Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Why is it important to turn off automatic windows security updates

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
June 2, 2010 5:22:03 PM

I allow Windows to scan for updates, but I do not allow updates to be automatically installed. I prefer to manually install updates so I know what is being installed.
Score
0
June 4, 2010 10:10:08 PM

lowpost said:
Hello,
why do some people prefer to turn off automatic windows update?


These are the problems that XP computers with automatic updates are experiencing: desktop icons disappear, themes shut off, task bar turns white or gray, CD is no longer recognized in system drive, boot to blue screen after update completes, audio drivers disappear, etc...etc...
But the computers with updates shut off are not experiencing these troubles.
The theory being that if you are using a high quality security program, you don't need automatic updates, and that's why thousands of XP users have shut them off. You can still install them as you choose, manually.
Score
0
Related resources
June 4, 2010 10:46:09 PM

soundguruman said:
These are the problems that XP computers with automatic updates are experiencing: desktop icons disappear, themes shut off, task bar turns white or gray, CD is no longer recognized in system drive, boot to blue screen after update completes, audio drivers disappear, etc...etc...
But the computers with updates shut off are not experiencing these troubles.
The theory being that if you are using a high quality security program, you don't need automatic updates, and that's why thousands of XP users have shut them off. You can still install them as you choose, manually.


I don't know where this stuff comes from. This is not true.

Many people prefer not to have updates install automatically. That is not the same as this mythical list of alleged problems.
Score
0
June 4, 2010 11:09:53 PM

To you it may be a myth, to many it's a reality. Whether the updates themselves are corrupted, or whether turning on the updates allows malware to enter the system from a third party source is the mysterious part. But the problems mentioned occur when the updates are turned on, and do not happen when the updates are turned off. Further, malware scans are negative for the problems affecting computers as above.
Then we could just attribute these problems to the computers themselves being defective, but it happens in waves. On any given day, all of a sudden, desktop icons may disappear off several computers, they even report it here in the forum. What do they all have in common? On another given day, the audio drivers all disappear from many computers, etc...etc...
There's a bit more to it than myth. It has a cause, and it is real. But the thousands who have turned the updates off have so far not found a better way to prevent it, or a verifiable explanation for it. So until then, my updates remain off, and I have had none of those problems affecting my systems since I turned them off.
Score
0
June 5, 2010 9:35:29 PM

Thousands? Your the only person I have ever heard make this claim.

People attributing problems to windows update does not mean windows update is the cause.

Many people keep windows update off or set to notify, but not for those reasons.

No knowledgeable person would recommend a person not leave windows update turned on in some form. Your advice is dangerous.

Score
0
June 5, 2010 10:53:40 PM

Aren't you the guy who just told us to run programs on our computers that were detected as trojans?
(quote from FALCON:) 

"Yes this is true. There are many perfectly good programs that detect as trojans.

Run it through this and see how many scanners see it as a trojan.

http://www.virustotal.com/"

Did you infer that the illegal keycode generator, allowing pirated software to run on computers, was a "perfectly good" program?
Did you infer that we should ignore warnings from our anti-virus, referring to trojans, so that we would be enabled to run pirated software on computers?
Yes, I think you did infer that.

I don't think that any ethical person would recommend that a person run pirated software or keycode generators on their computer.
Your advice could be interpreted as unethical or perhaps unprofessional, but to those who are encouraged to run pirated software, dangerous.
Score
0
June 5, 2010 11:18:18 PM

soundguruman said:
Aren't you the guy who just told us to run programs on our computers that were detected as trojans?
(quote from FALCON:) 

"Yes this is true. There are many perfectly good programs that detect as trojans.

Run it through this and see how many scanners see it as a trojan.

http://www.virustotal.com/"

Did you infer that the illegal keycode generator, allowing pirated software to run on computers, was a "perfectly good" program?
Did you infer that we should ignore warnings from our anti-virus, referring to trojans, so that we would be enabled to run pirated software on computers?
Yes, I think you did infer that.

