Confused about todays updates

[Char Jackson]

In

No! I always updated Windows since Windows 3.1. This is one of the
computers that I use that is always kept up to date. And the updates
keep breaking System Restore and I have to go to fix it again and again.
This nonsense started with SP3.


Lots of problems with Windows updates. Nothing as bad as OS/2 updates,
but problems still exists. For example, I have seen Windows updates
screw up Windows Explorer. Then it crashes and sometimes the desktop
does too (it is actually part of Explorer). And then the desktop reloads
and some of the tray icons are gone, but still running. This nonsense
has been going on for over 10 years and many of my computers. One update
breaks it and the next one fixes it. And the vicious cycle repeats
itself.

You're a saint for putting up with it, especially for putting up with
it for all these years. I have a question, though. You claim to have
some knowledge about computer hardware and Windows software, so why
are you putting up with it and not just fixing it? I know I wouldn't
put up with that kind of thing on any of my systems.

 

[BillW50]

In

You're a saint for putting up with it, especially for putting up with
it for all these years. I have a question, though. You claim to have
some knowledge about computer hardware and Windows software, so why
are you putting up with it and not just fixing it? I know I wouldn't
put up with that kind of thing on any of my systems.

I do constantly fix the updates that cause problems. Although the user
side of me feels this isn't my job. As all of my software I got legally
and I shouldn't have to fix them too all of the time. And I can fully
understand somebody without my skills or experience to get frustrated
really quickly over this nonsense.

There is an old saying about don't fix something that ain't broke. And
updating is exactly like fixing something that ain't broke if there is
nothing there to fix a problem that you are having and especially if
everything is just fine before the updates.

 

[Char Jackson]

In

I do constantly fix the updates that cause problems. Although the user
side of me feels this isn't my job. As all of my software I got legally
and I shouldn't have to fix them too all of the time. And I can fully
understand somebody without my skills or experience to get frustrated
really quickly over this nonsense.

No, go read again what you wrote above in 2) and 3). It's not the
updates that are broken, it's your computer. I commended you for being
able to ignore your broken computer for so long. The updates have
nothing to do with it.

There is an old saying about don't fix something that ain't broke. And
updating is exactly like fixing something that ain't broke if there is
nothing there to fix a problem that you are having and especially if
everything is just fine before the updates.

That's actually not true. We're mostly talking about security updates
at this point, and you'll almost never be aware of the problem they
address. You've got your head in the sand.

 

[BillW50]

In

No, go read again what you wrote above in 2) and 3). It's not the
updates that are broken, it's your computer. I commended you for being
able to ignore your broken computer for so long. The updates have
nothing to do with it.

You don't listen too well. Not only do I backup my software, but I back
up my hardware as well. And I have dozens of computers here and they all
do it if you install routine updates. So they are all bad hardware eh? I
suppose you are also selling ocean front property in Arizona too I bet.
;-)

That's actually not true. We're mostly talking about security updates
at this point, and you'll almost never be aware of the problem they
address. You've got your head in the sand.

You still don't listen. I was forced to stop security updates on one
EeePC 4G because of drive space four years ago. I figured just like you
that this would cause security problems. And I figured I have would have
to do routine restores. But nothing of the kind ever happened. Was this
just a fluke?

So I set aside a half of dozen of other computers and I stopped security
updates on them too three years ago. And nothing bad happened to them
either. The outcome is always the same. Solid systems while being
malware free. So unless you have done your own homework like I have, you
really don't know what the real implications are.

 

[Char Jackson]

In

You don't listen too well. Not only do I backup my software, but I back
up my hardware as well. And I have dozens of computers here and they all
do it if you install routine updates. So they are all bad hardware eh? I
suppose you are also selling ocean front property in Arizona too I bet.
;-)

I get it, you apparently have a lot of different hardware, but what's
the one thing that every system has in common? You.

 

[BillW50]

In

I get it, you apparently have a lot of different hardware, but what's
the one thing that every system has in common? You.

