Seti interfering with Automatic Updates

[Twioz]

While the Seti Client is running Automatic Updates will not download and install updates on Windows XP with Service Pack 2. Anyone else have this issue and have a fix for it?

 

[Freewolf]

Hasn't been a problem for me.

 

[Coolkid]

Originally posted by: Freewolf
Hasn't been a problem for me.

Me Either...

 

[Doc Brown]

No Problem here .... all updates installed ....

 

[Fardringle]

Not the answer you were looking for, but I thought I'd chime in to say there haven't been any problems on any of the 20+ computers I have SETI running on, either.

 

[YOyoYOhowsDAjello]

Well, seems like this has been established already, but I too have had no problems.

 

[BadThad]

I haven't had that problem either. However, on occassion, I have seen the update process running fairly slow whilest SETI is running.

 

[RaySun2Be]

I've had it run slow, but it installs.

 

[emjem]

Maybe you have the Seti priority set too high?

 

[Soggysocks]

Auto updates are for those to stupid or to busy to check for themselves.

So..if you don't know how...or are to busy to update you computer....i would turn it off.

Then you won't have a problem.

 

[Wiz]

1. START
2. RUN
3. type: SERVICES.MSC
4. click OK
5. go to Autoupdate -> STOP -> DISABLE
6. go to BITS -> STOP -> DISABLE

Now, when you want to update your computer turn everything else (DC, games, other programs) OFF - do the reverse of the above, go to the Windows Update site & update it.
Then repeat items 1 - 6 after restarting your machine.

 

[SoulAssassin]

Originally posted by: Soggysocks
Auto updates are for those to stupid or to busy to check for themselves.

So..if you don't know how...or are to busy to update you computer....i would turn it off.

Then you won't have a problem.

I disagree, when did automation become a bad thing? Why should I have to manually go to all my machines and run windows update when it can do it for me? When it was first introduced I was initally hesitant to turn it on (out of not trusting M$) but after some of the big worms that have gone around it's really important to get those critical updates installed ASAP and manually doing it even on a small home network is a waste of time.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: SoulAssassin

Originally posted by: Soggysocks
Auto updates are for those to stupid or to busy to check for themselves.

So..if you don't know how...or are to busy to update you computer....i would turn it off.

Then you won't have a problem.

I disagree, when did automation become a bad thing? Why should I have to manually go to all my machines and run windows update when it can do it for me? When it was first introduced I was initally hesitant to turn it on (out of not trusting M$) but after some of the big worms that have gone around it's really important to get those critical updates installed ASAP and manually doing it even on a small home network is a waste of time.

Sometimes updates cause problems. I recently did Windowsupdate on my laptop (autoupdate disabled), and though I didn't select any driver updates from the hardware driver section of the update list, it still downloaded and installed a new driver for the video chip in the laptop. It asks to reboot of course, so I do - when it gets to the desktop, BSOD. Luckily, I was able to boot ot safe mode and roll back the video driver.
Autoupdates would have screwed that system up without warning.

So yes, the concept is excellent - automatic patching of PC's. Problem is, every time a new update is out, there's always a rash of some computers suddenly not working.

 

[SoulAssassin]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

So yes, the concept is excellent - automatic patching of PC's. Problem is, every time a new update is out, there's always a rash of some computers suddenly not working.

True, everytime we push updates to the clients at work (all 25,000 of them) we have a small percentage that blow up and need to be reimaged. The price of inaction or delayed action may be worse though.

 

[Unforgiven]

i set my automatic updates to download but not install themselves and i wait a few days to read reviews on the internet to see if people are having problems then install them as needed. the problem with windows updates are that some of them are critical and need to be applied right away, but you run the risk of hosing your entire system if there is something wrong. its really a catch 22 to install any windows updates but hey, what can ya do?!?

 

[Wiz]

It does make sense for some - esp large networks (25,000 machines)
However, sometimes the cost of doing it is far greater than the cost of caution.

My brother has one of those TigerDirect computers, came with WinXP & had autoupdate ON.

Apparently his machine was not entirely SP2 "ready" - it autoupdated to SP2 and guess what - NO BOOT.

He mailed it to me, I installed XP & SP1 & hotfixes and mailed it back with AutoUpdate OFF.

It wont get any MSFT "fixes" for a while, but I have Spybot & AVG on there & instructed them to make sure both stay up to date. At least they will have a working machine and be able to get online.

That's just one of many stories - everybody knows at least someone who has been shafted by MSFT. I myself have been many, many times. I will never trust them. I use their products, but am extremely wary of their fixes.

Ever since Windows NT4 SP3. :evil:

 

[Soggysocks]

Quote: That's just one of many stories - everybody knows at least someone who has been shafted by MSFT. I myself have been many, many times. I will never trust them. I use their products, but am extremely wary of their fixes: Unquote.

I have to agree with WIZ on this one. MSFT for the most part really does develope state of the art software, with some really nice bells and whistles. In a closed environment, you can't complain too much. But, as far as the web is concerned, a bastion of security holes.

I attribute this to the intigration of IE into the operating system. If they could design web applications, separate from system applications, then there may be a good solution to block current hackers and virus writers.

It just seems that everytime MSFT does an update or service pack........there is more grief than the hackers and script kiddies cause.

 

[Twioz]

Since there are 400 machines running Seti I cant turn it off each time I want to update and I cant go to each of the 400 machines and manually update. In the future I will be setting up a ZenWorks server with Patchlink software to automate and centralize updates but until then AutoUpdates are my best option. Turn out it does download/update it just takes a very long time (we are talking a day). Also I am not the admin and they are not my Seti machines so I cant really mess with that part. I for one like anything that gets the job done and Windows XP does a fine job and I appreciate it more each day. Of course if it was necesary to switch to Linux tomorrow I would be just as happy after I became more familiar with it. Thanks for the input guys.

 

[Freewolf]

Originally posted by: Twioz
Since there are 400 machines running Seti I cant turn it off each time I want to update and I cant go to each of the 400 machines and manually update. In the future I will be setting up a ZenWorks server with Patchlink software to automate and centralize updates but until then AutoUpdates are my best option. Turn out it does download/update it just takes a very long time (we are talking a day). Also I am not the admin and they are not my Seti machines so I cant really mess with that part. I for one like anything that gets the job done and Windows XP does a fine job and I appreciate it more each day. Of course if it was necesary to switch to Linux tomorrow I would be just as happy after I became more familiar with it. Thanks for the input guys.

Sure would like to know who's machines they are.

 

[bluestrobe]

Originally posted by: Twioz
Since there are 400 machines running Seti I cant turn it off each time I want to update and I cant go to each of the 400 machines and manually update. In the future I will be setting up a ZenWorks server with Patchlink software to automate and centralize updates but until then AutoUpdates are my best option. Turn out it does download/update it just takes a very long time (we are talking a day). Also I am not the admin and they are not my Seti machines so I cant really mess with that part. I for one like anything that gets the job done and Windows XP does a fine job and I appreciate it more each day. Of course if it was necesary to switch to Linux tomorrow I would be just as happy after I became more familiar with it. Thanks for the input guys.

and I thought running 6 machines with F@H was overkill