XPost: alt.comp.hardware   
   From: Spuds@yourmomshouse.org   
      
   On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 22:47:10 GMT, kony  wrote:   
      
   >On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 22:27:22 -0500, Spuds   
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 03:18:33 GMT, kony  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>On 1 Apr 2006 18:10:20 -0800, "Seymour Butts"   
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>It's getting to be a real pain having to manually install 40+ (and   
   >>>>growing daily) hotfixes from Microsoft everytime someone brings me an   
   >>>>unpatched XP/SP2 system. I know MS is working on an SP3 or rollup in   
   >>>>the near future but is there an unofficial rollup or even script that   
   >>>>is available to save me a half hour of aggravation everytime I gotta   
   >>>>bring an SP2 system up to date? I don't need a slipstream or patching   
   >>>>program to put them into the OS install, that does me no good. Just a   
   >>>>simple 1-click and install all post-sp2 hotfixes.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Thanks   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>What's wrong with just enabling automatic updates, leaving   
   >>>the system sit idle so it's downloading them at peak speed   
   >>>automatically, then rebooting at which point it displays   
   >>>something akin to a shield on the reboot window signifying   
   >>>you have things ready to install?  It's about as hands-off   
   >>>as it gets, and if your users "need" to have updates done   
   >>>for them, they might benefit more from the updates being   
   >>>automatic, risking the small chance an update could cause a   
   >>>problem, rather than the larger security risk of NOT having   
   >>>the updates in a timely manner.   
   >>   
   >>Not an optimal solution if the user was on a dialup connection.  Downloading   
   >>all the patches since SP2 takes eons.   
   >   
   >   
   >True, but, we're talking about the poster doing it now,   
   >plus, later if the owner only has dial-up, that IS the   
   >method that'll have to be used unless you're suggesting they   
   >bring the system back to the OP every time MS releases   
   >another patch??   
      
   I think the original context was for a tech to reconfigure a client's machine.   
   You wouldn't want to send the client away with the OS needing patches.  I   
   think it's a given that the client is responsible for updates after the fact.   
      
   Not sure why you'd conclude the user would have to bring the machine back.   
   It's infinitely easier installing patches via dialup, as they come out, rather   
   than several hundred at a shot.   
   --   
   If ignorance isn't bliss - I don't know what it is.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)