[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 08/01/13 00:44, Kai Hendry wrote: > On 8 January 2013 07:07, Martijn Grooten <sweetwatergeek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I see a lot of things from the security point of view. Microsoft has >> become rather co-operative when it comes to security. There are many >> others who should take leaves out of their book. > Am I correct in thinking that a Windows 7 install now seamlessly updates? > > How long did it take them to do that? :) > Oh god, I wish... not even close I'm afraid! MS still don't streamline their god damn updates, so a very out-of-date machine (say pre-SP1) will still require multiple runs of windows update and multiple reboots. You can work around this by slipstreaming into your corporate install images, and handling your WSUS update server properly. But no, for ordinary consumers, windows update is still an absolute car crash. Windows 8 is no different. When I'm hopefully prodding people into "would you perhaps like to try this other system, it's called linux" then second after cost, the hell that is windows update is my next avenue of attack. There have been very, very few - even the staunchest of windows fans - that don't shudder involuntarily when the issue of windows updates comes up :] Damn, I really wish they'd fix that shit. And, outside of a properly handled corporate network with WinRM, powershell scripts and other stuff way out of the realm of ordinary consumers, you still can't fire off an update from the cmd prompt! It just can't be done. *bangs head on table* Cheers -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq