Microsoft Posts Critical Patches

[jtommyj]

I am not against ms...but they do have flaws...who doesn't? Sefy was just doing his job by trying to raise awareness. The scary thing is alot of people think their pc is like a toaster. Plug it in and nothing else ever needs done to it. The problem is Microbill has not always focused on security, instead focusing on user features. With worms like msblast, and the nachi virus, this way of thinking has come back to haunt them. What you need to consider is no computer is truely safe.

But my point about this all along is, is it MS fault for not being able to have a crystal ball and see the possibility of every hole and worm, or is it the jerks who are MAKING the worms and exploiting the security holes fault that our world has come to that ? I don't work at MS and am not privy to their internal meetings so I have no clue that MS doesn't focus on security. Unless someone here does and can shed light on it, I don't take that as being a fact. Could be your right but you have no more idea than the man on the moon what goes on behind closed doors in any company unless you work there and are present. Neither do I.

There is no one here that does any kind of work that is so great that they can foresee any and all possible failures and problems in their line of work until they actually happen.

It is like some people think that MS should have the ability to test every single hardware and software configuration on the planet before releasing an OS or a patch. Have you never seen other products recalled or patched because after it was released to the public problems were discovered ?

And forget about the paying to be a beta tester line. It's old and stale and it pertains to everything. The people in the late 1950's were beta testers for the polio vaccine and other products. Many died.The people in the 1960's were beta testers for safety belts in cars and other products. Many died. The people in the 1970's were beta testers for german measles vaccine and other consumer products that failed. Many died.


I've seen cars recalled that have killed people not recalled until many lives were lost. Let's put it all in perspective, people. Re-installing an OS, no matter how much of a pain, isn't likely to compare to making funeral arrangements for a loved one who died because the tires on their SUV caused the SUV to roll over. Or a rear end collision caused the car to explode. Or the wiring in the television was flawed and burned down the house. These things happen everyday to many companies worldwide.

It's like we all think we do the best job we can everyday, but those slackers at MS are screwing us up on purpose.

Please think it through.

[jtommyj]

@JohnnyCNote, no, it's a matter of taking responsibility when posting news regarding a fix/patch/update that may cause an unknowing user to have a disabled PC.

Simply saying there's an update is not sufficent.
Also give warning (after you check on the web, not just YOUR pc) that it may cause damage in some way (if was reported).

I believe that goes without saying. An individual who doesn't realize they are taking a risk by installing anything doesn't belong in front of a computer. Just my opinion.

And I agree with this whole-heartedly. Well said.

[JohnnyCNote]

@JohnnyCNote, no, it's a matter of taking responsibility when posting news regarding a fix/patch/update that may cause an unknowing user to have a disabled PC.

Simply saying there's an update is not sufficent.
Also give warning (after you check on the web, not just YOUR pc) that it may cause damage in some way (if was reported).

All this has nothing to do with anyone's opinion of which OS is better or not, it is about the simple fact. You posted news without even wanting to think of the possibility it may cause harm and it didn't even bother you one bit if it did. But you got pissed when someone did say it causes harm, cause "it didn't happen to me" doesn't mean it won't do damage to someone else!.

So it's my fault if someone has a problem with the update. You also seem to be fond of making people responsible for things they've never said, as you've already tried with me, hence my reference to adolescent games. Are you similarly going to blame PCWorld.com, CNet, or any other of the many websites that alert people of software updates when they go wrong? It's all part of using computers and taking a little responsibility for one's own actions instead of looking for scapegoats and otherwise conducting "discussions" in an intellectually dishonest manner.

Get this through your head: I am under absolutely no obligation to try to anticipate all of the myriad outcomes of applying an update or patch to a particular piece of software. Their manufacturers have technical and legal departments for that.

I, for one, and tired of your games, and find it ridiculous beyond belief that this thread has gone on as long as it has. However, if it's your, and others', aim to prevent me from posting similar such topics in the future, you can forget it!

[JohnnyCNote]

@JohnnyCNote, no, it's a matter of taking responsibility when posting news regarding a fix/patch/update that may cause an unknowing user to have a disabled PC.

Simply saying there's an update is not sufficent.
Also give warning (after you check on the web, not just YOUR pc) that it may cause damage in some way (if was reported).

I believe that goes without saying. An individual who doesn't realize they are taking a risk by installing anything doesn't belong in front of a computer. Just my opinion.

Thanks! I've posted such information for years, and this is the first time someone has tried to play this game with me. If it's his goal to prevent me from doing it again, he's sadly mistaken....

