes better sense to do that.

    BTW - the software manufacturers aren't mandating anything. The market is.
    Customers want more features, faster machines, shinier graphics and all of
    the rest. The hardware and software manufacturers understand this, and
    create new products accordingly.

    > >Given that NT is about 10 years old, and most software goes bellyup (in
    > >terms of currency and usefulness) in about 3 - 5 years, I would say you

    have
    > >well and truly recouped your investment in it. Move on.
    > >
    > >BTW - what happened to the farriers when the automobile was invented? Did
    > >they all claim GM and Ford was morally obliged to keep them in business

    by
    > >buying horseshoes they no longer needed, or did they go out and learn how

    to
    > >be motor mechanics?
    > >
    > >Or when cars become computerised, did motor mechanics claim moral

    obligation
    > >on carburettor manufacturers to not make electronic ignition systems, or

    did
    > >they upskill...
    > >

    >
    > The cars could still be used in the same fashion they were designed
    > for. Due to security defects , I can't connect to the web (or fisk
    > problems), and the software was designed to connect to the web when I
    > purchased it.


    Yes, they can. And so can your computer. However, to follow the car analogy,
    you still get 17 miles to the gallon, blow black smoke, and need a new
    warrant of fitness every 6 months.

    A new car (or the same engine capacity) gets 35 miles to the gallon, is
    cleaner burning and needs a warrant every year. It also has a stereo system
    better than the one in my house, has airbags on every hard surface, and in
    real terms cost less than a similar vehicle did 10 years ago.

    It also requires less maintenance, is quieter and much more comfortable.

    Like I said, I know where you are coming from (and I can't believe I am even
    half way defending M$!!!), but the reality of business is that tools age,
    and businesses need to plan accordingly.

    Even if you can't depreciate your equipment, you should plan for its aging
    and obsolesence.

    Wishing it all away, or hoping for altruism from M$ (that feels better!)
    won't make the reality any different.

    Cheers,

    Brenton
     
    BTMO, Sep 12, 2003
    #10
  11. max

    max Guest

    On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:20:46 +1200, "The Other Guy" <>
    wrote:

    >See comments below -
    >
    >"BTMO" <> wrote in message
    >news:_Y98b.144905$...
    >> > I have paid for a full version of
    >> > NT 4 (with no expiry date) , and it should be able to continue to be
    >> > used, and I shouldn't be forced to upgrade my computer due to MS
    >> > software flaws, and them not wanting to help their customers who have
    >> > older software. The fact is the software can't be upgraded to a newer
    >> > version as the computer is old and doesn't have another memory or
    >> > speed to use thenew bloated windows software. I would go to linux, but
    >> > the accounting software doesn' support it. I do believe that MS do
    >> > have a moral obligation to provide patches for their older operating
    >> > systems.

    >>
    >> So what you are saying is that you can **phyiscally** no longer connect

    >to
    >> the internet, yes?
    >>
    >> Or are you really saying "I am scared of the consequences of using this
    >> software in case I download something, like a virus, or I am subjected to

    >an
    >> attack by someone exploiting a security hole in my OS, that might take me
    >> off the air"
    >>
    >> While I feel for you, the nature of business is that tools and plant do go
    >> out of fashion, out of style, wear out, and all of the rest. That is why

    >you
    >> can claim depreciation on your capital assets every year - they have a

    >shelf
    >> life and a use life.
    >>
    >> Given that NT is about 10 years old, and most software goes bellyup (in
    >> terms of currency and usefulness) in about 3 - 5 years, I would say you

    >have
    >> well and truly recouped your investment in it. Move on.