I don't think that any ethical person would recommend that a person run pirated software or keycode generators on their computer.
Your advice could be interpreted as unethical or perhaps unprofessional, but to those who are encouraged to run pirated software, dangerous.


Wrong again. He ask a question about a virus. I answered his question. NO RECOMMENDATIONS WERE INCLUDED except how to deal with a potential security problem.


Score
0
June 6, 2010 12:21:55 AM

Wrong again, the question asked is: why do people turn off automatic updates?
And I told him why I do, and why others do.
And I wish to add that I do not recall holding a gun to anyone's head, forcing them to turn off automatic update.
That's up to the individual, for their own reasons.
But I think that using all in one security, turning off updates, was one of the smartest things I have ever done to my computer. No more update surprises.
Score
0
June 6, 2010 7:05:49 AM

soundguruman said:
Wrong again, the question asked is: why do people turn off automatic updates?
And I told him why I do, and why others do.
And I wish to add that I do not recall holding a gun to anyone's head, forcing them to turn off automatic update.
That's up to the individual, for their own reasons.
But I think that using all in one security, turning off updates, was one of the smartest things I have ever done to my computer. No more update surprises.


Your answer is WRONG. These fantasies exist in your head. There are not these vast hoards of people turning off auto updates because they fear with machine will blow up. Its paranoia.


Score
0
June 6, 2010 10:48:49 AM

The majority of people who don't want to install updates are pirating software, as some updates stop said software from working.

For the legit people out there, they just like to know what is being installed as they might not want all the updates, for example I don't want the additional browser update Microsoft has been forced to offer everyone.
Score
0
June 6, 2010 10:54:36 AM

soundguruman said:
Aren't you the guy who just told us to run programs on our computers that were detected as trojans?
(quote from FALCON:) 

"Yes this is true. There are many perfectly good programs that detect as trojans.

Run it through this and see how many scanners see it as a trojan.

http://www.virustotal.com/"




The idea of you giving advice is that you know what you are talking about, you sir do not.

He did not tell people to run a trojan on their computer, he told them to scan it with www.virustotal.com - a very useful tool.
Score
0
a b 8 Security
June 6, 2010 11:56:42 AM

SevenVirtues said:
The majority of people who don't want to install updates are pirating software, as some updates stop said software from working.

For the legit people out there, they just like to know what is being installed as they might not want all the updates, for example I don't want the additional browser update Microsoft has been forced to offer everyone.



I agree wholeheartedly with this and with falcon's stand. People who've whinged over the yeqars and are still living in SP1 are fooling themselves which is fine until they go to Forums and try to fool others as well. Love 'em or hate 'em, you have to agree M$ continue to hand out updates to a nine year old, free of charge, mainly because the pirating brigade and their ilk attack the vulnerabilities, principally for crooked purposes.

Accept any update you can from M$ because they won't be offering them for no good reason and the only exception I've made in several years is the European Browser Choice update. I reject that one in every system I work on and that's because it's irreversible and I don't think M$ should impose that on anyone just because they've spat their dummy out over rulings of the European Court of Justice.

Score
0
June 6, 2010 6:31:15 PM

I wholeheartedly disagree with FALCON. My updates are off and will remain off. Sooner or later you will encounter a computer that has repeat problems that are cured by shutting the updates off. After shutting off the updates, the problems no longer occur.
Ni-He-He-He Ha Ha Ha!!! Does it really bother you that my updates are shut off? Do you loose sleep at night over it?
The after-market security solutions are superior to any update offered by M$. He-He Ha Ha hohoho.
Score
0
June 7, 2010 6:47:53 AM

SevenVirtues said:
The majority of people who don't want to install updates are pirating software, as some updates stop said software from working.

For the legit people out there, they just like to know what is being installed as they might not want all the updates, for example I don't want the additional browser update Microsoft has been forced to offer everyone.


Not just pirating software, pirating windows. Or at least using windows with an activation bypass. I know a couple of people who do this with a legitimate license, so its not all piracy. But they don't turn windows update off.
Score
0
June 7, 2010 6:57:37 AM

Saga Lout said:

Accept any update you can from M$ because they won't be offering them for no good reason and the only exception I've made in several years is the European Browser Choice update. I reject that one in every system I work on and that's because it's irreversible and I don't think M$ should impose that on anyone just because they've spat their dummy out over rulings of the European Court of Justice.


