Microsoft Forces Shutdown of Autopatcher

kaufmanmoore writes "Posts on Neowin and Autopatcher's site announce Microsoft has forced the closure of the Autopatcher download section. Details are scarce as to the exact reason for the take down after over 4 years of availability, but an official from Microsoft legal says that it has nothing to do with Windows Genuine Advantage. Goodbye to another useful tool that helped sysadmins apply Microsoft's numerous patches."

One down, X to go.

[c0l0]

Whilst skimming over the About-Section of the page, this tool's description reminded me of heise's "offline update" ( http://www.heise-security.co.uk/articles/80682 [heise-security.co.uk] ). It's an alternative tool, allowing the download of selected Microsoft Windows update packs for later, offline (re-)use. Nice to have - if you're still on Windows, that is. Wonder if/when it's gonna be shot down as well.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

There's better ways to do the job anyways (like slipstreaming updates in the install CD, since autopatcher was mainly used on new installs). Loads of similar tools (like WindizUpdate and many others) and tools like MS' WSUS (free too) to do the job anyways. I won't particularly miss it either, it was quite buggy -- you'd expect it to finish doing its job unattended, but you'd usually come back to yet another error message. Not that it was hard to put all the patches in folder along with a batch file or scri

For many, this makes Windows XP more expensive.

[Futurepower(R)]

The purpose of Autopatcher was to reduce the VERY high maintenance costs of Windows XP. Windows often becomes corrupted and must be reloaded to clear away system files that have been infected with viruses and other malware.

Notice that Microsoft has not released a Service Pack 3 for Windows XP, even though it has been years since SP2 was released. The purpose of the delay is apparently to make Windows XP more expensive, in the hope that people will begin to adopt Windows Vista.

The Windows XP updates of just last Patch Tuesday were more than 20 Megabytes.

Windows Vista is not an option for many, since because of the hassles with Windows XP, many companies have a rule never to use a Windows version before the 2nd service pack is released, and the bugs in Windows Vista are reinforcing that rule.

Also, Windows Vista requires far more resources. Each new Windows version requires more resources, apparently to try to manipulate customers to buy new computers. That serves Microsoft's biggest customers, the computer builders.

SP3

[Enderandrew]

I have a copy of the Windows XP SP3 pre-beta. If you really look, you can find it is as well. It is very official, and stable for a beta. However unlike SP1 and SP2 it doesn't offer anything new. It is merely a collection of 900 fixes. Oddly enough, even though IE7 is considered a critical update, it isn't in SP3. So when I made my latest slipstreamed install CD, I still had to add WMP11 and IE7 seperately to the disc. I'm wondering if SP3 will add new functionality after pre-beta status. For instan

Re:

[Lt.Hawkins]

offline update is terrific; its basically a script that wgets the patches directly from Microsoft, and can work incrementally after each patch tuesday. it'll create an ISO for you, or just have it store the patches in a directory with an auto-installer.

I even customized it (its source is available) to download an unlisted windows language.

Terrific. How long before they break even that?

[Erris]

offline update is terrific; its basically a script that wgets the patches directly from Microsoft,

The geinous of M$ can not be understated. Rather than let people share the burden of distributing their "patches" (efficiently [netcraft.com])they will make everyone go to them. We have just seen how well they do at an easier task [slashdot.org].

It won't be long before they only allow "authenticated" clients to download.

The contrast between this and the free software world could not be greater. Every gnu/linux distro has been easy to keep up today for the last ten years and there are verified mirrors everywhere. When you download a package from a mirror, you can md5 sum check it against the original source and most package managers do this automatically. M$ on the other hand, won't even let you distribute what they consider "free". Be wary when someone from M$ advocates BSD, love of your freedom is not the reason for their advice.

Re:

[turbidostato]

"Most MS users are unsophisticated, which is one reason why MS products are so prone to bugs."

Uh!? Last I reviewed a reason for a software product to be prone to bugs were unsophisticated *developers* but... users?

Re:

[mrbcs]

This works for the last release: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=auto p atcher+mirrors&btnG=Search&meta=/ [google.ca]

I like this one better though:CT Update http://www.vulnerabilityassessment.co.uk/ctupdate. htm/ [vulnerabil...ment.co.uk]

This is sad...

[CFBMoo1]

That utility has obtained patches that Windows Update indicated were already installed but wasn't. This utility has saved a lot of headaches. Really sorry to see it go like that.

