UCSB bans Windows NT/2K

[zscoundrel]

  I don't see it that way.  If the manufacturer of the OS in question is 
unwilling or unable to patch the myriad of security holes, (or for that 
mater, to even ACKNOWLEDGE the problems) then the people that own the 
network infrastructure that are responsible for running and maintaining 
the network should have a say in the OS.

If you had read the story, you would have seen (at least, I hope you 
would have!) that the reasoning behind this was all the problems caused 
by systems running these particular OSes.

If the NT, 'doze2k source was available, 2 things would happen:

1  Thousands of the more obvious bugs would be patched in the first 2 
months

2   The justice department would spend six weeks in Redmond doing 'perp 
walks' to round up everyone that had any contact with the code for these 
two releases.  The Charge:  Criminal Incompetence!

ndr wrote:

> Thats kinda lame. Its inhibiting choice and is rather rash. Default
> RedHat installs on college students computer is very much the bane of
> most administrators existence. To single out Windows on this without
> education is a sign of laziness.
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 11:03:57AM -0400, Mark Hutchings wrote:
> ::http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,603293,00.asp
> ::
> ::Students at the University of California at Santa Barbara have been banned from 
> ::using Windows 2000 and NT, to protect the health of the network.
> ::
> ::
> 
> 
> 
>