Changes in Windows Update Service

on Apr 05, 2005

I can assure you that there is a registration code that has to be entered to activate the software

It may just be a corporate version of the OS as opposed to a consumer version. Even pirated versions of the consumer OS require an activation key but as far as I know only the corporate version does not require activation. You have to enter a CD key, but you don't have to activate it.

17

Double Zero

on Apr 05, 2005

The change was made to increase the ease and efficiency of getting updates installed. The majority of problems on people's computer's relate to the end-user not installing a security patch or update; however the end-user immediately blames Microsoft for the problem instead of being responsible and installing the required patches. One only has to turn on the automatic update feature - you still have the option of whether or not to install them automatically or not.

First of all, nice reply..except I disagree with that paragraph..
I have installed MS updates that have totaly screwed my machine..MS does NOT always know whats best for our computers, however much they would like to think they do.
Turning on the "Auto Updates" may still give you the option of installing them..but it does NOT give you the option to install them 1 at a time as I must do to insure a "Quick" repair if something goes wrong, as it has in the past with MS updates, more than a few times!!
I disagree with the implimentation of this new update proceedure, I think there is a better way they can achieve the same results.

And under the heading of "Why is this change so important" They seemed to have left out the first and formost reason, it is important in the reduction of Windows Piracy.. So I ask you..Are we all to be treated as "Pirates"..
Apparently MS thinks so..

Zero,

18

_02

on Apr 05, 2005

First of all, nice reply..except I disagree with that paragraph..

Zero, I totally agree with everything you said. I would also like to add that I am very responsible for my updates, and do them regularly. I only place blame where it rightfully belongs. Cindi

19

_02

on Apr 05, 2005

Users now consistently receive security updates and high priority patches for Windows content and other applications by either navigating to the Microsoft Update site and clicking Express, or turning on Automatic

I thought that was what their newsletters were for. I receive them all the time.

20

Elesarr

on Apr 05, 2005

You need to remember that people like us who are tech savvy are aware of these things and do what we must to ensure our systems are up-to-date and secure.

clwoods I was not "blaming" anyone I was talking in general terms about the average person not being proactive and installing their updates and patches in a timely manner: I see this everyday with my clients who are run of the mill people and business leaders. I certaily wasn't blaming or accusing you of anything

Additionaly, you are right that is what their newsletters are for, but you would be surprised how many people don't even know that they exist and that they must sign up to receive them and even if they did they would actually have to go and install the updates - many people say "Oh, whatever, I'll do it later..Microsoft is just trying to tell me what to do again...".

It may just be a corporate version of the OS as opposed to a consumer version. Even pirated versions of the consumer OS require an activation key but as far as I know only the corporate version does not require activation. You have to enter a CD key, but you don't have to activate it.

f0r3,
even a corporate version requires activation, generally this is done behind the scenes without the end-user having to click on "activate" like most consumers do; however, there is an activation process even in the corporate environment. The most streamlined environments have the activation keys on a separate server and are acessed when a new station is installed via a script. Even Microsoft requires activation keys for their computers: I worked on the Redmond Corporate Campus and had to activate many a copy of Windows

The whole purpose of activation is get rid of Piracy and the biggest victims of piracy are corporate businesses. I suggest to you again that if a corporate individual has a cd with WinXP on it and can install it on any computer without having to activate and verify the key then it is pirated.

I have installed MS updates that have totaly screwed my machine..MS does NOT always know whats best for our computers, however much they would like to think they do.

Zero,
I empathize with what you are saying. As an IT professional I deal with many computer environments from mom and pop to business stations. My experience with this type of occurrence is that the end-user has manually changed registry settings or some such to "tweak" their OS. If someone thinks they know what they are doing and are willing to take responsibility for messing up their system then fine, but people shouldn't blame Microsoft for messing up a computer when the OS environment is not the way it should be and then an update doesn't install properly. I have run many a different "shell enhancements" and skinning programs; I have changed the bootscreen via the registry and tweaked the kernel to change the dialogue boxes and logon screens in Win2K. I have even changed settings in WinXP registry to meet my needs in a few cases; however, I have never had a problem with any update I have received from Windows Update Service.

