Sign in to follow this  
willy

Beware of W2K SP3

Recommended Posts

Full article at http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,477299,00.asp

" ... A big warning to administrators about configuring the agent to automatically apply updates (by default, this is done at 3 a.m. each day): This option will result in automatic system reboots whenever an update is downloaded that requires a restart.

In our tests, after configuring the agent to automatically apply updates, it waited until its scheduled time and then downloaded all the critical updates pending for the system. It then applied the updates and rebooted the system, giving us a 5-minute countdown each time, during which we could stop it from acting.

Without active intervention, however, it forces a reboot, losing changes to a number of documents we had left open. This is completely unacceptable for most sites because administrators won't be able to predict or warn users when their systems will be restarted—that will depend on what Microsoft posts to the Windows Update site.

One administrator at the University of Arizona, in Tucson, already reported on a Microsoft support newsgroup that "there have been several people here who have lost a great deal of work" because of automatic updates. ... " :cry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As James has already said elsewhere, you can setup your own Windows Update server and get your clients to dl from there, thereby giving you control of what updates are applied. That is, if you insist on having it auto update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

software update services are a big pain in the ass imho

i just use group policy to mandate clients update from ms themselves, and let my web proxy deal with the would-be repetitive bandwidth issue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried the SP3 update manually and my system wouldn't work after that. The desktop was completely blank, and I couldn't run 'explorer' at all. I ended up getting the drive re-imaged, and haven't been brave enough to try SP3 again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd better stop updating your OS and get to work crunching those UD work units, Mister Duck(y) (you are the same person, no?)! I'm leaving you in the dust with the new CPU :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I tried the SP3 update manually and my system wouldn't work after that.  The desktop was completely blank, and I couldn't run 'explorer' at all.  I ended up getting the drive re-imaged, and haven't been brave enough to try SP3 again.

SP3 also bombed on my machine. Wouldn't even get to the login screen. I then took an older ghost image and restored that and then put SP3 on top of it thinking that it had problems with some existing service on my current setup but same results. I then slipstreamed SP3 with my W2K CD and started with a fresh install and reinstalled everything. This worked and I have had no problems since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After installing SP3 none of my passwords worked, neither my normal user or the admin password, but after entering the admin password about 20-30 times it suddenly worked, i then reset all the other passwords. No problems after that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am curious to hear from some of the people who applied SP3 to Win2K. Does it concern you at all that by applying SP3 you just gave MS rights to remotely administer your box. Can MS just pick a box and log on or do they need some type of voice authorization. How does that exactly work? I have a couple of boxes that run Win2K SP2 and WinXP SP1 and I have put off upgrading them because of the crap MS added in the EULA in SP3 and SP2. Maybe I could just block the ports that this runs on. TIA.

-JR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no, it doesn't bother me. i think they have better things to do.

there is a tool out there that will let you install sp3 after clicking 'i disagree' to the license, so you could have ww3 over click licenses with them if they suddenly decided your server was important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no, it doesn't bother me.  i think they have better things to do.

there is a tool out there that will let you install sp3 after clicking 'i disagree' to the license, so you could have ww3 over click licenses with them if they suddenly decided your server was important.

That's just a feel-good measure or is likely to be. Since the software is only designed to be installed if you agree, once the software is installed, it is presumed that you indeed agreed to the EULA.

It would be interesting to see this play itself out in court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You'd better stop updating your OS and get to work crunching those UD work units, Mister Duck(y) (you are the same person, no?)! I'm leaving you in the dust with the new CPU :)

Lol, I know, I know....I've been slacking lately. I need to run that crap more often.

...Now if I could only sneak UD onto the mainframe at work (IF it would work).....nothing like four zSeries 900's crunching numbers for me =) Yeah, I wish. *grins*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Now if I could only sneak UD onto the mainframe at work (IF it would work).....nothing like four zSeries 900's crunching numbers for me =) Yeah' date=' I wish. *grins*[/quote']

Sshh...! Not so loud! Last time I mentioned that, I got quite a rubbing down on my morals from the Prof. when I mentioned that to him... :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this