Question about Updates

Just out of curiosity, and being that today is "Update Tuesday ", the day to get the latest updates and to clean up my computer, and knowing that there are 12 updates that are being currently releaded I went to Microsoft Updates and it checked and told me that everything was current. Not the first time that this has happened. Other times I have gone back in the afternoon and got everything with no problem. My question is , are the updates released by time zones or what.? I'm in Arizona on Mountain Standard Time.
Thanks in advance.

 

Answers that. Thank you both very much. I've learned a lot from this forum in the past several years.

 

It's 12:10 PM here in California right now and for the past several minutes my HDD has been rattling away and the ZoneAlarm icon down by the Sys Tray clock has been blinking up a storm. I suspect that the monthly MSFT check is underway and any moment now I'll be notifed that a MS update is ready for download. Is that the way it works for everyone else?

 

Just seconds after I submitted my post, the rattling and blinking stopped. I manually checked for updates and there were eight to download and install. Everything went smoothly.

 

And I wasted another 20 minutes downloading a Genuine MicroSoft Verification tool and another file that validated my system once again. This is the 3rd or 4th time I have suffered through this and I'm getting a bit tired of proving my system on a monthly basis. Is there no end to this madness. Since they came across listed as "Critical Updates" I don't have an option to refuse. It's starting to kill my desire to fool around with these one-eyed monsters. MicroSoft seems to thing we really have to put up with their high handed tactics. I could tolerate proving my self once, maybe even twice, but this continual assualt on my integrity is getting a bit bothersome. They may be controlling piracy but if it's at the cost of offending the honest operator, it's going to bite them in the butt eventually.

 

I'm afraid that isn't an option since there is was no check box. Here's how it looks:

(The only option offered)

When that download is installed (took 10 minutes total) it immediately requires another validation download (KB905474) that takes even longer. If offers the one single choice button as before. BTW, you can't trust the estimated download time that MS lists, it always takes much longer - as much as 3 times what they say for an average speed dial up connection.

After it all finishes (took 25 minutes total), I am allowed to query the site and find out that there are no critical updates at this time. Some fun - you bet.

Now today I'm offered 31 minutes of critical updates so I'll be investing some more time in this beast. I spend more time some weeks updating and securing this system than I actually use it.

I searched the MS download site for the above items and it returns no hits on either. I thought any security update would be available for manual download. Wrong again. These items are apparently specific to people who do not opt for Automatic Download of Updates. I have read that if you allow the Automatic method, these validation checks are not required. That may be the answer, albeit a poor one since I don't like the idea of Auto downloading files and losing that element of control of what goes on with the system updating process.

 

MS has been updating its validation tool a) to reduce the number of genuine installs of XP that it was not validating properly, and b) to change its behaviour so that it no longer phones home on every restart, but maybe once a fortnight or so. The current updated version of wgatray.exe is 1.5.532.2 (previous was 1.5.532.0).

BTW according to MS it is phoning home, not to pass on private info about your PC (if it is validated), but to check whether it should run or not (in case they want to switch it off because some major bug has been found).

 

I had to allow the one WGA before I could get the rest of the updates through custom install. I was able to remove the second WGA listed with the critical updates of which i needed 9. I checked my firewall settings and don't see WGA listed for it to check back with MS. I did notice it is grayed out so I cannot disable it in Manage Add-ons. I also had to grab 2 updates for Office 2000 (Word & Power Point). So far I see no issues with any of the updates.

 

FWIW, I never use AU, always use the Catalog Update site. I'm working my way thru the criticals spaced out over days.

So did not install WGA so far. So far, because if it becomes mandatory I'll have to install it in order to access the Catalog site.

Regards - Charles

 

I'll endorse SD2's commentary as I think MS is shooting itself in both feet. No argument regarding the right to protect intellectual property but the current approach is forcing many to disable auto updating and is an open invitation to investigate alternative operating systems. New motto circulating in Redmond - We have met the enemy and it is us.

 

The Pogoism is very appropriate Rockster.

I think I'll just refrain from updating and fly by the seat of my pants. I have great backups (full drive images weekly) and could likely escape any infection that I may get. Frankly, I trust good backups more than I do MS patches.

I think the greater risk is not from some insidious virus from an unknown source but rather the waste of a large amount of time and effort trying to patch up a very vulnerable system MS has provided and all the while having to prove over and over again that I'm a legitimate user that paid full price.

 

I’m the same surferdude2 in that I trust my own security and good backup over patches. I still run Win98se out of the box with not one single update and think I’ve had two minor incidences in the last 5 years, both of which were dealt with in the few minutes it takes to clone a clean install to the partition.

I’ve just recently started using XP as well (Google Earth’s fault) and have worked out a system to make the updates painless and give me full control. I figured with XP being so full of holes I’d give this update thing a go, but I immediately didn’t like the method and conditions of delivery.

I have a multiboot system where I keep a clean install of XP that I only use for getting the updates. Once they are installed I copy them to the data partition and from there install them individually to my working XP. If I get a problem I restore my working XP from an image or clone and then this time I don’t install the offending update. It was easy to spot the Validation and Advantage updates and exclude them from this install, which of course I never need to let check for updates.

 

Now you're cookin' McTavish. I also dual boot XP but I operate one of them without patches. I see no big issues that the patched system is protecting me from. If a person is half smart and exercises due caution in opening strange files, hackers and viral infections don't deserve a lot of extra hoopla and patches and all that jazz.

 

Hi surferdude2,

Disagree with you somewhat.

I do all that stuff, dual boot two XP's, image the OS partitions, but I would still find it annoying if something gave me trouble because of IE, which if I patch nothing else, its IE because that is always the big hole.

The rest, I decide after reading the info about what the vulnerabiities are whether to apply the patches or not. I certainly don't apply patches all at once.

Regards - Charles

 

Hi Charles!

That's fine - do what you're comfortable with - I don't mean to suggest that my way would work for anybody else. I do think that security and hacking fears get a little overblown at times and it reminds me a bit of Don Quixote.

To each his own.

Cheers.