Contact MS here

[Darthmalt]

Via the Autopatcher torrent page Be polite [microsoft.com]

Captcha = Bypass
thought it appropriate

Morons.

[adam.dorsey]

Do they even understand the concept of bad publicity any more, or did they just stop caring?

Fuckers hit close to home, this time; Autopatcher was great for keeping relatives on dialup up-to-date.

Re:

[jollyreaper]

Do they even understand the concept of bad publicity any more, or did they just stop caring?

Maybe they're following the Hollywood publicist school of publicity: anything that doesn't involve a dead spouse or sex with children is good publicity.

Re:Morons.

[tftp]

They just stopped caring. And why not indeed - what is there to be afraid in squashing a little web site? The society is already in deep apathy (if not slumber,) and critical thought is about to send you to jail. Bloggers on /. will rage and fume for a few days, but nobody will notice that anyhow, and all that rage will dissipate in a week, but the good business remains.

MS is cynical and ruthless because it can and because it is profitable; and so it will stay. If you don't like that don't run Windows, it is that simple. With modern Linux distros it's not such a great loss. And if you don't want to fiddle with X settings, get a mac - Apple will charge you for that, but you get a sane system in return, not a buggy treadmill. [full disclosure: I do not own a modern Mac; all I have is an ancient PowerBook with 8.5.x MacOS, and I rarely even power it on, I keep it as a piece of history.]

Understatement of the Month.

[twitter]

... don't run Windows, it is that simple. With modern Linux distros it's not such a great loss.

It's more like a tremendous savings in time and trouble.

Re:Understatement of the Month.

[tftp]

Well, you do lose PC games, since rare a game works under WINE. But I personally fixed this issue by just getting a console, and I am not sorry that I did - the thing just works, and I don't need to throw kilobucks at video cards. And in any case, games are first released for consoles, and only much later - maybe - rereleased for a PC.

Re:

[pallmall1]

Not even close. I hate Windows as much as the next guy, but the simple fact is that Linux is not appropriate to 80+% of people's usage.

The modern distributions of linux beat windows (any flavor) hands-down. It's easier to install a kubuntu system from a DVD/CD than it is to install any version of windows. Kubuntu is also easier to update, more secure, and more reliable than windows. It also works better with most users existing peripherals (cellphones/PDAs, printers, etc) than Vista does. It's also eas

Re:

[hansamurai]

They must have hired the RIAA's publicist. Not that shutting down an autopatcher is on the same level as suing a dead person, but you gotta start somewhere, right?

Re:

[hedwards]

I don't think that in this case they are being unreasonable. I do think that it is a bit odd that they waited this long to assert their rights, but they are behaving.

I don't think that it has been a secret that cracked versions of windows have the potential to contain malware embedded at the deepest levels, to suggest that patches couldn't also be infected is a bit on the dishonest side.

As to whether this is really why, I have no idea. But I personally wouldn't feel comfortable downloading a copy over the n

Should have bought and funded it instead

[EmbeddedJanitor]

Instead of shutting it down, Microsoft should have bought Autopatcher and funded it.

This service added a lot of value to MS customers. Tearing it down because they were better than their equivalent is destructive.

Doing things that make your products harder to use is bad business sense. It really shows how badly out of touch MS is with the industry.

Re:

[TechForensics]

What on Earth could Microsoft be thinking making Windows XP harder to use? Would kind of tend to make Vista look good by comparison..

Oh wait....

Re:Should have bought and funded it instead

[binarybum]

"Doing things that make your products harder to use is bad business sense. It really shows how badly out of touch MS is with the industry."

Nah, it shows what a powerful monopoly they have developed. They can make using their products downright miserable (they practically have already) and people will continue to curse that evil ol' bill gates as they IM each-other on MS messenger in MS vista on their laptops with the "built for windows!" sticker still attached. Plenty of other companies would like to implement the kind of security lockdowns MS has, and are capable of doing so. However, market pressures force them to realize that excessive measures create a barrier to use and sway customers towards friendlier products. Microsoft is not out of touch with the industry. Microsoft is the industry.

Re:

[canuck57]

Nah, it shows what a powerful monopoly they have developed.

Microsoft aught to remember how fast Netscape, Visicalc, WordPerfect, ccMail, and a long road kill list lost to monopolistic competition. For functional competition, it will be worse once people overcome unfounded fear of change.

