Do I need this update

[dazdaz1]

Hi
For a while I've ignored down loading this update, "Update for Microsoft XML Core Services 4.0 Service Pack 2 (KB973688" Do I really need to download it? I'm running the bog standard W7 on my laptop.

Daz

[mixture]

dazdaz1,

Let me turn that question on its head.

Why are you looking to filter your updates ? Particularly as (don't take this the wrong way), you don't appear to understand the implications of filtering said updates out?

Perhaps read KB973688 and then come back here ?

Apologies for the tone, but it's a slippery slope if you start filtering out updates with no clear goal or reason.

[dazdaz1]

Yes, I know the update is to prevent applications from sending too many HTTP requests, what ever that means. But is that relevant to me? Or more aimed at commercial computer system networks.

"no clear goal or reason" The reason being is that I don't want to fill my HD with non needed downloads from MS. Hence my #1 post

Daz

[green granite]

Why not just delete the older update files, say any that are older than 1 month?

[Mike-Bracknell]

"no clear goal or reason" The reason being is that I don't want to fill my HD with non needed downloads from MS. Hence my #1 post

...and of course, hard drives are bloody expensive and not very large at all, are they? :rolleyes:

Seriously, take the updates....ALL of them, and then count the amount of hard drives you could have bought with the time and money saved by not having to bugger about with things like this.


/sorry for the tone - bad day of dealing with (L)users.

[mixture]

dazdaz1,

"no clear goal or reason" The reason being is that I don't want to fill my HD with non needed downloads from MS

Unfortunately that's not what I would call a "clear goal or reason".

What I would call such a reason is the very same reason a professional IT department would look for before expending time on such matters.

Examples include, but are not limited to :

- You've got some servers running mission critical apps. The update is fairly major and also requires a reboot. You want to determine whether the update needs to be applied ASAP or whether you can hold back a bit .... hence you assign an IT slave to play with it in the lab for a bit in order to get an idea of its likelihood to break things or whether it might bring additional benefits.

- You're running some software written by incompetent developers that has very strict system requirements in terms of .NET versions or whatever. you don't fancy breaking said software, hence you have a valid reason to hold of whilst you pester the code monkeys to bring out an update to their software.

In the end it will most things still end up being applied in some scheduled maintenance slot down the road. The main reason being that OSs like Windows and the software that runs on it are so complex and intertwined (through developer APIs etc) that without a stack trace you never really know what influences what.

Fact remains that Microsoft don't employ developers and spend money managing a download infrastructure just to p*ss you off and eat up your hard drive space..... they release patches to fix issues in their software. The fewer patches they release is a win win situation (less HD space for you, less development time for them). But, unfortunately, as we all know, Windows is buggy and needs love and care !

[dazdaz1]

Forget it, sorry I posted.

Daz

[BombayDuck]

Actually, it's not always perfect. Twice Microsoft has pushed updates through to Vista that have resulted in a loss of sound. Once a year ago, once two days ago (but an old update, I'd not update for a while :\). Uninstalling the update restored the sound instantly.

And yet, this is absolutely the only problem I have EVER had with Vista. I know it gets a bad rap (with good reason) and people have been told to avoid it ever since MS announced they would release 7 soon, but I've had no other trouble for three years now.

Better not jinx it now...

[mixture]

dazdaz1,

In the end, it's your computer and you can do what you want with it.

It's just somewhat rare to find a home-user with a good reason for filtering out updates, hence the surprise expressed by some here.

Actually, it's not always perfect.

Never said it was perfect. Just said home-users rarely have a good reason not to apply an update.

[Donalduck]

"-You're running some software written by incompetent developers that has very strict system requirements in terms of .NET versions or whatever. you don't fancy breaking said software, hence you have a valid reason to hold of whilst you pester the code monkeys to bring out an update to their software."

Sounds like a description of Windowns... Get rid of Windows- problem solved. At least it worked for this user.

[Slasher]

I'm the same as Daz - I have XP and there're a lot of updates
I simply ignore. The only ones I do download are the security
patches.

[dazdaz1]

Thanks Slasher, my thoughts exactly:ok:

Daz

[Donalduck]

If you are not into gaming... try Ubuntu. It's Linux based, easier to use than windows, is open source so costs nothing (including software), and bug free.. ... I am a home user, not at all a computer whizz, and since installing it over a year ago on my first machine have not touched window.
Until I stopped using Windows I thought all the problems were just normal... they aren't. Windows is a really bad operating system unless you have some compelling reason to use it.
Just google Ubuntu... you won't look back if you make the swap. Try it on an old worn out machine that won't run Windows anymore first... You will be amazed that Microsoft has got away with it for so long!!!

