Originally Posted by doc
----
Thank you for being kind enough to express your opinion.
Please be aware that facts are just that, and that they are not the same as opinions - even if those opinions are yours.
Does one actually need a PhD in Information Technology to have an opinion these days - or to post their opinion on FT?
Yet it appears that a perception problem exists between what is fact and what is opinion! There the problem lies!
Statements such as "... it indisputedly has far better security compared to its predecessor, including a built-in phishing filter to help users detect and thus avoid malicious sites." appear to me to be a statement of fact. Yet perhaps I misread!
Even if so, on what basis do you make such absolute statements?? Such qualifications or equivalent experience are necessary to be able to evaluate said issues properly. Given that we've already seen a flaw found in IE7, how can you state that it's indisputably more secure? Have you examined the codebase? Were you involved in the testing procedures? The security audit?
Proper security evaluation and assessment is much more than an "opinion!" Of course, I don't purport to be an expert in such areas and never have. I don't recall you having done so as well, hence my question!
If I am to accept advice, I'd like to know on what basis the person putting forward such advice is offering it! Is it based upon professional and/or personal experience or merely gleaned from reading what others have written on blogs and the web?? This is an important distinction!
Surely anyone can feel free to run SP1, even though SP2 has been out for about 2 years now, and MS no longer even supports it!
And anyone can feel free to run IE6, as they now do, even though it is not a very good browser. Its up to them, of course, not to you, or to me!
Ah, yes, of course they can feel free... and are also quite free to break their ability to use software and 'sites that worked previously! While they're free to do so, I'm sure you wouldn't advise this.
Sadly, not all software and websites 'play nicely' with the latest and greatest from our friends in Redmond!
Sometimes, they even break their own software with updates designed to fix something else! Microsoft makes great products, yet they are not perfect! And no update is right for everyone!
A hypothetical example: Annabelle has a Personal Information Manager she's used since 2001 that's no longer supported and uses a proprietary data format that cannot be imported into modern software! It works perfectly under XPSP1, yet SP2 introduces new libraries that break the software! Surely this is a valid reason not to shift to SP2! And, worse, what if she uses proprietary business software that's no longer supported and no more modern replacement exists!!
Such examples are, sadly, quite common! Thus, why some people still run DOS, Windows 3.11, NT 4.0, Windows 2000, etcetera! So, you see, you may be unable to imagine why one wouldn't install SP2 but very valid reasons exist! And clearly, for our poor Anna, installing it would
not be a good thing! JMHO, of course.