From: "Hrvoje Mesing" 


"Geo"  wrote in message
news:42fc0a0f$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> "Glenn Meadows"  wrote in message
> news:42fb978f{at}w3.nls.net...
>
>> I thought part of the discussion was in locations that needed to pull the
>> patches over a slow link for each computer.
>
> there could be lots of reasons not to use windowsupdate, the reason is
> unimportant, pick one and then try to deal with the manual patch method
> and
> how to improve it.
>
>> I've had great luck with the free SUS and now WSUS's running internally
>> on
>> one of our servers.
>
> I paid for hfnetchkpro5 for my automated method of choice (since it
> patches
> things like winzip as well as the MS stuff) but assume that for whatever
> reason there is a huge set of machines for which these methods are
> unacceptable. Personally I'm just not willing to give MS my personal
> inventory for them to market at some later date but that's not why so many
> others pick the manual method. So instead you download the manual patches
> and apply them one at a time.
>
> Why does that manual method need to be so difficult? MS releases 6
> different
> august patches, most of those 6 come as separate versions, one for W2K,
> one
> for XP, one for 03, one for XP64 and one for 03/64. That's 30 different
> files to track just for august alone. What, they couldn't turn that into a
> single exe or two or even 5?
>
> As of right now, using the manual method, you have 28 files for W2K (and
> we
> just had a rollup), 33 more for XP, and 51 for Server03, sorry but I don't
> do 64 bit patches (yet) so I don't know how many there. Doesn't that seem
> kind of insane to you? I mean remember the old days when OS/2 had what 15
> fixpacks and everyone way saying how nice and easy it was for NT because
> all
> you had to do was apply the latest service pack and you were up to date?
> What do you think people would have said if OS/2 had 51 fixpacks? Course
> that's back when MS actually was listening to customers instead of selling
> us out to every corp who want's to exploit us and IBM was ignoring us in
> favor of their "we know best, let them eat squatty fonts" attitude.
>
> Funny how things change, isn't it?


-+-

Should not be difficult at all.
Or have a SUS server, block it to windows update, get patches from
elsewhere to Stick, Import to SUS (MS method, or give Your self a lil time
to figure the alternate way :), auto patch machines :) Also, Use VBScript
(in example) and create script which will connect to every computer in
local LAN and pull updates from central location, no problems cauze all of
the MS updates have command line option, even for silent install - peace of
cake, like 30 minutes job with testing :)


-+-
M.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5