-
Auto-updates of virus scanning software is not just a change to the .dat files. In most cases the scanning engine is updated as well(if an update is available). In McAfee I have seen atleast 4 different instances where a scan engine update caused problems to the system. So it is the same thing. The biggest issue here is that the common everyday computer user will never patch their systems.. They don't understand why they need to, and they also don't know how to. Even though it is as simple as clicking on the "windows update" button.
I think the really funny thing is that people think it will make a difference if the system updates itself automatically as opposed to a user who knows nothing installing the patch. It gets you the same thing. The user still doesn't really know what is going on. And you will never educate everybody to the level that they need to be educated to. So I say this is a great thing. So if the system crashes after they manually install a patch are they really going to know what to do to fix it? No.. They are not going to know what to do. So what difference does it really make if the system updates itself automatically. I've talked to several co-workers of mine that know very very little about computers, and they all say that had they known that they could turn the auto-update feature on to automatically update, that they would have done it. In all of the cases I told them how to do it and they all went to their machines that have auto-update and enabled it. To the non tech savy computer user the system taking care of itself is a good thing.
It is pretty obvious that they would not take away the ability of the informed user to turn off the auto-update features. For the users who don't know how to manage their systems, having it done automatically is a great thing. It works for my employer of 80k people. Sure problems happen. But the occasional problem here and there is a lot better than having hundreds/thousands of systems infected by something that had a fix available weeks if not months prior.
Just had another thought on this.. Given that XP and the newer OS's have the system rollback functionality it would not suprise me one bit if MS dramatically improved this particular function of the OS so that the average home user would be able to easily identify if their system had been patched automatically, and give them the ability to easily back out of that patch. If the tools are built properly this is easily something that a tech person from Dell, etc... could do over the phone.
Also, about the SMS issue. I don't think this competes with SMS at all as automatic windows updates will only install MS patches and things like that. There are always been tools that are not as expensive as SMS that allow you to blow hotfixes out to a large group of systems. SMS/Tivoli is still critical to deploying major software updates and application packages inside of an enterprise environment. I don't see how this interferes with SMS at all.
-
Hi Folks,
I think that this is a most interesting thread......should be sticky for a while..............a lot of us work in some sort of support role; either that is our job, or how our friends and family perceive us?
We will come across all sorts of problems, many of which are related to software or hardware incompatibilities?.............I personally rate virus/malware attacks at around 40% of incidences.
As people have already said......education is a big problem........I meet this all the time....Microsoft will not beat this...autoupdate will not..........IF THE SOFTWARE WAS FIREPROOF... IT WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE?...............if you issue software before it is "ready", then you are bound to have problems..................
Nice posts folks!
cheers
-
It is not a matter of releasing software before it was ready.. If that was the case no company would have any released software on the market as all software has bugs..
-
mohaughn
You are quite right...........but they do issue the software................so it has "bugs"....hey, I understand, and have no problems with this
cheers
-
I agree with mohaughn. Your average home PC owner has no idea what is going on, and is almost certainly running some flavour of Windows - in many cases a completely unpatched version of Win98/ME or WinXP.
So the brutal choice is should updates happen automatically or not?
Obviously this process is far from perfect, but to repeat the point I made earlier, to date I have seen no serious side affects from the home PCs that I have fixed for friends & family.
I would far rather they got the odd dodgy update from MS, rather than leave themselves exposed to the latest worms & viruses.
Curiously, there is a simple roll back process for a lot of MS updates, under the simple Add/Remove programs option (as well as System restore, of course).
I always make a point of leaving them with a simple list of do's and don'ts and to email me if they are unsure about something.
-
I think there are those who would like the auto-update and would think it was a great upgrade for thier computer. If windows can have its way with your system so can others. Would there be a way to piggy back into a system on an update? There would have to be a hole in the firewall to let ms update in. For the average user, ms would have to set that hole up for them. The 2 xp's I have in my house came with firewalls. All's a use has to do is set it at default and ms would have it's way. Hmmm, I don't like that idea at all. Sounds like a majer FUBAR waiting to happen.
The rollback feature was a real help to a friend of mine. He was downloading some software from his 98se and messed it up. His wife was pissed off about spending all that money and breaking the computer. He shut it down and went to bed. He says he couldn't sleep all night because he thought he broke the machine. In the morning he went back to try and fix it, and found it was right back were he started. You talk about a happy gent. That rollback feature saved his hide.
Some of the new features are great, but the auto-update is one that sounds like trouble.
-
I rather have home user who doesn't know anythink about Windows Security/Patch call me when a automatic patch broke their system rather that get alot of call when a big worms get out specially since patch rarely broke home user system because they basically use Windows for Internet and Office.
-
You wouldn't have to punch a hole in a firewall to make auto-update work. As it is basically just a port80 HTTP call, most NAT firewalls will allow that type of communication to happen anyway. As long as the computer inside the firewall begins the communication, which it does, the firewall will not block any traffic.
