how-to block ads
|
Comments on news posted 2003-08-19 09:17:02: After the MSBlaster worm spread like wildfire, Microsoft execs are considering making "Windows Update" an automatic process. ..
| |
page: 1 · 2 · 3  |
 
blackjeep
join:2001-07-12
Atlanta, GA | Not on my machine! That definitely will not fly with the PC savvy crowd, I know I don't want them automatically updating my PC. I like to pick and choose what updates I dl and install. | |
| | 
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| Re: Not on my machine! Automatic updating is already an opt-in solution. It should remain that way and not become an op-out method. Automatic updates that are forced on the customer should never be allowable.
--
My Home Page , "The huge advantage of Canada is its backwardness." - Marshall McLuhan
[text was edited by author 2003-08-19 09:26:03] | |
| | | 
Speedy8
Premium
join:2002-08-22
Alliance, OH
clubs: | Re: Not on my machine! I see what you are saying, but that defeats the purpose of them wanting to change it. If they change it the people who know what they are doing can easily disable it, whereas people who need the feature won't know how/why/where to turn it on. | |
| | | | keyboard5684
join:2001-08-01
Youngsville, PA
 ·Teliax VOIP
·WestPAnet Inc.
·WestPAnet Inc. CA..
| Re: Not on my machine! I agree. I go through an enable it to automatically do the updates most of the time. I am "tech savvy" and still prefer the updates to just run without me knowing.
If it is enabled to automatically just do it then the people who actually want it disabled can do that (plus, the only people that really care are people who know how to anyway). | |
| | | | | dragonboylink
join:2001-09-06
Port Royal, SC
|  WIN XP USERS BEWARE !!!!!!!!!!!!!
To me what is worse is contained in articles I've been reading on The Register (actual posting ... »www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/25956.html This is a perfect example of the way that computers are actually being allowed to control what you do on them.
USERS OF WIN XP BEWARE - Included in a couple of articles I have read, the EULA agreement for Microsoft has changed. The normal crap no one ever reads ... just click ok and let the computer go most people do. Well unfortunately users of XP that upgrade to Service Pack one have already given away all rights on their computer. The EULA agreement on SP1 states that by clicking the 'I agree' button you are giving Microsoft 100% CONTROL over the files and software on your computer, whether it be Microsoft or Sonic Foundry or just whoever, it doesn't matter. A patch in the service pack allows Microsoft to 'AT ANY TIME' with or without your knowledge scan ALL info on your system and determine it's validity. An example ... Say you downloaded the game Myst from a files sharing network. That means there was not a CD install and usually not a unique registration or serial number. The new service pack finds stuff like this and DISABLES the entire program.
In the new EULA it also states that any damage to your system by any updates are YOUR PROBLEM NOT THEIRS! Microsoft will no longer be required to give customer support for all the screw ups that the 'new de-bugged' (ha ha) patches and updates they deliver.
Well, I am computer savvy, and alot of my life is on my computer. And it truly concerns me that I put all this time, effort and money into a good running system. I carefully read and choose the programs I use on it. Have a personal firewall setup, anti-virus, anti spam & pop up blockers. Business reports, yearly tax information, music (mostly created by myself)and lots of other stuff. By updating your computer you are telling Microsoft they have UNRESTRICTED access to both your information purchased AND the personal, private or otherwise acquired information you conatin on your hard drive. They can install patches, remove patches, alter the functionality of other programs and files NOT MADE BY MICROSOFT and potentially SCREW UP your system, with ZERO percent responsibility.
Microsoft has officially removed 'personal' from the personal computer. They are making it theirs, it just sits on your desk at home!
OH BY THE WAY This same EULA agreement is included with the Windows Media Player 9 series. | |
| | | 
vice8686
join:2000-10-13
Lancaster, CA | I have a good habit of manually visiting Windows Update twice a week. No need for automatic anything as far as I'm concerned. | |
| | joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| But will it really be so bad for Joe User, who wouldn't even know how to click the "Windows Update Button" on his PC? After all, tech savvy people who would turn it off are not Microsoft's target with this automatic update, since they know enough (I assume) to protect their computer.