[indolikaa]

Microsoft. Security. Updates.

These are the ways to the Dark Side.

[vitualis]

But my point about this all along is, is it MS fault for not being able to have a crystal ball and see the possibility of every hole and worm, or is it the jerks who are MAKING the worms and exploiting the security holes fault that our world has come to that ? I don't work at MS and am not privy to their internal meetings so I have no clue that MS doesn't focus on security.

Yes, it is MS fault because they are selling a commercial product. MS aren't doing us a "favour". They are SELLING US A COMMERCIAL PRODUCT. MS indeed acknowledges that it is their fault and that they have a responsibility which is why they release updates!

As for MS's "lack of focus" on security, please don't be obtuse. When we say Windows is good for this or bad for that, we are in reality comparing it to its contemporary alternatives. There is without a doubt that Windows is intrinisically less secure compared to Linux or Mac OS.

As for your continuing statements on Microsoft making it easy to use the internet, please get some historical perspective!

Microsoft did NOTHING of the sort. The boom in the use of the "internet" (by which we really mean the WWW, e-mail, IRC and IM) had nothing to do with MS and MS did not "make it easy" to use. The commercial uptake in the use of the Net was brought forward primarily by the "killer apps" or WWW (Netscape Navigator) and e-mail.

Please remember that it was a devil to get Win95 to connect to an ISP. Furthermore, Internet Explorer was really pretty crappy until the version 4 generation.

If you are talking about "easy of use" of the internet by the stage of Windows 98, you again have to compare Windows to its contemporaries. It wasn't really then any better than its contemporaries -- just on par (compared to Win3.1 and 95 which was SUB-PAR). I don't particularly think we need to congratualte MS on making their OS as easy to use as everybody elses in this regard...

There is no one here that does any kind of work that is so great that they can foresee any and all possible failures and problems in their line of work until they actually happen.

But you can design something with the consideration of potential failures to come and try to minimalise the risk. For example, you can't trash a Linux system unless you log on as the superuser and this is not done by default. On Windows, you BY DEFAULT are logged in as the superuser which means a even you cat walking on your keyboard can kill your OS (which also means any worm or trojan installed on your PC has unlimited access to your PC). This is not secure by design.

It is like some people think that MS should have the ability to test every single hardware and software configuration on the planet before releasing an OS or a patch. Have you never seen other products recalled or patched because after it was released to the public problems were discovered ?

Nobody expects this and you are really going off at a tangent. Most people would consider Windows hardware compatibility to be its strong point.

I've seen cars recalled that have killed people not recalled until many lives were lost. Let's put it all in perspective, people. Re-installing an OS, no matter how much of a pain, isn't likely to compare to making funeral arrangements for a loved one who died because the tires on their SUV caused the SUV to roll over. Or a rear end collision caused the car to explode. Or the wiring in the television was flawed and burned down the house. These things happen everyday to many companies worldwide.

What the HELL does this have to do with comparing Windows to Linux or Mac OS , etc.... ????

It's like we all think we do the best job we can everyday, but those slackers at MS are screwing us up on purpose.

Please think it through.

No a lot of people think that Microsoft releases products (i.e., FOR SALE) that have not fully gone through their development and test cycles and that there are many design flaws in their products. And they do so for commercial advantage... not for the good of the consumer.

Regards.

[jtommyj]

@Virtualis
My statements that you so conveniently clipped to put out of context answer all of your own questions.

Please don't you be so obtuse. Automobiles are commercial products also and have DEADLY flaws. Prescription drugs are commercial products and they have DEADLY flaws. There are many products that have flaws which was my point, to keep it in perspective. Do these companies test their products ? You bet they do. Some pharmaceuticals are tested for YEARS and still patients die once they are released to the generaql public. Why ? Because like computer software and hardware set-ups, no two people are exactly alike, and no two situations are exactly alike. My Point ? Tests are great but they are not infallible.

What the HELL does this have to do with comparing Windows to Linux or Mac OS , etc.... ????

Nice try ,but it don't work here, jack. On the surface it has nothing to do with comparing OS's which, once again,I have never done in this thread. I haven't made one comparison that said MS is bettter than anything FOR ANYONE BUT ME.

I never said MS is, was, can be, or could be better than anything else FOR ANYONE ELSE. I never stated it was perfect.
I am NOT comparing Windows to Linux or anything else. I am stating that products "in general" have flaws and my examples proved the point.