Apple knows this first hand, remember Apple IIe and MS-DOS? I just hope Apple knows revenge is best served cold.

And more and more are turning Linux, Dell isn't selling them because people are 100% happy with Vista. Th

Re:Should have bought and funded it instead

[Technician]

They can make using their products downright miserable

Tell me about it.

My wife bought a new Vista laptop for her Masters classes. A simple request was to transfer some files and documents to and from our network SMB fileserver (A stand alone product).

They changed the default authentication protocol. It can't log in to any server using a password unless you either upgrade the server or downgrade Vists (not recommended by Microsoft) The server is an embedded Linux appliance (SimpleTech SimpleShare NAS).

The next simple task was to connect to my LAN printers. They hang on the LAN using the well established IPP interface with an address of IPP://192.168.1.101/lp1 and IPP://192.168.1.102/lp1. It took 4 hours and lots of Google searches to find out how to enter a non-IIS printserver address into Vista.

To make it easy, you leave off the IPP:// and put in the IP address and leave off the /lp1. On another page, you change from raw to LPT and put in the port name of lp1. Simple but not intuitive. To make matters even easier, noplace in Vista does it refer to it as Internet Printing Protocol. They just call it Network Printing. Very intuitive and user friendly.

Ubunto was much simpler to connect to these Windows printers. (an HP laserjet and HP inkjet) on garden variety stand alone hardware Print servers using IPP. (Hawking Technology Print servers)

Why would Microsoft make it much harder on Vista Home to connect to a home network and printers? It makes no sense to me.

It's almost like they designed it to be easier to use Ubuntu at home. It is much easier to use Ubuntu at home than Vista. Vista kept interrupting for a Java Update, Sound system Update, AV update and reregistration, and a few other things got in the way of setting up LAN settings and configuring 2 printers. Ubuntu was much better in that also. A single small notification popped up letting me know there were updates available. The small notification did not cover my applications in Ubuntu or force a reboot to close the notification.

Re:

[ACDChook]

Just wait. I can almost guarantee that they've done this now to clear the way for something new of theirs. Something which will allow you to download updates for use and installation on multiple PC's at a later day. Yep, yet another MS 'innovation'.

Re:

[LurkerXXX]

Why fund it? They already make and give out WSUS [microsoft.com] for free.

Re:

[secolactico]

Can you stick wsus on a dvd/cd and take it to your relative's XP PC that's still on dialup?

Microsoft should release roll-up updates every month or every patch day. That way, new install can simply apply the service pack and then apply the roll-up and be up to date.

While I regret seeing autopatcher go, I understand what I believe are Microsoft's reasons: autopatcher is distributing MS's patches without permission. Besides intellectual properties issues there's the question of integrity. Who vouches for t

Re:

[Grishnakh]

I'll fill in #5 for you:

5. Maintain a monopoly in operating systems and office software, and sit back and laugh as people continue to buy and use your products despite superior (but not fully compatible) alternatives because they're either afraid or apathetic, no matter how inconvenient you make your products.

People want to stick with the market leader, no matter how much better any alternative is. They also especially want to be "compatible" with everyone else, which is one of their reasons for sticking

Re:

[slapout]

"We don't care. We don't have to. We're the OS company."

Stop caring?

[mac1235]

I slept throught the bit where they used to care...

Re:Morons.

[ConceptJunkie]

Microsoft stopped caring over a decade ago. Do you think they have any interest in what users want or need? It's all about lock-in, baby.

They don't care what's on your hardware as long as it's theirs. Actually I wish that were true, because XP is pretty decent, but they couldn't leave well enough alone and had to spend 5 years squatting on the toilet to excrete Vista, the first piece of software that doesn't even pretend to offer anything new to the customers, it's only selling points are what's good for Microsoft and their big media buddies. OK, I lied. It does offer a new feature for users: It's shiny.

Re:Morons.

[William-Ely]

I used it a lot as a PC tech. Microsoft might not realize that some people use dial-up still and downloading large updates isn't really practical. With Autopatcher all I had to do was pop in a CD or a thumb drive and get down to business patching up Windows. At least then I could be sure that when I left my clients computer fully patched up no matter what their connection was like. Way to go MS.

/em Pours out a '40 for the departed Autopatcher ; ;

WindizUpdate next?

[Aggrajag]

So are they going to shut down WindizUpdate next as it is a lot more useful that Windowsupdate has ever been. Then again maybe the patches are downloaded from Microsoft's servers but I'm not sure.