That's not really a security update though. I can't think of any security update over the years that was a problem, except Service Pack 2 which some older machines just wouldn't run. But I thought MS was very forthcoming with that info in advance.
Score
0
a b 8 Security
June 7, 2010 8:29:07 AM

FALC0N said:
That's not really a security update though. I can't think of any security update over the years that was a problem, except Service Pack 2 which some older machines just wouldn't run. But I thought MS was very forthcoming with that info in advance.



There was the rather amusing instance of KB977165 in, I think, February's second Tuesday bunch. However, it only affected systems that had already been hacked and the hackers had to rush out their second Wednesday fix because 977165 was preventing hacked systems from getting online. :D 

Soundguruman I certainly won't be losing sleep over your system - if you and you're happy to be vulnerable, carry on doing so but it's a bit irresponsible to post it as a piece of advice where people who know a bit less might swallow it. Out of interest, does Tigsounds share your view? ;) 

Score
0
June 7, 2010 4:04:09 PM

So I finally hear some admission that updates have caused problems, in older computers in particular. And you best believe that there are a lot of older computers being used out there.
Presto.
Score
0
a b 8 Security
June 7, 2010 7:21:37 PM

soundguruman said:
So I finally hear some admission that updates have caused problems, in older computers in particular. And you best believe that there are a lot of older computers being used out there.
Presto.




That's not what you heard at all. Read it again.


Score
0
June 7, 2010 7:41:10 PM

soundguruman said:
So I finally hear some admission that updates have caused problems, in older computers in particular. And you best believe that there are a lot of older computers being used out there.
Presto.


Are you reading a different thread to he rest of us? He said it caused an error in computers that were already hack, which, incidentally, were only able to be hacked because they didn't have a previous Microsoft update.
Score
0
June 7, 2010 8:14:06 PM

"except Service Pack 2 which some older machines just wouldn't run".
Score
0
June 7, 2010 8:40:07 PM

soundguruman said:
"except Service Pack 2 which some older machines just wouldn't run".



Which microsoft made clear before the update. You just don't know what your talking about.
Score
0
a b 8 Security
June 7, 2010 10:01:33 PM

Saga Lout said:
There was the rather amusing instance of KB977165 in, I think, February's second Tuesday bunch. However, it only affected systems that had already been hacked and the hackers had to rush out their second Wednesday fix because 977165 was preventing hacked systems from getting online. :D 

Soundguruman I certainly won't be losing sleep over your system - if you and you're happy to be vulnerable, carry on doing so but it's a bit irresponsible to post it as a piece of advice where people who know a bit less might swallow it. Out of interest, does Tigsounds share your view? ;) 



I see a form of an invitation to express my opinion of Automatic Updates, here goes.

Microsoft has done a wonderful job of keeping systems they have sold over the years running properly. They have addressed issues of hacker invasions, application bugs, general errors, general product improvements and have taken reasonable steps to protect their interest in seeing their products are actually purchased and not duplicated, shared, traded or given away. They didn't sell a product and then say "Here ya go, hope it keeps working and see you later," they support that product for years-on-end after the sale. For all the money Microsoft may or may not have, they are entitled to be paid for their products by the people that use them. They made the investment in the product, they deserve a fair return on that investment.

I own stock in some electric utilities. I'd be rather angry to learn someone has developed a method of making electric meters stop, or go slower than the honest quantity of power delivered. My investment would suffer, the power producers still must bear the cost of producing that power, so everyone down the line suffers because of dishonest people that can very well afford to buy power, but have found a clever way to get it free. The same thing applies to software. Microsoft pays a huge staff to make the products they sell a reality and still pay a dividend to investors that put up the money to make it all possible in the first place.

