810565 - another bum patch?

I had to repair my installation of XP Pro yesterday which involved downloading all the patches since SP 1 - I repaired from a slipstreamed XP + SP1.

NB Inadviseable to install Send To from Win 95 Powertoys - even though some on the board claim it works. Fouled up my Send to Desktop as shortcut completely and none of the methods suggested on the board worked to fix it.

Yesterday with all the patches installed except 810565 I had no problems working this board.

Today, after installing 810565 my log in to the board was not recognised. Uninstalled it and everything is back to normal.

Anybody else experienced sinilar problems?

Not sure I need that patch anyway as I only use IE and the patch is supposed to expedite use with other browsers - or something similar.

 

Hi Pete!

I have 810565 in my can and everything works fine.

I´ve just completed my XP Pro migration and with SP1 in place there was 23 critical and 7 recommended updates. I downloaded them but was not 100% sure about in which order to install them. I decided to chicken out and let Windows Update handle it but from now on, when the updates come one by one, I think that I can handle it ...... ......

I read in a MS technical note that the install order is important if different updates include different versions of the same file. You might end up with the wrong one in your system.
It´s possible that this only concerns multiple update installs without reboot inbetween, I´m not sure ...... ..... but 810565 isn´t among the most recent ones.

Christer

 

Hi Charles,

It's my technical background I guess - having spent a lifetime solving problems and breaking barriers (35+ years in metallurgical development) I don't like unsolved problems!

 

Abraxas,

I'm sure you are right - thanks for the link. It's more than likely down to me as the patch worked fine prior to the repair. I had a very slow connection the other day and decided to download the smaller updates first and and the larger ones individually, so the order was all awry - BUT MS allow you to do this!! No warnings!

I shall sort this one, even if it means uninstalling some of the patches subsequent to that one.

Thx

 

This is confusing - re-installed the patch this morning - absolutely no problems (so far).

Interestingly MS say the patch cannot be removed - well, it can as it appears in Add/Remove Programs and I removed it (or did I ??). Another case of MS/Windows lying to us ??

So, Charles, problem solved, but not entirely satisfactorily as no cause identified.

 

Hi Charles

No offence taken - a most reasonable question!

The rationale to install the patch was the statement in the TechNet spiel re certain hyperlinks may 'open in Internet Explorer rather than in Help and Support Centre' where they belong.

M$ may be scaremongers to some extent, but they have such a poor record re. security holes in their software - and have taken the decision - at Bill's insistence, to remedy that situation. Critical to one user is not necessarily critical to another. At present I prefer to 'trust' MS and install the patch if deemed 'critical', although that trust is weakening in the light of recent 'bum' patches. As in government, you are only told what MS wants you to know - what lies beneath some of these patches is anybody's guess.

Non critical patches I install if they are relevant to my situation.

I have started to download to HD prior to installation, if only to have the updates to hand if a repair to XP is necessary sometime in the future