Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 29th Oct 2007 20:03 UTC, submitted by Geonon
Windows Microsoft has apologized for a Windows Server update that automatically installed the Windows Desktop Search tool on users' desktops without approval. The mistake happened because Microsoft reused the same update package for when WDS was first published in February as an optional update that was only applicable to systems with the search tool previously installed.
Thread beginning with comment 281638
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Suspicious
by flanque on Mon 29th Oct 2007 20:45 UTC
flanque
Member since:
2005-12-15

I don't know why, but I have suspicions about how 'accidental' this was, given Microsoft's battle over searching with Google.

RE: Suspicious
by TaterSalad on Mon 29th Oct 2007 20:55 in reply to "Suspicious"
TaterSalad Member since:
2005-07-06

Not me. Mistakes happen. If anything I would think Google would be the one trying to sabotage since they had a fit over not being the default search on Vista.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE[2]: Suspicious
by flanque on Mon 29th Oct 2007 21:37 in reply to "RE: Suspicious"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Yeah mistakes do happen that's true, but I just don't understand how something that is as obvious as this being missed through all the Q/A processes.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 6

RE: Suspicious
by anomie on Mon 29th Oct 2007 22:02 in reply to "Suspicious"
anomie Member since:
2007-02-26

"Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence."

Variations on that same quote here: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Robert_J._Hanlon

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 6

RE[2]: Suspicious
by ShadesFox on Mon 29th Oct 2007 22:38 in reply to "RE: Suspicious"
ShadesFox Member since:
2006-10-01

My favorite is a combination of that quote and another,
"Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from malice."

Edited 2007-10-29 22:38

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 4

RE[2]: Suspicious
by buff on Wed 31st Oct 2007 12:00 in reply to "RE: Suspicious"
buff Member since:
2005-11-12

"Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence."

This person must never have worked with Microsoft. Ever notice how their blunders always seem to benefit themselves?

Edited 2007-10-31 12:01

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE: Suspicious
by gilboa on Tue 30th Oct 2007 06:12 in reply to "Suspicious"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

It wasn't an accident... they were just testing how far they can go without being detected.
Think about it - in most cases, users will not detect this update when its being installed; when their machine starts slowing down (as mine did *) they'll either disable/remove it (if they know what they are doing), use it (if they need it - instead of Google search) or upgrade their machine ("because it's too slow") switching to Vista instead.

I may sound paranoid, but what exactly did Microsoft lose because of this mistake?

- Gilboa
* My workplace doesn't use auto-update; They push authorized updates down-stream only after they test them; however, being an incompetent bunch, they chose to authorize this update even after I, and others like me called to warn them about this update. Needless to say they are enjoying the joy of having the number of support calls quadruple.
Lucky for me I mostly use the Windows XP machine to read mail ;)

Edited 2007-10-30 06:14

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 5

RE[2]: Suspicious
by stestagg on Tue 30th Oct 2007 10:14 in reply to "RE: Suspicious"
stestagg Member since:
2006-06-03

If you read the article, this was an 'update revision' so once the base update (without WDS) had been authorised, revisions are automatically installed, this bypasses the autorisation mechanism rather neatly for microsoft.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2