Digg this topic Add to my del.icio.us Submit to SlashDot 2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> The Return ov the Servicepacks
MedEvil
post Nov 6 2007, 02:32 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 1,372
Joined: 29-December 06
Member No.: 2,192



Remember some months ago when all of a sudden M$ made everyone take down their homegrown servicepacks?
Well they are back. Just stumbled across one, while looking for more information about the kaunch of the eeepc here in Germany.

(IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/cheers.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psc
post Nov 6 2007, 02:59 PM
Post #2


Guru
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 3,241
Joined: 14-July 06
From: Korschenbroich, Germany
Member No.: 3


Germany


QUOTE (MedEvil @ Nov 6 2007, 03:32 PM) *
Remember some months ago when all of a sudden M$ made everyone take down their homegrown servicepacks?
Well they are back. Just stumbled across one, while looking for more information about the kaunch of the eeepc here in Germany.

(IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/cheers.gif)


????
Please explain a little bit more.

Peter
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MedEvil
post Nov 6 2007, 03:28 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 1,372
Joined: 29-December 06
Member No.: 2,192



QUOTE (psc @ Nov 6 2007, 03:59 PM) *
????
Please explain a little bit more.

Peter

There use to be homegrown or pseudo servicepacks around. They were basicly a collection of all the little patches that M$ released since servicepack2.
Some months ago M$ forced everyone to take those packs down.
Now for some reason they seem to be up again.
I've seen one up at WinFuture.de.

(IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/cheers.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nuno Brito
post Nov 6 2007, 03:49 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 4,314
Joined: 13-July 06
From: Azores
Member No.: 1


Portugal


Do you mean AutoPatcher?


The story behind it being closed is a sad one - MS had the right to complain but it's frustating when they were in fact working for free in behalf of a microsoft issue and solving this major gap. (IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MedEvil
post Nov 6 2007, 04:55 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 1,372
Joined: 29-December 06
Member No.: 2,192



No i'm not talking about autopatcher specificly.
In case you didn't know, there were a bunch of those Updatepacks around.
From the top of my head, i remember at least 4 german ones.

(IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/cheers.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Moon Goon
post Nov 6 2007, 05:19 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Advanced user
Posts: 192
Joined: 1-August 06
Member No.: 95



Has anyone has any experience with unofficial service packs?

I've used an unofficial Win98SE service pack before with mixed results. My main concern is if the service pack will:

A: Interfere with installing a REAL service pack or
B: Show up in the Add/Remove programs (It would look bad for customers to see an unofficial service pack listed)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psc
post Nov 6 2007, 05:42 PM
Post #7


Guru
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 3,241
Joined: 14-July 06
From: Korschenbroich, Germany
Member No.: 3


Germany


I do not have experience with unofficial service packs.

But let me create a scenario:

I build a new company 'DistribServPacks'
I make a contract with a provider to have my own WEB page.
Whenever M$ publishes a new service pack, I mirror it on my site.

Good?
Because I do not have any incoming from my company, at least at the second bill of my provider I'm w/o of money.

Result: Sites offering an inofficial service pack have something else to survive. Maybe payed links, maybe they need a high Google rank for other pages, (maybe trojans?), ...
To reach this, the service pack offer is just a tool.
And it does not matter, whether the 'service pack' is a clone of the official supplyer, or it is built from several hotfixes collected anywhere in the WEB.

That is the reason for me, that I never download an inofficial service pack.

Currently XP SP3 is actual. Selected users of Microsoft Connect can download, but nobody else.
I think the SP3's offered in the WEB, are very dangerous, and I would never try.

As an Add-On
If my system is running well, why I should install the new SP with unknown benefits, but also with unknown troubles?

Never touch a running system!

Peter
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MedEvil
post Nov 6 2007, 06:13 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 1,372
Joined: 29-December 06
Member No.: 2,192



QUOTE (psc @ Nov 6 2007, 06:42 PM) *
As an Add-On
If my system is running well, why I should install the new SP with unknown benefits, but also with unknown troubles?

Never touch a running system!

In the software section you eighter get no listing or just the listing of the M$ fixes depending on which pack you use. Other things are of cause also possible, but i havn't seen it yet.
Those packs are nothing more than a collection of hotfixes, so you don't have to leech them over a modem for instance.
Some can be integrated into a source CD, some can only be applied to a running system.

As for, why use them, for the same reason people use M$ update service.

(IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/cheers.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paraglider
post Nov 7 2007, 12:32 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 170
Joined: 12-August 06
From: NC,USA
Member No.: 153


United States


Its one thing to bundle the publically available hotfixes as anybody can download them. However some of these collections were also including hotfixes which are only available by request from MS. I think it was this that resulted in the MS response.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nuno Brito
post Nov 7 2007, 12:56 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 4,314
Joined: 13-July 06
From: Azores
Member No.: 1


Portugal


QUOTE (paraglider @ Nov 7 2007, 11:32 AM) *
Its one thing to bundle the publically available hotfixes as anybody can download them. However some of these collections were also including hotfixes which are only available by request from MS. I think it was this that resulted in the MS response.


AutoPatcher is working on a new version that will download these public available updates from the MS servers - do you think it would be legal then? (IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
« Next Oldest · News · Next Newest »
 

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Fast ReplyReply to this topicStart new topic

Members Who Viewed Topic Today ()

 

Display Mode: Standard · Switch to: Linear+ · Switch to: Outline

Track this topic · Email this topic · Print this topic · Subscribe to this forum

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 9th November 2007 - 02:13 PM

MKPortal ©2003-2006 mkportal.it