Big Microsoft Updates Today [Archive]

Milo Minderbinder

9th Apr 2013, 19:43

No, not a keyboard problem
See Pwn2Own - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pwn2own)

the patches usually start rolling out in volume on the evening of the second Tuesday of each month, Seattle time. So you'll probably note them from tomorrow onwards. Not everyone gets them at the same time - the "push" is phased to balance server loads

vulcanised

9th Apr 2013, 19:50

Oddly enough, there was an advert on another forum today, imploring me to "Get the latest drivers for Windows XP".

BOAC

9th Apr 2013, 21:54

No, not a keyboard problem - I tink yer missed the :).

Got all mine tonight, XP and 7. We (UK) have to wait for California to wake up, have its bagels and coffee and push buttons.

onetrack

9th Apr 2013, 22:57

OFSO - So .. what you're saying is that we'll get another 10 updates that include another 25 bugs that require another 30 updates to fix??

I already have updates (for W7) that constantly fail to install. Chasing down the error message fixes, I find that there's a "System Update Readiness Tool" that fixes Windows Update errors in Windows 8, Windows 7, Windows Vista, etc, etc.

I download the System Update Readiness Tool, and it fixes nothing. Obviously there's a bug in the System Update Readiness Tool, and there'll be a patch along shortly to fix that bug ... :rolleyes:

Milo Minderbinder

9th Apr 2013, 23:31

onetrack
what are the KB numbers of the patches that won't install?
I'm guessing they just need installing manually one at a time.

onetrack

10th Apr 2013, 00:17

Milo - The update that refuses to install appears to be KB2729094. Every time I shut down the computer it says it is loading 1 update, and it appears to load, then shutdown - but upon the next shutdown, I still get the "1 update being installed" message.
I've gone through the update history and KB2729094 appears to be the culprit that is regularly failing to install - despite my having successfully loaded the System Update Readiness Tool.
I just noticed there's the 9 new "urgent" updates waiting for me. :rolleyes:

onetrack

10th Apr 2013, 00:48

I've downloaded all the new updates, and I get the message that one update failed, which is what happens every time I download updates.
The error code is 8024200D. Searching the MS knowledge base tells me I have to download System Update Readiness Tool to fix error 8024200D ..... :ugh:

Milo Minderbinder

10th Apr 2013, 06:19

download and run it manually from
Download Update for Windows 7 (KB2729094) from Official Microsoft Download Centre (http://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/download/details.aspx?id=30521)

OFSO

10th Apr 2013, 11:42

I believe OFSO is referring to what is expected to be a larger 'Tuesday' than normal?

Indeed I was, and mixture, I wasn't asleep on all previous "Tuesday Patch It" days, but I heard this one was due to be a bigger than usual, f*ck-up-a-perfectly-good-working-system day. So far it hasn't happened, just one update for Defender.

And before anyone jumps at me, no I don't allow system updates and patches to be installed automatically, but look at them carefully first and see whether I think I need tham. Then, and only then, do I allow them to be installed. (Always !)

green granite

10th Apr 2013, 12:12

but I heard this one was due to be a bigger than usual,

Perhaps due to this update

NVIDIA driver update Download size: 227.8 MB

onetrack

10th Apr 2013, 12:50

Here's the list of updates that MS offered today (10th April 2013). I downloaded them all successfully. I also manually downloaded the KB2729094 update - thanks Milo.

7 Updates were deemed "Important" by MS - 2 were "Recommended" - and 5 were "Optional".

I saw no harm in downloading the optional ones, and I believe my computer is performing a fraction better - but that's just a feeling, not a measured result.

I'm running Chrome as a browser, but I downloaded the Explorer updates in case I revert to it, as I do once in a blue moon.

1. Definition Update for Windows Defender - KB915597 (Definition 1.147.1392.0) - (Important)

2. Platform Update for Windows 7 (KB2670838) - (Optional)

3. Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool - April 2013 (KB890830) - (Important)

4. Update for Windows 7 (KB2574819) - (Optional)

5. Security Update for Windows 7 (KB2823324) - (Important)

6. Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 8 for Windows 7 (KB2817183) - (Important)

7. Windows Internet Explorer 9 for Windows 7 - (Optional)

8. Update for Windows 7 (KB2729094) - (Update that regularly failed to load)

9. Security Update for Windows 7 (KB2813347) - (Important)

10. Security Update for Windows 7 (KB2813170) - (Important)

11. Update for Windows 7 (KB2799926) - (Recommended)

12. Update for Windows 7 (KB2709981) - (Optional)

13. Security Update for Windows 7 (KB2808735) - (Important)

14. Update for Windows 7 (KB2592687) - (Optional)

There are two more new updates that have just arrived and are waiting to be downloaded, as of right now. That will make 15 updates offered today.

rgbrock1

10th Apr 2013, 13:08

I'm not going to say it. I'm not going to say it. I'm not going to say it.

I'm so friggin' glad I'm a Linux user.

There. I said it anyway.

Keef

10th Apr 2013, 13:17

I just got the same batch, and the apparently inevitable

Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 9 for Windows 7 for x64-based Systems (KB2817183)

Installation date: ‎10/‎04/‎2013 14:10

Installation status: Failed

Error details: Code 800F0902

Update type: Important

A security issue has been identified in a Microsoft software product that could affect your system. You can help protect your system by installing this update from Microsoft. For a complete listing of the issues that are included in this update, see the associated Microsoft Knowledge Base article. After you install this update, you may have to restart your system.

More information:
Microsoft Security Bulletin MS13-028 - Critical : Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer (2817183) (http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=285215)

Help and Support:
Microsoft Support (http://support.microsoft.com)

It seems to be an update for IE9. Since I never use IE, the easiest solution may be to remove it altogether. In fact, I suspect I already did. Maybe that's why the update won't work...

OFSO

10th Apr 2013, 13:19

Linux to the left of me, XP in the middle, 7 to the right, and Andy in my pocket tablet......that's my office.

I can see why the update didn't bother the main machine. Not much there for XP to chew on. I'm now about to activate Mr 7 on the right, and see....no, other than new AVG definitions, there's nothing there.

My friend in the sauna told me this morning he received updates to Firefox this morning.

rgbrock1

10th Apr 2013, 13:34

Keef:

You removed MS Internet Exploder from your PC/machine?
Auggggghhhh, sacrilege. (Did it take less than a week to do so?)

Are there any black helicopters hovering outside your home right now, with men dressed in black military assault-type uniforms with Microsoft emblems over their breast pocket?????

They're gonna getcha.

Keef

10th Apr 2013, 13:39

Well.....

A large, green military helicopter did fly past a few minutes ago. It was bristling with stingy things, and looked the part. The pilot is a friend of mine - when he's not flying military stuff and throwing nasties at HMQ's enemies, he has a share in our little Jodel. You have to have the right friends...

I thought I would do right by Mr Microsoft, so I downloaded KB2817183 from the MS site and ran it. The next message was:

http://jillings.org.uk/KB2817183.JPG

rgbrock1

10th Apr 2013, 13:49

That's good, Keef. We'd hate for you to have to see this outside your window:

http://www.trs-usa.org/assets/images/FR-1.gif

Guest 112233

10th Apr 2013, 20:14

As an XP(SP3) user - I had about an 20.00 MB update from Microsoft. Not a pimple of a prob - Also dual boot with Ubuntu 12.04 as an alternative - again no probs.

We really need an informed debate of the security issues of using XP & IE8 after Microsoft finally do cease support; of XP (SP3). I use FF and Chrome.

The problem with W7 for me is that I have a lot of work historically dependent on XP

PS I do now about Vista for Business (fully patched). It is supported until 2017. The GF is delighted with her Lenovo (4GB).

mixture

10th Apr 2013, 22:01

We really need an informed debate of the security issues of using XP & IE8 after Microsoft finally do cease support

I'm sorry, what ? :ugh:

It's a software product. In particular its a Microsoft product.

