Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

KB891711 UPdate AGAIN! Whats the matter with Microsoft?

Last response: in Windows 95/98/ME
Share
April 25, 2005 10:36:24 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

I just came back from fixing a disabled lady's ME computer because it auto
updated with the defective Microsoft Update KB891711.exe and Q891711.DLL
again.

How can I fix the update manager so it does NOT download and install that
update again?
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 4:20:35 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

How did you establish that the update was the old rather than the new
version of the 891711 patch? What were the versions of the two files
involved?
--
Mike Maltby MS-MVP
mike.maltby@gmail.com


Firewire <firewire@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> I just came back from fixing a disabled lady's ME computer because it
> auto updated with the defective Microsoft Update KB891711.exe and
> Q891711.DLL again.
>
> How can I fix the update manager so it does NOT download and install
> that update again?
April 26, 2005 10:44:32 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

The symptoms of the of the infection with the KB891711 update were the same.
They were auto downloaded several weeks apart. The name of the update is the
same, to remove it was the same. I removed it both times for the lady. It
was a reissue of the same update. I did not mean to say it was the old
update that came back.

Firewire

"Mike M" <No_Spam@Corned_Beef.Only> wrote in message
news:eklri1eSFHA.3184@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> How did you establish that the update was the old rather than the new
> version of the 891711 patch? What were the versions of the two files
> involved?
> --
> Mike Maltby MS-MVP
> mike.maltby@gmail.com
>
>
> Firewire <firewire@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I just came back from fixing a disabled lady's ME computer because it
>> auto updated with the defective Microsoft Update KB891711.exe and
>> Q891711.DLL again.
>>
>> How can I fix the update manager so it does NOT download and install
>> that update again?
>
Related resources
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 7:08:04 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

I also have a question regarding this same Windows update and subsequent
"fix" update. Have just posted a message about an error message I've been
getting, but am not sure that is related, although I have my doubts. Anyway
.... I digress --

My question is this, since I do the Windows updates automatically, is there
something I should do to remove the bad or "old" KB891711 update and related
updates from my system? I notice they are in the installed programs list
although they at least are not running in my start up anymore. (Am wondering
if this is my memory and start up problem too.)

Thanks for any and all help/input on this #$%@! update. *g*

Suzanne

"Firewire" wrote:

> I just came back from fixing a disabled lady's ME computer because it auto
> updated with the defective Microsoft Update KB891711.exe and Q891711.DLL
> again.
>
> How can I fix the update manager so it does NOT download and install that
> update again?
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
April 27, 2005 12:30:28 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

In article <#9xszceSFHA.356@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>, Firewire says...

> I just came back from fixing a disabled lady's ME computer because it auto
> updated with the defective Microsoft Update KB891711.exe and Q891711.DLL
> again.

> How can I fix the update manager so it does NOT download and install that
> update again?

I am not sure what is wrong. I was one of those having problems with this
particular hotfix; the latest version available from the WinUpdate site
fixed the issue on my computer.

--
Norman
~Win dain a lotica, En vai tu ri, Si lo ta
~Fin dein a loluca, En dragu a sei lain
~Vi fa-ru les shutai am, En riga-lint
Anonymous
April 27, 2005 3:44:20 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

The "bad" (for some) 891711 hotfix will be replaced by the new version
without the user having to uninstall the old version with the new version
being offered via both Automatic Update and on the Windows Update site.
--
Mike Maltby MS-MVP
mike.maltby@gmail.com


Suzywoo2 <Suzywoo2@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> I also have a question regarding this same Windows update and
> subsequent "fix" update. Have just posted a message about an error
> message I've been getting, but am not sure that is related, although
> I have my doubts. Anyway ... I digress --
>
> My question is this, since I do the Windows updates automatically, is
> there something I should do to remove the bad or "old" KB891711
> update and related updates from my system? I notice they are in the
> installed programs list although they at least are not running in my
> start up anymore. (Am wondering if this is my memory and start up
> problem too.)
>
> Thanks for any and all help/input on this #$%@! update. *g*
April 27, 2005 10:20:03 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

"N. Miller" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1cd8a730d5cfc6b898a7f7@msnews.microsoft.com...
> I am not sure what is wrong. I was one of those having problems with this
> particular hotfix; the latest version available from the WinUpdate site
> fixed the issue on my computer.
>
> --

I suppose I can take the ladies computer to the update site and see if I can
download the "fixed" version of the hotfix. But I believe at this point it
will just cause the same problems as before... blue screen exception error
06:0000:00002c47 and constant explorer errors on big white error windows
when connecting to the Internet. The only way to get control of the computer
is to ctrl-alt-del, end task the KB891711 running in the background, then
uninstall it in Add/remove. Same symptoms, same hotfix number that was auto
downloaded March 16, the second time was two days ago, April 25. She said it
had been in the tray for several weeks because she was afraid to install it.
When I was installing a USB hub and external hard drive I let it update.
The symptoms started as soon as she tried to connect to the Internet so she
called me to come back to remove it.

