I imagine half of linux users could make better automated update rules in their cron.
So many better ways.
So why are they making it intentionally bad?
… Sabotage from Microsoft employees who hate Microsoft?
… Part of a larger Embrace Extent Extinguish tactic, where they’ve already embraced the Linux Foundation etc enough, they’re ready to extinguish Windows, already having sufficient monopolistic total-control hooks in Linux???
What are they up to? There has to be a reason it’s so bad. There has to be a reason they go out of their way to make it so bad.
It surely can’t just be the effects of The Corporation, the hierarchies and compartmentalisations and bureaucracy of the structure where they don’t understand (or even perhaps do understand [and maybe have seen Kevlin Henney’s excellent talk on clean code vs enterprise programming] but) can’t do anything about it, can it?
What are they building in there? We don’t get to see, we don’t get to know, just trust them, they know best when and how, and so you are not allowed to change it.
Windows has had always a problem: unlike Unix, where files are referenced by an inode where the name points to, Windows has the names directly linked to the files. When Windows needs to update a system file that is in use it has to stop being used. And for some system files there only one way to do it: reboot. On Unix, the name of the file can change the inode where it points to and the system goes on. The old file exists until every process stops using it and then is erased while new processes access the new file. So no reboot is needed.
That leads to not having to update everything on reboot. Only the kernel and little more.
Reminds me of one of the truest comics I ever read.
It is weird isn’t it.
Why do they make it so bad?
I imagine half of linux users could make better automated update rules in their cron.
So many better ways.
So why are they making it intentionally bad?
… Sabotage from Microsoft employees who hate Microsoft?
… Part of a larger Embrace Extent Extinguish tactic, where they’ve already embraced the Linux Foundation etc enough, they’re ready to extinguish Windows, already having sufficient monopolistic total-control hooks in Linux???
What are they up to? There has to be a reason it’s so bad. There has to be a reason they go out of their way to make it so bad.
It surely can’t just be the effects of The Corporation, the hierarchies and compartmentalisations and bureaucracy of the structure where they don’t understand (or even perhaps do understand [and maybe have seen Kevlin Henney’s excellent talk on clean code vs enterprise programming] but) can’t do anything about it, can it?
What are they building in there? We don’t get to see, we don’t get to know, just trust them, they know best when and how, and so you are not allowed to change it.
We are not doing that any more.
Windows has had always a problem: unlike Unix, where files are referenced by an inode where the name points to, Windows has the names directly linked to the files. When Windows needs to update a system file that is in use it has to stop being used. And for some system files there only one way to do it: reboot. On Unix, the name of the file can change the inode where it points to and the system goes on. The old file exists until every process stops using it and then is erased while new processes access the new file. So no reboot is needed.
That leads to not having to update everything on reboot. Only the kernel and little more.
Having a monopoly makes you arrogant. That is probably the only reason why they do it.
Maybe train you into avoiding shutdowns, never shutdown, stay on Microsoft windows for ever, forget about other things like sleep or eating.