Confused about todays updates

[BillW50]

In

Your unadulterated bullshit doesn't negate the *fact* that one should
update Windows. This is based on personal experience in fixing
hundreds of computers, many of whom believed -- like you do -- that
updates aren't necessary. They don't believe that anymore.

My experience is also based on hundreds of computers over decades.
Although unlike you, I started questioning the belief that always
updating is better than not. People have questioned this belief for
decades, including this famous quote:

"We're thinking about upgrading from SunOS 4.1.1 to SunOS 3.5." -- Henry
Spencer

And when both Microsoft and Asus forced me to ignore updates and all of
the warnings that silly people like you claimed that would occur, never
happened. So I did more scientific tests just in case this was just a
fluke and every experiment that followed came to the same conclusion.

 

[BillW50]

In

I don't know if *anyone* is but I do know that I have never had a
problem with updates since 95 on hundreds of machines

First, what updates did you install under Windows 95? As I have found
the original Windows 95 the best of the retail versions of Windows 95.

And second of all, you can't honestly really think we believe that you
actually have worked on hundreds of computers. And not one single update
ever broke one single driver or application? Boy there is a long list of
Microsoft competitors who would strongly disagree with you. As they keep
using the excuse that Windows updates break their software. They even
have been known to take Microsoft to court because of this belief. So
why is it you are so ignorant even about computing 101 stuff, Alias?

 

[BillW50]

In

I suspect your problem is that you don't know how to prepare for
updates. You certainly have a problem, though, that I'll grant you.

I suspect you make things up and hope it sticks. But okay Alias, let's
compare notes. Tell us how you prepare for updates and I tell you if we
do things differently. Although I seriously doubt it if it isn't
different than Microsoft's method.

 

[BillW50]

In

LOL!

And you think that is funny? How many do you think of the retail
versions was released?

You don't know how to prepare properly for Windows/Microsoft Updates
and you even use W/MU for drivers. <rolls eyes>

That would be wrong, unless you want to claim Microsoft's method is
wrong.

 

[BillW50]

In

You first or no deal.

Nobody I know believes you. As you just like to waste other people's
time.

 

[BillW50]

In

What are you afraid of? How do you prepare for Windows Updates or do
you set it to just update automatically?

Are you just a doofus? You blow off the long list of Microsoft
competitors who claim that Microsoft uses updates to break their
software. And there has been court cases over this. Yet you pretend it
just doesn't exist. And I knew you were too much of a coward to go
first. How I prepare is pretty standard.

1) Turn off AV

2) Turn off all disk utilities

3) Clear Internet history and cache

4) Update the drivers from the manufacture's website and not from
Windows update.

5) Let the Windows update itself without using the computer.

6) If asked to reboot, reboot and recheck updates again. Repeat until
there are no more updates.

 

[Big Steel]

On 1/1/2012 3:34 PM, Alias wrote:

<snipped>

Why does this have to be a 50 posts or more on BS between you two?

 

[Big Steel]

On 1/1/2012 4:02 PM, BillW50 wrote:

<snipped>

Why does this have to be a 50 posts or more on BS between you two?

 

[BillW50]

In

On 1/1/2012 4:02 PM, BillW50 wrote:

<snipped>

Why does this have to be a 50 posts or more on BS between you two?

Scientific evidence with updates and without, history of lawsuits
against updates, and experts about 25 years ago would say don't bother
if they don't pertain to you is all BS, eh Big Steel? Not to me, as this
is the real world.

 

[Big Steel]

In

Scientific evidence with updates and without, history of lawsuits
against updates, and experts about 25 years ago would say don't bother
if they don't pertain to you is all BS, eh Big Steel? Not to me, as this
is the real world.

Whatever, it's obvious that you are not on the planet Earth, and Alias
has got you by your nose.

 

[BillW50]

In

Whatever, it's obvious that you are not on the planet Earth, and
Alias has got you by your nose.

Hardly. Alias never answers the obvious and just blows it off. And if
not from this planet means looking at the obvious, then I'm guilty.

 

[Big Steel]

In

Hardly. Alias never answers the obvious and just blows it off. And if
not from this planet means looking at the obvious, then I'm guilty.

Yeah Update Messiah Bill from planet "Update" -- kind of like a Jim
Carrey's Fire Marshal Bill.

No need to get you started as you will run your mouth.

Later...

 

[BillW50]

In

Yeah Update Messiah Bill from planet "Update" -- kind of like a Jim
Carrey's Fire Marshal Bill.

No need to get you started as you will run your mouth.

Later...

What can I say except to repeat myself: "Scientific evidence with
updates and without, history of lawsuits against updates, and experts
about 25 years ago would say don't bother if they don't pertain to you
is all BS, eh Big Steel? Not to me, as this is the real world."

And apparently just like Alias, you don't want to tackle the real world
either. And you want to pretend those that do, are not from this planet?
Very interesting. After all, you ignore the scientific method and all
past history. So what do you do for an encore?

 

[MetalStorm©]

I don't know, why? Are you hurt you were left out?

i think the posts are by one person with a severe mental breakdown who
believes he is two people. updaes are your friends

 

[Big Steel]

I don't know, why? Are you hurt you were left out?