They would need to better test the patches to ensure it doesn't cause too much havoc, but unless it crashes the system, I doubt Joe User would notice if something somewhat-subtle went wrong. | |
| | 
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
 ·Qwest.net
| NO WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!
I will do my own updates thank you. How many of you have
been burnt by some M$ update to fix an update, that patched another update, that fixed a patch that was intended to fix something else.
--
low Brass Rules!Irish Terriers do to!!! | |
| | | 
Nothlit
Premium
join:2001-02-04
Lexington, MA | Re: Not on my machine! That's never happened to me.
--
Grove City College | |
| | | | 
richk_1957
If ..Then..Else
Premium
join:2001-04-11
Minas Tirith
| Re: Not on my machine! Be Thankful!!
Althought it didn't happen to be personally, someone I know asked me about a problem with their PC. The problems they described could be attributed to a microsoft update. I asked if they had installed any patches lately and was told they had automatic updateing turned on and without hesitation downloaded and service pack, security or critical update. After all, it's microsoft's product [windows] so they show know what to/not to install.
They learned. | |
| | 
batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs: | Sounds good, if people are too stupid to protect them selves Microsoft will have to do it. | |
| | | 
jhudson2
Copyright Martyr
join:2000-11-07
San Marcos, CA | Re: Not on my machine! What if Microsoft is too stupid to protect us as well? | |
| | | | 
oliphant5
Got Identity?
Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA | Re: Not on my machine! Then the world just ends doesn't it. | |
| | 
72276539
Premium
join:2001-01-19
Atlanta, GA
| Unfortunetly you now have IT execs making mincemeat out of Microsoft in the papers for not having an auto-update. So they are the ones pushing it, Microsoft is merely seeing what people are saying and adjusting products accordingly. If the IT community would accept its blame for not patching this wouldn't be an issue, instead its the typical finger pointing of today's society. | |
| | |
jhudson2
Copyright Martyr
join:2000-11-07
San Marcos, CA
| Re: Not on my machine! Yet another benevolent, selfless corporation unfairly ravaged by the complaints of their evil whiny customers.
Oh the horror...the horror. Who will make them stop? Who will have the courage to speak up for the abused impotent long suffering Microsoft?
If only MS's critics would allow them to produce a better OS instead of clamoring for less security and more bugs maybe we could solve this problem. But customers aren't interested in solutions, are they?
A sad commentary on our typical finger pointing society if you ask me.
--
When a dog howls at the moon, we call it religion. When he barks at strangers, we call it patriotism. - Edward Abbey | |
| | | | BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: Not on my machine! hey there stop pointing your finger at me ...
does any one else see this as MS attempt to change with the market place like all good businesses do. The companies hit by the worm should rethink their IT positions. These guys are obviously not earning their money.
--
Need a web host try us at www.servercentral.net... message me directly and we can make you some killer deals. | |
| | | 
ikarus1
Premium
join:2002-10-23
Urbanna, VA
| Well, while anubis... makes all kinds of anti-Microsux noises, and I clearly feel the taste of Microsux is somewhat akin to what my Shepard leaves in the yard...
Microsux has built an empire based upon holding the incapable hands of lusers (google for it)... Do you know absolutely nothing about your system except that the big blue "e" will get you somewhere? Then run Microsux... "We know how to do it for you..."
Thus I am *VERY STRONGLY* in favor of the default being to download the upgrade and install it WITHOUT asking, period.
Guys, these users, could care... They just really could care less. Their philosophy is, "I JUST WANT IT TO WORK AND IF IT DOESN'T WORK IT IS SOMEONE ELSE'S FAULT." That IS the average Microsux user. Therefore Microsux should continue to take responsibility for these users.
After all these same users have DSL, Cable, wireless, and their systems are compromised by the hundreds and thousands EVERY DAY. Those self-same systems attack my servers, my workstations, and your servers and your workstations EVERY DAY. If Microsux can do something to mitigate a PROBLEM WHICH THEY CAUSED IN THE FIRST PLACE... Let them.