You do not use it post-EOL unless you have a death wish or you have a substantial corporate IT department with some competence in maintaining security of obsolete systems.

I don't give a toss if you are using Firefox or whatever.... if you're connecting an obsolete system to the internet, you are at risk. The operating system is at the foundation of everything.

For home users, the message is clear. The journey's over, upgrade, deal with it. You've had more than enough notice.

stumpey

11th Apr 2013, 00:00

Sorry Mixture, but I think thats just a load of old Twaddle put about by Micro Shaft and its brain washed supporters in furtherance of that company's continued income and profits!

The AVERAGE home user of XP will be EFFECTIVELY no more at risk after the loss of support than before. Theoretically yes, effectively no, providing you continue using an up to date virus and add wear scanner, and follow normal safety rules about only downloading from trusted sites and scanning BEFORE opening.

My old Win98 machine still hasn't been hacked yet and why would any one bother to? There again, perhaps your porn stash is more risqué than most peoples, so it might be worth you keeping them in wonga? :eek:

Milo Minderbinder

11th Apr 2013, 00:15

Stumpey

I'm afraid that is totally wrong. A large number of Windows vulnerabilities are not covered by antivirus software. Protecting the operating system is a completely different game than protecting against viruses

As to your Win98 system, well just maybe you were lucky. But it brings into focus another point: within a couple of years of MS killing Win98 support, it became almost impossible to find security software to work with it. When XP dies the decline will be even quicker. The software companies are waiting keenly for XP to go, so they can finally ditch the last elements of legacy code.
Which begs the question....what AV software are you running on that Win98 machine? I bet it doesn't work. To the best of my knowledge there is NO current up to date security software that actually works for any form of Win9x

mixture

11th Apr 2013, 07:54

Sorry Mixture, but I think thats just a load of old Twaddle put about by Micro Shaft and its brain washed supporters in furtherance of that company's continued income and profits!

I've been involved in the industry for a long time. I don't work for a box shifter. I don't pledge allegiance to any manufacturer (much to the annoyance of the manufacturers who call me up each and every day trying to convince me to shift to their products for non-technical sales-led reason X Y or Z).

Windows98 machine.... great.... that's probably contributing to all those spam and zombie machines that keep on bombarding my infrastructure. What on earth do you need a Windows 98 machine for ?

How do you know your Windows 98 machine has not been exploited ? Well written exploit code will clean up behind itself, hide itself and perhaps just collect data or carry out specific tasks before deleting itself.

As Milo pointed out, its not just the security aspect that I highlighted, but the fact that third-party software developers will also drop support, either due to their own internal processes in terms of optimising their software or because they need/want to take advantage of newer/faster/optimised APIs that are only available in newer OSs.

here again, perhaps your porn stash is more risqué than most peoples, so it might be worth you keeping them in wonga?

I don't have a porn stash thank you very much. And please don't turn this into a personal attack..... its childish, un-necessary and will get you banned from PPRuNe.

Fly-by-Wife

11th Apr 2013, 15:04

Stumpey,

Both what you say and how you say it suggest that it isn't worth listening to.

I've been involved in IT for over 20 years, and I support both Milo and mixture on this - old, unpatched and insecure OSs have no place connected to today's internet. End of.

FBW

mixture

11th Apr 2013, 15:41

The AVERAGE home user of XP will be EFFECTIVELY no more at risk after the loss of support than before.

By the way, stumpey, this is the wrong attitude to take.

My guess, and that of many others, is that post D-Day, the scale of exploits and attacks against windows XP will increase.

Those operating on the dark side of the internet will be pushing out exploits faster and more aggressively than ever before because they know Microsoft will have filed away the XP source code in the archives and the employees working on XP code moved on to other duties.

Have you considered, for example, the fact that the blackhats may already be holding back on releasing details of exploits....awaiting the opportunity to be able to turn a healthy profit on the sale of post-EOL exploits.