People who avoid updates as a shield against Microsoft somehow disabling their illicit operating systems and applications are what they are; common thief's and should be treated as such. They cannot ever use their machine with one powerful element of joy; that they helped make that system come into being by purchasing the software they are now using. This is my highest priority when using any software, that by buying it, I had a part in it even existing. People that avoid updates as a shield also leave themselves vulnerable to others like themselves and worse. They may someday have some personal information, or very private files outright stolen by another thief on the internet, and they very well deserve it and all repercussions of those files being stolen. They also loose any benefit of improvements, reliability, security, functionality and more.

Microsoft has no way of knowing the applications we are running in our machines, so they cannot provide updates consisting of only elements we personally actually need.

That said, I do not have "automatic" updates turned on. I take the time to read about updates, study their function, what the improvement will be, whether the patch applies to a problem I may not be experiencing, what applications will be affected and so forth. I do not take updates for applications I don't have in my system and don't ever anticipate having in my system. This keeps my system a bit leaner because unneeded patches and updates are not installed. Updates for XP itself are always installed because Microsoft knows their own software better than anyone else, and knows how to keep it running at it's best. Hackers may find a vulnerability in Windows, but Microsoft wrote the program. Guess who can handle the other the best?

Keys: I have seen a few post where a person needs the Product Key to their system. Perhaps their Windows is limping along and they need to do a clean install of Windows but can't because they just can't find their key anymore. I post a link to a free program that will reveal their key so they can re-install Windows. I will consider a person honest until they show otherwise, or, you are indeed innocent until proven guilty. If someone says they just need a key and where can they find one, they're out of luck here. If they obtain their own key and share it around the world, that's going to come back to bite them someday and they deserve every bit of the pain it inflicts on them.

Cheers,
~Tigsounds~
Score
0
June 7, 2010 10:36:38 PM

Just for the record, my software is bought and paid for-all of it. None of my software is pirated.
And yet my auto updates are turned off, permanently. This is because I don't want to use them, ever.
Score
0
June 8, 2010 2:51:11 AM

soundguruman said:
Just for the record, my software is bought and paid for-all of it. None of my software is pirated.
And yet my auto updates are turned off, permanently. This is because I don't want to use them, ever.


So I am assuming that whatever OS your using is the original RTM?
Score
0
a b 8 Security
June 8, 2010 7:29:19 AM

FALC0N said:
So I am assuming that whatever OS your using is the original RTM?


[#0005ff]Given that choice, I'd have stuck with 3.11. :D  [/#000ff]
Score
0
June 8, 2010 2:13:09 PM

Digi-Comp 1.0 is my choice, but the rubber band flip flops do occasionally need replacing. virtually impenetrable to malware.
Score
0
June 8, 2010 5:44:10 PM

soundguruman said:
Just for the record, my software is bought and paid for-all of it. None of my software is pirated.
And yet my auto updates are turned off, permanently. This is because I don't want to use them, ever.


You do realise that means any idiot could take over your PC in roughly 10 minutes if they wanted to? Microsoft provides updates for a reason, certain exploits cannot be stopped simply with a firewall and standard security settings.
Score
0
June 8, 2010 7:56:40 PM

My PC was attacked 9 times today and three times yesterday, all of those were blocked. (it logs every attack and the IP source)
But yet I repair PCs that have all the updates installed, and the attacks go right through the microsoft protection, and the anti virus protection.
The difference between the systems? The type of security program system installed.
Any idiot can take over my PC? Hasn't happened in years, since I adopted my own security policies, instead of doing what most other people are doing.
System failures? (like those reported on Tom's by posters) none of those either, not a single one.
Score
0
June 8, 2010 9:34:54 PM

soundguruman said:
My PC was attacked 9 times today and three times yesterday, all of those were blocked. (it logs every attack and the IP source)
But yet I repair PCs that have all the updates installed, and the attacks go right through the microsoft protection, and the anti virus protection.
The difference between the systems? The type of security program system installed.
Any idiot can take over my PC? Hasn't happened in years, since I adopted my own security policies, instead of doing what most other people are doing.
System failures? (like those reported on Tom's by posters) none of those either, not a single one.


