Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Releases Replacement Patch With Two Known Bugs

snydeq writes Microsoft has re-released its botched MS14-045/KB 2982791 'Blue Screen 0x50' patch, only to introduce more problems, InfoWorld's Woody Leonhard reports. "Even by Microsoft standards, this month's botched Black Tuesday Windows 7/8/8.1 MS14-045 patch hit a new low. The original patch (KB 2982791) is now officially 'expired' and a completely different patch (KB 2993651) offered in its stead; there are barely documented revelations of new problems with old patches; patches that have disappeared; a 'strong' recommendation to manually uninstall a patch that went out via Automatic Update for several days; and an infuriating official explanation that raises serious doubts about Microsoft's ability to support Windows 9's expected rapid update pace."

140 comments

  1. Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And people still come up to me and say they can't use free software cause they need enterprise-grade quality

    1. Re:Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      When free software comes with a sea of bugs without often no one taking responsibility of fixing them, I can understand those people's arguments. If we look at Linux desktop, usually the GUI does not stay in one piece, and is full of little glitches here and there. Compared to that, these Microsoft patches are a very minor worry.

    2. Re:Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      BSoD, boot failure... yeah very minor compared to GUI imperfections... pinhead. And i wonder which linux desktop you're talking about or are you still in 2007? Linux Mint to say one is very sound, functional and elegant.

    3. Re:Oh microsoft by lippydude · · Score: 0, Troll

      It's understandable why you would post anonymously ..

      "When free software comes with a sea of bugs without often no one taking responsibility of fixing them, I can understand those people's arguments. If we look at Linux desktop, usually the GUI does not stay in one piece, and is full of little glitches here and there. Compared to that, these Microsoft patches are a very minor worry."

    4. Re:Oh microsoft by thieh · · Score: 2

      What enterprise-grade quality?

    5. Re:Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just the other day I read here that Linux Mint is a poor distro when talking about Linux being ready for primetime on the desktop, and that more robust distros like Ubuntu and Red Hat should be used.

      Make up your damned minds!

    6. Re:Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. I'm kind of tired of the "you are just using wrong distro" argument. Today it seems to be the easy way out when someone mentions about problems. There is no clear consensus about a robust desktop Linux distro anyway. They all seem to have their share of problems.

    7. Re:Oh microsoft by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Well if you read it in a post on Slashdot it must be true! No shills ever post here and try to spread misinformation about Linux! Well, er, I mean, you're the only one.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    8. Re:Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

      If you could read you would realize he said misinformation, not pro-linux.

    9. Re:Oh microsoft by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 0

      And as you agree by your own admission, they never spread misinformation about it :-)

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    10. Re:Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The free software desktop's problems are a lack of polish. Microsoft's problems are outright neglect.

    11. Re:Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that your argument is nothing but semantics, right? ...right?

    12. Re:Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Fair enough, then I remove the first sentence of my comment. But I still believe that the word "shill" is thrown around a bit too much here.

    13. Re:Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Posting AC for obvious reasons, but....

      My main account was paid for by Microsoft, and they send me $400 a week to post pro-Microsoft stuff. I am paid directly by Waggener Egstrom.

    14. Re:Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What enterprise-grade quality?

      Software from a billion dollar plus company, which required a PO large enough to justify firing the person who approved it, not just the one who implemented it.

      If MS F's up, you can blame them as they yell at you to fix it. If your cobbled together, zero budget, but works 99% of the time solution fails, then it is 100% on you.
      It is completely unfair, but that's the way it is. If the Oracle DB blows up in a patch, you can point to not having a 2nd instance to use as a test system. The finance guys can point to the lack of an extra $100k to spend on a test system and the CEO can blame Oracle/budget to the board.

      If the same issue occurs on mysql, everyone points at you and you alone, since you could have just set up a second system for cheap - never mind that that would double the admin/patch/test time with no corresponding increase in headcount.

      Pendants: This is done in serial, not parallel, otherwise you are not staging it properly to test it.

    15. Re:Oh microsoft by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've written enterprise software, used by large banks and other corporations. Our software was so bad, I couldn't understand how it would help anyone, I'm sure the people who used it were slowed down by the process.

      Finally I realized they did get one thing from it: accountability. If you've never been there, it's hard to understand how corporations are shaped by SOX compliance, and general accounting problems. If a $2000 purchase disappears at a startup, it's a minor problem. But at a large company, accountants will be looking for weeks to find what happened to it.

      Those are the kinds of issues large companies deal with, and removing the accountability of the decision making process (of figuring out what software to use) and giving it to Microsoft is a real service for them. This is the same reason people use RedHat, even though RedHat gives their software away for free. It is one of those things that makes no sense to you until you've worked in that kind of environment.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    16. Re:Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually, I tend to see IT departments making the argument that 'they need enterprise grade quality' when wanting to avoid Microsoft, these days. Such arguments _against_ open source software vanished years ago in my line of work, mostly when it became patently clear that job security for upper-mid level managerial mediocrities was not really achieved by being able to pay someone you can blame for IT failures. The more competent examples of upper management don't buy that argument any more. They actually want IT executives who can get problems fixed, not a pay to blame someone else culture, or outsourced crap that costs massive amounts to customise.
      At least when you have a problem with open source code, you can get it fixed, assuming it hasn't already been fixed upstream.
      It only takes one competent developer to fix almost any problem, given a few days, and a willingness to communicate with the upstream developers if there is a need. I know. I have done that job on occasion, and I don't regard myself as a world class, or genius developer. It takes only some time and persistence.
      Anyone who has ever tried to get ANYTHING fixed in a Microsoft product will know how hard it is to even get acknowledgement of a problem, let alone a fix for it.
      There is not even a proper public bug tracking system. How can you do business with such a company? How can you know the status of your problem, and when/if it will ever be fixed?
      Fixes to Microsoft products also don't tend to get released out of cycle, unless they are critical. If you really want enterprise grade quality, look at what large financial institutions, massive cloud sites, or scientific users employ. It certainly isn't Windows in mission critical systems. Look at Microsoft's own showcase deployment in such an environment, at London stock exchange, as published in Microsoft's tongue and check 'Highly Reliable Times' adverts. It had unacceptable latencies, and inevitably failed completely, in an embarrassing catastrophe, leading to a Linux migration.
      Yes, open source software has plenty of bugs, but compared to its commercial equivalent, the quality difference is evident under load, and in complex configurations, where if something goes wrong with Windows, traceability/logging/debugging becomes a positive nightmare of opaque, undocumented, and un-debuggable, and often monolithic monstrosities. Add to that the fact that Linux or UNIX admins or developers also tend to be better at fault finding, in part due to a background in cross platform technologies and system integration, and you have plenty of clear incentive to make the sensible choice, and that is ignoring the obvious saving in license costs, which alone I wouldn't suggest should be the primary motivator in this kind of decision making.