Firewire
Anonymous
April 28, 2005 3:40:30 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

> She said it had been in
> the tray for several weeks because she was afraid to install it.

The 06 error you are seeing is symptomatic of the error caused for some by
installing the OLD version of the 891711 patch. That the update was
sitting waited for several weeks to be installed strongly suggests that
this is the old patch that has been installed and not the updated version.
To verify which version is installed you need to check the version of the
file kb891711.exe. The original version was version 4.10.2222 which was
then updated to v4.10.2223 when the patch was updated and re-released on
15 April. The file q891711.dll remains as v4.10.2222 regardless of which
version of the patch is installed.
--
Mike Maltby MS-MVP
mike.maltby@gmail.com


Firewire <firewire@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> I suppose I can take the ladies computer to the update site and see
> if I can download the "fixed" version of the hotfix. But I believe
> at this point it will just cause the same problems as before... blue
> screen exception error 06:0000:00002c47 and constant explorer errors
> on big white error windows when connecting to the Internet. The only
> way to get control of the computer is to ctrl-alt-del, end task the
> KB891711 running in the background, then uninstall it in Add/remove.
> Same symptoms, same hotfix number that was auto downloaded March 16,
> the second time was two days ago, April 25. She said it had been in
> the tray for several weeks because she was afraid to install it. When
> I was installing a USB hub and external hard drive I let it update.
> The symptoms started as soon as she tried to connect to the Internet
> so she called me to come back to remove it.
April 28, 2005 3:40:31 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

"Mike M" <No_Spam@Corned_Beef.Only> wrote in message
news:e5Eogo3SFHA.3680@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> She said it had been in
>> the tray for several weeks because she was afraid to install it.
>
> The 06 error you are seeing is symptomatic of the error caused for some by
> installing the OLD version of the 891711 patch. That the update was
> sitting waited for several weeks to be installed strongly suggests that
> this is the old patch that has been installed and not the updated version.
> To verify which version is installed you need to check the version of the
> file kb891711.exe. The original version was version 4.10.2222 which was
> then updated to v4.10.2223 when the patch was updated and re-released on
> 15 April. The file q891711.dll remains as v4.10.2222 regardless of which
> version of the patch is installed.
> --
> Mike Maltby MS-MVP
> mike.maltby@gmail.com
>
>
The version information is helpful. If it happens again I will check it out.

The reason I believe it is the new version and not the old one sitting there
is because the old one was installed via the auto update. That would have
completed the download and update and removed it from the tray, right? The
only way that would be the same one is if it remained in the tray after
being installed the first time. It could not even have been there from the
system restore either because at that time she did not have system restore
enabled. After I fixed the first KB891711 failure, uninstalled it and
deleted the necessary files, I enabled system restore.

How could the update remain in the tray to be installed again and again? If
it can do that, how do I get rid of the defective one that is staying in the
tray? Unless that is the issue, there were two hotfixes downloaded, both
causing the problem.

Firewire
Anonymous
April 28, 2005 5:45:56 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

I was under the impression that you said you had uninstalled rather than
disabled the original patch. If that was the case then the old patch
would have been offered again.
--
Mike Maltby MS-MVP
mike.maltby@gmail.com


Firewire <firewire@invalid.invalid> wrote:


> The version information is helpful. If it happens again I will check
> it out.
> The reason I believe it is the new version and not the old one
> sitting there is because the old one was installed via the auto
> update. That would have completed the download and update and
> removed it from the tray, right? The only way that would be the same
> one is if it remained in the tray after being installed the first
> time. It could not even have been there from the system restore
> either because at that time she did not have system restore enabled.
> After I fixed the first KB891711 failure, uninstalled it and deleted
> the necessary files, I enabled system restore.
> How could the update remain in the tray to be installed again and
> again? If it can do that, how do I get rid of the defective one that
> is staying in the tray? Unless that is the issue, there were two
> hotfixes downloaded, both causing the problem.
>
> Firewire
April 28, 2005 2:42:53 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

"Firewire" <firewire@invalid.invalid> wrote in
news:ed#XDd3SFHA.3392@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl:

>
> The only
> way to get control of the computer is to ctrl-alt-del, end task the
> KB891711 running in the background,
> Firewire
>
>

The updated version of 891711 is NOT present on ctrl-alt-del ..... you
still have the original release.

--
Adam and Eve - the worlds happiest couple ever.
Neither had a mother-in-law.
April 28, 2005 8:40:36 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

"Mike M" <No_Spam@Corned_Beef.Only> wrote in message
news:o MuGlu4SFHA.3636@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>I was under the impression that you said you had uninstalled rather than
>disabled the original patch. If that was the case then the old patch would
>have been offered again.
> --
> Mike Maltby MS-MVP
> mike.maltby@gmail.com
>
>
I uninstalled it in Add/Remove, and I deleted the .exe and .dll files that
are part of the KB891711. If it was the old patch that came back, how do I
remove it from the computer completely so that it never shows up in the
update tray again? System Restore was not enabled at the time of the first
hotfix problem. It was only enabled *after* I uninstalled it and deleted
the files associated with it.

