Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase ««12

The Patch Wild, Wild West Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Wednesday, April 17, 2013 4:22 PM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, March 10, 2014 5:44 PM
Points: 2,225, Visits: 1,258
"easier for Microsoft, but it's a big step backward for companies"

This is not a big step backwards for a company who develops excellent patches, tests everything so they know that it works perfectly, and can guarantee that it will work first time every time. If you always get it right, and really right, there is no problem.

Is this the rep that Microsoft has? If not then there needs to be either the ability to roll back patches, or a team of people working night and day fixing those pesky patches that fail.



Not all gray hairs are Dinosaurs!
Post #1443536
Posted Wednesday, April 17, 2013 4:58 PM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 12:02 PM
Points: 32,830, Visits: 14,971
Miles Neale (4/17/2013)
"easier for Microsoft, but it's a big step backward for companies"

This is not a big step backwards for a company who develops excellent patches, tests everything so they know that it works perfectly, and can guarantee that it will work first time every time. If you always get it right, and really right, there is no problem.

Is this the rep that Microsoft has? If not then there needs to be either the ability to roll back patches, or a team of people working night and day fixing those pesky patches that fail.



It's not that all MS patches fail, but some do, including a few Win7 patches last week. They do work night and day (I've talked to some of them), but it's still an impact to people when there are issues.

I think we should always be able to roll back, since we never know if there will be issues.







Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1443545
Posted Wednesday, April 17, 2013 5:05 PM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, March 10, 2014 5:44 PM
Points: 2,225, Visits: 1,258
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (4/17/2013)
Miles Neale (4/17/2013)
"easier for Microsoft, but it's a big step backward for companies"

This is not a big step backwards for a company who develops excellent patches, tests everything so they know that it works perfectly, and can guarantee that it will work first time every time. If you always get it right, and really right, there is no problem.

Is this the rep that Microsoft has? If not then there needs to be either the ability to roll back patches, or a team of people working night and day fixing those pesky patches that fail.



It's not that all MS patches fail, but some do, including a few Win7 patches last week. They do work night and day (I've talked to some of them), but it's still an impact to people when there are issues.

I think we should always be able to roll back, since we never know if there will be issues.


I agree that not all fail. And in fact most are very successful. And the folks work more hours than we realize. But when a patch fails it is really a big deal. And if we have no option to back it out, there is an instant need for a very quick correct hot fix. If that isn't possible, we have to have the ability to back things out.



Not all gray hairs are Dinosaurs!
Post #1443548
Posted Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:02 PM


SSCertifiable

SSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiable

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 9:41 PM
Points: 7,090, Visits: 14,715
Well on the devil's advocate side of the argument - if you don't know why your patch might fail, it's going to be difficult to guarantee a way to back it off. Chances are that the factor that caused the patch to fail will also be the thing getting in your way when trying to unapply the patch.

That's unfortunately a difficulty intrinsic in any open system (too many variations to make something 100% foolproof).


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
Post #1444063
Posted Monday, May 13, 2013 12:47 AM
SSC Eights!

SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 8:03 AM
Points: 825, Visits: 319
OCTom (4/17/2013)
hakim.ali (4/17/2013)
iOS devices being almost entirely consumer oriented, it makes sense in that environment to automate the process and make it as "easy" as possible, at the cost of control. If Microsoft goes down this route, it's only a matter of time before enough corporate customers complain and force them to address the issue. I'll wait until then to adopt Windows 8 and its server cousins.


I agree with this. The iOS style of updates makes sense for consumer devices but not in an enterprise business environment. All things are more tightly controlled in an enterprise environment. It would be bad for Microsoft to do this for enterprise servers and environments.


Apple has found the iOS devices being adopted more and more by businesses but have seen no need to amend the way they do their upgrades/patches and I can see this continuing. The iOS philosophy is to have everything controlled by the manufacturer so if anything goes wrong they can pinpoint where the problem is - hence the refusal to have Flash on iOS.
Post #1451985
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase ««12

Permissions Expand / Collapse