Hot to control updates

t-4-2 wrote:

>
> FromTheRafters;709265 Wrote:
>> "t-4-2" <guest.TakeThisOut@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message
>> news:dea25e92fd0aa81fa845698ef6a01a39@xxxxxx-gateway.com...> > >
>> > >
>> > > FromTheRafters;709193 Wrote:
>> > > Bruse Chambers must have a XP. In vista all updates ,except optional
>> > > updates, will be installed auto, unless one disables the auto
>> > updating
>> > > option ( not recommended). Any updates that are so called "non-
>> > > essential" will be under the umbrella "optional". > >
>>
>> More likely IMO is that his Vista is in the "not recommended"
>> condition.
>> Those with a clue often use the "not recommended" setting because
>> they want the choice of whether or not to install a particular
>> update.
>>
>> ....and of course my above recommendation was for updates that
>> related
>> to security - not just new features the developers are adding to the
>> mix.
> Hello,
> I understand what you had said. Please consider this :
> 1. MS will not offer you an XP update if you have Vista.
> 2. As stated before, an update which is" non-essential" will be
> labelled optional. MS won't jam it down your throat.
> 3. You said that yourself that you would recommend to update it even if
> one did not use it much, if at all.
> So, what is the down side of enabling auto updating other than to
> satisfy one's ego of being master of one's destination, which is just a
> myth. It only applies to 1 % of the population -- may be less than that.

The downside of autoupdating is that Windows Update may very well install an
update that will render your computer unusable. Additionally, your faith
that "MS won't jam it down your throat" is naive. All of us in the tech
industry have seen otherwise in practice.

As far as I'm concerned, Bruce is 100% right and I'm with him all the way.
He did an elegant job of explaining his position, too.

All my Windows boxen - XP and Vista - are set to download updates and to let
me know when they are ready. I don't allow automatic installation on my
machines. I also set machines up this way for my clients, explaining the
situation carefully. They can always call/email me if they need help.

Bottom line: don't install anything automatically. Look before you leap.

Malke
--
MS-MVP
Elephant Boy Computers
www.elephantboycomputers.com
Don't Panic!

"t-4-2" <guest.DeleteThis@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:4b46036aebd15e078181fa00ac5d912e@nntp-gateway.com...
>
> FromTheRafters;709265 Wrote:
>> "t-4-2" <guest.DeleteThis@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message
>> news:dea25e92fd0aa81fa845698ef6a01a39@xxxxxx-gateway.com...> > >
>> > >
>> > > FromTheRafters;709193 Wrote:
>> > > Bruse Chambers must have a XP. In vista all updates ,except optional
>> > > updates, will be installed auto, unless one disables the auto
>> > updating
>> > > option ( not recommended). Any updates that are so called "non-
>> > > essential" will be under the umbrella "optional". > >
>>
>> More likely IMO is that his Vista is in the "not recommended"
>> condition.
>> Those with a clue often use the "not recommended" setting because
>> they want the choice of whether or not to install a particular
>> update.
>>
>> ....and of course my above recommendation was for updates that
>> related
>> to security - not just new features the developers are adding to the
>> mix.
> Hello,
> I understand what you had said. Please consider this :
> 1. MS will not offer you an XP update if you have Vista.
> 2. As stated before, an update which is" non-essential" will be
> labelled optional. MS won't jam it down your throat.
> 3. You said that yourself that you would recommend to update it even if
> one did not use it much, if at all.
> So, what is the down side of enabling auto updating other than to
> satisfy one's ego of being master of one's destination, which is just a
> myth. It only applies to 1 % of the population -- may be less than that.

On those occasions where an update causes problems on some systems,
you have the option of implementing a workaround rather than the faulty
update. Indeed, the recommendation is meant 'for most people' because
they aren't expected to know how to implement workarounds - and the
assumption is that updates won't be faulty.

IIRC history has proven otherwise.