Windows XP was (probably) Microsoft's most widely deployed OS ever. That makes for a very attractive target, because even if I decide to be optimistic and I say only 1% will be left online D-Day, that's still a significant number.

You're not going to see any enterprising individuals offering unofficial third-party patches either because the only people with a copy of the Windows XP source code outside of Microsoft are the Chinese government (and probably a bunch of Western governments too).

OFSO

12th Apr 2013, 16:55

To answer my original post, had eight updates last night, installed, restarted, I can't see any difference to my XP.

Guest 112233

12th Apr 2013, 18:27

I need the Win XP M/C for its legacy apps: luckily I can just switch off the wireless networking when using windows. Still has Linux as a co boot operating Sys.Purchase of a Win 7 PC required before April 2014

XP has had a very good innings.

CAT III

occasional

13th Apr 2013, 17:23

<i>XP has had a very good innings.</i>

And to many people still appears to work better tham Microsofts more recent offerings.

Saab Dastard

13th Apr 2013, 18:36

And to many people [XP] still appears to work better tham Microsofts more recent offerings.

I get the impression that many of the people who express that opinion haven't really used Win 7 enough to make that judgement.

For sure it's a different experience, and I had my reservations initially (particularly after experiencing Vista), but I've been using Win 7 on all my home PCs (4 desktop, 1 laptop) for about 18 months, and I am now firmly of the belief that Win 7 is significantly better and vastly more stable than XP.

I've had to use XP for the last few months at work for my current client, and it is a constant irritation not to have the functionality to which I've become accustomed - not to speak of the stability problems (although I think some of that is down to their standard build ;)). Their Win 7 upgrade is scheduled for Q3 of this year...

I have still got some irritations with Win 7, particularly around the sound subsystem, but I would not willingly go back to XP. No sir.

Of course Windows 8 is complete rubbish - who would ever want to move from Win 7? :)

SD

occasional

13th Apr 2013, 21:25

I have Windows 7 on a notebook and that has certainly never persuaded me that I should upgrade any other machine.

However I dont do things that produce stability problems with XP, which is what may well produce the difference of opinion..

mixture

13th Apr 2013, 23:20

I get the impression that many of the people who express that opinion haven't really used Win 7 enough to make that judgement.

Agreed.

Vista was a pile of smelly stuff.

Windows 7 is what Vista should have been.

Also SP1 has been and gone for Windows 7 ... which means any major issues in the RTM version have been ironed out and we're now (generally) talking bug and security fixes.

mixture

13th Apr 2013, 23:21

I have Windows 7 on a notebook and that has certainly never persuaded me that I should upgrade any other machine.

Trouble is that that sort of statement is a personal opinion of something that might not even be Microsoft's fault.

For example, we don't even know the specs of your laptop.

lomapaseo

14th Apr 2013, 01:05

Trouble is that that sort of statement is a personal opinion of something that might not even be Microsoft's fault.

For example, we don't even know the specs of your laptop

The operable word is upgrade

onetrack

14th Apr 2013, 03:28

There's more BS appears when IT is discussed, than the BS thrown around the bar on a Friday night. I started on Windows 98 in '98, went to XP in 2005, then onto Windows 7 in 2009.

They all have some bugs, but MS do their best to keep up. All upgrades are retrospective, you can't do anything about that.
Most IT crims and hackers are always a step in front of the companies, it's no different to law enforcement.

I've never had any major problems with any of the MS products I've purchased - apart from one.
I've had problems dealing with MS, because they're arrogant, aloof and treat lowly owners of their products with disdain - unless you spend $50K a month with them.

The one major problem I had, was updates to W7 that I allowed on a laptop when I was travelling. The update failed and I ended up with corrupted boot files.
It was a disaster, and I had to pay an IT expert good money to repair the laptop. Never again will I allow updates when I'm travelling.

To me, it makes a lot of sense to keep up with the latest in IT, if it performs as expected and has general acceptance. Keeping up with security updates reduces the crims and hackers chances of getting at your files and databases.

