Panacik Posted September 5, 2007 Share Posted September 5, 2007 DID YOU SAY TO MICROSOFT THAT UPDATES SHOD BE ON CD___ WAS WALL AS ON THERE WEB SITE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO DO NOT HAVE INTERNET I>E LIKE NORTON DO Well if i understand what you are saying correctly, then i am sure MS will NOT be sending out updates to everyone across the world for free each month. I am sure they would do this only at a large cost to the end user... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whocares78 Posted September 5, 2007 Share Posted September 5, 2007 DID YOU SAY TO MICROSOFT THAT UPDATES SHOD BE ON CD___ WAS WALL AS ON THERE WEB SITE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO DO NOT HAVE INTERNET I>E LIKE NORTON DO then you really don't care about patching, if your not on the net you really don't need to worry about security updates, how are they going to hack you, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shoki_D Posted September 5, 2007 Share Posted September 5, 2007 And next move from Microsoft will be that you could not install anything except their programs. And if you try to install Opera or something else your copy of windows automatic become unofficial and you need to buy new one. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panacik Posted September 5, 2007 Share Posted September 5, 2007 then you really don't care about patching, if your not on the net you really don't need to worry about security updates, how are they going to hack you, Thats a very valid point (Y) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven P. Administrators Posted September 5, 2007 Author Administrators Share Posted September 5, 2007 I would just like to throw my hat in and say, GREAT JOB AP team sorry to see it end this way!! That being said I would also like to take a moment and scorn Neowin for overreacting and taking down non infringing content like the forms. Grow a backbone and get educated about individual rights, the forms are free speech and taking them down is borderline censorship in my opinion.Now that that is out of the way I would agree with other posts about having some way to wrap or automate the downloads package and burn a cd or dvd. This would eliminate the infringing content issue. This program could be a shell that would allow the user to populate it with the needed files, burn or otherwise archive the files and allow the user to create the desired patch disk. Another option is to take the project offshore and host and manage the system from a non MS friendly country. I have seen other projects particularly with regard to cryptography do this in order to side skirt US export laws. Thanks again for providing a truly needed SERVICE something large companies have long forgotten about. I hope this is not the last we see or hear of it. This was a joint decision between Neowin and the AutoPatcher team after the effect. Just because we don't decide to be the small man going against the big bad Microsoft doesn't mean we don't have a back-bone, we have experience in these sorts of problems, about 7 years of experience ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Mat Posted September 5, 2007 Share Posted September 5, 2007 And next move from Microsoft will be that you could not install anything except their programs. And if you try to install Opera or something else your copy of windows automatic become unofficial and you need to buy new one. :p While thats unlikely to happen, it is definately an example of how stupid Microsoft can potentially be :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cme4pc Posted September 5, 2007 Share Posted September 5, 2007 (edited) ^ I don't think so. I'm really confused.... why would MS post a phone number to contact it's legal dept site for obtaining authorization to distribute hotfixes, patches, etc. and then deny such permission to an organization like AutoPatcher that has built in validation and security, plus the overall spirit of encouraging legitimate ownership of MS products (Windows and Office)? If MS won't officially authorize as worthy an effort as the AP Project, then for whom would such authorization be given????... I'm REALLY CONFUSED! There has got to be more to this than what meets the eye..... on the side - to further illustrate that the WGA issue is not the primary cause of AP receiving the C&D... Genuine checks pass when using a win98 computer to download any and all Win XP, VISTA or other OS components from the MS download site and/or technet.... true the components will not run on Win9X but that does not prevent users from ACQUIRING components that would be subject to WGA check online from MS update..... AP Shut down is NOT A WGA issue... in other words, there are this and other work-arounds that anyone can employ to obtain these components from MS whether a particular XP/Vista installation is licensed or not... I also wonder how many other projects for "roll your own" slipstream/auto updating mechanisms are also being sent C&D's from MS?.... This has been a well established practice with technicians and support personnel since MS necessitated patch managment by releasing vulnerable OS's into the marketplace. MS Creates a necessity by releasing defective / insecure OS's when exploited cause business/home users 100's of millions of dollars per year to remedy => MS Limits User Choice in dealing with the defects / vulnerabilities caused by its negligence.... does this seem RIGHT? Is this an isolated case or an indication that MS will attempt to shut down / license (w/fee) all alternative patch management systems in the market place?... How is MS supposed to escape the image of being a monopolistic tyrant that uses unfair trade practices to limit the freedom of choice for consumers to secure their systems as computer technology becomes an ever increasing necessity in our daily lives?..... Edited September 5, 2007 by cme4pc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazysah Posted September 5, 2007 Share Posted September 5, 2007 Can someone sum it up and tell me what exactly is going on besides Auto Patcher being shut down? Is it going any where? Any alternatives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borbus Posted September 5, 2007 Share Posted September 5, 2007 Autopatcher was distributed with BitTorrent and tracked off site. How can Microsoft stop people talking about it on Neowin. That's all that was really done on Neowin.. announcing new updates and talk about it. Surely this is just censorship? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgEnTsMiTh Posted September 5, 2007 Share Posted September 5, 2007 It boggles my mind how a lot of you think there is some censorship, conspiracy with neowin on this. It is plain and simple and a waste of time to explain it any better then Neobond has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farquard Posted September 5, 2007 Share Posted September 5, 2007 I don't think so. What an ignorant post. No more ignorant than the reply. If you disagree just say so, and provide your facts as to why you are correct. But do not call some one ignorant and not be prepared to defend your statement. I can provide proof as to my statement. I doubt you can do anything but make sarcastic comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimsland Posted September 5, 2007 Share Posted September 5, 2007 re the reply https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?show...