I have no problem with you and clwoods doing it manually and installng your updates one at a time (or anyone else for that matter). I made my comments in response to the feeling that I got from this thread that there was no point in the changes that microsoft made to its windows update service.

And under the heading of "Why is this change so important" They seemed to have left out the first and formost reason, it is important in the reduction of Windows Piracy.. So I ask you..Are we all to be treated as "Pirates"..
Apparently MS thinks so..

The auto update feature is not so much focused on piracy as it is on ensuring that everyone has the patches and updates that need to be installed to make the OS secure. Their response with this change only makes sense: I can read a handful of bulletin boards and read the comments from people who have blamed Microsoft for a problem when there was an update waiting to be installed but these same people ignored the update or "forgot" about it and then they make the comment "isn't there a better way they can do this?" This change was their attempt to do it a better way to better ensure these same finger pointers got their updates installed on their systems with as little interaction as possible and to make it easier for less tech savvy people to feel that they are being protected and receive updates when they need them. I will add though that I believe eventually there will be stronger authentication methods integrated into the Windows Update Service to keep pirated versions from being updated in an attempt to slow down the piracy process.

Zero, how are they supposed to know if a copy of windows is authentic without checking it? If you are not guilty and have a legal copy of windows running on your system(s) then it should be no problem to click an extra button to verify your authenticity: you have nothing to hide afterall. If you follow this link to download the antispyware software you will see that only genuine microsoft customers are allowed to have this software: Link and that you must click on the "Continue" button to complete the authentication process and receive the software that is being provided for free to Genuine Microsoft Customers. Now this is not fool proof: I can provide the downloaded file to anyone I want so they never have to go to the download site and do the check. In fact I have a copy of the file on one of my "tool disks" that I take to my clients home so that in the event their problem is not being able to connect to a web page and all other troubleshooting steps have not resolved the issue I can run this software to see if there is malware that is causing the problem. Even though not fool proof the majority of windows users will go though the download page to get the software - or in a corporate environment their system will be updated by the IT department.

I would like to say again that I am not blaming anyone for anything and I apologize if it came across that way. I am simply stating the "whys" so please do not take it personally: if the shoe fits wear and think about it and if it doesn't then don't worry about it

Raymond

21

_02

on Apr 05, 2005

Message recieved. Thankyou.

22

kona0197

on Apr 05, 2005

Raymond - If MS updates are made to not screw up a system why is it so many people (myself included) have many problems with SP2?

23

Double Zero

on Apr 05, 2005

I would like to say again that I am not blaming anyone for anything and I apologize if it came across that way. I am simply stating the "whys" so please do not take it personally: if the shoe fits wear and think about it and if it doesn't then don't worry about it

It isnt you or anything you have said Raymond that anyone is taking personally..::laughs:: as I said..I thought your first reply was a good reply, and so is your second. I think that most of us are simply irritated at MS for various reasons, perhaps the first reason is the price of the software that we apparently do not own and are forced to use as intended by the evil MS empire..(LoL..Perhaps a little overdone??)) It isnt as bad as all that..but it is bothersome..

I have indeed payed for my copy of windows, as well as every copy I have ever owned previously.. I did not have to in any case, other than being "Legal" and it's against the law to pirate software. The legalities however are not anything that bother me in the least bit, I pay for my copies because I support MS by doing so, that is the main reason I pay the overpriced fee for the privaledge to use MS Windows.

Some "Legit" software, and some "Legit" hardware does not play well with windows xp..or I should say it is the other way around.

What are we to do?, change the software we want to use to show MS that we are doing exactly as they want us to do?, which is use or buy only there products at their inflated prices, because these are the ones that work the best with their Windows?
The same with the hardware, must we buy and use only what MS deemed worthy to run with their OS??..Shhhhheeeeeesh..When you put it like that it almost looks "Communist" doesnt it?

I do know that there is alot of software and hardware that works with MS, that isnt related to MS in the least..but then there is alot that doesnt as well..thats where my issues with the updates lay..
Some of the Software conflicts with other software I have on my machine.. The hardware as well..
I suppose if I were to buy a standard manufactured PC (which I totaly HATE the idea of) I would have *zero problems with anything MS would throw my way.. But I am one of the many that build their own box's and have things set up my way, and have certain software that I want to use, other than what MS would suggest I use..