Re:

[tholomyes]

Shhh, don't mention any alternatives here, you'll just give them ideas!

Are they making the arguement that.....

[8127972]

... this is some sort of DMCA violation? That's bizarre because Microsoft has known about them for some time and according to their site, they didn't care:

"Q: Is AutoPatcher legal?
A: Yes, Antonis Kaladis (our project manager) once spoke to a Microsoft employee and apparently they know about us but don't care what we do! The AutoPatcher project has been going strong since 2003 and never had a sniff of trouble from Microsoft."

From http://www.autopatcher.com/faq/ [autopatcher.com]

Re:

[tftp]

Meet the new MS lawyer, not exactly the same as the old MS lawyer.

Re:

[prshaw]

How does someone in your company talking to a random Microsoft employee make them legal? How does Microsoft knowing about them make them legal?

I am not a lawyer, but I think I know when one is needed. And I think if that is their claim on being legal they really need to talk to one.

I have no idea if they are legal or not. My point is just talking to someone in a company and having them say they know about you doesn't make what you are doing legal.

Re:

[PPH]

IANAL, but there is a legal principle called laches [wikipedia.org] which allows you to defend yourself against civil proceedings if the plaintiff has sat on his rights for too long. If it can be shown that this service has existed and Microsoft was aware, they can't stop it anymore.

How 'bout getting that in writing next time?

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

"Q: Is AutoPatcher legal?
A: Yes, Antonis Kaladis (our project manager) once spoke to a Microsoft employee and apparently they know about us but don't care what we do! The AutoPatcher project has been going strong since 2003 and never had a sniff of trouble from Microsoft."

How 'bout getting that in writing next time? Welcome to the real world, folks.

On the other hand, the only thing I can think of that they're doing wrong might be to redistribute Microsoft patches from their own servers or media. (Not fami

Re:How 'bout getting that in writing next time?

[quantum bit]

I have noticed at least one hotfix that's not normally publicly available, but was included with autopatcher. You know, the ones where you go to the KB article and it describes the exact symptoms you're seeing, and when you scroll down to download the patch it says something like:

"We don't think this is a major problem, and people who are having it are obviously too dumb to realize that it's somehow their own fault. Therefore, in order to get this patch, you'll have to call our support line where we will bill you outrageous fees in order to tell you whether you really need the patch or not."

Fortunately, the one I was looking for just happened to be included with autopatcher somehow, so I extracted the file and sure enough it fixed the problem.

Re:

[ScrewMaster]

Yeah, well probably somebody at Microsoft noticed that Autopatcher was including hotfixes that would otherwise bring in more revenue for Microsoft. Wouldn't take much more than that to get the Legal Department involved.

Re:How 'bout getting that in writing next time?

[afidel]

You don't even need to call anymore, just go to this form [microsoft.com] and you can get the non regression tested hotfixes by email! Include platform because they will want it even if there is only one applicable fix in the KB article.

Re:Are they making the arguement that.....

[hal2814]

So Kaladis talked to Microsoft's best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend who heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with a girl who works somewhere in a Microsoft call center who saw Autopatcher in use at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty ironclad. It's my understanding that they can pursue legal action against Autopatcher at their leisure even if the Microsoft employee in question was accurately reflecting Microsoft-as-a-whole's knowledge of Autopatcher.

Re:

[RobertM1968]

"Yeah, so I talked to the janitor at MS, and he says he doesnt care... so lets keep AutoPatcher up..."

Re:

[Reziac]

Okay, explain to me how you're supposed to get updates, say for a client whose PC is borked or unsafe, if you don't have a functional Windows machine handy, already running a version of Windows approved by M$? (Presently meaning with WGA installed, I gather.)

Are the patch installers still available?

[LordSnooty]

Autopatcher was really just a front end to all the official MS one-off hotfix exes. If those files are still available, why not adapt the frontend to grab those files from MS instead? Hell, the least MS could do is take on the tech and offer it to their customers with a free WGA check thrown in. Because it was so much easier even for home users with say two machines to update at home, plus mum & dad's, and that one they built for their pal.

Torrents for August release plz?

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/mystats.php [m2ys4u.co.uk]

Coming tomorrow

[faloi]

Microsoft announces a new service available for $50 a seat (check with sales rep for volume licensing) that will allow administrators to do what used to be free from some web sites.

Torrent links here for August ...