Oh I get it! I can drag your ass here, install everything from scratch
with Microsoft's own disc, do the Windows updates, and let you see what
happens first hand and you will still be in denial! So what is the
difference between you and a lousy punk?

"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance." ~
Albert Einstein

"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion and
politics, but it is not the path to knowledge; it has no place in the
endeavor of science." -- Carl Sagan

 

[Char Jackson]

In

Oh I get it! I can drag your ass here, install everything from scratch
with Microsoft's own disc, do the Windows updates, and let you see what
happens first hand and you will still be in denial!

I'm not having any of the problems on any of my systems that you're
having on multiple systems. I'm not unusual, most people are like me.
If that's denial, then mea culpa.

You should probably ask yourself, what is it that you're doing
differently from most people? It's not about installing updates, it's
something more than that. I don't live with you and I can't observe
you, so I can't help you figure it out. Only you can do that.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Count your blessings.

+1

 

[BillW50]

In

I'm not having any of the problems on any of my systems that you're
having on multiple systems. I'm not unusual, most people are like me.
If that's denial, then mea culpa.

You should probably ask yourself, what is it that you're doing
differently from most people? It's not about installing updates, it's
something more than that. I don't live with you and I can't observe
you, so I can't help you figure it out. Only you can do that.

That is because when something goes wrong, you are not observant. The
problem is right there and you can't see it (even when it is in black
and white, see below). If I wasn't observant, I could claim I never had
a Windows stability problem either after an update. It is easy to do
when you are in denial. As I can claim everything that happened was just
a fluke or something and move on.

But I am not like that at all. I am an engineer and I can't ignore
flukes and I have to be very observant. Things like Joe Blow would never
catch, I have too. Plus when I am beta testing hardware or software, I
have to work them to the limits and look for any problems at all. Plus I
document things and I can tie things together and find the real cause.

You apparently cannot and can't even see any problems. There are lots of
people out there just like you because you are not trained in this area.
But professionals are and we spot them right away. Thanks to people like
me, your software runs so well as it is. ;-)

Even Microsoft knows that making any change to an OS is libel to break
something. That is why they release bug fixes to a small number of
people first in a KB which is only given to those who calls up for
support. Once they feel confident with a large group of them, they roll
them into a Service Pack.

Even when a Service Pack is publicly released, there can be huge
problems still. Everybody knows this except little people like you who
is in denial. Heck remember Windows 95 Beta was said to be the most
heavily beta tested software ever (at that time)? And what happened?
There were still bugs. Even the bug accepting all zeros for the key
number was there too. And what about XP SP3 and HP computers with AMD
processors? They couldn't even boot after the update. The list is huge
about update failures and yet you are still in denial. See no evil, hear
no evil, speak no evil. That is you Char.

 

[charlie]

XP SP3 and HP computers with AMD
processors? They couldn't even boot after the update.

News to me! All of our older systems used AMD processors and XP.
Most finally died due to MBD failure (Bad Caps)
Our pain in the rear was getting various TV cards to work properly.

 

[BillW50]

In

News to me! All of our older systems used AMD processors and XP.
Most finally died due to MBD failure (Bad Caps)

There is tons of stories on this issue alone, this is just one of many.

HP Fixing XP SP3 Problems
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Desktops-and-Notebooks/HP-Fixing-XP-SP3-Problems/

Our pain in the rear was getting various TV cards to work properly.

Oh internal TV cards? What kinds were they? And did you find one brand
that worked well? I have tried a few and so far I really like AVerMedia.

 

[DanS]

In

There is tons of stories on this issue alone, this is just
one of many.

HP Fixing XP SP3 Problems
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Desktops-and-Notebooks/HP-Fixing-XP
-SP3-Problems/

Did you even read that article ?

...."The main problem, as Johansson and others see it, happened
because HP, and possibly other OEMs, used the same images for
AMD-based PCs that were used with Intel-based hardware. The
result for customers with those AMD machines when the SP3
service pack was applied turned out to be a number of
problems, including endless rebooting.

In her e-mail, Smith wrote that the early users of XP SP3
seemed to have had the most problems. When SP3 boots up on
these machines, she wrote, it looks for an Intel driver that
isn't installed on AMD-based PCs.".....