    >
    >NT which is being talked about here was released in 1996 and was the current
    >NT OS up until Windows 2000 became available in 2000. After that both
    >operating systems were available from system manufacturers for a period of
    >time.
    >
    >That means many users of NT4 have only had 2-3 years use of the product.
    >
    >Moving on is not always a solution. Many IT organisations lag behind on
    >upgrades so bug fixes can be made etc, they should be given the ongoing
    >support they need. Forcing upgrades through increasingly bloated software
    >just isn't acceptable IMO. I have an old P166 running as a server... works
    >perfectly, I have no need to upgrade it. Why should I be forced to buy new
    >hardware to run a new accounting package or other system just because it
    >contains more compulsory eye candy, or is dependent on certain OS-specific
    >APIs, when it could be written in ANSI C to run on anything, and without a
    >bloated interface?
    >
    >Yes, context menus are nice, but Microsoft Word 2.0c had these... a 32bit
    >bersion was available for NT which most likely contained threading. What has
    >Word 95/2000/XP actually added over and above that to justify the additional
    >expence, and why does it use so much CPU power to do little more than it did
    >ten years ago.
    >
    >I certainly don't expect software vendors to continue to support their old
    >software indefinately (We do), but users should not be left out just because
    >they choose to stick with something that works and meets their needs.
    >Software should not be written to require modern hardware. Certainly make
    >use of it if it is there, but there is no reason to force eye candy and
    >useless features upon those who don't need them. It is a sensible business
    >decision on their part to not invest in equipment and software they don't
    >need.
    >
    >> BTW - what happened to the farriers when the automobile was invented? Did
    >> they all claim GM and Ford was morally obliged to keep them in business by
    >> buying horseshoes they no longer needed, or did they go out and learn how

    >to
    >> be motor mechanics?

    >
    >Did they all change over night to the new method? No.
    >
    >> Or when cars become computerised, did motor mechanics claim moral

    >obligation
    >> on carburettor manufacturers to not make electronic ignition systems, or

    >did
    >> they upskill...

    >
    >When cars became computerised were end users expected to upgrade their cars?
    >No.
    >
    >It makes no sense replacing something that works just because something
    >theoretically better has come along.
    >
    >The Other Guy
    >
    >



    Totally agree. I have only had NT for about 3 years, and it should
    have lasted longer than that, without MS telling me to upgrade my OS
    or my computer could get taken over due to holes in their product.
     
    max, Sep 12, 2003
    #11
  12. max

    T.N.O. Guest

    "max" wrote
    > Under the CGA, the product should last a reasonable period of time. I
    > purchased NT4 in 98 or 99, and it is now 03, so I don't believe it has
    > lasted a reasonable period of time.


    If you use a firewall and AV then it should be fine online.

    > The fact that I am now restricted
    > in its use(due to the chance that it may be compromised if connected
    > to the internet), means that the product is defective and not suitable
    > for its purpose that it was purchased for.


    With no firewall maybe, but if you have a firewall, you can then narrow it
    down to things that you download.

    > I do believe MS do have a moral obligation to provide patches for
    > known security flaws when they occur, for a reasonable period of time.


    They have... 5 years after the release date... standard for all MS OS's.
     
    T.N.O., Sep 12, 2003
    #12
  13. max

    max Guest

    On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:47:31 +1200, "Olson Johnson" <> wrote:

    >
    >"max" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> I run NT 4 on an old Pentium, simply for email and accountiing
    >> software, and is ideal for this. However due to these recent security
    >> problems with MS software, I can't use it for connecting to the net
    >> anymore, due to MS not providing patches for their older software . I
    >> really do wonder if Microsoft have intentially made their software
    >> with flaws, so that people are forced to update to newer versions,
    >> simply to allow them to be patched. I have paid for a full version of
    >> NT 4 (with no expiry date) , and it should be able to continue to be
    >> used, and I shouldn't be forced to upgrade my computer due to MS
    >> software flaws, and them not wanting to help their customers who have
    >> older software. The fact is the software can't be upgraded to a newer
    >> version as the computer is old and doesn't have another memory or
    >> speed to use thenew bloated windows software. I would go to linux, but
    >> the accounting software doesn' support it. I do believe that MS do
    >> have a moral obligation to provide patches for their older operating
    >> systems.

    >
    >Why can't you connect it to the internet ?
    >What a pile of crap !!
    >Install a free firewall and a free antivirus package and use a 3rd party
    >email package that doesn't open attachments or support html
    >Tight bastard ;-)
    >Microsoft should make a fix available for DCOM on NT4 though.
    >


    All the firewall and antivirus protection won't necessarily help, as
    they don't fix flaws in MS software. Sure I could connect to the web,
    but it could annoy a few people if they start receiving virus emails
    from my system.
    I am certainly not tight, but one o the richest companies in the world
    should do better. I do have another uptodate computer running NT5,
    which doesn't have these issues, but simply I don't want to throw
    something away that works perfectly well. There are enough computers
    in our landfills causing enviromental damage.
     
    max, Sep 12, 2003
    #13
  14. max

    Peter Guest

    max wrote:
    > I have paid for a full version of
    > NT 4 (with no expiry date) , and it should be able to continue to be
    > used, and I shouldn't be forced to upgrade my computer due to MS
    > software flaws, and them not wanting to help their customers who have
    > older software.


