FW: [LINK] Re: Heads Up - troubles with time zones
lannet at lannet.com.au
Wed Mar 29 12:44:50 EST 2006
Daniel Rose wrote:
> I have some general comments. Firstly, I hold that IT should be
> designed and implemented in such a way that it conforms to the desires
> or business processes of the owners. A situation where someone says
> they can't do something they way they want to because the software
> prohibits it is a problem. I have noticed people complaining that it
> was irresponsible of the Govt to make this change, and that they ignored
> the cost to business. I say that if the costs to your business are high
> then that's your problem, not the Govt's.
> Secondly, it's also a bit precious to carry on a week before or after
> the change complaining about Microsoft not doing the job for you. They
> are a for profit company and are not obliged to do these sorts of
> things. Except in special cases, you buy a licence from MS for a
> particular piece of software, not a managed contract to grow, improve
> and evolve the software over time. As I see it, any patches you do get
> are a bonus.
In that case M$ should be forced to provide a product that is of
If you buy a physical object then you can inspect it, or have it
inspected, to determine that it complies with the manner in which it is
advertised, and is of merchantable quality, and in default you have
cause for action in law.
If you pay for a service to be performed, you similarly have a cause for
action in law if it not suitably performed.
With software you are paying a small, often zero, price for the
distribution media, which has to be of merchantable quality, but you are
paying a considerably higher fee for the licence to use the software - a
fee which you have to pay for the licence which you have to agree to
before you are able to assess whether the software performs as
advertised and without significant flaws.
I agree that the software vendor does not have an obligation to cater
for the vagaries of governments after you have determined that their
software is suitable, but the most definitely have an obligation to
rectify software that does not perform as advertised.
> Next, appliance vendors need to make patches for their linux rack mount
> appliances. Otherwise we end up with the cost of the appliance and the
> cost of managing it, which is a bit much.
Having just said that for-profit companies have no obligation tosupport
the vagaries of governments, you are now saying the opposite when it
concerns FOSS - that's a bit hypocritical.
> The patch I got for Linux didn't have a Canberra timezone in it, so the
> symlink didn't work anyway and had to be reset to Sydney. Not a big
> problem, but it shouldn't really happen -- but then I wasn't paying for
> support services, so I have no solid objection to this.
Since when has Canberra had its own timezone.
> OS X just needed an automatic update & all was well. Everything else I
> tried before that occurred to me just made things worse, synching from
> the apple asia clock gave me 4am the next day...
> The Windows patch gives you a new timezone to select, but it moves any
> existing appointments during the affected week forward an hour. When
> you change the timezone back again, the appointments move backwards an
> hour, so any that you created during that week will also be out again.
> Essentially, the earlier the patches were applied, the less problems you
> would expect. IMHO, patching after the clock shift is irresponsible &
> unprofessional -- but that's just a personal opinion.
The problem only occurs because Windows insists on running on local time
as the base instead of an offset from UTC as the base.
LANNet Computing Associates - Your Linux people <http://lannetlinux.com>
When you want a computer system that works, just choose Linux;
When you want a computer system that works, just, choose Microsoft.
Flatter government, not fatter government; abolish the Australian states.
More information about the Link