 |
Search |
|
|
|
|
Classic 2 Guys |
|
10 Random Stories:
|
|
|
|
Can Computer Viruses Kill Humans? |
|
 I ran across this story last night at Network World Fusion that said hospitals are going against medical device manufacturers recommendations, and installing Microsoft critical updates on their Windows based PC's that are used to control the equipment. Thereby risking lives by possibly rendering life saving machinery useless because of unsupported patches (that could take months to approve for use), and voiding any support from the manufacturer. But, on the other hand, if they do not install the patches they could be putting human life at risk because of computer down time due to computer viruses, and worms. Gives a new meaning to "Blue screen of death", doesn't it?
I'm not saying hospitals should be using all Macintosh computers for these applications, I don't even know that Linux would be a good choice. All I do know, is I sure wouldn't want my life in the hands of Windows. It seems to me that a hand built, job-specific OS would be best. Something that isn't widely known, at least something that isn't "widely known" enough to have viruses.
Not connecting the Computer to the internet doesn't seem to help, because the article goes on to state that some viruses come from the factory with the device. Besides, it only takes one jerk in the mailroom to spread a virus through the entire network.
So why do people still put up with windows? If you save money on the machine, but spend more money on support, downtime, and Virus/Worm/Trojan/Spyware protection, what is the reasoning for continuing to use the same sub-par OS that Microsoft has been releasing for years?
I am not saying that Mac's are perfect, nothing's perfect. And I know that a lot of Apple's success in developing a good OS is due to its control of the hardware, but who cares if it works? I would rather have less hardware choices, than have to upgrade my virus protection every year, as Norton and McAfee require you to do.
I also know that this article will probably spawn some trolls, I encourage intelligent debate. But just attacking myself, or blunt statements about your opinion of certain computers is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you are still retarded.
[Editors note]I would like to apologize in advance for insulting retarded people by comparing them to Windows users.
|
|
August 10 2004, 10:54 AM EDT, by
 |
Comments:
|
| rlhamon |
8/10/04, 12:21 PM EDT |
I agree a specific OS would be best. I would think that a Lite-Unix based OS on these machine would be best.
First though if they wanted to use Microsoft product I thought that Pocket PC OS would be a good fit because they are not occipital to the same virus but with research I found that was just a myth.
That's why I feel that a Unix based would be best.
|
| sweetjimmyhugs |
8/10/04, 12:33 PM EDT |
[sarcasm]Something that runs BASIC would probably do the trick for simple things like heart monitors or MRI machines.[/sarcasm]
|
| nhmacusr |
8/10/04, 1:57 PM EDT |
In reality, most of these machines don't need a full blown operating system. A small compact well written operating system from scratch with custom software be be better. Unfortunately, most companies don't want the risk of letting engineers do their job.
|
| sdfasdafsda |
8/11/04, 5:41 AM EDT |
like getting the fox to look after the henhouse?
|
| Angry Mob |
8/11/04, 1:12 PM EDT |
What is that supposed to mean, sdfasdafsda? And what kind of name is sdfasdafsda anyway? And why am I starting a sentence with a conjuction?
|
| nhmacusr |
8/11/04, 3:53 PM EDT |
No.... The sad reality is that most programs will opt for an 'off the shelf' solution that ends up being far more than what is needed than writing their own from scratch (which in most cases isn't really that much work and that hard). In the end one of two things happens:
1. The software becomes bloated because of the extra features allowed by the 'off the shelf' OS.
2. The programming gets sloppy (i.e. security holes and bugs) because the programmers rely to much on the OS to watch their backs.
Simple solutions are always the best. I have seen the train derailed too many times.
|
This article is archived, so you may not comment on it.
(The good news is there's always the shoutbox, the forums or the contact form if you're socially-inclined at the moment!)
|
|
|
|
Site Links |
|
|
|
|
Deep Thoughts |
|
|
If you lived in the Dark Ages, and you were a catapult operator, I bet the most common question people would ask is, "Can't you make it shoot farther?" No. I'm sorry. That's as far as it shoots.
|
|
Around Da Web |
|
| iProng: |
iPhone steals show at CTIA Wireless 2007
|
DLO offers dual cover fashion case for iPod
|
AT&T received 1M inquiries on iPhone
|
| MacDailyNews: |
Ars Technica in-depth review: Apple TV ?impressed all those who touched it?
|
Inside Apple?s Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard Server OS
|
The chips inside Apple TV
|
| Think Secret: |
Adobe Creative Suite 3 pricing revealed
|
|
|
We Like: |
|
|
|
|
Side Projects |
|
Jonahan
- JediPoker.net
- Jonahan.com
- iProng
- MacProng
iKen
Jedbeck
J.P.
|
|