....."This is not an AMD or Microsoft issue," Graves wrote.
"It's an issue of matching the correct software image with the
correct hardware. I talked to our software engineers and it
seems the real culprit is a driver called intelppm.sys. By the
name, you can probably tell that this is an Intel driver ...
and it causes issues with AMD-based systems."


I guess some people will blame MS for everything and the
weather, no matter whos *really* at fault.

 

[DanS]

Interesting... since we have very similar past. Although I
started 35 years ago. And I too have detailed knowledge of
Windows dating back to '93 and I have known about replacing
the shell since about '95.

And say, since I know virtually every shell replacement out
there, which one did you write?

It's been in the works since 1990-something and has been an
ongoing project. Initially, it was just a popup menu program
based on an old Win3.11 program I used to use called Flash!
Menu.

I've not released it. A couple years ago, I was conversing with
someone over at ShellCity about it hoping they'd host it, but
they were hoping for some quantity of documentation before
they'd do it, there's virtually no documentation, and I *still*
haven't gotten around to actually creating some good
documentation.

Essentially, when you middle click, no matter what program
you're in, the shell window I designed will be shown at the
mouse position. (Or at least as close to the mouse position you
can get if you're near the edge of the screen.)

It has a system tray, task launcher, clock, control of startup
programs, etc. Nearly everything has been duplicated that
explorer does....nearly everything because we all know, the
shell documentation is pretty slim pickins'. You middle click to
show the shell window, then everything is right there to access
to minimize mouse movement. The design from the start was
supposed to be a minimalistic design, low RAM usage, non-
intrusive, so no typical desktop functionality is supported by
default. I'm sure peope wouldn't like that however, you know how
they like to fill the desktop with a 100 icons.

Like I said, this has been a long running project, so as
hardware speed increased, I decided to create a desktop module
as well. Yes, you can have icons on it, of any size, and save
and restore icon layouts. You can also add pictures to the
desktop to any size and position you like, so one can create a
collage of their favorite pictures on the desktop. I never use
the desktop module, but it was a good programming excercise.

I haven't created a real install package for it
since.....2003...v 0.0.3.0 and have been doing rolling updates
and running the 'test version'.

I worked out thumbnail previews for windows in the task manager,
but never implemented. At one point I was researching using
OpenGL to create an window overlaying system to implement
effects similar to Compiz & KDE's built-in effects, but, that
never took off.....I'm only one person doing this in my spare
time.....and then MS comes out with their own compositing window
manager with Vista anyway.....exactly what happened when I was
writing a multi-server Usenet binary downloader that worked and
look extremely similar to a beta version of a binary d/l'r
called Zeonews that I bought while still in beta, and the guy
stop developing it to move on to something else. I was 60% done
when NewsLeecher came out....which looked and worked extremely
similar to Zeonews, and my d/l'r.

The old manual for what I call DDT, circe 2006:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2694585/DDT_v.0.0.3.0.pdf

But it's changed significantly since.

I've created a 1 minute video showing some of the operation of
it if you'd like to see.

From my streaming server which will buffer some then start
playing....

http://freakneck.cjb.net:8000/Shell1.wmv

Or if you'd prefer a full d/l then play....

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2694585/Shell1.wmv

 

[DanS]

In

Scientific evidence with updates and without, history of
lawsuits against updates,

Lawsuits brought on MS about Windows Updates ?

I've never heard of that one. Patent infringement, "unfair"
tactics like incuding a browser and media player, etc.

Where's a cite for this one ?

(Where's a cite for *anything* you claim that actually backs up
your opinion?)

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

+1

And while we're at it, a smile too.

 

[Big Steel]

I may. Or you can just ignore it. No one's forcing you to read
all these posts.

Do actually think I am reading all this crap? It's a very very small
portion of this junk I have read with men grabbing each other's man bras.

 

[Char Jackson]

In

That is because when something goes wrong, you are not observant.