[trolltalk.com]

http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/mystats.php [m2ys4u.co.uk]

http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_DirectX_Aug07_x86_ENU_Addon.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]
http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_Extras_Jul07_x86_ENU_Addon.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]\
http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_Office02_Aug07_ENU_Core.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]
http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_Office03_Aug07_ENU_Core.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]
http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_Office07_Aug07_ENU_Core.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]
http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_OfficePack_Aug07_ENU_Addon.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]
http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_Win2K3_Aug07_x86_ENU_Core.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]
http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_Win2K_Aug07_ENU_Core.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]
http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_WinVista_Jul07_Core.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]
http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_WinX64_Jul07_x64_ENU_Core.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]
http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_WinXP_Aug07_x86_ENU_Core.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]
http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_WinXP_MCE2005_May07_x86_ENU_Addon.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]
http://autopatcher.m2ys4u.co.uk/torrents/AutoPatch er_WinXP_WMP10_May07_x86_ENU_Addon.exe.torrent [m2ys4u.co.uk]

Found via google cache :-)

I noted this on Neowin...

[8127972]

"I asked the representative if Windows Genuine Advantage had anything to do with it and he categorically told me this was not the case, he added that Windows Update for pre-Vista versions of Windows can now be accessed using Firefox and that the concern at Microsoft had more to do with the possible malicious code that could be redistributed with certified Microsoft updates."

Sure. Whatever. We all know that there's never been a case of malicious code distributed with Autopatcher. So I'm calling it now. Watch M$ come up with their own tool that does the same thing as Autopatcher and watch them find a way to turn it into a revenue stream.

Re:

[nutrock69]

Watch M$ come up with their own tool that does the same thing as Autopatcher and watch them find a way to turn it into a revenue stream.

They already have that. It's called WGA.

It auto-patches your system, then claims it isn't genuine and tells you that you need to buy your operating system again. Instant revenue stream.

Re:

[ceoyoyo]

No, it's nothing to do with Genuine (dis)Advantage. It's because of... um... security! Yeah, that's it!

Re:

[iminplaya]

"I asked the representative if Windows Genuine Advantage had anything to do with it and he categorically told me this was not the case..."

"I am not gay; I never have been gay..."

Re:

[quantum bit]

Watch M$ come up with their own tool that does the same thing as Autopatcher and watch them find a way to turn it into a revenue stream.

They have one, it's called WSUS. It's a "free" download that lets you set up your own mirror for automatic updates. The only problem is that it's so big and bloated (IIS, SQL server, AJAX-ish web page for management) that you pretty much need dedicated hardware (and Windows Server license, ca-ching!) to get any decent performance out of it.

Re:

[quantum bit]

Hmm, I'll have to take a look. It was still in "beta" status last time I checked. I wonder if they've improved the database schema any. I knew it had to be pretty badly designed when I performed a simple operation such as synchronizing with the Windows Update servers or approving a batch of updates and the sqlservr.exe process would be pegged at 100% CPU for what (in a sanely designed schema anyway) should be a simple INSERT or UPDATE statement.

It was good, but

[Toreo asesino]

Patches can be slipstreamed anyway [winsupersite.com], and for the mother of all 'off-line patching systems' there's Windows Server Update Services [microsoft.com].

That said, the overall rhetoric of this move still isn't nice. AutoPatcher was at the very least, a handy tool for people that didn't know about the above methods, and to leave it 4 years in the game before sending in the lawyers isn't a nice way of treating the user community. A shame if you ask me.

Re:

[MightyMartian]

Microsoft has a long history of fucking over the community. Just remember this the next time one of the whores from Redmond comes around pretending to be our friend.

Re:

[DRAGONWEEZEL]

Hey! I am one of the whores from redmond. And M$ clients pay me well you insensitive CLOD! As for pretending to be your freind, that's what you all pay me to do!

Re:

[zippthorne]

There have been a number of patches since SP2 came out, and SP2 is a 1-reboot patch anyway, so why would you bother?

But you don't understand what it was good for

[spun]

Patches can be slipstreamed anyway, and for the mother of all 'off-line patching systems' there's Windows Server Update Services.

Slipstreaming? WSUS? Those are useful in entirely different situations. Autopatcher is for when you are visiting your aunt Tilly and don't want to spend four hours downloading all the latest patches for her over her dialup. Please explain how either of your proposed solutions would be even remotely useful in the very common situation of patching a relative's computer.