-m-
--
FAVORITE ANSWERED QUESIONQ: I want to add an antenna to my wireless device, any suggestions?A: »www.freeantennas.com | |
| | 
F walker
Hey Intern, Get Me A Campari
Premium
join:2003-04-10
Anchorage, AK
clubs:
| OH NO...UH-UH....
With this as a standard, (auto forced updates), How will all of those individuals running illegal copies of MS OS'S and APP'S going to avoid the heavy hand of Billy Gates?? People, if MS could better configure their software and not automatically change settings when we downloaded the updates, this would be a GODSEND to all of the computer semi-literates (our grandparents and parents)!! I do not relish having my grandfathers computer attacked because he once hand cranked his car to start it and cant figure out a firewall. This would protect him and others from being infected. MS, go ahead and get it on! those of us who do not like this option can prob figure out how to disable the updates we do not like (add remove programs, delete MS Hotifxes, add remove windows components etc....). We need a more secure digital environment... this, in some form, would be a good step in the right direction. consider if it were done properly.....eh....?
--
Microsoft's mantra, "Build a machine any idiot can use and only an idiot will use it" Forest's Mantra, "If they built a better machine we would just have to build a better idiot." | |
| | |
Speedy8
Premium
join:2002-08-22
Alliance, OH
clubs: | Re: Not on my machine! People running illegal copies will just disable it or find a way to disable it, or hell, not even download. That is the irony, you would have to use auto update to get the new auto update. | |
| | | | | | Urzumph
join:2002-11-06
Australia
| said by F walker  :
OH NO...UH-UH....
With this as a standard, (auto forced updates), How will all of those individuals running illegal copies of MS OS'S and APP'S going to avoid the heavy hand of Billy Gates??
Uhhh Illegal copies of Win XP update both manuelly and automatically (under the current system) just fine.... | |
| | |
ikarus1
Premium
join:2002-10-23
Urbanna, VA
| said by F walker :
OH NO...UH-UH....
With this as a standard, (auto forced updates), How will all of those individuals running illegal copies of MS OS'S and APP'S going to avoid the heavy hand of Billy Gates??
Bill is NOT going to go after them... It is better to give away a copy of your OWN OS than to have the user run a copy of someone else's OS... It's that simple, really.
Hmmm... which brings up a related question...
If the music vendors, movie vendors, and software vendors figure the cost of piracy into the SELLING price of their own products, HOW CAN THEY ALSO SUE PEOPLE WHO COPY THEIR PRODUCTS?... They are already being paid for the theft, right? If they are already compensating for the value lost in theft in the price of the product, how is it that they can justify sueing people for using a product that YOU AND I ALREADY PAID FOR? Just a question...
I mean, aren't they sueing people for OUR money? We paid, right... They sue and they get BACK the money WE PAID???? I am sure there are too many lawyers in this country.
-m-
--
FAVORITE ANSWERED QUESION
Q: I want to add an antenna to my wireless device, any suggestions?
A: »www.freeantennas.com
[text was edited by author 2003-08-20 22:17:54]
[text was edited by author 2003-08-20 22:19:52] | |
| | | | joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| Re: Not on my machine! said by ikarus1 :
Hmmm... which brings up a related question...
If the music vendors, movie vendors, and software vendors figure the cost of piracy into the SELLING price of their own products, HOW CAN THEY ALSO SUE PEOPLE WHO COPY THEIR PRODUCTS?... They are already being paid for the theft, right? If they are already compensating for the value lost in theft in the price of the product, how is it that they can justify sueing people for using a product that YOU AND I ALREADY PAID FOR? Just a question...
I mean, aren't they sueing people for OUR money? We paid, right... They sue and they get BACK the money WE PAID???? I am sure there are too many lawyers in this country.
-m-
--
FAVORITE ANSWERED QUESION
Q: I want to add an antenna to my wireless device, any suggestions?