[Mike-Bracknell]

If you are not into gaming... try Ubuntu. It's Linux based, easier to use than windows, is open source so costs nothing (including software), and bug free.. ... I am a home user, not at all a computer whizz, and since installing it over a year ago on my first machine have not touched window.
Until I stopped using Windows I thought all the problems were just normal... they aren't. Windows is a really bad operating system unless you have some compelling reason to use it.
Just google Ubuntu... you won't look back if you make the swap. Try it on an old worn out machine that won't run Windows anymore first... You will be amazed that Microsoft has got away with it for so long!!!

Let me just highlight the errors in that last statement.

[Slasher]

For ref - a rundown by a bloke on Ubuntu 11.04 v W7.

HbksYQPckyY

For info I'm an XP user and have steered clear of W7.

[Donalduck]

"Let me just highlight the errors in that last statement."
Fire away!!!

[goldfrog]

"Let me just highlight the errors in that last statement."
Fire away!!!

Think that is what the bold bits were. Maybe they don't show on you Linux system :rolleyes:

[Mornington Crescent]

goldfrog

Irony is alive and well and living in Bucks. You have brightened up my morning.

[Donalduck]

The bold bits show ok... just wondering where the errors were. It is free... it is easier to use than Windows (because it doesn't require constant attention to keep it bug free)... and Windows is a really lousy operating system(I spent as much time fixing it as surfing).

I am also keen to check out Google's new Operating System...

[Load Toad]

Really? I've used Windows Something or Other since oh, about '94 and have spent hardly any time fixing it. As a % of the time I've spent using it I'd say Windows runs & works perfectly well 99.9% of the time.
I never owned a car that reliable.

Download the updates, they are there for a reason, they don't use much memory, they don't shag your system, not using them is a bigger risk.

This is what we call a no brainer.

[green granite]

Well said Load Toad. As for Ubuntu being bug free try reading through their security notices, 5 Kernel bugs, among others, in August alone.

Ubuntu security notices | Ubuntu (http://www.ubuntu.com/usn)

[mixture]

and bug free

You've no idea what you're talking about.

I've found bugs in Ubuntu without even trying.

You only need to look at the source code repositories of any open source project, and the subsequent regular updates they roll-out to realise your "bug free" statement is utter nonsense.

No piece of software (OS or otherwise) can be bug free. It's the nature of software development. Software is designed and coded by humans. Humans make mistakes.

As the great orator D. Rumsfeld put it :

As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don't know
We don't know.






Until I stopped using Windows I thought all the problems were just normal... they aren't. Windows is a really bad operating system unless you have some compelling reason to use it.

Again, your personal experience. You appear unable to tell the difference between a localised problem and a problem with the product (i.e. Windows OS).

There are far more users out there who can demonstrate to you that Windows is not "really bad".

I'm a Mac OS supporter at heart, but even I have to admit that Windows 7 / Windows 2008 are actually half-decent operating systems going-forward. Of course some will always bemoan the departure of XP, but Microsoft are taking large strides forward to ensure that you will reap benefits from an upgrade. Yes Windows is not perfect, but it's not hideous either.

The problem with the Open Source community is just that, there's no clear course or direction. No incentive for people to contribute (a) quality code and (b) do so in a timely manner... because they are not rewarded (financially or otherwise) for doing so.

The whole linux thing is also getting out of hand, why does the world need quite so many linux distros ? It's not a good recipe for quality, reliability, efficiency or sustainability.

[Donalduck]

"You've no idea what you're talking about."
Guilty as charged... I am not a computer expert.
As I say... for me it just works... and I have not had any problems with my computer use since going to Ubuntu. Not one.
This is in start contrast to the last computer I had with Windows (admittedly I have not used 7 much as I find it tricky now after using Ubuntu for the last 12 months or so.)
I don't claim to be an expert... but have found with every single Windows computer that after 6 months things start playing up... and I don't have the knowledge to fix it. Even taking the computer to an expert usually resulted in them not fixing the problems or at least not for very long.
I don't have this problem with Ubuntu.
It just works... Sure you guys might prefer Windows... I just like stuff that works... the only system so far that I have found that achieves this goal is Ubuntu.
I like the KISS principle... I am typing this on a $200 netbook (about as cheap as they come Downunder) with a free operating system... I had enough confidence with Ubuntu that I wiped Windows 7 lite off it when I bought it... in fact bought it just to run Ubuntu.
For this it is perfect for me.
You guys do what you like with your operating systems... for you it obviously works... but I pointed this out as the original poster sounded like he was having the sort of problems that I was and asking the same questions that led me to Ubuntu.