Message from @scaryred24
Discord ID: 494660481584201748
wut, companies *already installed them*
you can revert *in linux* to an older build ez
if the new one is buggered
or at all
you have to reinstall the whole damn thing
>you might have to reinstall the whole thing because something happened outside of your PC
wot
listen shithead, you need to see it how we represented it to you, not how you want things to be
comform to our ideas and keep your ass backwards ideas out of it
"you need to see it in this very specific way that doesnt make sense, or I'll insult you"
que?
>Microsoft releases new FUCKED PATCH
>Everyone installs it
>Oh no, this is fucked
>Everyone reverts back to prior patch, which was already installed, which backups exist for
>someone makes fucked Linux commit
>everyone installs it
>oh no, this is fucked
>apparently we have to reinstall the whole thing now
I dont understand
Are we talking past each other here? Is there a separate issue you're trying to describe
dont talk again about this until you can go do your fucking research before spewing more of your bs out of your ass
that I'm somehow mistaking for this one?
@scaryred24 if i have an image of a machine before the fucked up version of linux was released, its impossible to fuck up that image
okay thats perfect
but how long will it takes before something gets buggered with that?
not even just consciously saved images. CentOS SAVES PRIOR UPDATES and you can revert to them at any point in time
**automatically**
if it wasn't buggered when you made the image, then never
you cant remotely fuck data without accessing the specific machine and fucking with the image lol
well heres where im kinda against using backup like that
so unless SJWs are going to hack America and fuck up everyone's backups, this isnt a thing
it might be stable enough now but what about later on down the road?
I know this will sound crazy to anyone who has never worked in IT, or talked to someone who has, but that shit happens *all the time*
People are still running earlier versions of MS Server software
like '03
there are companies with machines running on windows 3.0
so people are still running windows xp?
yes
like there are companies that are *just* upgrading to 7
well in a realistic scenario, virtual machines like that are supposed to be closed off from the general public from accessing them
think a lot of ATMs still us XP
legacy support exists for a reason
or at least they did not too long ago
thats the thing though- if the new version's fucked, people use the old one until an unfucked alternative is presented
for me once the legacy software stops functioning, you are left no choice but to upgrade to a newer variant or adopt something else
you would only hold onto legacy software until something makes it obsolete enough that it would hold no value
you've got it a bit backwards though. Enterprise software (third party at least) conforms to the needs of the consumer
the consumer being the company
which means those companies still end up supporting older versions becasue everyone's on XP/7/whatever
well you know how you get the customer to adopt newer operating systems
you choose to end support for said platforms
by not breaking the OS :^)