A: »www.freeantennas.com
[text was edited by author 2003-08-20 22:17:54]
[text was edited by author 2003-08-20 22:19:52]
Two reasons:
1) To deter people from stealing
2) Supply and demand mean that even if they include the full cost of theft in the product price, they still lose money.
Example:
You have a store that sells widgets. You buy the widgets wholesale for $80 and have selling expenses of $20. You need to make $10 a widget. Assuming no shrinkage, you sell the widgets for $110, and make $10 a widget.
Now, let's toss in 4.5 percent shrinkage. Essentially, each widget has $5 additional cost for shrinkage. Each widget has a cost of $80 wholesale, $20 selling expenses and $5 shrinkage. Since you want to pass that cost along to customers, you sell the widgets for $115 each, and make $10 a widget.
So, let's say you catch the little punk stealing the widgets and he whines "But you pass this cost along to customers so how can you sue me? It didn't cost you anything when I stole a widget, you still made $10 on every one you sold." Unfortunately for little Johnny, you've actually read an economics book, so you have the answer.
If little Johnny (and those like him) did not steal widgets, they would sell for $110 each. Since they do steal, they sell for $115 each. Thanks to the law of supply and demand, you will sell less widgets at $115 than $110, so you will make less money with shrinkage, since you sell less widgets, but still net the same profit.
Note I am ignoring opportunity cost of the loss sale, because I don't want to get into "but XXX would never purchase the stuff he stole anyway" arguments. Also, to avoid the argument "but pirated software costs the company nothing because nothing is physically stolen" you made your point on the supposition that pirated goods did cost the seller money. With pirated software, it is more a question of making enough in sales to cover fixed costs which leads to higher prices, but the same principle applies, it is just much clearer in the widget example.
[text was edited by author 2003-08-21 12:02:42] | |
| | | | | 
Kylemaul
Lovin' My Firefox 1.5.x
Premium
join:2001-03-30
North Port, FL
clubs:
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Not on my machine! Good point, but here's another bias on the subject:
Companys that make widgets that cost them too much in the first place are doomed to failure (via supply and demand you expertly explained), unless they use illegal means themselves. In other words, the company has to resort to monopolistic tactics to stay in business.
In other words, Microsoft has just gotten too big for Joe consumer. The masses don't have the ability to afford Microsoft's software anymore. I still laugh when I go to a store and see the newest, buggiest (OK, so its buggy because its new) software on sale for $200 to $400 a pop. And I'm just talking the basics: an operating system, word processor, contact manager, finance software, spreadsheet, etc. And for what? software that has little (and I mean very little) to offer as an improvement over similar software that is getting close to 15 years old!!
As frequently as these new 'improved' versions come out, Joe consumer would not use the software if forced to pay for it. The catch-22 for him is that instead of being backward compatible, these new versions very intentionally leave that feature out. Instead of perfecting their software, companies such as Microsoft are doing exactly the opposite. Smart idea from a marketing point of view. Joe consumer can't wait for new versions because he thinks they just might fix that annoying bug that directly affects him.
And there lies my biggest personal aggravation with software makers: Don't fix it, just come out with a newer version with different bugs.
--
'The tighter the RIAA squeezes their grip, the more stars and systems will slip through their fingers.'
[text was edited by author 2003-10-11 00:47:20] | |
| |
F walker
Hey Intern, Get Me A Campari
Premium
join:2003-04-10
Anchorage, AK
clubs:
| HAHA good point speedy, update to get the auto-forced update.... you echoed my point, those with illegal copies are smart enough to get around this (in theory). And those who do not like this idea (running LEGAL copies), as I stated before, are smart enough to get around it. So, in review:
A logical and sound approach to this auto-forced update would be a great help to the bulk of internet users (the computer semi-literates), and those who do not need/want this as a windows feature would just need to hold on for a week or so until a reshack came out to avoid the auto-forced update. This will not happen anyway... so moot point altogether.....
