>>My IT group has a "policy" where they age all Microsoft patches for 30 days before rolling them out to nearly 100 machines.
>>
>>I feel this practice is dangerous and puts everyone at risk. I think that at least for the High Priority Security patches they should be installed immediately.
>>
>>The IT group claims that they install these on a machine in their lab and allegedly "test" it.
>>
>>What you think?
>
>A very dangerous and biased attitude. Why do they think they know better? There must be a reason.
>
>I would advise your IT department to immedeatly uninstall all MS software, because you can never be to sure.
>I would also advise you NOT to attach your personal pc to such an unsecure network, never.
>
>What happens if your network is affected by a worm in the 30 days, a worm which would have been detected by the last update? Whom to blame?
>Microsoft or your IT department?
>
>My advise: install a HP patch imm without any delay. Test it, retest it and counter test it not for 3o days but infinitiv. In case you find the SP damaged your system, make use of the backup.
>Regards,
>Koen

You can easily get around the security problems with the network -- regardless of the OS used -- just don't turn on the computers -- ever. There will be side-benefits too:
* Reduces electricity usage (and therefore your "carbon footprint", which is always a good thing)
* You can turn off that big honkin' environmental control system in your server room (since they're not on, so they'll not overheat) -- talk about something that sucks down power 'cause it's on 24 hr/day
* Save money on payroll -- you can signficantly reduce your IT staff.
* You can continue to use the older computer systems -- even systems you've "retired" -- they'll work just the same as newer ones
* Older software will run just as well as newer ones!
* Heck, at that point, one write "computer" on a cardboard box (or even "laptop" on a pizza box) and it'll run just as well as any brand-spakin' new computer!