-
- Want an iPad alternative? Wait for Android 3.0
- Neowin Hands-on: Windows Phone 7 review
- iPhone 4 hardware revision coming at the end o...
- Digg users fight back, sabotage main page
- Google's browser gets opt-in features via...
- Lenovo releasing a game console
- Paul Allen sues Apple, Facebook, Google and ei...
- AMD kills off the ATI brand name
Microsoft Ceases AutoPatcher Project
I had a call from Microsoft Legal this morning and they have told me that we are no longer allowed to endorse AutoPatcher on Neowin.
Microsoft will only allow updates to be downloaded from its own servers.
AutoPatcher started in 2003 and has been redistributed in some of the worlds best computer magazine cover CD/DVD's. I have no explanation for why Microsoft allowed it to continue unchecked for 4 years before making this decision.
I asked the representative if Windows Genuine Advantage had anything to do with it and he categorically told me this was not the case, he added that Windows Update for pre-Vista versions of Windows can now be accessed using Firefox and that the concern at Microsoft had more to do with the possible malicious code that could be redistributed with certified Microsoft updates.
We have no grounds to challenge the decision by Microsoft.
I'd like to thank the whole AutoPatcher team for their continued work, unfortunately none of the team is online, but they have been contacted via the AutoPatcher.com website by Microsoft Legal.
The AutoPatcher forums on Neowin have been disabled for guests and members.
Update: A Microsoft representative has told Neowin that he is looking into the matter and will try to get some answers. More to follow.
Link: Forum Announcement + Discussion
View: Announcement @ AutoPatcher.com
Comments (237)
sgtLENIN - 29 August 2007 - 09:17
I hate you MS.
12Iceman - 29 August 2007 - 21:12
You are not the only one who hates it when large companies abuse their power.
A message to the Neowin Administrators:
Microsoft doesn't own you. Stop acting like it does.
billyea - 29 August 2007 - 21:38
A message to the Neowin Administrators:
Microsoft doesn't own you. Stop acting like it does.
You're absolutely right, they don't. Microsoft owns the updates.
If AutoPatcher didn't distribute updates maybe we wouldn't be here wondering about this problem, but it does, and apparently some idiot in MS has a problem with it. Whether it's right or wrong is debatable, but it's MS' patches, it's MS' decision.
werejag - 29 August 2007 - 23:20
You're absolutely right, they don't. Microsoft owns the updates.
If AutoPatcher didn't distribute updates maybe we wouldn't be here wondering about this problem, but it does, and apparently some idiot in MS has a problem with it. Whether it's right or wrong is debatable, but it's MS' patches, it's MS' decision.
no its not their decision. they can not force the project to end. neowin should look at itself in disgust that they allowed microsoft to bully them.
the project should continue without Microsoft seal of aproval.
Sumeet - 30 August 2007 - 01:35
no its not their decision. they can not force the project to end. neowin should look at itself in disgust that they allowed microsoft to bully them.
the project should continue without Microsoft seal of aproval.
Okay werejag, you can pay the legal fees once neowin gets sued.
whocares78 - 30 August 2007 - 07:39
You're absolutely right, they don't. Microsoft owns the updates.
If AutoPatcher didn't distribute updates maybe we wouldn't be here wondering about this problem, but it does, and apparently some idiot in MS has a problem with it. Whether it's right or wrong is debatable, but it's MS' patches, it's MS' decision.
IT'S NOT REALLY DEBATEABLE oops sorry caps, legally MS can do as they want, they OWN the updates and can do what they want with them.
whocares78 - 30 August 2007 - 07:41
no its not their decision. they can not force the project to end. neowin should look at itself in disgust that they allowed microsoft to bully them.
the project should continue without Microsoft seal of aproval.
LMAO they can quite easily stop the project they own all the updates, if it is kept going they can be sued by MS and have to close the site down, all i can say is don't even try do battle with MS legal, noone ever seems to win especially in this case as autopatcher has absolutley no case
Andy1369 - 30 August 2007 - 08:08
A message to the Neowin Administrators:
Microsoft doesn't own you. Stop acting like it does.
I agree! I think we should rally against Microsoft and be strong. Don't let the big boys bully us little boys.
Neowin, I'm sorry, but I'm disgusted at the way you handled this. Shutting down the Autopatcher forums immediately, and shutting down the project. How do you think the people who were in charge of the project felt? All their hard work has been put to rest. The least you could do is stand strong and tell Microsoft, "we're sorry, but we won't let you bully us." At least keep the forums.
Together, we can come up with a solution to this. This isn't the end of the world. We're NOT going to let stingy Microsoft stop this terrific project!
*nods, determined*
+Examinus - 30 August 2007 - 10:50
Neowin, I'm sorry, but I'm disgusted at the way you handled this. Shutting down the Autopatcher forums immediately, and shutting down the project. How do you think the people who were in charge of the project felt? All their hard work has been put to rest. The least you could do is stand strong and tell Microsoft, "we're sorry, but we won't let you bully us." At least keep the forums.