If the old patch was removed from Microsoft's offering as a legit fix, why
would it be downloaded again? I am trying to understand how it got into the
computer again so I can prevent it in the future.

Firewire
Anonymous
April 29, 2005 2:13:46 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

Firewire <firewire@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> I uninstalled it in Add/Remove, and I deleted the .exe and .dll files
> that are part of the KB891711. If it was the old patch that came
> back, how do I remove it from the computer completely so that it
> never shows up in the update tray again?

Why? There is no need to remove the old patch, just install the updated
version. No-one, to the best of my knowledge has reported any problems
with the updated version of the patch, and the old version was removed
from the Windows Update site and replaced by the new version on 13 April.
After that date only the new version would have been offered and this
would happen regardless of whether the old version had been installed or
not.

That it was the old version of the patch is clear from your statement that
you could see KB891711 running when you used Ctrl-Alt-Del. Ctrl-Alt-Del
does not show the new version as running, it is, but it is hidden in the
same way as other services are hidden such as smgr.exe, spool32.exe and
msgsrv32.exe

> System Restore was not
> enabled at the time of the first hotfix problem. It was only enabled
> *after* I uninstalled it and deleted the files associated with it.

Whether you had used system restore or uninstall the effect would have
been the same, that is the old version would have been re-offered to the
system between the date it was removed and when the updated patch was
released.

> If the old patch was removed from Microsoft's offering as a legit
> fix, why would it be downloaded again?

Because you chose to uninstall it. Remember, you've already said that you
removed the patch some weeks before the patch was updated on the Windows
Update site so the original patch would have been offered again. What you
could have done is to decline the patch when offered using Automatic
Update but that's water under the bridge now as the old version is no
longer available for download. If instead you had unchecked the entry in
MSConfig | Startup you would not have been re-offered the original update
but by uninstalling it you configured your system so as it appeared the
patch had never been installed and it was thus offered again.

< I am trying to understand how
> it got into the computer again so I can prevent it in the future.

I hope this helps a little.
--
Mike Maltby MS-MVP
mike.maltby@gmail.com
April 29, 2005 5:37:19 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

"Mike M" <No_Spam@Corned_Beef.Only> wrote in message
news:%23J6JrcDTFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
>
> I hope this helps a little.

Not really. Seems we are going round and round on this. Removed or not, the
computer has to download the second one from somewhere. I have no
comprehension how a patch removed by Microsoft as defective update would
again be downloaded and installed into a computer. Removed is removed,
gone, no more to bother anyone. It seems logical to you that this computer
could find it somewhere and just do it again.

Sorry to be so dense but it is not logical.

Firewire.
Anonymous
April 30, 2005 12:05:11 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

> Not really.

You may want to try re-reading my post.

> Removed or
> not, the computer has to download the second one from somewhere.

The computer would have downloaded a new copy if Automatic Update was
enabled - that's its purpose. If between 8 March and sometime on 15 April
it would have been version 1 and since 15 April it would have been version
2. If version 1 was installed then version 2 would have been offered on
or shortly after 15 April.

> Removed is removed, gone, no more to bother anyone. It seems logical
> to you that this computer could find it somewhere and just do it
> again.

I'm sorry but it is you who I feel is being illogical here. What exactly
do you not understand? The systems lacks a particular critical update and
it will be offered by either or both of Windows Update (WU) and Automatic
Update (AU). That is their purpose. You don't have to accept that or any
update - whether you do or not is your decision or that of the user of the
computer. However if you decline an update via AU it won't be offered
again via AU but will still be offered if you visit the WU site. If you
choose to uninstall a patch then both WU and AU will offer it again - just
the same as if the patch had never been installed at all.

Regards and best wishes,
--
Mike Maltby MS-MVP
mike.maltby@gmail.com


Firewire <firewire@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Not really. Seems we are going round and round on this. Removed or
> not, the computer has to download the second one from somewhere. I
> have no comprehension how a patch removed by Microsoft as defective
> update would again be downloaded and installed into a computer. Removed
> is removed, gone, no more to bother anyone. It seems logical
> to you that this computer could find it somewhere and just do it
> again.
> Sorry to be so dense but it is not logical.
May 4, 2005 2:07:54 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

> I can only commend MS for dealing with - and apparently solving - the
> problem (which they admittedly caused) within a single refresh cycle of
the
> WU site - one month.

Hey, Noel!

I'd expect them to solve it in one day!

I mean, if I was running the company.............



Shane
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 3:16:01 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

Hehe!


--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2005, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.btinternet.com/~winnoel/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's

"Shane" <shanebeatson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uAMgsQCUFHA.3076@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> I can only commend MS for dealing with - and apparently solving - the
>> problem (which they admittedly caused) within a single refresh cycle of
> the
>> WU site - one month.
>
> Hey, Noel!
>
> I'd expect them to solve it in one day!
>
> I mean, if I was running the company.............
>
>
>
> Shane
>
>
!