--
Microsoft's mantra, "Build a machine any idiot can use and only an idiot will use it" Forest's Mantra, "If they built a better machine we would just have to build a better idiot." | |
| | hescominsoon
join:2003-02-18
Brunswick, MD | nod..the instant they make hte automatic updates opt-out is when i find what port it uses and block it with my linux firewall..
--
God Blesshttp://www.faithwalk.org | |
| | | | 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo!.
-
remember that patch that hosed many systems so bad the patch needed a patch. i always like to wait to see if there are any problems with a certain fix as im not what they call a 'version chaser'
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
| | 
BlKrAiN
join:2002-04-08
Bensalem, PA | DONT WANT MICRO(GOVERNMENT)SOFT DOING ANYTHING AUTOMATIC ON MY MACHINE!!! I'LL DO IT MYSELF! | |
| | 
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | Dang. If the corporate customers I deal with on a regular basis are any indication, this will never fly in the business world, at least.
-tom
--
You can be only -so- accurate with a sledgehammer. | |
| | | | |
Nothlit
Premium
join:2001-02-04
Lexington, MA | Re: Not on my machine! So if they implement auto-updates, I assume you're not tech-savvy enough to disable the feature?
--
Grove City College | |
| 
Penguins
Have You Played Atari Today?
join:2001-12-01
Cleveland, OH | How can we take advantage of this situation? Sure customers said they didnt want us stuffing their machines with poorly tested patches and spyware, but what the hell, we can get carte blanche now!
--
Pure magic in 2k of 6502. | |
| 
R4M0N
Brazilian Soccer Ownz Joo
join:2000-10-04
Glen Allen, VA | Classic case of knee-jerk reaction... They can shove automatic update where the sun don't shine.
If they leave an option to disable it for the advanced users, I have no problem with it. Just give me the option. | |
| | 
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs:
| Re: Classic case of knee-jerk reaction... said by R4M0N :
If they leave an option to disable it for the advanced users, I have no problem with it. Just give me the option.
That's my fealings on the subject. Unfortunately there are toooo many people out there who don't update their system and thus things like the blaster virus get around.
--
"Knowhutimean, Vern?" - Ernest P. Worrell »www.maxolasersquad.com | |
| | | | | | | tsigo
join:2001-10-11
Mclean, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Classic case of knee-jerk reaction... How bout they make the ability to turn it off purely a registry hack. That way the people that this generally doesn't apply to (the tech-savvy people) can have full control over their system, while knowing that their Internet connection won't be slowed down by a less experienced person who can't/won't apply patches. | |
| 
ravital
Just Another Pesky Independent Nh Voter
Premium
join:2001-07-19
Merrimack, NH | Each an every one of these fixes has an equal chance of being as destructive as a virus instead of being a fix. So now Microsoft is going to go into the business of distributing viruses. Sure, why not, we don't get enough of them. | |
| DonLibes
Premium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19
| Please select one of the following . . . Please select one of the following:
____ Update with latest MS bugs in all products
____ Update with latest MS bugs in security products only
____ Do not update with latest MS bugs; instead update with obsolete bugs
____ Do not update at all; leave system with existing MS bugs | |
| 
Roundboy
Premium
join:2000-10-04
Drexel Hill, PA | it already is here Auto update already exists.. XP by default installs to use automatic windows update..
I always have to go in and disable it.. | |
| sonnybadbutt
join:2001-05-11
Elizabethtown, KY | ISP and updates I think this would help alot with the issue of ISPs supporting customers pcs. I know if we supported our customers pc I would put every patch known to man on it. Just to cya. So what differnece would it matter if Microsoft did it or your local ISP? | |
| | 
graysonf
Premium,MVM
join:1999-07-16
Fort Lauderdale, FL
| Re: ISP and updates The difference is that if the ISP, by providing a value added service, hoses the machine with a patch, it's pretty likely someone will sue and win.
When Microsoft hoses you with a patch, you can't sue at all - you waived your rights when you agreed to the license.
How much more would you have to charge your customers to support their PCs? How many people would you have to hire and properly train to do that? How much would the liability insurance to cover this cost?