Re:

[HoosierPeschke]

I do an update via VMware. I wrote a script for apache that displays all hits (through squid) to Windows Update. I then download the files manually. I use the via a perl logon script I have for my Samba domain (which is easily portable to a flash drive) which does silent updates with logging, so if something doesn't take, I can just install manually. With the consideration of autopatcher going down, I may release said scripts so other geeks can still have a useful way to help non-geeks. Did I mention th

Re:

[HoosierPeschke]

Not really, every few months I'll use hfslip to slipstream the updates and nLite to customize an install so I'll have an up to date disc. Besides, I wanted to learn perl and this project really helped. Besides, at least my way I can get updated drivers for my hardware.

Re:

[spun]

Oh twitter, you are so predictable. But to be fair, the aunt Tillys of the world could be just as happy with Linux as they are with Windows if it does what they want to do. What do they do with computers? They write email, chat, write and print out letters, view and print pictures... hey wait a minute, how easy is that last one? A quick visit to MEPIS help [mepis.org] shows the camera part of it shouldn't be a problem. What about printers? Looks like MEPIS has a nice guide [mepisguides.com] for that, too.

Things are looking good so far.

B

Re:It was good, but

[NMerriam]

Patches can be slipstreamed anyway [winsupersite.com], and for the mother of all 'off-line patching systems' there's Windows Server Update Services [microsoft.com].

Yeah, except that neither of those things does what autopatcher does. I don't want to have to reinstall the whole OS just to keep patches up to date, and I don't want to have to lay ethernet cable several hundred miles to my relatives' homes in order to patch them quickly from a server I control.

Re:

[loraksus]

Next time I go to a small company to do updates, I'll be sure to bring along a windows server to do updates.

Microsoft

[Archangel Michael]

There is no reasonable alternative to the AutoPatcher from Microsoft, and Microsoft is threatened by revelation of hundred patches for a clean/new install of XP (wSP2).

Apple and Linux, he we come!

Re:

[Twanfox]

As someone else said, WSUS is really not useful for when you go visit a relative and all they have is dialup. Where's the WSUS server in that setup? Oh ya.

Slipstreaming & WSUS are not equivalent

[Noksagt]

Slipstreaming, so far as I understand, solves only installation (or, at the least, would not be as space-efficient as a tool that was only for updates).

WSUS still requires a network.

There are non-networked PCs or PCs with slow/intermittent network connections that must be kept updated too. AutoPatcher addressed this niche quite well. So what to use instead?

Re:

[Archangel Michael]

Running WSUS isn't a solution to deploying fully patched computers. WSUS keeps them patched, but is still sucks at initial patching.

What I'm talking about is WinXP clean install that is fully patched. I used NON-MICROSOFT products to keep my installers fully patched, because Microsoft STILL doesn't provide a tool to do that for me.

I use WDS (RIS) to deploy WinXP over the wire, but I sill have to MANUALLY patch (slipstream) the install. To maintain that, I used NLITE and Autopatcher combination to keep my in

Windizupdate

[witte]

You can find windows updates thru http://windizupdate.62nds.com/ [62nds.com]
I hardly use IE, and this updates through Firefox.
Which is of course very neat. *cough*firefox fan*cough*

Re:

[StikyPad]

You mean I can download all my OS updates through an unknown, untrusted intermediary with a questionable URL? Sign me up!

Re:

[Reziac]

And that requires javascript to access any content. When I saw that, I turned around and left. NO update is better than an untrustable update.

From Neowin

[Anonymous Coward]

I had a call from Microsoft Legal this morning and they have told me that we are no longer allowed to endorse AutoPatcher on Neowin.

Microsoft will only allow updates to be downloaded from its own servers.

AutoPatcher started in 2003 and has been redistributed in some of the worlds best computer magazine cover CD/DVD's. I have no explanation for why Microsoft allowed it to continue unchecked for 4 years before making this decision.

I asked the representative if Windows Genuine Advantage had anything to do with

AutoPatcher needs to think "business" instead

[SplatMan_DK]

They could have avoided a lot of trouble, if they had just signed up as a Microsoft Partner. It costs nothing and would have made them "a co-player" rather than a "security risk".

- Jesper

Re:

[SplatMan_DK]

I think your statement is just a bit troll-ish and unfair (not enough to be moderated down though).

While I agree that the OOXML approval process in certain countries sucks ass, that is not in itself a proof that *ALL* Microsoft Partners are dishonorable.