Are you sure? Who says you would know if a remote attacker had succeeded?

Your computer was attacked 9 times today? Thats more than I have ever been attacked.

All that said, it IS a good idea to take control of your own security. It is a bad idea to NOT include MS security updates.
Score
0
June 8, 2010 9:53:14 PM

You do not have an attack log? I have a record of everyone who has tried. It amuses me.
The point being that most people don't know that they are being attacked or who is attacking. Most of the attacks go straight through without being blocked. That is the situation on most home computers, updated or not.
You are most welcome to leave the updates on, nobody's stopping you.
Score
0
June 8, 2010 10:32:49 PM

soundguruman said:
You do not have an attack log? I have a record of everyone who has tried. It amuses me.
The point being that most people don't know that they are being attacked or who is attacking. Most of the attacks go straight through without being blocked. That is the situation on most home computers, updated or not.
You are most welcome to leave the updates on, nobody's stopping you.


For one thing, pings are not attacks. They are pings. Im not sure you know what an attack is.
Score
0
June 8, 2010 10:43:59 PM

In this case most of the unauthorized connection attempts are designed to plant adware and spyware, and to track my internet usage habits so that I can be targeted for spam E mail. Most of those are from Charter Communications.
Then there are port scans that come from China (how thoughtful of them). Then there are actual virus and malware attacks too. And in the majority of home computers, little of this is blocked, or none. The updates don't stop that either. In fact 90% or more of the people out there don't realize this is going on all day every day, they don't have a clue. Good for them, more computers for techs to repair. And whoops, I almost forgot about the pings, designed to identify computers ready to be attacked.
Score
0
June 9, 2010 5:29:14 AM

soundguruman said:
In this case most of the unauthorized connection attempts are designed to plant adware and spyware, and to track my internet usage habits so that I can be targeted for spam E mail. Most of those are from Charter Communications.
Then there are port scans that come from China (how thoughtful of them). Then there are actual virus and malware attacks too. And in the majority of home computers, little of this is blocked, or none. The updates don't stop that either. In fact 90% or more of the people out there don't realize this is going on all day every day, they don't have a clue. Good for them, more computers for techs to repair. And whoops, I almost forgot about the pings, designed to identify computers ready to be attacked.


That was a lot of nothing Soundguruman. You don't understand the threats you face. And I don't care. Do what you want.
Score
0
June 9, 2010 5:59:28 AM

thinking it over and reading what everyone had to say, my conclusion is that the updates were created to stop people from pirating software, and there could be several other reasons that we are unaware of. OK I can agree with that.

The part about having people take over control of the computer, I think this is a scare tactic, designed to frighten people into installing the updates. I honestly don't buy it as being completely true, although there may be a sliver of truth in there somewhere. I can see that it certainly does not stop many virus attacks, or spyware or a lot of other things. And as I said, I still have not seen anybody take over a computer that had the updates turned off, including my own. Well if I may say, not any more or any worse than compared to the computers that have the updates turned on.

As far as the things that seem to happen in the computers that install automatic updates, as I mentioned earlier, nobody has explained just why these things happen, and why the same system failures seem to occur over and over to a variety of different makes and models of XP computers. (hmmmmm?)
Interesting, I'm done, and I wuv you too.
Score
0
June 9, 2010 6:12:49 AM

The ignorance of statements like that speaks for itself.
Score
0
June 9, 2010 6:20:24 AM

http://www.tomshardware.com /forum/247837-45-document-queue-print#t897639 :

"Hello,
I have a two-computer home network (wired). Computer A hosts the printer (shared). Computer A can print to printer. Computer B can see printer, can submit a job to the queue, and the print job can be seen in the printer queue on computer A, but then it simply disappears without printing. New problem since installing Sophos AV and latest XP updates (still at SP2 since SP3 won't load). Why does the job make it to the queue only to disappear w/o printing? How to fix?"