#entry588815492 Actually I agree, that's why I always thought that AutoPatcher would be sold to MS (as the highly valuable asset it is) I just forgot about the possible (and now real) take down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meriden Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 I used to use autopatcher alot back in the day. But I don't bother now for Vista. Takes about 45 minutes to get all updates. But would'nt one of the main reasons MS stopped this is because people who pirate xp for example and cant validate their install, can use autopatcher to get said patches? Completely bypassing MS authentication?Not sure though. I have a "legal" installation of XP on my laptop. When I tried to update via MS updates recently, I was denied. Message was that I had an "illegal" copy of XP. I cannot relate how angry I was about that. Auto Patch saved me from the time it would have taken to straighten-out this problem. (ever talk to "help" from India? I have. Still talking to them about a problem about my phone bill, 2 months now) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalN. Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 this is going to suck, installing XP many times a day at work, having to visit windows update for everyone of those is going to be a pain in my ass, and a waste of bandwidth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarkar1985 Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 Atleast we have the latest August ones before they weere taken down.. we can use that and then goto their site and update. Sad day in the history of AP and this takes the **** Microsoft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whocares78 Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 And next move from Microsoft will be that you could not install anything except their programs. And if you try to install Opera or something else your copy of windows automatic become unofficial and you need to buy new one. :p i think you got MS and apple confused :) the scary thing is apple actually pretty much used to do this!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whocares78 Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 this is going to suck, installing XP many times a day at work, having to visit windows update for everyone of those is going to be a pain in my ass, and a waste of bandwidth. set up a WSUS server on your LAN it will at least save you download time adn bandwidth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gadean Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 set up a WSUS server on your LAN it will at least save you download time adn bandwidth This is not always as easy as it sounds. I was just out in Iraq (active duty, USMC) and some of our sites are isolated and bandwidth is costly and speeds are dirt slow. Text-only email is sometimes all they can handle. We use Ghost when making new images but when several months go by it was always so easy to copy and burn the latest and greatest Autopatcher to CD and send it off with the next convoy to the remote locations. Now we're faced with downloading each patch individually and installing each one by hand? We have better things to spend our time with!! :angry: It makes no sense to me that MS would cease the Autopatcher project. This is nonsense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfree81762 Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 This is not always as easy as it sounds. I was just out in Iraq (active duty, USMC) and some of our sites are isolated and bandwidth is costly and speeds are dirt slow. Text-only email is sometimes all they can handle.We use Ghost when making new images but when several months go by it was always so easy to copy and burn the latest and greatest Autopatcher to CD and send it off with the next convoy to the remote locations. Now we're faced with downloading each patch individually and installing each one by hand? We have better things to spend our time with!! :angry: It makes no sense to me that MS would cease the Autopatcher project. This is nonsense! I agree 100%. Ever try to test out a new laptop when the LAN drivers haven't even been writen yet? Kinda nice if the OS is updated for field testing. Or when ASUS had great nVidia LAN drivers for their CSM mobos? When I first started doing OPK images our system-builder rep told me to d-load all the patches and compile them into a silent install batch script. Looking into the AP modules they are, what? Silent install command lines that detect if they've been installed already? What kind of double-standard is MS trying to do? Part of me misses the hard-core R&D but mostly I'm glad I took a break from it-mainly cause of mistakes like this. Will keep lurking on AP forums to help bring AP back where I can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matrix XII Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 Good post gadean! Maybe the US military will throw some weight around hehe :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luky Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 Its simple! Microsoft want recognition and traffic to their website. Also, AutoPatcher is the most common way to get updates on an illegal OS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whocares78 Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 Its simple! Microsoft want recognition and traffic to their website. Also, AutoPatcher is the most common way to get updates on an illegal OS. umm doubt it, i am sure they get more than enough traffic, i think your second point is the real reason behind all of this, not sure if MS still do the security rollups, i know they used to, you may all want to look into that? i had a quick look and it appears they stopped after security update1 for XP but i didn't look that hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panacik Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 Also, AutoPatcher is the most common way to get updates on an illegal OS. Urm since when? It has been said many times before in this thread... AP will check your machine to ensure it is genuine with the MS tool and only then will install the updates. AP will not "bypass" any security on the machine and install the patches regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Mat Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 this is going to suck, installing XP many times a day at work, having to visit windows update for everyone of those is going to be a pain in my ass, and a waste of bandwidth. Even when you install Windows XP with service pack 2 you have to download well over 100mb and sometime 150mb of updates to ensure that your new install is fully updated and secure. And what about if you only had a original XP CD to use - surely it would take you over a day to get your computer updated. This is not only a tremendous waste of bandwidth but it takes time and effort to ensure that they all get installed correctly, and to keep an eye on the status in case the update freezes. Autopatcher was a simple way to update your computer with minimum fuss and with only a few mouse clicks. Surely this rash action will only anger people and give them another reason to be annoyed with Microsoft. If they really wanted to keep the community spirit up then surely they would not take such drastic measures to control their updates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xline Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 MS it's always like this, frist they seen ppl get used to update their OS then, they get thet source of so that they all must use ms as as source... i'm not a Windows user for 8 wonderfull eyars, I like to use a decent software wen i work. they say it's securuty, I say that they sould get some secure programing lessons. as long as theirs ppl online with time an knolege things can be done.... allways for good of bad. you can allways do the same i did lol chanded to a decent OS. *NIX ROCKS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts