How true. Last thing I did before leaving work last night was go check for updates for this W2K HP notebook. There was one driver update for an Intel display driver. I applied it, only to find that after rebooting, I could only see the top half of all fonts.
A check of the display adapter shows me running in dual monitor mode, which is a waste of resources, to say the least. I was unable to change any settings back to "normal". So I figured I'd uninstall the driver update.
After uninstall, I went to WUS to try and get a better driver than the default 16 color driver. No updates to install, it tells me. Great.
Has anyone realized how beautiful \. looks in 16 color/ 640x480 resolution? Download the "update" and find out for yourself. Don't thank me, thank Intel and MS for the great opportunity.
See you later. I've got to try and get an updated driver despite my notebook's objections.
(Sorry if this is posted in the wrong place - it's difficult to see all of the page:( )
Well, other than we have found other issues, one being that we are unable to add a printer that will print. We can see printers but you cannot add them. Our print servers use NetBEUI and TCP addresses; XP uses TCP without supporting NetBEUI. I'm not going to buy 14 new print servers at ~$300 when the Digi's I have work fine. It's _XP_ that's unwilling to cooperate. W2K works just fine, so that's what we'll stick with, execept on the machines that are using.asp pages through a browser to connect with our vendor's 3270s. For those Red Hat works fine, but not on nearly enough machines.
I am aware that as little as a few minutes difference can cause WUS issues, but I synchronize time with a little batch file that also re-maps drives with every logon. So time differences are not the culprit here.
Yes, I evaluate the need for every patch. That being said, there are some patches that do not get applied, and several options that do not, for reasons of EULA or unappropriateness..NET and WMP9 come immediately to mind.
Our workstations are behind a NAT, through a VPN, and those behind a PIX.
I am anything BUT a "default install" kind. I do nearly everything custom, despite the additional time it requires. It is always worth it, though.
Last week I spent all day downloading patches for an XP laptop that we are evaluating.
Today we (my notoriously adorable assistant) received a notification that there are (surprise!) more patches to download. When I looked at the list, some of them were going back to Feb of 2002.
We looked at what patches and Q#'s show as installed, and several of these are the same ones WUS show as needed.
Needless to say, we are yanking the XP OS and going back to W2K. Oh, that we could use Linux in our production environment!!!!
Hey, some of us non-MSCE or CCNE-types don't know any better, and the more it's repeated, the more we learn!
Sure hopes he tries this with some article about Microsoft security. Patch management couldn't be any better than what exists now.
Slashdot Mirror
How true. Last thing I did before leaving work last night was go check for updates for this W2K HP notebook. There was one driver update for an Intel display driver. I applied it, only to find that after rebooting, I could only see the top half of all fonts. A check of the display adapter shows me running in dual monitor mode, which is a waste of resources, to say the least. I was unable to change any settings back to "normal". So I figured I'd uninstall the driver update. After uninstall, I went to WUS to try and get a better driver than the default 16 color driver. No updates to install, it tells me. Great. Has anyone realized how beautiful \. looks in 16 color/ 640x480 resolution? Download the "update" and find out for yourself. Don't thank me, thank Intel and MS for the great opportunity. See you later. I've got to try and get an updated driver despite my notebook's objections. (Sorry if this is posted in the wrong place - it's difficult to see all of the page :( )
Well, other than we have found other issues, one being that we are unable to add a printer that will print. We can see printers but you cannot add them. Our print servers use NetBEUI and TCP addresses; XP uses TCP without supporting NetBEUI. I'm not going to buy 14 new print servers at ~$300 when the Digi's I have work fine. It's _XP_ that's unwilling to cooperate. W2K works just fine, so that's what we'll stick with, execept on the machines that are using .asp pages through a browser to connect with our vendor's 3270s. For those Red Hat works fine, but not on nearly enough machines.
I am aware that as little as a few minutes difference can cause WUS issues, but I synchronize time with a little batch file that also re-maps drives with every logon. So time differences are not the culprit here.
Yes, I evaluate the need for every patch. That being said, there are some patches that do not get applied, and several options that do not, for reasons of EULA or unappropriateness. .NET and WMP9 come immediately to mind.
Our workstations are behind a NAT, through a VPN, and those behind a PIX.
I am anything BUT a "default install" kind. I do nearly everything custom, despite the additional time it requires. It is always worth it, though.
Last week I spent all day downloading patches for an XP laptop that we are evaluating. Today we (my notoriously adorable assistant) received a notification that there are (surprise!) more patches to download. When I looked at the list, some of them were going back to Feb of 2002. We looked at what patches and Q#'s show as installed, and several of these are the same ones WUS show as needed. Needless to say, we are yanking the XP OS and going back to W2K. Oh, that we could use Linux in our production environment!!!!
Hey, some of us non-MSCE or CCNE-types don't know any better, and the more it's repeated, the more we learn! Sure hopes he tries this with some article about Microsoft security. Patch management couldn't be any better than what exists now.
Great! Now the higher price will make Microsoft think twice about making their product less expensive due to Linux competition!
Just don't ask anyone there to vote on whether or not they should be using Linux.