Can you make any money at new this aspect of your business? Or are you willing to assume the risk, lose money, and just provide this additional support as a courtesy to your customers? | |
| | | sonnybadbutt
join:2001-05-11
Elizabethtown, KY
| Re: ISP and updates said by graysonf :
The difference is that if the ISP, by providing a value added service, hoses the machine with a patch, it's pretty likely someone will sue and win.
When Microsoft hoses you with a patch, you can't sue at all - you waived your rights when you agreed to the license.
So if you don't patch totally and something happens to the machine. Someone will sue and win. So why would an ISP want this? Why not let Microsoft take the fall. like you said they wouldn't get sued. They would just piss off a customer. | |
| | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Fine, make autoupdate mandatory.
Oh and how do you intend to tell people n dial up connections they have to wait and download over 30MB of service packs? And make sure you move that mouse every few seconds or AOL will kick you off.  | |
| 
53059959
Temp banned from BBR more then anyone
join:2002-10-02
PwnZone | that would make a good poll... whether or not you would like windows update to become a permanent microsoft entitiy. | |
| 
NewLife
Just Keep Swimming, Just Keep Swimming
join:2001-07-31
Calhoun, GA |  2 words for Microsoft concerning Auto Updates....
| |
| 
AthlGrond
Premium,MVM
join:2002-04-25
Aurora, CO
·Comcast
| I am 100% for this for the home versions of their OS'.
The professional versions should use the system they have currently.
That way the people who are supposed to know what they are doing don't have to have the OS downloading patches automatically.
The home users? They sometimes get confused by having choices... | |
| |
See 7 replies to this post | |
Ken Sohryu
Darkest Days
join:2001-01-07
Chicago, IL
| Psh. The day I think this is a good idea is the day Microsoft can put out a patch that won't knock half a million people offline, won't exceed 50 megs in size, that isn't a patch to fix the previous botched patch, and won't turn someone's computer into a worthless heap of metal and plastic.
--
Darkness is to Light as George W. Bush is to God. | |
| 
draven
Premium,Mod
join:2002-02-20
my bunker | Alternative OS, here I come... If Microsoft were to start doing things like this, I would seriously consider going back to *nix OS's. | |
| |
See 8 replies to this post | |
markopoleo
join:2003-04-02
Bonne Terre, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| I feel sorry for the poor guy on 56k... Installing windows would require half a day "Now installing updates for Windows" "Estimated time remaining "4hours 14min". lol
Lucky for us, this won't happen im sure of it.
Im in favor of a Popup windows after every fresh install, and every month after saying something about "Please update windows for latest security patches".
Im sure some home users, don't even know about windows update...my aunt installed every AOL CD she got because "hey free software right?". 
--
If PLC goes mainstream, every other broadband provider will be considered what dialup is today...not broadband. | |
| |
See 8 replies to this post | |
bigbeartech
Goo?
join:2001-09-23
Saint Louis, MO
|  How easily Microsoft forgets
The security update caused people with Norton Internet Security to not get onto the internet.
So, how does Microsoft plan to release its patches, if they are forced?
What if Microsoft were to mess up like that again?
What if the patch was worse than that?
Microsoft needs to err on caution, not panic.
They have done fine thus far in their patch releases and their status in the "opt-in" for automatic updates, its the consumer that is the issue.
Should the companies that provide and support the OS, put a huge big red sticker on their computers, "Update constantly"?
Who is responsible for educating the consumer?
As it is now, no one. But thats been the status qo since forever. No one taught me the inner workings of my vehicle, no one taught me how to operate the dishwasher, washer, and dryer.
So why are computers any different?
We should all know, they are different because of things like this. Viruses, trojans, and worms. But they are nothing more than a disruption of our lives, much like spam.
If you ask anyone today, who doesnt know much about computers, "you know you need to backup information constantly right?"
Most of them will say yes. Thats the #1 thing EVERYONE tells EVERYONE about computers.