    17. Re:Oh microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A year ago I switched from Windows 7 to Ubuntu Linux, I've never had any problems - just smiles all around on my side.

      My friend upgraded from Windows 7 to Windows 8. He had so many issues, and eventually when back to 7. I will not repeat his words of utter disappointment in Microsoft, here in polite company.

    18. Re:Oh microsoft by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      That is because that bullshit excuse is soooo damned old it has its own meme .

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    19. Re:Oh microsoft by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      There is no accountability. With very few exceptions, software companies disclaim all responsibility or accountability.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    20. Re:Oh microsoft by kwbauer · · Score: 1

      Okay, we won't refer to it as misinformation. We will call it misleading information or not the whole truth information or rose tinted information instead.

    21. Re:Oh microsoft by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      There is no accountability.

      That's not important. Really.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    22. Re:Oh microsoft by lippydude · · Score: 1

      Excuse, me while I reply anon and mod you down :)

    23. Re:Oh microsoft by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Oh, I know that. It depresses me.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    24. Re:Oh microsoft by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  2. Never useful info given with patches by RenHoek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What pisses me off as a consumer is that Microsoft patches never come with any kind of useful information.

    "There are X patches available", and when you click a specific patch you get "This is a stability patch for Windows 8" or something generic like that.

    How can a consumer make an informed decision to go ahead and install patches or not without hours of looking up KB numbers?

    I'd like more info, so that unless a patch specifically fixes a security bug, I'd rather leave the rest of the patches uninstalled as long as my system runs ok.

    1. Re:Never useful info given with patches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Click on the update and you should see a 'More Information' link on the right. Click it and your browser should open to a MS knowledge base page that explains what the patch does.

    2. Re:Never useful info given with patches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What pisses me off as a consumer is that Microsoft patches never come with any kind of useful information.

      "There are X patches available", and when you click a specific patch you get "This is a stability patch for Windows 8" or something generic like that.

      How can a consumer make an informed decision to go ahead and install patches or not without hours of looking up KB numbers?

      I'd like more info, so that unless a patch specifically fixes a security bug, I'd rather leave the rest of the patches uninstalled as long as my system runs ok.

      I completely agree, but that is a problem only shared by very few Windows users. A vast majority of users aren't going to care about anything more than "This is a stability patch for Windows 8". Most won't even care about that, they just install without reviewing.

    3. Re:Never useful info given with patches by MrL0G1C · · Score: 4, Informative

      You beat me to it, this page is what we need:
      https://technet.microsoft.com/...

      But of course that info should be right there on the windows update window.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    4. Re:Never useful info given with patches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because they trust the MS guys must be right in deciding those are the patches needed to actually fix or improve their systems.

    5. Re:Never useful info given with patches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the dreams of a certain mega-corporation consumers only salute, say yes sir and happily apply whatever crap that same corporation graces them with.

      Actually most of the consumers I know almost never bother installing upgrades, patches and the like. They only consume.

    6. Re:Never useful info given with patches by MobyDisk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How can a consumer make an informed decision to go ahead and install patches or not without hours of looking up KB numbers?

      Consumers don't make such decisions. If you want that level of control over your OS, don't use Windows. This isn't a knock against Windows or anything: it's just part of the closed-source model. You trust them. If they do a good job, then it saved you effort. If they do not, you get burned. That is the trade-off.

    7. Re:Never useful info given with patches by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Most won't even care about that, they just install without reviewing.

      I doubt it's much different in other platforms. Mac OS or Android or Linux. When there is an update, most people don't have the time to carefully go over what it's doing. Nor should they.

      When the plumber comes to my house, as he did yesterday, all I care about is that the hot water is coming and the toilets flush. I don't crawl under the sink to see if he properly greased the pipes or whatever the hell it is plumbers do.

      I have met people who work for Microsoft and Apple and they are neat and earnest and are by all appearances proper and trustworthy citizens. I've also met people who contribute to open source OSs. They look like the guy who stands on the on-ramp with a sign asking for change. A little bit dangerous with greasy hair and a a psychotic glimmer in the eyes.

      I'm kidding of course, and just tweaking people who use Linux (like myself), but as Eclipse (played by Frank McRae) said to Sylvester Stallone upon his imprisonment in the classic American film Lock Up, "You gotta trust somebody. Let me hip you to the joint."

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    8. Re:Never useful info given with patches by westlake · · Score: 1

      What pisses me off as a consumer is that Microsoft patches never come with any kind of useful information.

      "This patch makes Windows 8 a little more stable." states its purpose clearly and simply.

      The link to the KB --- which is always there --- implies a deeper understanding of the OS than most users are likely to have or need.

      It won't make their decision to install the patch any easier.

    9. Re:Never useful info given with patches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Over the next few days after the release of a patch the KB links in the patch information window point to the actual documents instead of 404.

    10. Re:Never useful info given with patches by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But of course that info should be right there on the windows update window.

      It was there in WinXp.
      Microsoft seems to think that dumbing down all their user interfaces = the future of computing.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    11. Re: Never useful info given with patches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same on android or whatever. Updated Chrome and lost a couple of UI things I was used to. This is just the **** with luser-friendly updates, they don't work. Automatic or non descript patches should be for serious security issues or bugs ONLY.

