Richard Brown wrote:
On 24 January 2017 at 21:33, Per Inge Oestmoen <pioe@coldsiberia.org> wrote:
Richard Brown wrote:
Keeping with openSUSE 13.2 when it is unmaintained and vulnerable is senseless.
If the system works and is fully functional, why not?
Look at how many issues we fix due to security issues:
https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2017-01/ Then consider that in addition to that we regularly fix things that are not security relevant, but are important issues for users. It's probably also worth accepting that sometimes we fix security issues by accident while fixing those non-security issues. All of that. All of the security issues, all of the non security issues, has now ceased for 13.2
That is understood by most if not all users who are aware of the fact that every development of openSUSE 13.2 is over.
It may be advisable to refrain from connecting to the internet if security issues are serious and cannot realistically be counteracted effectively with that software, but that is entirely another topic. Let the proprietary software manufacturers try to force their subscription schemes and cloud computing on us, we should be thankful for representing an alternative.
You wrote your email from a machine claiming to be a Macbook Pro running Firefox 42.0 on OS X 10.6
That was the other machine, this is another running openSUSE 13.2 and with Seamonkey as e-mail client.
If this is true, your operating system is out of support and has been for almost 3 years Your browser is out of support and you should really consider upgrading to Firefox 59 or Firefox ESR 52.x
The thing is; Upgrading to ever new operating systems entails serious challenges: One is severe incompatibility issues with existing programs that are fully functional and frequently cannot be replaced arise all the time of one upgrades uncritically. Also, a computer that is such upgraded will be gradually less functional over time because software programs tend to be larger and demand ever more of the hardware. Thus, the software upgrade frenzy leads to the need to buy new computers much more frequently than what would have been the case in a more sane economy. Moreover, Apple has ceased to deliver a full version of their operating systems with their computers. Of course, CD's or DVD's are no longer the best solution. USB sticks are their natural successor, but Apple does not deliver any USB sticks with full software versions. I and other reasonably tech-savvy users can still make bootable USB sticks, but the point is that Apple as well as Microsoft and Adobe want us to be completely dependent on ties to the manufacturer and the permanent availability of a software service in order to run our computers. Any social, political or economic crisis or technical failure, discontinuation of the software service or possible legal intervention or failure to pay for the software subscription for whatever reason will make many people unable to write as much as a letter to grandma - unless the typewriter has a renaissance. Which is in fact not that unlikely, in view of the cloud computing schemes devised by software companies that see endless opportunities for profit if the damned standalone, independent computer can be eliminated. So yes, this is among other things an Open Source theme. The existence of free software gives us an alternative to the software restrictions that started with copy protection schemes, then followed by witch hunting after software pirates - and as we should remenber the definition of piracy was basically broad enough to encompass any user who wanted to back up his or her legally licensed software and be able to install it without further ties to the software company. Cloud computing is the software companies' brilliant attempt to restore the restrictive control that was taken from the proprietary companies when Linux and Open Source software emerged as an alternative for those who want user control and are not content if the machine merely "works." Needless to say, this Open Source argument is tangential to the discussion - but it is nevertheless relevant insofar as more or less planned obsolescence must be considered a conscious strategy in much of the software industry. It may be added that the aforementioned deplorable tendencies within the software industry may necessitate the introduction and spread of not only Open Source software, but also Open Source hardware. User-controlled computers require hardware that is capable of running user-controlled and copyable software that is installed and run from each individual local computer which may or may not be connected to networks. (There is of course rather more to the "Cloud" concept than the infamous form of "Cloud Computing" referred to in the above. To establish an internal Own Cloud within the company or in our home is - needless to say - a good and recommendable idea. Likewise, the "Cloud" is in reality what we use when we share data with others over the internet.)
This isn't a proprietary vs open source thing. Both development models rely on developers to keep on securing systems against the threats that are out there.
The latter sentence is demonstrably and obviously true, the first is best described by a "yes and no" statement because the fundamental premises and thereby the possibilities are entirely different.
Without those developers constantly and vigilantly patching out security vulnerabilities, every user of that software is at risk. openSUSE 13.2 no longer has anyone looking into it's packages. It is no longer providing security updates. Any user still using openSUSE 13.2 is at an increased risk of immeasurable security issues. Of course there is nothing I can do to compel someone to take my advice, but anyone who ignores it should do so with a fair understanding of the risks they are taking.
We are in basic agreement about the above. My point is that the answer is not as clear cut as some would like to argue. There are quite a few other considerations. Many people see no reason to update functional programs at the cost of reduced functionality and/or eventual unnecessary premature obsolescence of the computer. For computers that are not connected to the internet, there are no compelling reasons to upgrade as long as the computer is functional. -- Noise reduction is just another word for image destruction. Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org