This is becoming more entertaining by the moment.
Score
0
June 9, 2010 6:24:15 AM

Everyone here has figured out that you don't know what your talking about. Your only kidding yourself.
Score
0
June 9, 2010 12:05:48 PM

soundguruman:

First of all 9 attacks in a day is a LOT, are you doing something illicit, or maybe confusing pings with attacks?

My old job used to be to fix and secure computers for small and mid sized companies, in order to do that I had to have a pretty good knowledge of how to break into a computer, so I could prevent others from doing it.

When you browse the web, anyone can see what OS you use, and in the case of Windows, what Service Pack you have. So, if you are still on SP1, that could be why you receive 9 attacks a day, as drones/hackers know SP1 is an easy target and the exploits have not been fixed.

That does not mean that every attack gets through, as if you have set up a rock solid defence as you say, then you will block most, but not all (as some do not just come through your standard internet connection, they are actual exploits within programs you use).

You wanted to know why Windows Updates cause system failures - 99% of the time that happens because the PC which is updated is already infected with malware.
Score
0
June 9, 2010 4:33:14 PM

9 or more attacks a day is normal when you are connected by Charter internet, and yes they are all blocked.
But the majority of Charter customers do not have unauthorized connection blocking and port scan blocking installed. It just goes right in and plants itself.
And as I mentioned, the updates do nothing to stop that.
Score
0
June 9, 2010 7:59:52 PM

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk /forum/247853-35-chat-logs:

"Hello,
somehow i have lost the my chat files directory in my documents. we upgraded
to service pack2. any ideas on how to get the "my chat files" back?"
Score
0
a b 8 Security
June 10, 2010 7:25:23 AM

soundguruman said:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk /forum/247853-35-chat-logs:

"Hello,
somehow i have lost the my chat files directory in my documents. we upgraded
to service pack2. any ideas on how to get the "my chat files" back?"



[#0005ff]Find me a post that complains of SP2 causing problems where the poster starts off by saying they followed the proper procedure and I'll start to believe a miniscule percentage of the millions of systems that applied the Pack may have been adversely affected. That said, I'm not sure I could put enough noughts before a figure to display that percentage here.

I Beta tested SP2 for almost nine months along with a couple of hundred thousand other ordinary XP users. It was a major step forward - almost the launch of "real" XP and included the firewall for the first time and a lot of care went into preparing it for the public at large, mindful of the myriad variations in systems. I hope you have some form of firewall if you're still on a virgin build of XP, born in 2001.

Take Steve Gibsons Shields Up tests down at http://www.grc.com.
[/#000ff]
Score
0
June 10, 2010 10:28:38 AM

Saga Lout said:
[#0005ff]Find me a post that complains of SP2 causing problems where the poster starts off by saying they followed the proper procedure and I'll start to believe a miniscule percentage of the millions of systems that applied the Pack may have been adversely affected. That said, I'm not sure I could put enough noughts before a figure to display that percentage here.

I Beta tested SP2 for almost nine months along with a couple of hundred thousand other ordinary XP users. It was a major step forward - almost the launch of "real" XP and included the firewall for the first time and a lot of care went into preparing it for the public at large, mindful of the myriad variations in systems. I hope you have some form of firewall if you're still on a virgin build of XP, born in 2001.

Take Steve Gibsons Shields Up tests down at http://www.grc.com.
[/#000ff]


Your wasting your time. A knowledgeable person would have written that drivel to begin with. Your not going to change his mind. He is a lost cause. :( 

By the way, XP already had a firewall all the way back to the RTM. It was just activated by default in SP2. But it was there from the beginning.



Score
0
a b 8 Security
June 10, 2010 11:10:24 AM

FALC0N said:

By the way, XP already had a firewall all the way back to the RTM. It was just activated by default in SP2. But it was there from the beginning.


Ah yes - it all comes flooding back to me across the years.
Score
0
June 11, 2010 5:01:40 AM

Saga Lout said:
Ah yes - it all comes flooding back to me across the years.