    12. Re:Never useful info given with patches by msobkow · · Score: 1

      It has nothing to do with "closed source." Show me what info is available when you do an "apt get upgrade". :P

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    13. Re:Never useful info given with patches by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      When you click for more details it tells you to visit a web page. Then on that web page, full of long boilerplating, there is some description. Useful description, but it takes you enough time that to follow that patch for every update is a tedious chore. It would indeed help if the patch description said something more useful than "stability pach" or the name was something other than "KB11878723".

      I think the rationale is that either the interns it would take to do this minimal work are costing too much, or they want customers to blindly install everything shoved at them.

    14. Re:Never useful info given with patches by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The thing is that most of those stability patches are no such thing. They are for cards you don't have on your computer, for a product you don't use, and in some cases have nothing to do with stability but instead added new features.

    15. Re:Never useful info given with patches by Darinbob · · Score: 0

      Apple pops up a notification (more annoying than Microsoft actually) that says "install these patches now or later?", and you have to click and open up before you can even see what you're clicking "now" or "later" for. Then it turns out it's just something stupid like itunes. So I ignore it. Then a few days later it repeats. Then a few days after that. And so on. It's basically the apple store window, even though I have zero software anywhere on or in the vicinity of the mac that even saw that store. So yes, I am indeed crawling under that sink to see what shit the plumber left there.

      At least be glad microsoft isn't merging their updates and patches with their store.

    16. Re: Never useful info given with patches by macs4all · · Score: 2

      Apple pops up a notification (more annoying than Microsoft actually) that says "install these patches now or later?", and you have to click and open up before you can even see what you're clicking "now" or "later" for. Then it turns out it's just something stupid like itunes. So I ignore it. Then a few days later it repeats. Then a few days after that. And so on. It's basically the apple store window, even though I have zero software anywhere on or in the vicinity of the mac that even saw that store. So yes, I am indeed crawling under that sink to see what shit the plumber left there. At least be glad microsoft isn't merging their updates and patches with their store.

      While I must admit I liked the old Software Update system a bit better, overall I still find Microsoft's free-for-all pop ups during boot up to be far more annoying than the Growl-like notifications in OS X. For one thing, OS X NEVER says "I'm rebooting your system in x seconds" like Windows does, leaving you to scramble around to ask PERMISSION from your own computer to DELAY the Reboot.

      BTW, Apple isn't "mixing their software updates with the App Store"; they are just using the same secure distribution method. It's not like they dump you at the front door of the App Store, hoping you'll get distracted by teh Shiny and buy something. And frankly, for the few apps I have that I have purchase through the Mac App Store, I kinda like the fact that their updates are announced/distributed in the same way, rather than having the Windows method of having the blizzard of pop ups each time I boot. With the OS X system, it's only ONE pop up, which can simply be dragged off the edge of the screen to dismiss.

      By the way, you can customize plenty of things about how Updates and their notifications happen (or don't)

    17. Re: Never useful info given with patches by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I turned off Microsoft's automatic updating and such, after the first mistake. I've rarely seen any popups. I don't know what setting I have that enables/disables them. I never see anything on boot except for the ongoing patches that started when I shut down.

    18. Re:Never useful info given with patches by rdnetto · · Score: 1

      It has nothing to do with "closed source." Show me what info is available when you do an "apt get upgrade". :P

      Install apt-listchanges, and you can see the entire changelog.

      --
      Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
  3. OH NOES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But how is this NEWS? MS has fallen into the shitcan for sure, mama!

  4. What about security against Microsoft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "People are aware that Windows has bad security but they are underestimating the problem because they are thinking about third parties. What about security against Microsoft? Every non-free program is a 'just trust me program'. 'Trust me, we're a big corporation. Big corporations would never mistreat anybody, would we?' Of course they would! They do all the time, that's what they are known for. So basically you mustn't trust a non free programme."

    "There are three kinds: those that spy on the user, those that restrict the user, and back doors. Windows has all three. Microsoft can install software changes without asking permission. Flash Player has malicious features, as do most mobile phones."

    "Digital handcuffs are the most common malicious features. They restrict what you can do with the data in your own computer. Apple certainly has the digital handcuffs that are the tightest in history. The i-things, well, people found two spy features and Apple says it removed them and there might be more""

    From:

    Richard Stallman: 'Apple has tightest digital handcuffs in history'
    www.newint.org/features/web-exclusive/2012/12/05/richard-stallman-interview/

  5. Other strange update issues.. by wbr1 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Yesterday in my repair shop I started getting a 0x80246002 error when checking for updates. Only on Win 7, (8 and vista were unaffected). This first occurred on a customer box that had a malware infection. The KB for this error simply states:

    This problem may occur if Windows Update or Microsoft Update determines there is a file hash mismatch when you try to search for available updates from the Windows Update Web site or from the Microsoft Update Web site.

    I spent a couple hours down the rabbit hole, thinking malware had broken updates on this box. Not unusual, and normally fixable by one of several means. When all attempts failed, and then another box presented the same error, I checked, every single windows 7 box would not check for updates.

    I found that it was not something strange in our router or firewall, and it even occurred on other building tenants computers using a separate internet connection. Everyone in the building is on Comcast. Even more interesting, if I connected a computer to another ISP (tethering on my phone in this instance), the update check would succeed. You could then reconnect to comcast and download and install the updates.

    Further all of these computers were running Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320, which is a recent (KB less and not able to be skipped) update to Windows update, that you cannot roll back easily. However, by going to a restore point prior to this update, checking for updates magically worked again, until this Agent updated itself and it was broken again.

    So somehow, for whatever reason, the way Windows Update on Win 7 with this version of the agent checks for updates was being blocked by Comcast (Business class). Try explaining that to a comcast support rep. Fortunately today it seems to be working again.

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
    1. Re:Other strange update issues.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you know, it would've saved you a lot of hassle if you just used apt-get.

      your post reminds me of Mrs. Doubtfire in the kitchen, burning her fake tits.