    It is Microsoft's business model. You can like it or lump it.

    > I would go to linux, but the accounting software doesn' support it.


    What accounting package is it? It will probably run on wine (free) or
    Codeweaver's crossover (costs).
    But that won't be the main obstacle in changing to Linux. There is a fair
    learning curve involved for Windows users making the change. It takes a
    bit of effort, and isn't for everyone.

    Personally, I don't like the MS business model, and I'm well pleased with my
    decision to change to a completely different OS.


    Peter
     
    Peter, Sep 12, 2003
    #14
  15. max

    cowboyz Guest


    > All the firewall and antivirus protection won't necessarily help, as
    > they don't fix flaws in MS software. Sure I could connect to the web,
    > but it could annoy a few people if they start receiving virus emails
    > from my system.
    > I am certainly not tight, but one o the richest companies in the world
    > should do better. I do have another uptodate computer running NT5,
    > which doesn't have these issues, but simply I don't want to throw
    > something away that works perfectly well.



    If it is working "perfectly well" then what are you complaining about?

    you are saying that 5 years is not a long time in the software/computer
    industry. It is a lifetime. (as it happens the lifetime of your OS)


    >There are enough computers
    > in our landfills causing enviromental damage.
    >
     
    cowboyz, Sep 12, 2003
    #15
  16. max

    N Lawton Guest

    "Rob King" <> wrote in message
    news:3f612eeb$...
    >
    > "BTMO" <> wrote in message
    > news:_Y98b.144905$...
    > > "max" <> wrote
    > >
    > > > I run NT 4 on an old Pentium, simply for email and accountiing
    > > > software, and is ideal for this. However due to these recent security
    > > > problems with MS software, I can't use it for connecting to the net
    > > > anymore, due to MS not providing patches for their older software . I
    > > > really do wonder if Microsoft have intentially made their software
    > > > with flaws, so that people are forced to update to newer versions,
    > > > simply to allow them to be patched. 3

    > >
    > > Whoa, that's a fine crop of paranoia you have growing there, Max!
    > >
    > > ;-)

    >
    > Ooooh look! A grassy knoll. :)
    >

    No
    That's Windoze XP
     
    N Lawton, Sep 12, 2003
    #16
  17. max

    steve Guest

    max allegedly said:

    > I run NT 4 on an old Pentium, simply for email and accountiing
    > software, and is ideal for this. However due to these recent security
    > problems with MS software, I can't use it for connecting to the net
    > anymore, due to MS not providing patches for their older software . I
    > really do wonder if Microsoft have intentially made their software
    > with flaws, so that people are forced to update to newer versions,
    > simply to allow them to be patched.


    They probably authored the viruses to force the upgrades....now that you
    mention it.

    ....and because it isn't Open Source - you're screwed.
     
    steve, Sep 12, 2003
    #17
  18. max

    steve Guest

    Olson Johnson allegedly said:

    >
    > "max" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> I run NT 4 on an old Pentium, simply for email and accountiing
    >> software, and is ideal for this. However due to these recent security
    >> problems with MS software, I can't use it for connecting to the net
    >> anymore, due to MS not providing patches for their older software . I
    >> really do wonder if Microsoft have intentially made their software
    >> with flaws, so that people are forced to update to newer versions,
    >> simply to allow them to be patched. I have paid for a full version of
    >> NT 4 (with no expiry date) , and it should be able to continue to be
    >> used, and I shouldn't be forced to upgrade my computer due to MS
    >> software flaws, and them not wanting to help their customers who have
    >> older software. The fact is the software can't be upgraded to a newer
    >> version as the computer is old and doesn't have another memory or
    >> speed to use thenew bloated windows software. I would go to linux, but
    >> the accounting software doesn' support it. I do believe that MS do
    >> have a moral obligation to provide patches for their older operating
    >> systems.

    >
    > Why can't you connect it to the internet ?


    Without a patch, if he connects he'll get infected.

    > What a pile of crap !!
    > Install a free firewall and a free antivirus package and use a 3rd party
    > email package that doesn't open attachments or support html
    > Tight bastard ;-)


    MBlaster infects your system directly through port 135 (?). No e-mail
    required. A firewall seems a high price to pay......in terms of cost and
    convenience.

    Anti-virus software is ineffective against it as far as I know. You need the
    patch from MS.

