[geeks] No more anon FTP for Sun patches after August 2006

[velociraptor]

On 6/10/06, Charles Shannon Hendrix <shannon at widomaker.com> wrote:
> Fri, 09 Jun 2006 @ 09:12 -0500, Kris Kirby said:
>
> > On Tue, 6 Jun 2006, William Enestvedt wrote:
> > >    Am I the only one who didn't know this date?
> >
> > I didn't notice it either.
> >
> > > Title:       Access to the anonymous FTP server to download patches will
> > > cease from August 2006
> >
> > I smell a Cisco-izing. Why would we buy new boxes when we can use old
> > ones, etc.? Cisco's CCO system is one of the reasons why I stay as far
> > away from them as I can practically do so.
>
> On that note, read the section here:
>
> http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/desktop_refresh?c=us&cs=04&l=en&s=bsd&~ck=anavml
>
> It's a section on Dell's website called "Why Refresh Your Desktops?"
>
> The brief version from Dell is that if you don't upgrade your desktops,
> your maintenance costs, security problems, and the fact you can't run
> the latest Microsoft software will cause you ruin and failure.

>From the economic standpoint of both the business and the end user who
is not highly computer literate, it's a valid argument.  As to the
comment about Cisco, recall that they do not sell software.  They sell
hardware and support services.  Having companies use old hardware is
not as profitable, because it extends the software development
life-cycle far longer than is profitable.  Having work there, and, in
particular, supported the IOS development groups, I know just how deep
that backlog was in the late 90's.

When 90% of the developers for a particular version of software are
gone, getting someone ramped up on a few million lines of codes so
they can bug fix is a monumental job in itself.  Not to mention a
truly hot-shot developer isn't going to be very happy working on
software that's 3 revs old all the time--no one wants to put that
stuff on their resume.  So you end up with the less than stellar folks
working on it.  The backlog is trimmed and reserved to the biggest
customers with the longest track record of service contracts and the
only time the guys with "uber" skills get involved is when all hell
breaks loose and something is escalated.  Everyone else is going to be
"encouraged" to migrate whenever possible.

Think about this: when I was still working there in '00--a single
"official" point release for all Cisco hardware was approximately 60GB
of binaries and source code to support every platform.  We had
progressed from a single 8mm tape in probably '95-'96 time frame to a
single DLT III for the archives.

If it was easy, then someone would have written OSS to slap in that
old Cisco gear.  Certainly the hardware is cheap enough.  IMO, this
hasn't happened because Cisco equipment is highly specialized.  That's
why everyone has glommed onto WRT64G* router/WAP/firewall, the franken
PIXes, etc.  They provide specialized services, but the hardware
platform is *not* specialized. Rather, the hardware is very common.
Particularly in the case of the WRT64G? boxes, it was easier for the
company to base the software on something generalized as well.  That
said software can be picked apart and easily (for geeks) tweaked and
reassembled just helps them sell more hardware.

Basing it on OSS also means it's easier to find developers, easier to
focus on the few specialized parts (the "building blocks" are already
built), and as a result, lower the total development cost for the part
that costs the most and takes the longest (software).

For the geeks of us, well, isn't hacking on this kind of stuff why we
are geeks in the first place?  Rolling upgrades be damned and all? :-)

=Nadine=