    2. Re:Other strange update issues.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Had the same problem yesterday on a newly patched Windows 7 laptop and then today on a Windows Server 2008 R2 server.

      Problems with Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320 and DNS seems to be where this is headed.

      But I'm holding off on KB 2993651 and Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320 until this one gets resolved too.

    3. Re:Other strange update issues.. by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      Comcast blocking windows update?

    4. Re:Other strange update issues.. by wbr1 · · Score: 1

      I did not see this thread. It (like many) seems to have a lot of useless info, but that DNS issues is probably key. We use open DNS here, and I did not even think to change DNS. If it recurs I will certainly check that. You sir deserve a +1.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    5. Re:Other strange update issues.. by eric31415927 · · Score: 1

      My experience somewhat mirriors yours:
      On the 2nd Tuesday, I connected my Win7 box to the Internet to install the 2nd Tuesday patches.
      After reading a Slashdot article, I uninstalled two patches on the bad-patch list.

      Yesterday, I connected it to the Internet to install the August 27 patches.
      This was a no go. Windows Update was broken and the Windows Update Troubleshooter was no use.
      Only a rollback to a mid-July restore point got the machine going properly again.

      My Windows box (which is not my main box) is generally off the Internet, so I don't know why I patched it so promptly.
      In the future, I'll wait a few weeks longer before applying patches.

    6. Re:Other strange update issues.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dang, we're OpenDNS here as well. Thanks for mentioning that. I'll move the Windows 7 laptop to another service later today and see if that helps.

    7. Re:Other strange update issues.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your post reminds me of Mrs. Doubtfire in the kitchen, burning her fake tits.

      Too soon, man. Too soon!

    8. Re:Other strange update issues.. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Yesterday in my repair shop

      Wait, there are still computer repair people?

      Say, if I buy a new video card, you think you could come over to my house and install it before Assassin's Creed Unity comes out? There's $50 in it for you. I live in Chicago.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    9. Re:Other strange update issues.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just had the same issue. Comcast biz account in NJ. Was pulling hair trying to figure out since all PC's were fresh installs. Typical Comcast BS.

    10. Re:Other strange update issues.. by wbr1 · · Score: 1
      Yes there are. This shop mostly supports our business IT techs by setting up and rebuilding stuff that goes out to businesses. But the shop also picks up plenty of residential infections and failed hardware.

      I can go to Chicago to install your GPU, however, it will cost about $900-$1500 in travel expenses.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    11. Re:Other strange update issues.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fixed by switching to google DNS server 8.8.8.8

    12. Re:Other strange update issues.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was tearing my hair out about this 0x80246002 error for several hours, when trying to set up a new laptop for my family.

      I reinstlalled Windows over and over again to figure out why it started, both from the recovery disk and from a clean install. It updated once just fine, but then would stop working. Following the old KB article about this did not work.

      Apparently setting your DNS as 8.8.8.8 fixes it. I'm on Verizon FIOS.

    13. Re: Other strange update issues.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can log into the opendns dashboard and there's an area where you can check the cached DNS settings for a particular domain and refresh it if necessary. It has really saved my ass in the past

    14. Re: Other strange update issues.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what sucks about Microsoft dropping the ball so terribly lately, especially regarding updates.

      I'm pretty much the resident IT guy in my extended family and among many friends and I usually do recommend staying current on updates because it's the secure thing to do. But after letting people know to uninstall those last bad updates, and now this, I have to start recommending "you know what, hold off on updates for a couple weeks after they come out..." Which is crap advice because MS shouldn't be sucking this bad given the Windows 8 debacle.

      Does anyone here that works at Microsoft know if things have been getting bad internally management-wise?

    15. Re:Other strange update issues.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks. Why are there so many f'ing DNS problems, worldwide, lately? I know Charter's outage was a DDoS, but there have been many many DNS issues affecting lots of providers within the past month. What is going on?

    16. Re: Other strange update issues.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anyone here that works at Microsoft know if things have been getting bad internally management-wise?

      They just laid off 18,000 people, what do you think? Now we're all having to reap what they've sown.

    17. Re:Other strange update issues.. by sjames · · Score: 1

      Perhaps if you call and ask them to turn off the malware filter for your connection...

    18. Re:Other strange update issues.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh! Yes, all you linux fans, just use apt-get to update your windows box. You can always fall back on rstrui.exe from the command line to recover from apt-gets little escapades.
      The problem Linux these days, is that any ac can put a cd into his machine as easily as sliding a dildo up their own ass. With usually, similar effects. Know nothing coxukers.

  6. No Patch Info by MrL0G1C · · Score: 4, Informative

    What pigs me off is that when you use Windows Update and look at a patch it gives you no info, so you click the patch and still no info', you click the link given but that pretty much just says it's a patch and you should install it, finally after following another link, scrolling down and expanding a section of page you get to find out whether or not the patch is actually relevant to your installation and not just a fix for something you will never use.

    I don't use and don't need patches for One-Note, IE, Windows Media Centre, SQL Server. Privilege escalation bugs don't bother me, if you've been compromised that far then you're probably f**ked anyway.

    The only bugs that look half-dangerous this month are MS14-046 and MS14-047 because they can lead to you being rooted when joined with browser etc bugs

    For future use: https://technet.microsoft.com/...

    --
    Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    1. Re:No Patch Info by phorm · · Score: 1

      Yeah, no kidding. If half the patches are for "issues when entering text with the Klingon language when your locale is set to Alpha Centuri" then I don't need the farging patch. Give me useful information, and don't load me up with patches that frankly don't apply.

    2. Re:No Patch Info by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Well, the IE patches should matter. They might affect the rendering engine, which is used everywhere.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    3. Re:No Patch Info by jittles · · Score: 2

      I don't use and don't need patches for One-Note, IE, Windows Media Centre, SQL Server. Privilege escalation bugs don't bother me, if you've been compromised that far then you're probably f**ked anyway.