Anyway, ::laughs:: Thats just a partial "Gripe List" of what I do not like about MS and also to reassure you that, Yes, I have a legitimate copy of Windows XP. But I do not appreciate having to live by assinine rules handed down by MS upon how they want me to use their OS..ie: Turning on the Auto Update to receive updates...

If I do they give me some cheesy spyware program for free?..Oh joy..LoL

Take care Raymond,
and believe me, it isnt aimed at *you at all.
Zero.

24

Elesarr

on Apr 05, 2005

no offense taken Zero

I just wanted to make sure I hadn't stepped on anyone's toes. And I never ment to imply anyone here has anything but a legitimate copy - my comments about the possibility of a pirated copy was only directed to the specific quote from f0r3 above.

I agree that there is a lot of software and hardware that does not place nice with WinXP; however, that is not necessarily Microsoft's problem, if I as an ISV or hardware developer want to create a program that is compatible with WinXP then it would be my responsibilty as the vendor to ensure that it is compliant with Microsoft's guidelines.

I too create my own boxes - the only machine I own which is not built by me is the laptop I work on. The biggest reason I do not use Linux is the lack of hardware and software support. And by software support I mean only that to accomplish my tasks and meet my deadlines I need Microsoft compatible programs that will allow me to work with my clients. Linux just doesn't provide that level of compatibility.

I too have only legal copies of the various Microsoft OSes. Microsoft erred on the side of trust with all versions of Windows up to XP and 2003 and piracy has been rampant. Even with the activation process they have implented to ensure only purchased copies of Windows are used it is still being pirated albeit at a lower percentage. So I can see why they have erred on the side of the "bad apples" and now everyone is paying for it. If another company was facing the huge pirating issues that Microsoft is I believe they too would react in a way to protect their own interests as well

LOL I find their "cheesy spyware program" to actually be a bit better than some of the more dominant ones on the market right now - it has found buggers the others didn't and saved me from having to fdsik several of my clients' harddrives

But I do not appreciate having to live by assinine rules handed down by MS upon how they want me to use their OS..ie: Turning on the Auto Update to receive updates...

but isn't that true of any OS that someone chooses to use? To use that specific OS you have to succumb to rules and guidelines that are imposed on the creator of the OS you have chosen to use. Which is why there are other OSes competeing for the market share i.e., Linux, Mac; someone felt the same way and created an OS that did not have those particular rules. But to use these other OSes you have to abide by their restrictions and requirements. Microsoft is erring on the side of the average user in this case. Those of us who want to do it our way because we understand the workings of it: we tweak a little and do it our way. The average home user won't tweak much except to install a program for enhancement if even that: most just use the apps built into WinXp, the corporate user generally doesn't have control over the configuration of their machine and the IT dept will ensure the correct updates are installed when needed and the ones that conflict with legacy programs or drivers won't be installed to maintain the integrity of the environment.

Anyway, just wanted to let you know I took nothing personally and I appreciate the postive response I have gotten for my views though I failed to acknowledge that earlier: I am so used to geek holy wars that I never know when someone is being receptive or not

I have actually enjoyed the discussion

25

Elesarr

on Apr 05, 2005

kona0197 - the only thing i can tell you is that it is a software/hardware incompatibility: that is my experience with SP2 related issues. I have had to do workarounds on a lot of my clients' machines because they just "had" to have a specific program - I have nothing against it, but if someone chooses to install a program that is not "completely" compatibile with WinXP or drivers that are not certified then one has to take the responsibility that there will be issues down the road that may require work arounds.

I have seen the same problems with bad installations of WinXP too. I have a friend who thought she knew what she was doing and started moving folders around and putting things wherever she wanted them to be and then had a lot of issues when SP2 was released because the integrity of the OS had been changed/compromised.

It all boils down to how the end-user has changed/modified/enhanced their system. There are a lot of people and web sites out there with tips and tricks that are not the best things to do or install, but without the knowldege to undo them many people are affected negatively at a later date by changes they made they thought they understood.

I am not saying that you are unknowledgable - only answering the question you pose with my personal experience in having dealt with these issues before while repairing systems whose end-users said "well, I didn;t do anything.."