    How interesting that this should come up now just days after NT4 when EOL.

    http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=8700301&pgno=2

    Windows NT 4.x
    Because NT4.x is nowhere nearly as popular as Win98 and WinME, Microsoft did
    not relax or extend its originally scheduled support options for this
    operating system. NT4 entered the "extended" support phase in June 2002. It
    will enter the "nonsupport" phase on June 30, 2003, and will reach "end of
    life" on June 30, 2004.
     
    steve, Sep 12, 2003
    #18
  19. max

    Max Burke Guest

    > max scribbled:

    >> On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:15:42 +1200, Steven H

    <>
    >> wrote:


    >> In article <>,
    >> says...
    >>> I run NT 4 on an old Pentium, simply for email and accountiing
    >>> software


    >> so you pay for a 7 year old car and am shocked and surprised when its
    >> manafacturer refuses to give you free tune ups?
    >> go figure.


    > Software can't be compared to a car, otherwise I would have crashed or
    > the car would have seized up the first day I got it. So many people
    > use this comparison, even MS have used it, but really they are like
    > chalk and cheese.


    Then you need to realise that MS has set a lifecycle for their
    products....
    I still use Windows95A on my old 486, and believe it or not I can still
    connect to the internet with it using IE4 and OE; This OLD PC is is
    coming up for ten years old, the OS is eight years old and it still does
    what it was designed to do. What is more it is at very little risk from
    virus or worm infection when I use it on the internet. It also runs all
    the old applications I have bought over the years for it. The only
    downside it that it's SLOOOOW compared to my main PC (a P4 running XP)

    > Under the CGA, the product should last a reasonable period of time. I
    > purchased NT4 in 98 or 99, and it is now 03, so I don't believe it has
    > lasted a reasonable period of time.


    Under the CGA a reasonable time for software can be (and often is) less
    than five years.....

    > The fact that I am now restricted
    > in its use(due to the chance that it may be compromised if connected
    > to the internet), means that the product is defective and not suitable
    > for its purpose that it was purchased for.
    > I do believe MS do have a moral obligation to provide patches for
    > known security flaws when they occur,


    They do. (most of the time)

    > for a reasonable period of time.


    Microsoft have decided that five years is a reasonable period of time
    (as a lifecycle for their OS'es)

    Why not switch to Linux; I'm sure you wont have to worry about OS
    lifecycles if you do..... ;-)))

    --
    mlvburke@#%&*.net.nz
    Replace the obvious with paradise to email me.
    See Found Images at:
    http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke
     
    Max Burke, Sep 12, 2003
    #19
  20. max

    Gavin Tunney Guest

    On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:00:27 +1200, max <>
    wrote:

    >I run NT 4 on an old Pentium, simply for email and accountiing
    >software, and is ideal for this. However due to these recent security
    >problems with MS software, I can't use it for connecting to the net
    >anymore, due to MS not providing patches for their older software . I
    >really do wonder if Microsoft have intentially made their software
    >with flaws, so that people are forced to update to newer versions,
    >simply to allow them to be patched. I have paid for a full version of
    >NT 4 (with no expiry date) , and it should be able to continue to be
    >used, and I shouldn't be forced to upgrade my computer due to MS
    >software flaws, and them not wanting to help their customers who have
    >older software. The fact is the software can't be upgraded to a newer
    >version as the computer is old and doesn't have another memory or
    >speed to use thenew bloated windows software. I would go to linux, but
    >the accounting software doesn' support it. I do believe that MS do
    >have a moral obligation to provide patches for their older operating
    >systems.


    I think this is a pretty fair comment from Max, NT was still being
    supplied just 3years ago & that's a pretty short life span. MS
    licences are open-ended in that nothing is said about them expiring at
    any time. Not patching NT in situations where NT can no longer be used
    without a patch is basically cancelling the licence IMO.

    All the faults that get uncovered in NT were there when it was sold,
    so one wonders just what are the consumer's rights in this regard.

    Gavin
     
    Gavin Tunney, Sep 12, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Nomen Nescio

    Privacy.LIE ripping off graphics

    Nomen Nescio, Sep 1, 2006, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    431
  2. lily

    DSE ripping off kiwis

    lily, Jul 22, 2003, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    1,452
  3. Graham

    Computer shop ripping off novice users?

    Graham, Nov 24, 2003, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    697
    T.N.O.
    Nov 26, 2003
  4. Max
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    421
  5. XP
    Replies:
    34
    Views:
    995
    Capt. Gladys Stoat-Pamphlet
    Sep 14, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page