      Uh you don't have to be compromised initially to fall victim to a privilege escalation bug. And you should care about bugs in IE or any other piece of software that is installed (and cannot be removed) from your system. Gone are the simple days of black hats using a single bug to take control of your system. They will chain together vulnerabilities until they can get to your unimportant privilege escalation, and that could very well take advantage of some bug in IE that you neglected to patch because it is unimportant to you.

    4. Re:No Patch Info by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      In the last decade I've ran my PC as Admin, in that time I've had zero viruses because I know what not to do, take a range of security measures and have been lucky... So privilege escalation bugs don't count because I'm already running as admin. And whilst Microsoft has found these privilege escalation bugs, I expect there are many more zero-days out there.

      If I don't surf the web with IE then the chances of getting an infection due to a IE bug is extremely low. Even though I don't use it, I set the security levels high anyway.

      I also make sure DEP is enabled for all programs, that combined with ASLR makes attacks more difficult.

      And I use NoScript - Top-Level domain scripts only.
      And I use Ghostery which is like bricking up 90% of the houses windows.
      I don't open fishy email attachments.
      I check downloads with VirusTotal if I'm in any doubt about their safety.
      I disabled all plugins other than flash and that only runs when I let it.

      It's like health and safety - you don't allow the dangers anywhere near in the first place. AV is the last worst line of defense.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    5. Re:No Patch Info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I do all that stuff, too, and still got my LAN hacked through the open port used for security cameras on my Synology NAS. (Which runs Linux, of all things.)

      Defense in depth is the only defense. The bad guys only have to guess right once.

  7. How is this insightful? Are links difficult now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You are talking about the short summary in the windows update UI, but there is always a direct link to a Knowledge Base article with much more details.

    Are Slashdot posters really unable to follow a direct hyperlink to the information you are after without spending hours on it?? WTF??

  8. Don't know what you are talking about by benjymouse · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Perhaps you should give it 3 secs investigation before you shout off.

    3 secs should be just enough to click the "more information" link.

    --
    Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
    1. Re:Don't know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      3 secs should be just enough to click the "more information" link.

      Every time I have clicked a "more information" link, I have been taken to a completely useless webpage that contains no information about the KB in question.

    2. Re:Don't know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Before you get too smug, please explain how clicking on "more information" would help explain the mystery of Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320 and all of the associated problems it causes? That's only one example of many over the last couple decades.

      There has always been *lots* of holes in the Microsoft KB and explanations of patches. Saying just click on more information implies that Microsoft has documented everything and the OP is simply an idiot and/or lazy. In this case he isn't.

    3. Re:Don't know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3 secs should be just enough to click the "more information" link.

      Every time I have clicked a "more information" link, I have been taken to a completely useless webpage that contains no information about the KB in question.

      I don't know which "more information" links you have been clicking, but the *KB in question* is directly linked in the short summary about the update.

    4. Re:Don't know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before you get too smug, please explain how clicking on "more information" would help explain the mystery of Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320 and all of the associated problems it causes? That's only one example of many over the last couple decades.

      There has always been *lots* of holes in the Microsoft KB and explanations of patches. Saying just click on more information implies that Microsoft has documented everything and the OP is simply an idiot and/or lazy. In this case he isn't.

      He said MS patches never comes with any kind of useful information, only a short generic description, and that he needs to spend hours to find KB information -- when this is directly hyperlinked in the update. Maybe idiot is to strong word, but it is uninformed nonsense.

    5. Re:Don't know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure what you're talking about. The link on Windows Update takes you to the KB article directly. In the introduction of that KB article is a clearly marked link for more information for IT professionals, which takes you to the TechNet security advisory.

      For the patch in question, here are those URLs:
      http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2993651
      https://technet.microsoft.com/library/security/MS14-045

      I read every single one of them before installing. They've never been remotely difficult to find.

    6. Re:Don't know what you are talking about by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      3 secs should be just enough to click the "more information" link.

      I'm pretty sure that unless he's suffering from the DTs, it won't take him 3 seconds to click a link.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:Don't know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I just ran updates on my Win7 box because of this comment, and I can verify this: The more information link does NOT take you to a related KB article. In fact three of the links timed out, the rest went to pages with zero information about what the update did, and no further information can be found.

      I can, however, Google the patch to find the exact KB article I need. There is no way to find that page from any line of clicking that starts from Windows Update though.

    8. Re:Don't know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should there even be a 'click for more info' link. Provide it immediately instead of wasting my time with yet an 'Click here' (and then click here...and then click there...and you'll need to provide your credit card info...and home phone number...and your first born, etc., etc., etc.

    9. Re:Don't know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It worked for me last night when I read the "known issues" bit and declined to install the patch. Maybe you should talk to your network administrator.

    10. Re:Don't know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am my own network administrator. Have you ever thought that MSFT sucks at Internet?

    11. Re:Don't know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every time I have clicked a "more information" link, I have been taken to a completely useless webpage that contains no information about the KB in question.

      This is correct. The more information link leads to a generic template page, which then in turn contains links to articles with more in-depth information (usually 2 links, one for home users and one for corporate users). The information is there, but you have to dig pretty deep for it.

    12. Re:Don't know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you suck at computers, bro. Maybe you should rethink that STEM thing and stick with the humanities. The world needs ditchdiggers, too.

  9. What I especially liked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    was after the forced reboot (wonderful design, you leave for lunch and you lose everything), Firefox lost all my tab history.

    What's the connection between the two things? In an era of multigigabyte RAM and terabyte storage, we can't store a few kilobytes of text to remember what URLs were open in a dozen tabs?

    1. Re:What I especially liked by mlw4428 · · Score: 1

      And this has what to do with the topic?

    2. Re:What I especially liked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a windows update? You know, like the topic?

    3. Re:What I especially liked by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Usually, Firefox remembers the URLs that were open. Thing is, it only appears to remember for the last closed window. If I'm going to reboot, I close Firefox myself, making sure to close the window with all the tabs last.