You had to look pretty hard for it as I recall. I don't think it was in the control panel then. So im sure a lot of people didn't even know it was there. So its about as good as not having one.
Score
0
June 13, 2010 3:09:01 AM

http://www.tomshardware.com /forum/247946-45- operating-system-working-properly-update#t897972

" Hello,

Windows XP updates were downloaded to my laptop several days ago and I have not
been able to use my computer properly since.
It Boots up and will connect to the Internet
, I then get a...
'Server.exe Application Error' window etc etc.
Next a 'System Shutdown NT/Authority/System' window appears with reference to
'Status Code 1073741819'

After the countdown my computer just hangs and I am unable to connect to the
Internet or use any windows programs.

I have just been able to get IE8 running by doing a Start Up from
'Last Known Good Configuration'

But don't know where to go from here??? and don't want to Shut it down again until
some of these issues have been resolved.

Love some HELP Please
Jo-Ann "
Score
0
June 13, 2010 9:42:27 AM

Yes soundguruman, we know your opinion.

People blame their problems on all sorts of things. From windows update, to the new program they installed, to the tooth fairy and the man on the moon. Rarely are they actually the cause.

You just go on thinking windows update is a problem. But we really don't need you to post every time someone who can barely turn their system on decides to blame their computer problem on windows update.
Score
0
June 13, 2010 3:19:30 PM

You who are so anxious to throw rocks at the messenger, the messenger sees something and reports it. There are usually 1-3 or more posts per day in this forum from people who have downloaded updates, then experienced system failure.

If you would be so kind as to now explain the true cause of these failures?

But you have not offered a single explanation, or preventative measure. All you do is throw more rocks at the messenger.
Score
0
June 14, 2010 3:33:26 AM

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk /forum/247992-35-help- security-update-waves-screen

Hello,
I tried installing the latest security updates from microsoft 2 days ago.. One of them KB980218 refused to load at all after i tried 12 times.. after reading alot i read its because its NOT supported by my older version of Windows.. Im running Windows 5.1 i believe . Anyways heres my dilemma.. I cant afford a repairman and there are NOW waves in all my pages when im scrolling up or down in all my images. web pages. etc.. terrible waves like its having a hard time even scrolling.. the images are in waves..AND my Mc Affee virus scan gets to 788 files (20%) scanning and just stops.. wont complete a scan.. Im beside myself and have no clue how to fix this.. I want my old computer back BEFORE these last 16 updates..
Does ANYONE have any suggestions on what I can try or do to fix this? thank you very much

Score
0
June 14, 2010 9:29:11 AM

soundguruman said:
You who are so anxious to throw rocks at the messenger, the messenger sees something and reports it. There are usually 1-3 or more posts per day in this forum from people who have downloaded updates, then experienced system failure.

If you would be so kind as to now explain the true cause of these failures?

But you have not offered a single explanation, or preventative measure. All you do is throw more rocks at the messenger.


Yes I have offered an explanation. And its the likely one. IGNORANT USERS!

Rarely is a problem associated with the garbage most users think caused it. Any tech will tell you this.

Case in point below....using your own posted example:

Quote:
Hello,
I tried installing the latest security updates from microsoft 2 days ago.. One of them KB980218 refused to load at all after i tried 12 times.. after reading alot i read its because its NOT supported by my older version of Windows.. Im running Windows 5.1 i believe . Anyways heres my dilemma.. I cant afford a repairman and there are NOW waves in all my pages when im scrolling up or down in all my images. web pages. etc.. terrible waves like its having a hard time even scrolling.. the images are in waves..AND my Mc Affee virus scan gets to 788 files (20%) scanning and just stops.. wont complete a scan.. Im beside myself and have no clue how to fix this.. I want my old computer back BEFORE these last 16 updates..
Does ANYONE have any suggestions on what I can try or do to fix this? thank you very much


There you go! If your not laughing histerically after reading the portion in bold, then you don't know what your doing. And neither does the guy who posted this. Which is why he posted to begin with.

He obviously has no diagnostic skills to speak of. It doesn't matter what he blames the problem on. A virus, windows update, a pumpkin in his back yard, its worthless info.

A skilled person would never have posted this as an example. But then again, a skilled person would never take this ridiculous position to begin with.
Score
0
!