I was hacked and had numerous viruses with W98. I had a couple of viruses with XP. I have had no hack attacks, viruses or any problems since I have had W7, and kept it constantly updated. I also use a good AV (Emsisoft Online Armor).

This indicates to me that MS now take threats to their products pretty seriously and do their best to make life difficult for crims and hackers.
You have to do your bit, too - and being complacent and using ancient software that isn't regularly keeping up to speed with current threats, is setting yourself up for a fall, IMO.

mixture

14th Apr 2013, 10:44

You have to do your bit, too - and being complacent and using ancient software that isn't regularly keeping up to speed with current threats, is setting yourself up for a fall, IMO.

Well said onetrack.

It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who'll happily do their online banking using computers that have not had software updates, don't run anti-virus, or even shared-use untrusted computers.

FullOppositeRudder

14th Apr 2013, 13:18

It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who'll happily do their online banking using computers that have not had software updates, don't run anti-virus, or even shared-use untrusted computers.There are a lot of people out there out there who simply don't know otherwise. They don't know any better. (I wonder who we might blame for this state of uninformed and potentially dangerous bliss ......)

You see, those people who have not a trace of geek in them (unlike all of us here), have purchased a computer to do a job and expect it to function like any other appliance. They don't have to constantly upgrade their dishwasher, telephone or TV set against malicious threats from outsiders. For them the computer is just another home appliance, albeit the most puzzling and often the most frustrating one they own.

They don't have to trash a perfectly good TV, dishwasher, telephone, or automobile just because the manufacturers decide after a time that they are no longer going to support it; meaning that not only should these people have to shell out for a new one; they also will have to learn a completely new (and invariably confusing) way of getting it to do what they found easy on the old one, if indeed the new machine does even that.

Please don't shoot the messenger here (me). That's how it is in the real world - at least the one I live in ...... :{

le Pingouin

14th Apr 2013, 14:55

Marketing is mainly to blame. You can hide the complicated bits behind a pretty and easy to use façade but it's still there.

It's only going to get worse as more devices incorporate "smart" components. The real nightmare will be when everything is tightly integrated as a full home network - malware affecting every electronic device in your house......

BOAC

14th Apr 2013, 15:04

Indeed - I'd be interested in the percentage of smart phone users who ensure they have the latest firmware - and how many don't run AV - but sync happily to their PCs and trawl the internet.

I'm trying to imagine re-formatting and re-installing the OS on the Washing Machine....:)

le Pingouin

14th Apr 2013, 15:30

Gives a whole new meaning to "rinse and repeat" :}

End users will inevitably be more than happy to sacrifice security for convenience. And for most of them it's just another appliance, not a general purpose computer.

mixture

14th Apr 2013, 16:54

I'm trying to imagine re-formatting and re-installing the OS on the Washing Machine...

My washing machine started smoking and talking to me in spanish the other day.

vulcanised

14th Apr 2013, 17:19

Don't leave cars out of the equation.

occasional

14th Apr 2013, 18:30

The one major problem I had, was updates to W7 that I allowed on a laptop when I was travelling. The update failed and I ended up with corrupted boot files.
It was a disaster, and I had to pay an IT expert good money to repair the laptop. Never again will I allow updates when I'm travelling.

For many people this would end up in them throwing the computer away. Would you welcome another update in such circumstances ?

This indicates to me that MS now take threats to their products pretty seriously and do their best to make life difficult for crims and hackers.

Threats to their products may well be taken seriously but it appears that threats to their customers are of little interest.

axefurabz

14th Apr 2013, 21:01

Just as a matter of interest, does anybody posting here have incontrovertible proof that ceasing to update an OS has resulted in damage?