      This may be a Firefox issue rather than a Microsoft one.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  10. Need developers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Dear Microsoft,

    I, and possibly many others, would like to offer our services. We charge $200+/hour, and don't move very fast because we like to think about our solutions. We dislike cargo programming a lot. I understand that the prospect of hiring us shakes some CEO's yacht more than the waves of the South Indian ocean displace the ships mapping the seabed in search for MH370, but we're not going to drop our costs and standards, even though you will. Even more so, considering the predicament you find yourselves in (no, we do not love you one bit, Microsoft).

    Cheers,
            The Real Developers

    1. Re:Need developers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Dear AC,

      Thank you for expressing your interest in a position at Microsoft. Unfortunately we are not currently hiring developers who test their code.

      Sincerely,
      Microsoft

    2. Re:Need developers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's not about profit, it's about product quality, idiot.

    3. Re:Need developers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha, you said "MBAs who have forgotten more about development". After having worked at MS, I can safely say there isn't a single executive that could program their way out of a paper bag. Grow some pubes kiddo, and quit huffing the corporate duster. You clearly need to preserve as many brain cells as possible.

    4. Re:Need developers? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I have known an MBA who could program pretty well. (He's also about the most left-wing person I know, FWIW.)

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    5. Re: Need developers? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Thank you for expressing your interest in a position at Microsoft. Unfortunately we are not currently hiring.

      There, fixed that for you.

  11. And people use MS servers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually not two days ago someone was complaining about the quality of Ubuntu - new surprise with every upgrade, let alone dist-upgrade. As opposed to the experience with RHEL where everything works forever and ever.

  12. Seems perfectly clear to me :) by lippydude · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Click on the update and you should see a 'More Information' link on the right. Click it and your browser should open to a MS knowledge base page that explains what the patch does".

    "To view this vulnerability as a standard entry in the Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures list, see CVE-2014-0318." ref

    'win32k.sys .. does not properly control access to thread-owned objects, which allows local users to gain privileges via a crafted application, aka "Win32k Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability ."'

  13. Comcast / TWC shared errors = scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yesterday in my repair shop I started getting a 0x80246002 error when checking for updates. Only on Win 7, (8 and vista were unaffected). This first occurred on a customer box that had a malware infection. The KB for this error simply states:

    This problem may occur if Windows Update or Microsoft Update determines there is a file hash mismatch when you try to search for available updates from the Windows Update Web site or from the Microsoft Update Web site.

    I spent a couple hours down the rabbit hole, thinking malware had broken updates on this box. Not unusual, and normally fixable by one of several means. When all attempts failed, and then another box presented the same error, I checked, every single windows 7 box would not check for updates.

    I found that it was not something strange in our router or firewall, and it even occurred on other building tenants computers using a separate internet connection. Everyone in the building is on Comcast. Even more interesting, if I connected a computer to another ISP (tethering on my phone in this instance), the update check would succeed. You could then reconnect to comcast and download and install the updates.

    Further all of these computers were running Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320, which is a recent (KB less and not able to be skipped) update to Windows update, that you cannot roll back easily. However, by going to a restore point prior to this update, checking for updates magically worked again, until this Agent updated itself and it was broken again.

    So somehow, for whatever reason, the way Windows Update on Win 7 with this version of the agent checks for updates was being blocked by Comcast (Business class). Try explaining that to a comcast support rep. Fortunately today it seems to be working again.

    I live in a time warner sector. Our primary hardware distributor uses TWC for internet, and the same thing was happening yesterday, but they have a ATT DSL backup line that when switched over to was able to update the machine.

    I have a feeling we are seeing the same issues, additionally I think that TWC and comcast are already crossing their streams.

    Great. FCC needs to stop this nonsense cold (even though I know they won't).

  14. I love watching these threads... by Phics · · Score: 1, Insightful

    There are so many ACs who post in response to MS-centric articles. It's almost as if you can feel the shame and terror as you read your way through.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world; those who believe there are two types of people, and those who don't.
    1. Re:I love watching these threads... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would appear you have never been e-stalked by someone who would rather try to ruin your life than admit a comment he made on the internet was wrong. Consider yourself lucky.

      In the meantime, not being condescending to people who have different lives than you would be a grown up thing to do.

  15. Not really related... by Junta · · Score: 1

    about Microsoft's ability to support Windows 9's expected rapid update pace."

    I don't think this stuff is expected to go any faster. To be fair to microsoft, the frequency of updates is already pretty respectable (latency and quality on the other hand...). The rumors are that MS will start mixing in functional changes more. Of course this seems like a mistake, their competitors really aren't mixing it up much on the fundamental level anymore (Google churned pretty hard because they needed too, but Jelly Bean seems to have marked where they broke out the functcion).

    Microsoft is only bested on the 'faster' (latency and frequency) front by Linux Desktop distros, and see how much that has made people in the wider market care. It's a shame because Android updates are pretty infrequent *and* get deployed extremely slowly. This means a great deal of mobile Chrome browsers continue to have SSL vulnerabilities, mitigated somewhat by most reputable servers having addressed it on their end. If MS was botching a security update that badly the community would be all over them. Though again, the wider market doesn't really care except to be pissed at having to deal with frequent update related interruptions (where again I think linux desktop distros seem to have the right balance of availability but not being so heavy handed).

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  16. They "F'd-Up" ALL of my rightclick menus... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even in their OWN apps e.g. IE11, MS Security Essentials, & others in the OS (trayicon & popup menus not working & of all kinds) - which causes me difficulty using them (there isn't always a main menubar alternate either, especially nowadays with the stupid ribbon one vs. classic menus). Heck - I had to go to commandline for Explorer.exe itself (just IE front now too) to change filenames &/or attributes, for Pete's sake!

    * Microsoft: When you "F" up? You *really* "F-UP", now don't you?

    (WTF were your devs thinking changing "Z-order" on windows?)

    APK

    P.S.=> Unbelievable - FIX THIS!!! apk

  17. Addendum: Can't UNINSTALL it either (WTF!!!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Per my last post I replied to, see subject-line: "WTF!!!", & here is the EXACT problem I am experiencing (known issue? STUPID creation of a huge problem is what this is knocking out rightclick menus & trayicon popup menus too) -> https://support.microsoft.com/...

    PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

    "Known issue 2
    After you install this update, the z-order of the windows is changed. (The z-order calls the SetWindowPos function together with the HWND_TOP parameter.) Therefore, the windows of certain applications may become invisible or may be incorrectly displayed behind other windows.

    Status
    We are currently working on a resolution for this issue.

    Notes
      This issue also occurs after you install the following updates:
    2965768 Stop error 0x3B when an application changes the z-order of a window in Windows 7 SP1 and Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1
    2970228 Update to support the new currency symbol for the Russian ruble in Windows
    2973201 MS14-039: Description of the security update for Windows on-screen keyboard: July 8, 2014
    2975719 August 2014 update rollup for Windows RT 8.1, Windows 8.1, and Windows Server 2012 R2"

    ---

    * Lastly, per my subject-line: I *tried* to UNINSTALL it, to go back to the previous GDI32.DLL & Win32k.sys files, & it's a "no go" on that too... wtf!

    APK

    P.S.=> "We are currently working on a resolution for this issue." ? HURRY THE HELL UP & FIX THIS since this IS an UNACCEPTABLE "fix" that breaks more than it fixes... imo @ least! That, is all I can say... apk

    1. Re:Addendum: Can't UNINSTALL it either (WTF!!!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh look! Nobody gave a fuck about these posts of yours either! Poor APK, nobody cares!

    2. Re:Addendum: Can't UNINSTALL it either (WTF!!!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You did. Your reply shows it. Microsoft does too. You can't read. MS is working on a fix.

  18. The whole distro arguement is retarded. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Learn a DE or Window manager you're comfortable with, learn the package manager for the distro of your choice, and learn the administration tools necessary to maintain your needed level of customization (for most people it's display settings, i8n, and network settings). Given those 5 needs fullfilled the distro itself usually doesn't matter, unless you happen to choose one that makes installing/updating your chosen packages difficult (Which honestly Microsoft is no better about since the XP->Vista transition, and the Win9x to NT transition prior.

    1. Re:The whole distro arguement is retarded. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But there are hundreds of distros with different package managers, DE's, should grandma and grandpa or average joe have to go through all of these distro's to find what they like, if their old brain can comprehend.

      So you have xp, vista, 7, 8, 8.1 and all these can run the majority of .msi and .exe programs do to api backwards compatibility. No cli needed. Shit! I can still run my old dos programs in windows 7 and 8.1.

      Unix was a shitty geeky toy and linus torvalds adopted this paradigm. Even MS dropped their xenix.

  19. Here's a thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ..don't use Windows.

  20. Stack ranking quality? by clawsoon · · Score: 1

    Is this mess possibly the long-term result of Microsoft's previous embrace of stack ranking? Too much cultural focus on back-stabbing and ladder-climbing instead of writing solid code and testing it properly?

    1. Re:Stack ranking quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect it's more due to laying off lots of testers a while back.

      I mean, any MBA can see that developers who write crappy code will be perfectly capable of testing their crappy code.

  21. Why are they hiding information? by sjbe · · Score: 2

    3 secs should be just enough to click the "more information" link.

    You apparently have never bothered to click the "more information" link. It is a pretty good approximation of useless unless you click several layers deep and shouldn't be necessary in the first place. A short description of what the patch actually is intended to do would not kill Microsoft. I shouldn't have to go hunting for that information if I want it. Yes I know how to find out what the patch is for but Microsoft has made it needlessly hard.

    Put bluntly, I shouldn't have to click ANY links to see a summary of what a patch is supposed to do.

    1. Re:Why are they hiding information? by nabsltd · · Score: 2

      A short description of what the patch actually is intended to do would not kill Microsoft. I shouldn't have to go hunting for that information if I want it.

      In addition, if you have set Windows Update to "download but not install", then it is possible that you don't have Internet access at the time you are thinking of applying the already-downloaded patch.

    2. Re:Why are they hiding information? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3 secs should be just enough to click the "more information" link.

      You apparently have never bothered to click the "more information" link. It is a pretty good approximation of useless unless you click several layers deep and shouldn't be necessary in the first place. A short description of what the patch actually is intended to do would not kill Microsoft. I shouldn't have to go hunting for that information if I want it. Yes I know how to find out what the patch is for but Microsoft has made it needlessly hard.

      Put bluntly, I shouldn't have to click ANY links to see a summary of what a patch is supposed to do.

      I really don't understand what is happening here, because I have the same experience as the people claiming there is a link in the update to the KB article. I'm on Win8.1.

  22. Microsoft has lost control of the monster... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 4, Funny
    Microsoft has lost control of the monster it created in Windows.

    .
    It now appears that Windows has taken on a life of its own, and is now roaming the countryside, harassing the villagers.

    Where is Dr. Frankenstein when you really need him?

    1. Re:Microsoft has lost control of the monster... by lgw · · Score: 1

      He was laid off with all the QA guys. He got a nice severance package though.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  23. Windows 9 update frequency by freeze128 · · Score: 1

    How often will Windows 9 receive updates? I heard on the TWIT podcast that it would be once a month.

    ***NEWS FLASH***

    Windows is ALREADY updated once a month, so I don't see how that is any more frequent.

  24. MS is reliable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's what I love about MS: its reliability. You know that when there is something stupid to be done, they'll do it.

  25. QA isn't important, my ass... by barfy · · Score: 1

    Hopefully this will change Nadella's mind. QA is part of the process, and has to be independent of engineering...

