Lover of quiet computers Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 In the latest newletter, Scot said In general the changes to Automatic Updates are a good idea. Some businesses may not want Automatic Updates to be quite so automatic, but on most consumer desktops, this is the correct setting.My previous understanding was that it was a bad idea to allow all updates to be installed, because some of them cause more problems than they solve. What gives? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackR Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 Automatic Updates are a good idea for people who have no clue about the going of their computers, and do not engage in any maintance or followups. I.e. they just keep using the Internet, Word processing, and few other applictions. Better than nothing is usually a Good thing.For every body else! :devil:Edit: Might be also good for IT people who have total solid grip on their system (i.e. employees do not install anything without their consent).Provided there is a Bona Fide discloser by the updater about the nature and exact content of the updates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nlinecomputers Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 I would tend to agree but the MSBlast virus just proved that the average user is too ignorant/lazy/stupid (pick one) to be even aware of the various patches let alone determine if they need it or not. It light of the inaction by the great majority of Windows users the defaults should be set to on. Yes some may be burned by a bad patch but more of them will be protected then not. We techs and geeks that are in the know can turn the feature off.http://www.n-linecomputers.com/modules.php...order=0&thold=0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havnblast Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 In the latest newletter, Scot saidIn general the changes to Automatic Updates are a good idea. Some businesses may not want Automatic Updates to be quite so automatic, but on most consumer desktops, this is the correct setting.My previous understanding was that it was a bad idea to allow all updates to be installed, because some of them cause more problems than they solve. What gives? Use your own judgement is what I say. Always nice to hold off a couple days on the updates to get reports of it causing problems or not. Like nlinecomputers said - Blaster was warned and warned, plastered everywhere for people to install the patch and it' still out there today, systems still not patched. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corrine Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 I like knowing when there are new updates but I want to decide what gets installed on my computer and when. After all, it is MY computer!Speaking of Blaster, Microsoft publishes program to blast MSBlaster Microsoft released a removal tool for the MSBlast worm on Monday after Internet service providers complained that home users' PCs infected with the malicious program are still causing network congestion.The MSBlast worm, also commonly called the Blaster worm, started spreading last August and is believed to have spread to hundreds of thousands of systems. While most corporations have cleaned up the worm, Microsoft has found that a large number of home users are still unknowingly infected, the software giant said in a statement. Download for Blaster Tool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_P Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 After all, it is MY computer!But you're only leasing the OS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 I like knowing when there are new updates but I want to decide what gets installed on my computer and when. After all, it is MY computer!Speaking of Blaster, Microsoft publishes program to blast MSBlasterMicrosoft released a removal tool for the MSBlast worm on Monday after Internet service providers complained that home users' PCs infected with the malicious program are still causing network congestion.The MSBlast worm, also commonly called the Blaster worm, started spreading last August and is believed to have spread to hundreds of thousands of systems. While most corporations have cleaned up the worm, Microsoft has found that a large number of home users are still unknowingly infected, the software giant said in a statement. Download for Blaster Tool I agree Corrine. It is a shame that Microsoft has gone to rentware.BTW: I prefer to use Steve Gibson's tools for such things:GRC.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rons Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 Two sided sword! I always wait a few days to see what happens. I figure if no one here is yelling, kicking or screaming about a bad patch.......then it MAY be OK to install. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stryder Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 Automatic updates, A good idea?For some, yes. Personally, I do not let ANYTHING update on its own on my network. I have a dedicated maintenance routine that I NEVER alter from. The problem is that the vast majority of computer users don't. They either do not care, are uneducated in the responsibilities of owning a PC or they are just plain lazy. I kind of compare it to the vast majority of car owners. All they want to do is put gas in and go. They do not want to hassle with the upkeep and routine maintenance. As long as they turn the key, it starts and takes them where they want to go, that is good enough for them. They only take care of problems AFTER the car breaks down and leaves them stranded. But if they only would of done the routine maintenance the vast majority of breakdowns would not have happened in the first place. So for some folks Automatic Updates can be a good thing. Be it for Windows Updates, virus defs, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corrine Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 But you're only leasing the OS. I disagree. The way I look at it, I didn't sign any lease agreement, rather I purchased a licensed copy of the OS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corrine Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 I agree Corrine. It is a shame that Microsoft has gone to rentware.BTW: I prefer to use Steve Gibson's tools for such things:GRC.com I also prefer Steve Gibson's tools. The way I look at it, if the FBI is going to recommend Steve, I'm going to trust him. (An FBI agent who deals with computer crime spoke at a Company Security Conference & said a lot of nice things about Steve & his site.) \Besides, it took M$ much too long to come out with a fix. Steve has had a fix for ages and Lavasoft added a fix. M$ would have been better off providing a link to GRC.com months ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_P Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 But you're only leasing the OS. I disagree. The way I look at it, I didn't sign any lease agreement, rather I purchased a licensed copy of the OS. Try putting your copy on multiple pcs. Give your copy to your kids. Sell the cd to a friend. Oops, sorry, not allowed, those things violate the license that you agreed to when you either opened the package or installed it the 1st time. Sort of a "digital" signature rather than a written one. Now if you buy a book you can read it, your family can read it, you can sell it or do whatever you what with it. That you own. I'm not saying that I agree with this policy, just that this is the way it is. My personal preference is the way it use to be in that you buy the OS and could use it on as many pcs as you owned. That seemed fair and reasonable to me. How to prevent someone from sharing the OS with everyone in the whole dorm I don't know but the current imposed limitations work in that regard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_P Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 Besides, it took M$ much too long to come out with a fix.!!!!! MS had the fix out two months before the virus hit. What was missing is the pc owner's incentive/ knowledge/ habits/ trust/ experience/ or in some cases the faster bandwidth to install the update. Unfortunately that same inertia will stop people from installing SP2.Rather than license software I think we should license pc usage. You can't drive without a license, you shouldn't be able to use a pc without one either. Part of the licensing program would be to educate the users about viruses, spyware, SPAM, viruses and performing regular updates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nlinecomputers Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 Now if you buy a book you can read it, your family can read it, you can sell it or do whatever you what with it. That you own.Not that I like proping up Bill Gates but that arguement is pure bull. When you give or loan someone a book you have no ability to read the book at the same time as the person who now has the book. When you give someone software almost allways you COPY it. You keep a copy and your friend gets a new copy(from you.) Now if I only make money from selling copies of my work then how do I make any money on that? Software isn't books. They are tools like a car engine is a tool. Every computer needs software to do anything. Just like a car needs an engine to move down the block. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_P Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 Automatic updates, A good idea?For some, yes. Personally, I do not let ANYTHING update on its own on my network. I have a dedicated maintenance routine that I NEVER alter from. The problem is that the vast majority of computer users don't. They either do not care, are uneducated in the responsibilities of owning a PC or they are just plain lazy. I kind of compare it to the vast majority of car owners. All they want to do is put gas in and go. They do not want to hassle with the upkeep and routine maintenance. As long as they turn the key, it starts and takes them where they want to go, that is good enough for them. They only take care of problems AFTER the car breaks down and leaves them stranded. But if they only would of done the routine maintenance the vast majority of breakdowns would not have happened in the first place. So for some folks Automatic Updates can be a good thing. Be it for Windows Updates, virus defs, etc. I totally agree. Excellent analogy. I think the reason the vast majority of computer users don't perform maintenance is they are uneducated in the responsibilities of owning a PC. Anyone with a credit card, or parent, can get a pc. We don't allow anyone with access to a car to drive without a license, the same should be applied to pc usage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_P Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 Not that I like proping up Bill Gates but that arguement is pure bull.I know but it was the best I could come up with at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.