Rats! MS Auto Updates Got Me Again!

[myarmor]

Autopatcher XP is the way I do my updates..
I've never had any issues with it, and in the newer versions the updater retrieves the files directly from MS anyway, making it faster to download and is as good as if not better than autoupdates.

Oh, and it's seems to always be a total of a single reboot afterwards, no matter how many updates you apply.

In addition to that I prefer to do it this way because I only need to download them once, not for every system and VM I use.

[Paul Keith]

I prefer to rely on patches from the source. I figure MS knows which patches are meant for the public. I've seen too many users who feel they have to have EVERY patch when certain ones are designed to fix a specific issue which is not affecting their machines.

-Josh (October 21, 2008, 09:12 AM)

Not sure if Autopatcher does this. Actually from what little I notice of the patches, usually Autopatcher even goes a step further and make sure there's a safe version of Autopatcher and a recent version. They even revert back to warn users where as MS is like Linux updating where unless you are using the right distro, any update can screw you up with no warning if you just click yes.

[manimatters]

Am I the only person who has NEVER had a problem with an update from MS? Any problem I have is usually caused by another product and NOT the Windows OS or a patch to one of its components.

WOOT! 1500 Posts!

-Josh (October 18, 2008, 01:14 AM)

Even ive had no problems with windows updates ever. Now that I think of it, its surprising.

[J-Mac]

Maybe it's that I have 1.5 TB of storage attached to my system, and several hundred applications installed (I wanna be like Darwin!!!    ). That might tend to be more vulnerable to some updates. Also, and I know that this matters - I have an AMD chip instead of Intel. Changes made by MS are tested much more thoroughly on Intel-based machines than with AMD chips. (Probably because there are more Intel machines??)

Jim

[mahesh2k]

Thanks 40hz, i'm going to try "Heise Security's ct-offline-updater" now.

[manimatters]

Also, and I know that this matters - I have an AMD chip instead of Intel. Changes made by MS are tested much more thoroughly on Intel-based machines than with AMD chips. (Probably because there are more Intel machines??)

Jim

-J-Mac (November 02, 2008, 12:59 AM)

Im also running an AMD chip, and doesnt it doesnt seem to be a problem, maybe my rabbit foot works!!

[J-Mac]

Man!  You guys/gals are just teasing me!

OK, it's not like I have problems with every update; just maybe three (or so?) that have really gotten me.

First one was back in April 2006, maybe? The update that installed a program that somehow facilitates the prefetch function. That same update also added, I believe, the new and - IMO, not improved - WinSxS manifest mess, which in turn messed big time with XP's DEP, or Data Execution Prevention. That update and the idiocy of a few developers caused me a lot of grief. TechSmith was one, and Mindjet was another. Both got lazy and when Windows Installer 3 was released instead of building new installer packages in WI3 they simply copied over the code they had used in Windows Installer 2 to the new WI3. Version 2 hadn't had to deal with the new WinSxS manifest stuff, but 3 did. That made both SnagIt and Mind Manager Pro go haywire after I installed them.

Both now must be listed in my DEP exclusion list or they will not even appear when I try to start them. (Or at least until I reinstalled Windows after that!)

Now this post will draw out another dozen members here who will post how they are soooo lucky!  (Creeps!)   

Jim