  26. wizard went sleepy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    dunno why geo-location is tied to what DNServer is used instead of the source ip.
    srsly it would make more sense to assign a local CDN by looking at the source/requesting/client computers IP instead of by looking at the DNSserver being used by the client computer.
    i have found that some "heavy" sites like steam, microsoft (updates), youtube have country or region specific caches, and that they assign the "correct" cache not by my Ip address but by the dns server i have configured.
    so assume i'm in india using a netherland dns server i get a CDN in netherland even thou i'm not hidding my IP address at all ... go figure : //

  27. Wouldn't have "hit you" *IF* you used this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hardcoding fav. sites in hosts (see "B" & "D3" below) - My FREE program for hosts adds speed, security, reliability, & more doing more, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' issues:

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    ---

    A.) Hosts do more than:

    1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
    2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
    3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

    C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity

    D.) Hosts files yield more:

    1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
    2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
    3.) Reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable dns, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ isp level + weak vs Fastflux + dynamic dns botnets)
    4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

    ---

    * Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

    * Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too(4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    Instead, work w/ a native kernelmode part - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack)

    APK

    P.S.=> Hardcodes wouldn't help others' complaints regarding "Windows Update" though (MS bypasses HOSTS it - DIRECT hardcoded 4 update servers) but would have on yours for DNS

    ...apk

    1. Re:Wouldn't have "hit you" *IF* you used this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Notice how your post earned you a +5, Insightful?

      Oh, that's right - it didn't. It stayed at 0 because nobody gives a shit about you or anything you have to say, APK.

    2. Re:Wouldn't have "hit you" *IF* you used this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You gave a shit. Quit lying. You also couldn't prove apk wrong. Double fail for you troll.

  28. Too late Microsoft, you already fucked my install. by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    Was working on the computer late on the 27th and I saw there were new Windows updates available (8.1 Pro, x64). I'd heard about the update issues two weeks ago but figured that had all been taken care of and the updates were pulled so this was fine.

    Big mistake.

    Machine BSOD'ing after launch and none of Microsoft's fixes worked.
    1) If I tried to boot into safe mode, which is still supposed to work -- BSOD
    2) There is a font cache file that supposedly is causing the crash. You're supposed to boot into safe mode to remove it. Okay, I boot into a Mint from a thumb drive and delete the file from out of my C:\Windows\System32 folder, unmounted the drive manually to make sure changes were written back, and rebooted -- Still BSOD.
    3) Tried using system restore points. Windows set one just before these updates. Windows was not able to restore to that point. Tried the previous one from an update to OpenOffice three days before this. That one was also no good. Tried the last one, one from the 20th -- when the previous set of Windows updates had been applied. Success. Now, straight from the horse's mouth, my Windows should now be rolled back to a time before the Windows Updates before the problematic updates were installed.

    Rebooted... BSOD at the exact same place in the process. No change at all.

    I can't uninstall the updates if I can't boot into the actual WIndows install it seems. There's no way to remove the updates from the recovery console (found a blog entry on how to do this in XP, but the updates aren't kept in the same folder structure and my ability to run things on the effected install seems much more limited in these later versions).

    As I'm typing this I'm running on the Mint flash drive and have Grsync doing a verified copy of my user folder from my C drive to one of my other internal disks, so I can do a reformat and reinstall of all my programs. Just what I wanted to do on my weekend!

  29. Don't trust Windows Update easily by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do not update immediately after the patches are released. Wait weeks and months and let the guinea pigs update first.

    Microsoft doesn't give a rat's ass. I bet many of the software testers have been laid off and/or outsourced to third world IT sweatshops.

  30. Downmod the truth all you like ... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doesn't change a thing: We know sockpuppeteers kissass to the *NIX hivemind to farm karma/get upmod points to abuse (upmodding their regular/normal account, AND, downmodding opponents they can't get the best of... period).

    APK

    P.S.=> That *IS* slashdot, to a tee - no doubt about it... apk

  31. Impacts XP/POS2009 As Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This update (KB2993651) and the original one (KB2982791) also impact XP/POS2009. Installing the original causes eventual system instability and spontaneous reboots (no BSODs) every few days - the "re-released" version does the same at a much faster rate (every few hours).

    I suspect a kernel heap/memory leak caused by GDI usage (exhaustion?) based upon anecdotal experience/testing. (Win32K.sys and GDI32.DLL are updated in XP/POS2009)

    I highly recommend all XP/POS2009 users avoid installing (or uninstalling) both KB2982791 and KB2993651 and hiding these updates at Windows Update.

    Also, the initial failure of Windows Update (as reported by some users) after uninstalling either of these updates is also seen (of course in XP/POS2009 it uses IE directed to a Windows Update URL), but again seems to correct itself once the user manually directs IE to update.microsoft.com.

    For the record, this is not the first time a kernel/GDI update has caused these instability issues and based upon the historical pattern of released patches, wont be the last.

  32. Wouldn't have "hit you", *IF* you used this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hardcoding fav. sites in hosts (see "B" & "D3" below) - My FREE program for hosts adds speed, security, reliability, & more doing more, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' issues:

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    ---

    A.) Hosts do more than:

    1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
    2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
    3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

    C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity

    D.) Hosts files yield more:

    1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
    2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
    3.) Reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable dns, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ isp level + weak vs DGA, & Fastflux + dynDNS botnets)
    4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

    ---

    * Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

    * Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too(4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    Instead, work w/ a native kernelmode part - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack)

    APK

    P.S.=> Hardcodes wouldn't help others' complaints regarding "Windows Update" (MS bypasses HOSTS it - DIRECT hardcoded 4 update servers) but would on DNS, if dns is @ fault.

    ... apk

  33. Manual Fix (get popup menus back)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have all my rightclick menus back: I did this fix by manually opening older previous hotfixes myself for a previous build of GDI32.DLL & WIN32K.SYS + registering the lib/dll with the system (even if not needed as in non-OLE related classic "oldschool" DLL, ActiveX, etc.-et al files, or drivers really (.sys)).

    * Anyhow/anyways:

    All right-click menus/popup menus & trayicon apps working again - like I knew they would be, lol!

    (Good Enough for me...)

    APK

    P.S.=> "I Rule the WasteLand: Whatever exists here, is MINE!" - The Lord Humungous from "The Road Warrior"

    (Especially on Windows - I can create, + tune as I like to be BETTER, by far, vs. "stock oem" setups - hotrodding it in software & setup, by easily 25% + 200% online)... apk