Slashdot Mirror
Deploying Windows Updates?
WinBreak asks: "Well, I guess I'd be an 'IT Administrator' - but I work for a public library. The job consists of baby sitting 20-odd computers. The problem is, as a public library, we don't have much bandwidth - a simple 768K DSL line shared among everyone. It's good enough, for our normal traffic, and when people want to come in and do research (as long as there aren't too many kids on YouTube!). The problem comes when we need to do reformats and installs on machines. Most of our CD's for these machines are XP with Service Pack 1 - though we have a couple with Service Pack 2. For the SP1 CD's, we immediately deploy the SP2 Redistributable. But that still leaves OVER 100MB worth of downloads from Windows Update to go get. Our budget isn't great in the IT department, so spending money is not a great option - but I could sling together a grant proposal if need be. So how do others manage deploying a new install of Windows? Are we really expected to still download 100+MB per reinstall? Is Service Pack 3 on the horizon?"
"I've heard of programs that download updates to a server computer and distribute them through the network to clients, but that only worked for files released on Microsoft's Knowledge Base, if I recall correctly - not for all Windows Updates."
Why do you keep downloading them? Why not keep them in a central location? Put them on a server, or burn them to disc.
i use norton ghost. This is the best thing ever. you simply install windows, activate, install all updates/ drivers, create a pristine ghost image, and let the bugs (in your case public users) loose on it! It's not an expensive investment for your employer, or even you so that you can have some sanity back. That's my suggestion.
-nick
So, instead of MS' spyware, I have to trust some third party's executable software?
Don't get me wrong, autopatcher is a great idea and as far as I know there's nothing wrong with it, but seeing as their page is still under construction and I've never heard of them before, I'll abstain from using them except in a testing environment.
No sig
I was slipstreaming post XP SP2 to the Windows SP2 installation.
There are plenty of references about slipstreaming.
Yeah... good one.
Let me put your proposal in other terms:
Me: "My car is running rough."
You: "Buy another car!"
How about we make useful proposals to this guy before swapping out
all his technology.
It's sad when I trust a completely random website more than my OS vendor.
Start masturbating, I'm going to feed your troll:
If you don't have legitimate copies, Microsoft isn't your vendor. You get to sleep in the bed you made.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
In my opinion, delaying SP3 is VERY abusive.
Well yeah, but what eprcentage of people don't get Windows pre-installed? 1%? I don't see your point.
The buying market has matured; everyone I know buys from small white-box builders; they don't "get Windows for free".
The problem then was that the applications sucked compared to their Windows equivalents
there was the issue of games.
Most people don't use their machine primarily for games. For them, even after Microsoft stops selling XP in 2 years, they won't care. The few times they'll want to play a game they'll continue to use their old, outdated, "obsolete" copy.
you are making the big (and common) mistake of assuming that people have security at the top of their list when evaluating an OS or application
Other's don't even know what a browser is, let alone an operating sytsem.
They're a small minority nowadays.
Back when a computer cost $4,000.00, DOS was $50.00, a very small "added cost" - 1.25%. Fast forward to when a decent computer was $2000, Windows was $75.00, 3.75% - again, a very small "added cost", but creeping up. When Windows 95 came out, a decent computer was still a couple of grand, but now the OS had crept up to $100 - 5%. Still not enough "added pain" to make a real difference. 5 years ago, a decent computer was $1500, and XP Pro was an additional $150 - now 10% of the cost.
Today, you can slap together a computer that would eat the lunch of anything made 5 years ago for $500.00. XP is an additional 30%. Trow in the cost of a copy of Office, and you can buy a second computer instead. Go retail pricing and its even worse.
Microsoft has only 2 real profit centers - Windows and Office. Both products are long in the tooth, and it doesn't look like the next version of either is going to be offering any "must have" features. By the time Microsoft tries to force everyone to, by no longer offering XP (January, 2009), linux will be a lot further along than it is now. That's why Vista isthe beginning of the end as far as Windows is concerned. The competition continues to constantly improve, while Microsoft won't be offering much, if anything, new.
They know this. Hence their recent forays into WGA - to be able to remotely deactivate Windows when its no longer supported. Since they won't be supporting it in 2 years, they'll no longer be giving out activation codes if you have to re-install because of a hardware failure, a virus, or other reason. Of course, there are already ways of getting the latest updates without having to install WGA, and of permanently shutting off registration on naked installs; people who have to legitimately re-install are going to use them, and then say "F.U." to ever buying from Microsoft again.
We've already seen this happen once - the people who bought Millenium, then asked for a downgrade to Windows 98 because ME was crap, and were refused. How many of these people, who never pirated anything before, are running a pirated copy of XP nowadays because they feel Microsoft shafted them?
Its going to be the same with the end of XP. Microsofts' activation scheme is going to force them to "turn to the dark side" ... and we all know that "once you go black, you never go back".
I agree, most people look at things like this:
Ease of use means that they aren't going to upgrade to something that means they have to relearn everything - and XP to Vista is not going to score points in that department. Since they're going to have to re