I know I am tired of watching you and Update Bill going at it. He's
gone, and you are right behind him.

 

[Big Steel]

i think the posts are by one person with a severe mental breakdown who
believes he is two people. updaes are your friends

You are an idiot.

 

[DanS]

In


I have heard for years that some outsiders claim that their
computers run better not updating. I also saw this a lot
being an IBM OS/2 Warp beta tester. Actually the beta test
was really going well and virtually no bugs. Everything
looked really promising. Then IBM released the gold version
and for some dumb reason, they changed zillions of drivers
without beta testing them. And the word was half of the
people couldn't even install Warp. I couldn't either from
CD, but I could from floppy. Something like 15 floppies or
something.

Later updates came out called FixPaks. Most of them broke
far more than they fixed. There was like 50 different
builds of these things in two years. And some bugs it had
taken them 2 years to fix. And out of 50 some builds, only
about 5 of them actually worked somewhat. This time span
was two years before Windows 95 to up to Windows 95. And I
was so sick and tired of OS/2 that I left it for good. It
won't even install on a drive larger than 512MB. As there
is a bug that it thinks there is less than 20MB there and
refuse to install.

Back then, Windows v3.1 didn't really have security patches
to speak of. And there was one update called v3.11 and that
was it. Windows 95 didn't have much updates either. There
were updated OEM versions, but not retail versions. And one
SP1 if I recall correctly and I didn't find that one useful
for most home users. As it fixed bugs that most would never
see anyway.

I don't recall much updates for Windows 98FE either. Except
that for a limited time, 98FE users could upgrade to 98SE
for about 10 bucks. Now I remember W98SE and ME of having
many zillions of updates like we have nowadays.

Having all of this experience, I was doing at least
security updates, as I believed they were a necessary evil.
But when I bought my first Asus EeePC back in '08 with only
4GB of SSD and XP SP2 installed. I had a new problem. That
SSD was soldered on the motherboard and you couldn't add
more. And if you tried to update it, you would run out of
space very quickly. And a computer with no disk space just
won't run Windows. So for the first time in my life, I was
forced by Microsoft and Asus to NOT to do updates.

I feared the worse of course. As without updates, this
computer would be a huge target for malware, right?
Strangely enough, it wasn't. As even this computer wasn't
getting any viruses, rootkits, etc. So after a year went
by, I have lots of other computers. Like two more EeePC
(these have upgradeable SSD), three Gateway MX6124, six
Gateway M465, three Alienware M9700, two Alienware M9750,
etc.

Having many of the same models and the same OS, I could
leave some without updates and some still being updated.


I don't normally test for performance and benchmarking with
and without updates since most of them don't seem to change
much. But I do test different CPUs and memory
configurations a lot. And the only really bad update for
performance was XP and going to SP2. I did that on about
five machines and all it ever did was to slow them down.
Although what works fine is to reinstall XP SP2 from
scratch. And that always worked wonderful. And I still feel
that XP should be at least up to SP2. Although I could test
the original XP without updates someday and see how well
that works.


What is there to cite? Most experts only do updates and
never test to see what happens if they don't. And very few
people actually take this on at all. So I believe that more
should be experimenting with updating and not. As data from
only a small handful doesn't qualify as much in the sake of
science.

I already know from my own experiments that the only
updates worth having are the ones that actually fix a
problem that you are actually having. But oddly enough,
that is what experts were saying about 25 years ago.
Experts today seemed to have forgotten this rule.

So, to summarize your thoughts.....

1) There were some bad updates for OS2 years and years ago.

2) Because of *this* experience, you barely ever update your
*Windows* PC.

3) You never mentioned any problems with MS Updates.

4) The reason you really started not updating was that an
EEEPC didn't have a lot of SSD space.

and 5) the only 'real' performance hit was to XP SP2, which
was expected, and one of my examples.

 

[BillW50]

In

So, to summarize your thoughts.....

1) There were some bad updates for OS2 years and years ago.

Some? More like many. :-(

2) Because of *this* experience, you barely ever update your
*Windows* PC.

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.

3) You never mentioned any problems with MS Updates.

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.

4) The reason you really started not updating was that an
EEEPC didn't have a lot of SSD space.

Yes and it is frozen in time. I believe it only has updates up to 2006
and that is it. I thought it would become a malware magnet and I would
have to constantly restore from backups. But that never happened. As it
is still running just fine like it did when it was new.

 

[DanS]

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).

Yes, I know Explorer is the desktop elements. I've written a
Windows replacement shell that completely replaces Explorer
(as the shell). I have very detailed knowledge of Windows,
going back to the early 90's.

(As a note for you to file. I've been
building/buying/installing/setting up PCs for 20 years now, as
well as programming in a multitude of languages, for different
purposes, for Windows PC platform, and for a variety of
embedded devices, ran an IT department for a few years, was
the lead in a couple statewide private wireless network
deployments....and so on...and so on...so all of my opinions
here are based on that 20 years of PC experience in many
different capacities, for both personal and professional
reasons.)

