Earlier, Simon Schuetz wrote: % Actually, changing an end-host is not terribly hard, if not even easier % than changing a router. End-users get their updates to OSes nearly % on a daily or weakly basis using update functionalities.
I think that is a really excellent observation. A decade ago, ordinary consumers tended to only upgrade/patch their home computers rarely or when hardware changed. Now, all the major consumer desktop OS vendors (including the common consumer-oriented versions of Linux) seem to push out updates quite regularly -- and most ordinary users seem to be applying those updates equally regularly. (Maybe some host OS supplier has approximate numbers on this sort of thing that could be shared publicly ? :-) I get several OS patches/upgrades from Apple each month. My company gets regular updates/patches from Microsoft for the Windows systems, and judging from IT announcements those get installed promptly. So upgrading an interesting percentage of the consumer desktop/laptop operating systems can be done much much more quickly now than in the past. % The thing that is hard is to get *all* hosts changing within a small timeframe. % But over a cycle of say 5+ years, most hosts will anyway run a new OS. Right. Would one needed to have all hosts upgraded or merely some interestingly large (whatever that means) percentage of them upgraded in a shorter timeframe ? Food for thought anyway. Thanks ! Cheers, Ran -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
