AutoPatcher no longer allowed

[Steven P. Administrators]

Sometimes it's better to do what we really wouldn't like to do so that the complaint can be argued more effectively.

I hope no-one thinks we are abandoning the project without pursuing a clear explanation and route to compromise?

[Prince Charming]

I'm saddened, Autopatcher was a truly wonderful update tool. I do hope this gets resolved properly (MS change their decision), but I'm not really expecting it :(

[The2]

Release the buildprocess & source code to the public.

Then we can make our own builds and ?Soft can't stop it anymore.

Long live open source.

Release it on Codeplex....

LOL

[JayZJay]

Below is an excerpt from Neowin member "PsiMoon314" (Simon). If possible, I would also at least like see AutoPatcher (whether the name changed or not) continue to list the hotfixes and updates available for download and/or provide a way to download them direct from Microsoft.

"... There are other projects which list the hotfixes for download or automate the download of the hotfixes directly from MS servers for offline use. If this could be combined with the AP framework then we could still have a viable project.

Folks would need to download the hotfixes themselves however once this is done the AP framework could still be useful for installing the hotfixes offline.

I have PM'ed some of the AP team with my suggestions so we will see what will come of it. ... "

Furthermore, as others have stated, AutoPatcher could still be useful as a single source for installing other items such as Flash Player, etc.

[Ferret]

It's a shame about this - Can't wait to here Microsoft's reason's for this.

[halcyoncmdr]

This is a sad day... :(

[well...]

To all those who want MS to reconsider their decision to kill off AutoPatcher, please consider making a polite comment requesting they do so here

done, i doubt it will ever be read though...

[+M2Ys4U Subscriber¹]

done, i doubt it will ever be read though...

If you don't ask, you don't get

[zeroday]

To all those who want MS to reconsider their decision to kill off AutoPatcher, please consider making a polite comment requesting they do so here

Done. Hope they listen. :/

[4CxbqFxVnstmA Veteran]

Maybe it is too much to hope for, but Neobond said he received a 'call' from Microsoft. Has he got any official paperwork or anything from their lawyers? Could the whole thing be a hoax?

[Chosen One]

altho I dont use Autpatcher for vista, I have used it for XP many times on customers computers for installing updates and updates on my computers, Autopatcher is a GREAT tool and for Micro*hit to not want to endorse it is complete bs.They have their heads so far up their asses they dont know how to take them out...

[sycamore]

seriously this blows.. MS needs an admin. change over from every division section.

beCause they just seem to be holding their cocks dancing around camp fires....

Enough Said

Edited August 29, 2007 by sycamore

[120]

I'd understand if it was for piracy/wga reasons ... but for security reasons? don't know... the autopatcher was a project that benefitted MS imo.

Please explain how autopatcher benifitted MS.

[PrEzi]

(M2Ys4U @ Aug 29 2007, 17:09)

To all those who want MS to reconsider their decision to kill off AutoPatcher, please consider making a polite comment requesting they do so here

https://support.microsoft.com/common/survey...WS=mscomukform1

ok, here's what I've wrote... You could use it freely and modify as needed.

Hello

First of all - I always was a big fan of Microsoft and what was done in the Operating Systems field by that firm.

But I just can't imagine why did Microsoft lawyers did shut down the Autopatcher - project which was helping the community of Windows users since 2003.

It was always a big help for people with slow (or no) internet connection, and it has offloaded Microsoft's servers too doing it a big favour.

Many users don't want to spend additional time on downloading updates, please imagine a situation where a computer-repairs shop has let's say 4 or 5 full XP reinstalls a day and has slow internet connection.

Autopatcher did a great job there, where customers did get a fully patched genuine windows and were satisfied with stability and security of their OS.

Autopatcher didn't violate any laws - it was a collection of (free) patches which users could get by windows update or manual download from many hotfix sites.

Some of them required validation - Autopatcher didn't remove it !

I hope (yes I am!), that Microsoft - a company which always looked to satisfy customers and Autopatcher team could get things to work without shutting this great project down.

As a matter of fact - shutting it down will result in fewer OS'es, that are fully patched, stable and secure, which could result in a growin network of zombie-computers sending spam and trash anywhere.

Please also remember what a negative customers response did NVidia get, when they've attacked some sites, which produced customized, tweaked drivers.

And look how good response AMD-ATI gets on supporting such projects...

Please, think about it...

Regards,

-----------

[4CxbqFxVnstmA Veteran]

Please explain how autopatcher benifitted MS.

it saved them bandwidth, for one thing

[PrEzi]

Please explain how autopatcher benifitted MS.

Read my last post, and think about it.

Think also about how good is to have it in one click (offline) package for people which work at computer or software repairs...

[d4v1d05]

Team America Microsoft has once again ****ed off the entire world...

[gigapixels Veteran]

it saved them bandwidth, for one thing

Bandwidth is hardly a concern for Microsoft.

[brlmedia]

sad day, I reinstall XP frequently for testing and last count including IE7 there are over 80 patches that u need right after a clean install of XP. auto patcher was a great tool, here is hope something can be worked out.

thanks to the autopatcher team for there hard work over the years

I just d/l the latest version a few days ago too, bummer.

[tao muon]

Maybe this will help some people understand a few things. The following are my opinions based on a bit of legal research and theory as well as intelligent / informed 'guesses' or inferences. It is not meant to be either argumentative or interpreted in any way as 'hostile' towards anyone.