Obviously that doesnt happen. I dont do it, but I also dont have vital files on my system.
It really comes down to the consumer. No one else will pay to educate, and unless the economy changes or computers become "a need" and not a want, then it will stay that way.
--
guycad: It may take you days and large clumps of hair to get it to work,CyberSchnook:I am so screwed--I haven't had large clumps of hair for years.  | |
| | | | Beeper
Part Of The Problem
join:2001-09-27
Dayton, OH
clubs:
| said by bigbeartech :
What if Microsoft were to mess up like that again? What if the patch was worse than that?
There is no "if" about it. It's "when".
The best way to fix bad software is to expose software to liability laws.
--
Guaranteed Fear and Loathing. Abandon all hope. Prepare for the Weirdness. Get familiar with Cannibalism. | |
| | |
See 6 replies to this post | |
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
·AT&T Midwest
·Comcast
| This fumes me just a little Ok, first off, there is no excuse for NOT using windows update. The problem is pretty clear. Joe user does not take the time to update the computer. If it wasn't for automatic update on virus definitions, then virus defs would be out of date. It seems like, when it comes to computers, the user expects the system to just run like a fridge or a microwave. What I and almost everyone here knows is that computers require some maintainance. Doesn't matter what OS you run or what kind of computer you have.
1. Driver updates
2. Firmware updates
3. OS updates
4. Software updates
5. Hardware cleaning such as using canned air to clean out the system.
6. Hardware replacement such as dying fans or dead hardware in the computer or upgrades to old equipment.
Joe user doesn't expect to do any of those things when he buys a computer. Everyone here knows the list by heart. We have done it all from updating drivers to replacing our video cards. It is easy to us. To Joe User, it is a pain in the ass.
Now, the issue at hand is Windows Update. Should it be an automatic process? I say it should be an automatic process by default. For us power users, we should have the ability to switch that off. Why make it default to on? Mainly because of all the Joe Users. There are users today, who I consider pretty smart computer users, who don't take the time to update their systems. Then, they call me when something isn't working right and I have to point them in the right direction. Those users and everyone under that SHOULD have automatic updates put on their computers. That much is certain.
As for everyone bitching about the updates killing their computer, I haven't had this problem in a long time. Last time was with a linux distro upgrade. With all the updates being released for every software and OS package, there are updates out there that do cause some headaches. However, for the most part about 99% of them are updates that will cause no problems. In fact, in the last year, there was only one update that caused a problem and it was fixed in less than a couple days and redistributed. That was a Microsoft patch. However, lets not leave anyone else out. There was also a patch for Symantec that killed the virus protection engine that was released last year. Sure, it only affected a small percentage, but I got hit with that. Then there was a linux patch about a year ago that I installed on my linux box that killed network connectivity. I could make a list of exceptions, but I am sure you see my point. Microsoft isn't the only one here that has made a patch that has caused some problems.
Maybe they can come out with a best of both worlds scenario. For instance, they have Critical Updates, Recommended Updates, and Driver Updates. Maybe only push ultra critical updates to every desktop forcefully if it isn't shut off. This way, you are protecting Joe user. Heck, it is just an idea.
--
My Domain
Nightfall's Hockey and Life Journal
[text was edited by author 2003-08-19 10:48:19] | |
| |
See 14 replies to this post | |
| | | | 
Phoenix__1
join:2003-07-17
Holyoke, MA
| said by meskinct :
The first questions the system should ask when the OS is installed -
1. Do you know what a firewall is?
2. Do you know how to properly protect your PC from intruders?
3. Do you know how to update your OS?
If the user answers no to any of these, then the system should activate the firewall and turn on install auto-updates automatically.
Then start with the user accounts, etc.
You'd be surprised on how many "John Doe" users, who would answer truely, yes.