26

Double Zero

on Apr 05, 2005

Ok Raymond, Now I hate you..I cant hate MS and your the next conveinent person to hate..LoL!! J/K

You do make very good points and I have reconsidered a few of my "Gripes" ::sighs:: I suppose there will never be an OS that is perfect, and I admit that without a doubt Windows XP is the best I have used to this day. They do only keep getting better and for that reason alone is enough to keep supporting the "Evil Empire" LoL!

As for the "Cheesy" Spyware program..I actually havent tried it yet, but I do plan on it..It's free!..LoL..We do not get many bargains like that from MS!

Ever see the movie "Kings Of Silicon Valley"? If you havent then I highly recommend it..It is a decent insight into the history between Apple and MS.. It seems Gates did a little "Pirating" of his own in the begining..Hipocrit?..LoL..you decide.

Anyway, thanks for the conversation Raymond, I have enjoyed it as well.

Take Care,
Zero.

27

Elesarr

on Apr 05, 2005

LOL - yep I've seen it and yep I agree BillG didn't play nice at all in the beginning - but I believe that people can change over time: even if the changes are small and slow.

As long as BillG keeps releasing his bug fixes and service packs at no charge and I can be happy with the computing environment I work in on a daily basis I will continue to use Microsoft Products. I am very much looking forward to Longhorn and IE7 as well as Longhorn Server.

You are welcome for the conversation! It has been awhile since I have had a nice level headed discussion that didn't turn into a "one of has to be right" debacle.

Raymond

28

_02

on Apr 06, 2005

As for the "Cheesy" Spyware program..I actually havent tried it yet, but I do plan on it..It's free!..LoL..We do not get many bargains like that from MS!

I have had it since it came out, Zero. To my suprise it is a very good program. Another good tool in the arsenal line of defense. Cindi

29

kona0197

on Apr 06, 2005

Raymond - I doubt it has anything to do with my drivers. I have a Nvidia Nforce2 chipset based system. after a fresh install of XP and then Nvidia drivers and then SP2 the system seems to slow down to the point where it takes close to 4 mintues to boot and on top of that 2 minutes to launch any program. Uninstalling SP2 gave me my speed back. Keep in mind I have a 1.6 Ghz CPU and 512 megs of RAM.

30

Elesarr

on Apr 06, 2005

kona0197 - there are more drivers on your system than just the video card

without being able to get my hands dirty and see what you actually have installed on your machine there is no way I can diagnose what is wrong with your machine. I can only share with you my professional experience in repairing SP2 related issues.

Again I wasn't accusing you of anything I was just telling you what I have expereiencd and what might be your problem. For as many people that have had problems with SP2 that many and more have not had any problems; my point is if it were the SP2 then everyone's computer would be messed up by installing it. If you are experiencing bootup issues then I would suggest that it is not SP2 but in fact a driver/software conflict - or you could have a faulty video card - have you tried a different card with different drivers? Do you have a video chip built-into the motherboard that you can use instead of an AGP or PCI slot and then check your boot time? There are many, many things that need to be looked at before making a blanket statement of what is wrong or isn't wrong.

Your machine specs really don't have anything to do with it. My mom is running WinXP Home on a Toshiba Satellite 2060CD with 162MB memory, a p3 proc, a 4GB harddrive, Office 2003 Professional, HP Photo Software and some other useful things (this is my old machine I bought used in 2000) and has SP2 installed with no issues of speed or anything else. BTW she had to install SP2 herself because I gave the computer to her 2 years ago and she lives in Oklahoma while I am in Seattle, so I did not do the SP2 install or anything "techie" to make it work right

Sherlock Holmes always talked about "deductive reasoning" and no matter how implausible or improbable the result it has to be the correct one if nothing else is left, so I postulate: Since all WinXP based computers in the world did not mess up and stop working properly when SP2 was installed, then we must look at the computers that were affected and see what they have in common. Almost always it is a hardware/software issue or the end-user has tweaked his/her system inappropriately which caused SP2 to have strange effects on their system.

The reason for most of these problems (as has been discussed in this thread already) is that they generally occur because of hardware and software/drivers/tweaks that do not play nice with WinXP - one of the reasons why Zero does a manual install of his auto Updates is to ensure there is no conflict, because as he has already pointed out he has his machine configured with the hardware and software he wants to use.

I really don't know how else to explain it.

Raymond