1) What grounds does Microsoft have to pursue this action?--- Updates distributed by Microsoft are intended and licensed for the end-user to apply to their system, and for system administrators to do the same for their network. Redistribution of the updates beyond the above scope is a violation of the Terms of Service(s) for the updates, hotfixes, patches and software. Also, since some of the patches are ones requiring contact with MS support for the download on a case-by-case basis, distributing these to people without MS customer support contact constitutes theft and the illegal distribution of copyrighted software.

2) How can / Why did Microsoft wait so long to initian this action?--- Statute of Limitations (laws limiting how long the government or other entity has to bring charges and indictments for a crime) specify a certain maximum period after which a crime is committed during which a case may be filed. Many states have limits of 3-5 years on theft, though some do not specifically mention theft, most have (a) clause(s) which group '...crimes otherwise not provided for...' within a certain period. Copyright infringement, which is the most likely basis for Microsoft's action(s) against Neowin, Autopatcher and others as enumerated in the Terms of Service mentioned above, has been legally interpreted as theft in many jurisdictions. Federal guidelines and many state guidelines also establish that this period commences from the date the crime is complete, not from when it first begins. What is the date the last copy of the software was distributed? The S.o.L. would begin from that date.

3) Why is Neowin accomodating Microsoft's cease-and-desist request?--- Though the action is being reviewed and the request is not yet legally binding, Microsoft has alleged the Autopatcher software is illegal. This makes discussing it- i.e.: it's use, redistribution and.or information about other locations to get it- a discussion of 'warez' (a violation of Neowin's own Terms of Service) as well as a possible violation of the Terms of Service mentioned above in part 1.

4) Why doesn't Microsoft endorse Autopatcher?--- Doing so would most likely incite a rise in customer support calls to Microsoft, and this could very well be the underlying motivation (with copyright violation being the means) behind Microsoft taking this action. Look at all the 'Autopatcher xxxxxxx'd my system when I installed update yyyyyyyy" threads around the Internet. Microsoft cannot control the method Autopatcher uses to determine what patch(es) need installed nor can it control the order they are installed in (which occasionally hoses systems)... nor can it contol whether a patch is installed or not (the basis for the Customer Support requirement for many of the patches)... now does it have the means to troubleshoot the problem in third party software. Just because a patch is released is not sufficient reason for everyone to have access to it, particularly if the installation of the patch has the distinct and likely possibility of doing so if it is installed on a system which is not affected by the problem requiring the patch.

5) Why doesn't Microsoft make it's own version of Autopatcher?--- It doesn't have to- it already offers most of the functionality of Autopatcher through Windows Update and Microsoft Update. Many of the updates available through Autopatcher are publically available from Microsoft. Yes this requires an Internet connection- but downloading Autopatcher and keeping it current does as well, or at least buying a lot of magazines. Many can be installed from Windows / Microsoft Update. Most of the updates are available from the Update Catalog for download to your computer for later installation. The remainder of the updates are either private, beta or require Customer Support authorization for download, but once approved, these can be downloaded for later installation. The primary benefit of Autopatcher is a 'one click, install everything' method of applying hotfixes and patches. Installing the patches from the Update Catalog is a bit more tedious but accomplishes the same end result. So, for now, download all of the Updatae Catalog patches, burn them and install them to your computers and take the disk with you when you have to go work on a computer without Internet access.

[DigitalE]

Such a shame :(

AutoPatcher was a great tool..

[AdzzzUK]

https://support.microsoft.com/common/survey...WS=mscomukform1

ok, here's what I've wrote... You could use it freely and modify as needed.

<snip> Good call, here's mine:

Hi there,

I write in response to the news issued today by the AutoPatcher team regarding your instruction to them to immediately stop work and cease allowing downloads of their AutoPatcher System.

While I appreciate that your decision will undoubtedly have a good basis, I feel I must write and request that you reconsider this decision.

As a Microsoft Partner and a fellow IT Professional, I have used AutoPatcher on many clients machines in the past. It is invaluable for me, and other IT Professionals, as it allows me to quickly patch fresh installations of Windows XP + SP2 to include all security upgrades and additional features (such as Internet Explorer 7 and Windows Defender) to new machines, in order to ensure that, when I return faulty machines back to their owners, I am able to be absolutely confident that their machine is fully patched and therefore as protected as can be when my clients access the internet.

Should the AutoPatcher facility be withdrawn permanently, this will seriously extend the amount of time taken to fix faulty computers, as I will have to download each of the updates via the Windows Update mechanism. While this isn't a problem in itself (apart from the amount of time that will be required), I feel that an offline mechanism that enables the updating of Windows PCs is absolutely essential in order for me to provide the quality service and speed of resolution that my customers are able to demand from me.

Please reconsider your decision, or make offline updating a possibility.

Thank you in advance,

[code65536]

5) Why doesn't Microsoft make it's own version of Autopatcher?

Because it already does. Sorta.

Microsoft already has tools to help with the deployment of updates in large IT environments: WSUS. Also, Microsoft offers ISO downloads that contain every patch (in every language) for that month's PT. And to address the problem of needing to download a pile of separate updates, Microsoft relies on service packs (SP3 is already in beta).

Of course, WSUS and the ISOs are not exactly comparable to AP, but the point is, they do have their own Microsoft way of catering to the IT segment (whether it's better or worse is beside the point).

[Jack 0Neill]

he added that Windows Update for pre-Vista versions of Windows can now be accessed using Firefox

I want proof, because as of this post it doesn't work with Firefox; so that's a crock.

[SamNeeds]

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.

The fact that its been around for so long and used by so many people, as well as being endorsed by multiple magazines and publications is surely proof enough that any malicious code doesn't and will not have (now that it has been taken down) made its way into the AP releases.

Just seems all a bit OTT.