Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 1st Apr 2009 13:48 UTC
Bugs & Viruses We're well and deep into April 1 now, and if you were to believe some of the reports and hype on the internet, we should've all been paying in bottle caps right about now. As any sane person already saw coming, the Windows worm Conficker didn't do anything. It just kind of sat there, patiently mocking all those who did not update their machines properly.
Thread beginning with comment 356329
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: April Fools
by sbergman27 on Wed 1st Apr 2009 21:04 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: April Fools"
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

sbergman27, to be completely honest I have NEVER seen any update from Microsoft that trashes someone's system, either personally or professionally.

Well, personally and professionally, the number one reason I have heard from people for turning off updates is that a previous one "trashed their system". Maybe it did. Maybe it didn't. But you really can't blame people who feel helpless anyway from taking an "If it works, don't fix it" attitude.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: April Fools
by flanque on Wed 1st Apr 2009 21:16 in reply to "RE[7]: April Fools"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Maybe, but I would argue that a more compelling reason to disable automatic updates in a corporate environment is to give the opportunity to test it before it is released to the masses. It'd be completely stupid to assume they'll always work thus testing beforehand is an absolute requirement.

That doesn't distract from the fact that the chances of an automatic update "trashing" a system is very very low.

As for at home, though I haven't checked every single patch, I am pretty confident that a restore point is created before the patche(s) are applied. I wouldn't be suprised if the overwealming majority of home users don't even know what this means and just assume their systems are toast.

Though not without exception, the updates from Microsoft are quite thoroughly tested. Having said that they cannot cover all possible situations some user's get their systems into, but it's pretty darn good.

Reply Parent Score: 2