Re:

[SplatMan_DK]

Untrue. And I could give you many examples. For now I will just stick with one: DotNetNuke [dotnetnuke.com], an OpenSource and free CMS of quite good quality for the .NET platform. They make a great product, have a good community, give their product away for free (free as in "beer), and supply the sourcecode along with it with a semi-free (as in "freedom") license which compares somewhat to an LGPL.

Can you please describe to me, in what way you think they are evil?
(because I surely can't see it).

Missing the obvious

[Sefert]

You are all missing the obvious reason for the shutdown. Microsoft has finally fixed all the bugs! Celebrate!

Why does Microsoft hate their users?

[Snowtide]

We give them the vast majority of our IT budgets, we try to keep believeing in them and still they hate us......

Shenanigans

[krgallagher]

"Microsoft legal says that it has nothing to do with Windows Genuine Advantage. "

I call Shenanigans!

Can we get an auto downloader for these updates?

[Noksagt]

The reason for the ban:

Microsoft will only allow updates to be downloaded from its own servers.

That's certainly MS's right. A technical objection is that one could use cryptographic hashes/signing so that the download source wouldn't matter (and wouldn't it be caveat emptor if users didn't go to MS for updates?), but c'est la vie.

But why can't we make this even vaguely win-win? Provide a utility that will download ALL of these updates (whether the machine thought they were applied or not) directly from MS for use on removable media.

What alternatives are there for those on dial up (or other cases of no or intermittent network connection)? For those who have had malware make edits to their hosts file and/or browser security settings that make obtaining updates directly from MS on the computer they're updating difficult?

Re:

[Noksagt]

I was under the impression that all the updates are still contain their digital signatures, so anyone can verify their veracity.

I believe that you're right. My real point was that those signatures should obviate any concerns about the patches being distributed by third parties.

Still many useful tools

[ThanatosMinor]

I have found that a combination of Heise Security's ctupdate [heise-security.co.uk] and nLite [nliteos.com] can be used to create a very nice custom Windows installation CD that not only includes any updates you choose to include, but you can also specify a large number of custom registry settings that will be set when you install.
Is very nice

Microsoft is immune to bad press

[rbanzai]

Microsoft is so large and its userbase so enormous that no amount of bad press can affect them. Anything short of eating live babies would not impact them in the slightest.

Shutting down Autopatcher is nothing to them and will not affect their business in even a negligible fashion.

I would like to think otherwise but I can't. They are unstoppable.

I just used this to fix a xp media center system

[Joe The Dragon]

That I did a repair install on and was not able to install windows updates after running auto patcher windows update now works.

Now THAT'S customer service!

[kimvette]

So much for small business and residential users in rural areas [slashdot.org]. You know, this will hurt ONLY paying customers; not the "pirates" downloading slipstreamed ISOs off of IRC and torrent networks (or buying "pirated" CDs in the streets, etc). This also hurts small businesses on cable and DSL connections where there are "unspecified" download caps to their "unlimited" internet services.

  Congratulations, Microsoft. You've shut down yet another tool useful for installing and deploying legitimate Windows, thereby increasing the value of "pirated" Windows offerings AND provided more reasons for users to choose alternatives such as Linux, OS X, and BSD. Good move there.

Why not actually, oh, I don't know, innovate some new features for Windows rather than harassing small third-party developers who offer FREE utilities to make YOUR piece of crap offering easier to manage? Like, say, I dunno, work on a better filesystem [slashdot.org] or something.

Re:

[kimvette]

I have a CD of SoftICE from a friend who bought it in China in his home town - it's on a pressed CD, but handwritten label. I didn't ask him if he literally bought it off a street vendor, or from an established store, but does it matter?

The CD's contents is presumably identical to the retail release (if it were still able to be purchased legitimately that is). I keep it around just because it's an interesting conversation piece about what passes for legitimate product in China.

I can't believe no one's mentioned this yet...

[Eddy Da KillaBee]

They might not listen, or they might -- who knows? <a href="https://support.microsoft.com/common/survey. aspx?scid=sw;en-gb;1348&showpage=1&WS=mscomukform1 ">Let Microsoft know about the mistake they're making by writing to them!</a> (I found the link at the torrent site for AutoPatcher.)

Re:

[stinerman]

Part of being a monopoly means not having to give a shit about what your customers think. I don't think they've cared since W2K was released and even with Vista tanking, I don't see this changing anytime soon.

What about the DVD ISO on MS's download page?

[Arctech]

I haven't heard of this before, (just found it, actually), but would this be a reasonable facsimile?
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=913086&SD=tech [microsoft.com]

Re:What about the DVD ISO on MS's download page?

[planckscale]

It looks like, for example, the latest August 2007 2GB .iso release contains 10 updates with support for XP (x64), Server 2003 (x64/Itanium), windows 2000 and Vista (x64) in all languages. It would take a lot of downloading of every .iso release to get every patch released since SP2...

You're missing the point!

[WarwickRyan]

It's about security: if you're not downloading the patches direct from Microsoft, there's more of a chance of them being compromised. Sure, it may not have happened yet but that's not to say it won't happen in the future.

Now what would be useful, is for Microsoft themselves to make it very easy for you to download and burn an 'windows update' DVD that'll take each version of XP up to date. Downloadable direct from Microsoft.

Alternatively, they could offer hashes for the downloads on Microsoft's servers, which Autopatcher can be pointed at in order to verify the downloads.

Had they done that, then they'd avoid all the negative PR!

Re:

[otomo_1001]

A better alternative would be for them to digitally sign their patches. Then it doesn't matter who gives you the file, as long as the decrypted file matches you know you have what you want.

Isn't this why we have things like ssl certs? Even Solaris does this, although the tool is pretty annoying.

Re:

[Spy der Mann]

It's about security: if you're not downloading the patches direct from Microsoft, there's more of a chance of them being compromised.

As opposed to not downloading the patches at all because you don't meet WGA requirements?

Re:

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Yes, if it is not directly from MSFT it could be compromised. So dont go about hiring sys admins yourself. Even if they have some paper saying they are MSFT certified. You should only hire Genuine Microsoft Employee to come to your site and do site maintenance. And also you should not plug into any generic Internet. Only Genuine Microsoft Internet is really really secure. And dont even think of using a Non Microsoft Keyboard or mouse or anything. If it is not Microsoft, it is not secure. Keep repeating that

Re:

[WarwickRyan]

That's not really the point - what's happening here is you're downloading patches from someone who's a compete stranger and not associated with Microsoft.

So yeah, the chances of compromises are much higher than distribution from a fixed point controlled by Microsoft themselves.

You'd most likely be one of the first to crucify Microsoft if a similar system results in large numbers of PCs being controlled by some Russian ID-theft or botnet criminals..

What's the deal with Neowin?

[belmolis]

Microsoft is within its rights, though obnoxious, with regard to Autopatcher, but since when is it their business what Neowin says about Autopatcher? Where does MS get off telling Neowin to take down their forums? Is MS just being a bully or is there some relationship between MS and Neowin that I don't know about?

How much money did this program save?

[r_jensen11]

I mean, neither Microsoft nor any large companies have "unlimited" internet usage. Once you scale your infrastructure up large enough, you have to pay for all of the data transferred in and out. So how much money could this program save not only Microsoft (which has enough money as it is), but all of the companies that used this? Or are there "official" ways of storing updates on your own computers to distribute amongst others on your network?

Just grab the script from MS that does it for you.

[JediJorgie]

MSDN's Version:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-US/library/aa387102. aspx [microsoft.com]

My modified version that forces cscript.exe and adds an /auto switch:
http://b0n.us/WUA_SearchDownloadInstall.vbs [b0n.us]

It usually takes 3 times with reboots in between to get all the patches.

It will use your WSUS settings and get the patches from a local server if you have one.

Yes, they are VBS, don't run them without reading them and understanding them!

jorgie

Re:

[Achromatic1978]

Haha. I know many sysadmins who needed to update sufficient systems that an automatic system was required: Number who used SMS/WSUS? Dozens. Number who relied on Autopatcher? None.

Re:

[Vancorps]

Sounds like Autopatcher was more useful for mobile techs going to places with less than adequate Internet access. Of course such a tech could setup WSUS and just copy all the files to a thumb drive. Most people round here prolly would prefer to just complain about Microsoft. From a liability and quality control standpoint I understand Microsoft's position. Although I would have preferred Microsoft worked with the folks rather than shut them down.

Re:

[quantum bit]

It's possible to extract the individual patches from WSUS, but it's not very easy to do so, since they're all named as some big long hash value that has nothing to do with the KB number of the patch. So it's very difficult to figure out which ones are even for your OS version / architecture, much less which ones you need.