Milo Minderbinder

14th Apr 2013, 21:15

"does anybody posting here have incontrovertible proof that ceasing to update an OS has resulted in damage? "

I can state quite factually that failing to update increases the risk of infection. If you had to sanitise as many machines as I have, the connection would be clear to you.
Other factors are obviously also at play: inadequate security software and customer stupidity being two key items, but failing to update the OS is a common factor in the majority of infections I see.

onetrack

14th Apr 2013, 23:37

For many people this would end up in them throwing the computer away. Would you welcome another update in such circumstances?
Occasional - Yes, despite this disaster involving my laptop, I'm happy to welcome updates. I'm just a lot more careful and better prepared now, when I do updates - knowing that things can go wrong.

In the case of my update disaster, it was due to one particularly major MS security update apparently being known to cause problems if interrupted during downloading.
This is what happened to me - and it would not have been such a disaster if I had been at home with access to other computers and boot discs for backup.

Computers, like all electronics, are decidedly prone to glitches. I destroyed a hard drive operating system once, by using an electronic welder on the same house wiring phase as the computer was running on.

The electronic welder "chattered" on startup, due to heavy current draw, and this voltage fluctuation and interference was enough to seriously damage the OS (XP) boot files - bad enough to make the OS unrecoverable.
This in spite of a top-class voltage surge protector, too. I know now to turn off all computers when using my handyman electronic welder around the house.

Milo Minderbinder

15th Apr 2013, 00:09

Many many moons ago, before the advent of the PC, I worked at a site where the business was run using a Cromemco minicomputer and twelve or so dumb Wyse terminals.

One day the company handyman was drilling in a wall, when he hit a power cable. The ring main tripped, so the terminals and Cromemco all crashed. OK, so far not a problem, we'd seen this before, no damage. Just to make sure, we went round and turned the mains switches off on all the equipment.
We didn't unplug them.
Next, the handyman reset the trip switch - next we knew was a ruddy great bang, two of the Wyse terminals went up in smoke and the case of the Cromenco suddenly distorted.
When we got it open, there was hole big enough to put your fist through in four circuit boards, while the back plane was twisted and fried. Even though the mains switch was off, the crossed wire had caused enough current to enter the terminals and then pass down the data line to the minicomputer to blow it apart.

A very salutory lesson, and one we never repeated. That drill cost us a lot of money

BOAC

15th Apr 2013, 07:37

M$ have 'withdrawn' the latest Win7 update (2823324) as it can cause problems and advise removal if so.

mixture

15th Apr 2013, 07:38

The electronic welder "chattered" on startup, due to heavy current draw, and this voltage fluctuation and interference was enough to seriously damage the OS (XP) boot files - bad enough to make the OS unrecoverable.
This in spite of a top-class voltage surge protector, too. I know now to turn off all computers when using my handyman electronic welder around the house.

and

We didn't unplug them.
Next, the handyman reset the trip switch - next we knew was a ruddy great bang, two of the Wyse terminals went up in smoke and the case of the Cromenco suddenly distorted.

Both of these are fine examples as to why you should install surge protectors between your computer and the wall. :E

onetrack

15th Apr 2013, 09:48

Both of these are fine examples as to why you should install surge protectors between your computer and the wall.
Mixture, if you read what I posted in my previous post, you'll see I said .. "This in spite of a top-class voltage surge protector, too" ... :rolleyes:

My surge protector is a $100+, top-of-the-wozza unit, plugged into the wall socket, and which provides protection to both of the desktops in our home/office. It also provides phone line surge protection.

This unit protects from over-voltage (surge) - but it doesn't protect from sudden and severe voltage variations (under the maximum allowed mains voltage - which is 240V + or - 6%) - which voltage variations can seriously screw up your OS files on your HDD. This is also a good reason for never running your laptop directly on 240V from a small portable generator, which often have unstable voltage levels.

Wodrick

15th Apr 2013, 10:30

M$ have 'withdrawn' the latest Win7 update (2823324) as it can cause problems and advise removal if so.

Is that only if you perceive problems or recommend uninstall anyway ?

BOAC

15th Apr 2013, 10:46

and advise removal if so..- as far as I know. Kaspersky is a known problem.

onetrack

15th Apr 2013, 10:48

The problems with update KB 2823324 appear to centre around Brazilian users of W7 and those using Kasperky AV. I installed KB 2823324 5 days ago and have encountered no problems.