And then the desktop reloads
and some of the tray icons are gone, but still running.

And one little detail of that intimate Windows knowledge is
that if Explorer restarts, and there are missing tray icons,
that's not the fault of Explorer. It is the fault of the
program who's icon is displayed there.

When Explorer starts it's 'shell', it sends out a broadcast
message that all programs here: TASKBARCREATED
Each program that "hears" this message is then supposed to go
through the routine of adding its icon to the System Tray,
just like it does when the program starts after the shell is
instantiated.

The authors of whatever programs are at fault for not handling
that broadcast message.

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.

This could have been any number of reasons....like a faulty
Explorer extension, and not necessarily Explorer itself.

Yes and it is frozen in time. I believe it only has updates
up to 2006 and that is it. I thought it would become a
malware magnet and I would have to constantly restore from
backups. But that never happened. As it is still running
just fine like it did when it was new.

Of course it never happened. Did you d/l and install pirated
s/w running keygens/exe patchers directly in Windows? Or do
you surf for porn? Do you 'share' media through file-sharing
programs?

If you don't engage in activities that are typical ways of
infestations of one way or another, you won't get infected.

Are you saying that you subscribed to the notion that just
connecting a Windows PC to the internet that it will be
infected and virtually unusable in 10 minutes?

That's just more Windows FUD spread by people that should
*truly* be called Lintards.

(In the Windows history, I believe there was only one exploit
that only needed your PC to be connected, directly, and that
was the Sasser Worm that propagated through RPC. From what I
recall, this was the only time that could have
happened....infection through just being connected. I also
recall a patch coming out for that very quickly.)

 

[BillW50]

Yes, I know Explorer is the desktop elements. I've written a
Windows replacement shell that completely replaces Explorer
(as the shell). I have very detailed knowledge of Windows,
going back to the early 90's.

(As a note for you to file. I've been
building/buying/installing/setting up PCs for 20 years now, as
well as programming in a multitude of languages, for different
purposes, for Windows PC platform, and for a variety of
embedded devices, ran an IT department for a few years, was
the lead in a couple statewide private wireless network
deployments....and so on...and so on...so all of my opinions
here are based on that 20 years of PC experience in many
different capacities, for both personal and professional
reasons.)

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?

And one little detail of that intimate Windows knowledge is
that if Explorer restarts, and there are missing tray icons,
that's not the fault of Explorer. It is the fault of the
program who's icon is displayed there.

When Explorer starts it's 'shell', it sends out a broadcast
message that all programs here: TASKBARCREATED
Each program that "hears" this message is then supposed to go
through the routine of adding its icon to the System Tray,
just like it does when the program starts after the shell is
instantiated.

The authors of whatever programs are at fault for not handling
that broadcast message.

I have to check again, but I thought even Windows own icons disappeared
too. Such as the speaker and the wireless icon. I could be wrong and
I'll experiment with this again to make sure.

This could have been any number of reasons....like a faulty
Explorer extension, and not necessarily Explorer itself.

Regardless, no updates, no crashes. I don't think most users care who is
to blame. They just want it to stop. And not updating definitely stops
this nonsense.

Of course it never happened. Did you d/l and install pirated
s/w running keygens/exe patchers directly in Windows? Or do
you surf for porn? Do you 'share' media through file-sharing
programs?

If you don't engage in activities that are typical ways of
infestations of one way or another, you won't get infected.

I wouldn't say you can never get infected if you just follow the safe
rules. True it is harder to happen nowadays than in years past. But they
still can happen from time to time. The biggest threat following safe
hex procedures usually comes from zero-day vulnerabilities. Although
these can easily be stopped by sandboxes.

Maxthon Beats Microsoft to the Punch...
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Maxth...h+Creating+Barrier+to+Zero-day...-a0217026050

Are you saying that you subscribed to the notion that just
connecting a Windows PC to the internet that it will be
infected and virtually unusable in 10 minutes?

That's just more Windows FUD spread by people that should
*truly* be called Lintards.

(In the Windows history, I believe there was only one exploit
that only needed your PC to be connected, directly, and that
was the Sasser Worm that propagated through RPC. From what I
recall, this was the only time that could have
happened....infection through just being connected. I also
recall a patch coming out for that very quickly.)

Back in 2001 I used to say the very same thing. As a test, I installed
Windows 2000 on a test machine. Logged on to my ISP. Opened IE and went
directly to Windowss Update and updated Windows 2000. I didn't have a
firewall or router installed. I didn't reboot if asked to. Installed an
AV and scanned. And I found a BOT queried my IP address, found a
security hole in one of Windows ports, and slipped a virus on the hard
drive. And it was set to install once the user reboots. And the BOT
found and set it up for an infection on this test computer within 90
seconds of being online.

And not only know it can happen, but I proved it can happen. But in this
case, it can only happen if your computer responds to anybody and the
attacker was using a known (maybe only known to them) vulnerability. And
back then and earlier, this was very common with Windows and even with
Linux. In fact, it was fun to finger Linus Torvalds' computer in the
early days to see if his computer was online or not. ;-)