I"m going to have to agree with Nightfall MVM & sayt hat it should be the default, but like today, we should have the option to op out if we like. Personally, there are only 2 updates on Windows Update, I have not & do not plan on downloading. They are, Messenger 4.5 & MS Viewer. I've totally uninstall messenger & don't need the view. Also, in the past the viewer, only kept reinstalling it's self, from time to time. | |
| | |
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
·Site5.com
·AT&T Midwest
·Comcast
| Re: Ask the Question @ 1st Start said by Phoenix__1 :
I"m going to have to agree with Nightfall MVM & sayt hat it should be the default, but like today, we should have the option to op out if we like. Personally, there are only 2 updates on Windows Update, I have not & do not plan on downloading. They are, Messenger 4.5 & MS Viewer. I've totally uninstall messenger & don't need the view. Also, in the past the viewer, only kept reinstalling it's self, from time to time.
Messenger 4.5 and MS Viewer should NOT be critical updates. Those are recommended updates actually. My thought is to just dump the patches that are critical to security. The RPC patch is critical. Messenger 4.5 is not.
--
My Domain
Nightfall's Hockey and Life Journal | |
| | 
IronChefMoto
Premium
join:2001-02-08
Alpharetta, GA
| said by meskinct :
The first questions the system should ask when the OS is installed -
1. Do you know what a firewall is?
2. Do you know how to properly protect your PC from intruders?
3. Do you know how to update your OS?
Actually -- I think it would be better if the questions at startup came up with the following dialogue:
"Welcome to Windows XP Professional. You must answer the following questions correctly in order to start your Windows XP Professional experience:"
•When you add more memory to your computer, you are adding: (a) a hard drive, (b) a disk drive, (c) a port, or (d) none of the above.
•The Internet is: (a) a modem, (b) your telephone line, (c) an Ether-ma-net port, or (d) none of the above.
•Screen resolutions are measured in: (a) inches, (b) VGA units,(c) megabytes, or (d) none of the above.
"Thank you for choosing Microsoft."
If a users picks anything but D for the answers, the computer formats the hard drive, boots back into the BIOS, and displays the following BIOS message:
PLEASE RETURN THIS COMPUTER TO THE MAJOR DEPARTMENT
STORE WHERE YOU WERE SUCKERED INTO OVERPAYING FOR IT
AND NO -- YOU WILL NOT GET YOUR MSN REBATES EVEN
AFTER YOU RETURN THE COMPUTER -- SO DON'T ASK
IronChefMorimoto
--
Desktop: Abit KG7-RAID | AMD AthlonXP 1800+ | 512MB PC2100 DDR | 128MB ATI Radeon 9500 Pro
Laptop: Dell Latitude C810 | Intel PIII-M | 512MB PC133 SDRAM | 32MB Nvidia GeForce2 Go | |
| | | 
meskinct
Mad Scientist at Work
Premium
join:2002-01-07
Danbury, CT
clubs: | Re: Better questions to ask at startup Yeah, a message like "Please return your PC for a more suitable product such as WebTV" | |
| 
tomkb
Premium
join:2000-11-15
Avon, OH
clubs:
·RoadRunner Cable
| What about rebooting Will my servers reboot 3 times a day, I don't want that on a server, it should be for workstations only.
Speaking of that, whatever happened to the initiative where the reboots would stop when win2k was released? They were doing good for a while with office 2000 not needing rebooting etc.. | |
| 
damonlab
Premium
join:2001-05-02
Detroit, MI
clubs:
| users with firewalls When a windows update is applied... zone alarm starts complaining that every windows component connecting to the internet has changed. If the updates were automatic, how would the person know weather it was windows that changed it or something else? | |
| | 
DenverDialup
join:2003-06-06
Littleton, CO
clubs:
| Re: users with firewalls For good reason -- this is something that SHOULD NOT be made automatic! Users on dial-up, for example, will find that hours of their time will be taken up for updates, and cause all their other internet activities to lag like hell. Even broadband users might get annoyed if this cuts into their bandwidth when they want to schedule updates for another time (i.e. they're behind a firewall and will wait until they're not downloading something, etc.)
--
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." -- Rich Cook | |
| | | 
noway0
@swbell.ne | Re: 2003 Does that already ok... | |
| | | |
|