Or it's because I'm not having any of the problems on any of my
systems that you're having on multiple systems.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

In

There is tons of stories on this issue alone, this is just one of
many.

HP Fixing XP SP3 Problems
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Desktops-and-Notebooks/HP-Fixing-XP-SP3-Problems/

Which of course, was NOT a problem with a Microsoft update - a MS
update may have uncovered it, but it was a problem with the way HP
delivered / imaged the systems. Quote from your article: "The main
problem, as Johansson and others see it, happened because HP, and
possibly other OEMs, used the same images for AMD-based PCs that were
used with Intel-based hardware." In other words, HP screwed up, not
MS. Another quote from your article: "This is not an AMD or Microsoft
issue," Graves wrote. "It's an issue of matching the correct software
image with the correct hardware."

If you screw up a machine, and a later MS update doesn't work right,
it is your fault, not MS. If the update didn't reveal the problem,
likely as not something else would have revealed it or would have gone
wrong. It was a ticking time bomb, just waiting to go off.

--
Zaphod

Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster: A cocktail based on Janx Spirit.
The effect of one is like having your brain smashed out
by a slice of lemon wrapped round a large gold brick.

 

[BillW50]

In DanS typed on :

Did you even read that article ?

Yes indeed. I also read about 2 dozen more articles on this very
subject.

I guess some people will blame MS for everything and the
weather, no matter whos *really* at fault.

Really? I don't see it that way. I routinely stick up for Microsoft a
lot. And this case is very interesting to me. As Microsoft routinely
does the same thing that HP was being blamed for. So does other
manufactures, IT departments, etc. Yet just blaming HP is really wrong.
So if HP is wrong, so is everybody else. But you don't see it that way,
now do you Mr. Dan?

You know Microsoft is supposed to beta test this stuff. Surely one of
the beta testers must of had an HP computer with one of those AMD
processors. What is that you say Mr. Dan? Microsoft doesn't have any HP
beta testers? Does Microsoft actually have any beta testers at all? If
they do, what computers do they test on? Maybe we should just buy the
types that Microsoft uses to beta test? That way those of us that uses
other computers won't have to beta test Microsoft's problems. ;-)

SIDE NOTE: This is the netbook by the way that doesn't have any room for
updates. And I checked the files and it is updated to December of 2007
and that is it.

 

[BillW50]

In DanS typed on :

Lawsuits brought on MS about Windows Updates ?

I've never heard of that one. Patent infringement, "unfair"
tactics like incuding a browser and media player, etc.

Where's a cite for this one ?

(Where's a cite for *anything* you claim that actually backs up
your opinion?)

How many years of computer experience do you have again? The list is
huge. DR Always accused Microsoft of updating Windows and breaking the
ability for DR-DOS to work with Windows for one. DR would fix it and
then Microsoft would update it again and break DR-DOS again. Also DR
accused Microsoft of later including MS-DOS into Windows 95 just to kill
of DR-DOS.

Netscape was another one always blaming Microsoft. In the early days
Netscape was the clear leader in the Windows browser market. And when
Microsoft updated Windows, interesting enough Netscape would break.
Netscape would fix it and Microsoft would update Windows again and break
it again.

GEOS, Norton, Quicken, AMD, and zillions of others would accuse Wintel
(Microsoft and Intel) of using updates just to break their competitors
products. All of this is all well known, been well documented, videos
made, lawsuits filed, etc. And you want cites? You are kidding right?
This is computers 101 stuff. Okay, well I could write a 700 page book on
this alone. So how many pages do you want me to cite? If you get
ridiculous, I'll have to charge you by the page. ;-)

And in Microsoft's defense. They generally blame their competitors of
cheating and using undocumented API calls which are unsupported and that
is why their products break when Windows gets updated. And the
competitors fire back that if they just used the API calls that they are
supposed too, their software would run so poorly that nobody would buy
it.

IMHO, there is a lot of truth on both sides of this issue. And it is
well documented that both sides don't play fair. And the PBS
documentarily: "Triumph of the Nerds: The Rise of Accidental Empires"
did a fair job of showing all of this.