Microsoft withdraws KB 2823324, second botched automatic update this year | Microsoft windows - InfoWorld (http://www.infoworld.com/t/microsoft-windows/microsoft-withdraws-kb-2823324-second-botched-automatic-update-year-216325)

Wodrick

15th Apr 2013, 10:50

Just curious as I have not noticed a problem, thanks.

Saab Dastard

15th Apr 2013, 15:02

Kaspersky is a known problem

Agree with that 100% as a stand-alone statement, especially in the corporate environment. :ouch:

SD

Milo Minderbinder

15th Apr 2013, 18:21

Not just WIn7, though thats all that M$ are admitting to.....
My ex's Vista desktop was taken down by that update this week - I only realised the cause when I read The Register this morning.
Symptoms of cycling at boot match exactly

Her machine had Avast on it

occasional

19th Apr 2013, 17:48

This computer seems to have decided to illustrate my point about the dangers of updating.

I have spent about 2 hours carrying out the supposed simple operation of updating Firefox and after updating Adobe reader, Firefox seems to be unable to find any information about plug-ins to update the rest.

Any suggestions ?

mixture

19th Apr 2013, 21:23

Any suggestions ?

Yeah, what sort of ancient version of Adobe Reader were you running in the first place !

Pelikal

19th Apr 2013, 23:04

Quote:
I'm trying to imagine re-formatting and re-installing the OS on the Washing Machine...
My washing machine started smoking and talking to me in spanish the other day. Pah! That's nothing. My washing machine started taking cocaine, talks in Welsh and occasionally Greek. It has now attempted to shag the oven which was particularly hot. The fridge has now intervened.

occasional

20th Apr 2013, 07:32

Yeah, what sort of ancient version of Adobe Reader were you running in the first place !

Probably the ancient version that was born a few months back - some idiots manage to write software that will not run unless you have a recent version of a product.

green granite

20th Apr 2013, 07:40

I have spent about 2 hours carrying out the supposed simple operation of updating Firefox and after updating Adobe reader, Firefox seems to be unable to find any information about plug-ins to update the rest.

Any suggestions ?

Yes, remove which ever additional nasty software that Adobe put on because you missed the 'untick this box' bit (it was McAfee with yesterdays flash update) then remove Adobe reader and sort out FireFox by removing any plug-in or extention you don't want, and then install Foxit reader (http://www.foxitsoftware.com/downloads/) to read PDF files

mixture

20th Apr 2013, 09:00

Probably the ancient version that was born a few months back - some idiots manage to write software that will not run unless you have a recent version of a product.

Have you tried uninstalling and re-installing Adobe Reader.

I wouldn't spend too much time mulling over green granite's suggestion of Foxit. I would stick to Adobe. Foxit is no better, no less bug prone. Adobe were the ones who invented the PDF format and therefore will be putting much development effort into Adobe Reader. :cool:

green granite

20th Apr 2013, 09:18

Adobe were the ones who invented the PDF format and therefore will be putting much development effort into Adobe Reader.

And producing bigger and better Bloat Ware. :(

mixture

20th Apr 2013, 09:54

And producing bigger and better Bloat Ware.

You can actually get official Adobe Reader installers that only install the reader itself and not any of the home-user attachments.

Poke around for the Reader Distribution Agreement .... if you meet the criteria, the rest is free of charge.

Milo Minderbinder

20th Apr 2013, 16:03

OK, we went round this one a couple of weeks ago.....the latest Firefox versions have built in PDF handling, they don't need a plugin. Only problem is the implementation is crap and the files don't format correctly.

To get round it you have to install Acrobat reader as an application (not as a Firefox plugin) and then hack the browser to use the reader application

see How do I disable the new built-in PDF viewer, but still be able to use the Adobe in-browser PDF viewer? | Firefox Support Forum | Mozilla Support (http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/950939)