Together, we can come up with a solution to this. This isn't the end of the world. We're NOT going to let stingy Microsoft stop this terrific project!
*nods, determined*
Let us know when you've finished your cape.
Unimatrix Xero - 29 August 2007 - 09:19
typical MS
DKAngel - 29 August 2007 - 09:19
ahh well they are right, welp sad day for all
toadeater - 29 August 2007 - 19:44
Why do you believe they are right? How is it illegal to maintain a local copy of updates? Does this mean every corporation that does the same is now also required to download updates solely from Microsoft each time they reinstall or add a new system? Does it mean that slipstreamed copies of Windows are illegal?
Microsoft should have released SP3 long ago, so users wouldn't have to make their own slipstreamed CDs or use tools like autopatcher.
DKAngel - 29 August 2007 - 20:57
Why do you believe they are right? How is it illegal to maintain a local copy of updates? Does this mean every corporation that does the same is now also required to download updates solely from Microsoft each time they reinstall or add a new system? Does it mean that slipstreamed copies of Windows are illegal?
Microsoft should have released SP3 long ago, so users wouldn't have to make their own slipstreamed CDs or use tools like autopatcher.
actually go do some research man eaheaheah, u can slipstream a cd using all the tools available from microsoft and there is nothing wrong with that, i just belive they are right cause it would be so easy for autopatcher to contain malicious code added from someone as it is mirrored in so many places it just isnt funny and u can still get updates just mean u have to get them from windows update doesnt stop u from keeping a copy of them
whocares78 - 30 August 2007 - 07:43
Why do you believe they are right? How is it illegal to maintain a local copy of updates? Does this mean every corporation that does the same is now also required to download updates solely from Microsoft each time they reinstall or add a new system? Does it mean that slipstreamed copies of Windows are illegal?
Microsoft should have released SP3 long ago, so users wouldn't have to make their own slipstreamed CDs or use tools like autopatcher.
read MS licensing restrictions i am sure you will find all the answers you want, but the truth is even if MS give somethign away for free it does not mean everyone else can, it's like if MS installed the free copy of acrobat in windows, they'd get their asses sued
RudyJ - 29 August 2007 - 09:20
I'm actually surprised MS let it go on for as long as it did.
Although it doesn't affect me in any way I can understand how that won't be the case for a lot of people.
Nighthawk-F117 - 29 August 2007 - 09:24
It was good while it lasted, but if only they'd told you before you spent months making the new version.
osirisX - 29 August 2007 - 09:27
The end of an era.
Ryan Hoffman - 29 August 2007 - 09:28
This really isn't surprising. Microsoft doesn't want it's updates being distributed by a third party, unless its through WSUS on a corporate lan. If there was Autopatcher for Mac OS X, Apple would probably do the same thing....
alucas - 30 August 2007 - 07:13
There is a flaw in that logic concerning Apple. Every few months Apple releases an all inclusive update to their OS so there is no need for an auto patcher. And even some of their minor security patches include all minor updates that have happened since the large update. Even Microsoft's Mac team is using this philosophy in their releases of Office. Their Office 11.3.5 update included SP1 (11.1.0), SP2 (11.2.0) and SP3 (11.3.0) and all minor updates came after them. My question is why doesn't the Windows team do this? it has been over 3 years since SP2 for XP came out. We need a new SP.
Like i said on the autopatcher.com website, all corporations should bill Microsoft for the waste of bandwidth that is being used for all PCs to be updated using auto updates. I work doing computer support for a satellite campus to a graduate university and our internet connection is bad on a good day, we have a 1.5Mbps connection but when all the students came in last night and tonight with all their laptops, the most recent MS updates just bogged down our network. There must have been more than 100 students each night and that I was getting a 32kbps download speed at times (that is worse than a 33.6kbps modem). You are talking 15kbps per laptop of shared bandwidth for each laptop if they were downloading MS updates. Maybe if Microsoft starts to see bills for use of bandwidth from a lot of companies, we might just see some changes around there concerning all inclusive updates.
Has anyone seen Microsoft's excuse for an "auto patcher? It is a 2.8GB iso file that only covered August 14th's security patches and includes patches for Vista, Vista x64, XP, XP x64, 2003, 2003 x64, 2003 iTanium, and all variants of Win 2000 in up to 36 different languages. It does not include any previous updates and does not include any of the Office security patches released that same day. I don't know about you, but at my work, we only support XP and speak only one language so why would we want to download this all inclusive patch for more than 10 variants of windows we do not use and in 35 languages we do not speak? Like I said, waste of bandwidth.
So everyone start calculating how much it costs to waste bandwidth updating windows their way and send your bills to Microsoft today.
Peter McGrath - 29 August 2007 - 09:32
wow - I didn't know Microsoft owned Neowin and controlled what was said on the forums~