I have stated in this thread that I have nothing for or against any OS, Windows or others. That I like what works for me and don't care what you or anyone else likes or dislikes.
I don't care that back in 95 this or that happened with MS, just like I don't care that back in the dark ages people were stoned to death if others thought they practiced witchcraft. I care about what has made it easier for ME NOW, and, seemingly much to your chagrin, MS has.

If i learn Linux well and it is the same, I will like it also.

Why is that so hard for you to understand ?

And as for my historical perspective, you , once again, need to read a little closer and get some factual perspective. Here is your quote :

As for your continuing statements on Microsoft making it easy to use the internet, please get some historical perspective!

Now, here is my quote

You guys are missing the point. I'm talking about ME ,MS making it easier for ME, so your points are moot about MS not thinking the internet was important. I don't care, once again, about anything except the fact they made it easier for ME.

I didn't say MS had anything to do with anything about the internet
EXCEPT allowing me to access it easier.

I said MS made it easier to use the internet FOR ME. Once again, FOR ME.

Please understand the words "For Me".

Are you going to now try to tell me they don't make it easier for me ?

Can you please then tell me what i have already used in the past that was easier FOR ME in my opinion than IE ?

[gitreel]

you can't leave well enough alone, can you. When the moderator put you in your place, you should have ducked out. You cannot compare operating systems to vehicles.

[jtommyj]

I hardly see a moderator misquoting me and being too obtuse to understand general comparisons putting me in my place.
It sure wasn't you that tried though, was it ?

Just jumped on after someone else took a shot.

[gitreel]

whatever where is that indolikaa special when you need it?

[indolikaa]

whatever where is that indolikaa special when you need it?

Love to!

Except for the following reasons...

1) This discusssion is WAY over my head,
2) jtommyj's avatar has me in a trance,
3) I'm already licking my wounds from another thread.

[jtommyj]

whatever

You got me there. That's my 14 year old girls' favorite line too.

[JohnnyCNote]

Do I get some sort of prize for unintentionally starting a thread that will soon be over 10 pages? The last one that lasted beyond a few was the one asking for people to post their disk printer results, however it lacks the joie de vivre of this one....

[indolikaa]

Unless I missed one somewhere, you should get a prize for having a thread go this long without a yellow card!

10-page thread, no yellow card.

That combination is somewhat like what I'm listening to right now: Battle Hymn of the Republic by the Russian Red Army Choir.

They just don't sound right, do they?

[gitreel]

that is quite an accomplishment.

[JohnnyCNote]

That combination is somewhat like what I'm listening to right now: Battle Hymn of the Republic by the Russian Red Army Choir.

They just don't sound right, do they?

You should hear them sing So Happy Together....

[indolikaa]

That combination is somewhat like what I'm listening to right now: Battle Hymn of the Republic by the Russian Red Army Choir.

They just don't sound right, do they?

You should hear them sing So Happy Together....

(Checking extensive Napster Orgy of 2000 collection for possible match...)

[jtommyj]

I once heard, although I can't back it up with any facts, that the Ebenezer Baptist Church choir in a small rural area of Pittsburgh did a cover of "The Devil went down to Georgia" by the CDB.

[JohnnyCNote]

(Checking extensive Napster Orgy of 2000 collection for possible match...)

Here's a lead: Total Balalaika Show, featuring the Leningrad Cowboys and the Red Army Ensemble...

[Sefy]

@JohnnyCNote, why do you INSIST on putting words in my mouth and doing translations to things i've never even said! Where did I say it's YOUR fault ? You are inventing things just to make it suit your line of thought which has nothing to do with what I said.

Since you didn't put the warning and I did, you went out of your head going it didn't happen to me! so who cares if it didn't happen to you! it happened to me and others. But no, then you go blaming me and those others for all their problems with that specific update.

Not only you didn't want to put the warning, you kept insisting it does not do any harm cause it didn't happen to you. That's an Adolecent game! trying to get out of responsibility, why don't you use some heavy drugs ? so many are going to say nothing happened to them!

Get this through your head: I am under absolutely no obligation to try to anticipate all of the myriad outcomes of applying an update or patch to a particular piece of software. Their manufacturers have technical and legal departments for that.

Get this through YOUR head: I did NOT ask you to anticipate any little thing, all I did was put a warning, and YOU went nuts about it! so put a nice cork in your mouth, open your eyes, READ and then start commenting on what I said or didn't say.

Regarding your question of C|net and PCWorld and I don't care who, if I'd been a moderator on THEIR forums and I heard or had a problem with any of THEIR products, then YES, I would also go out of my way to put warning to people it may cause damage.

Unlike jtommyj thinks, Drugs have Warnings on them, Alcohol has warning on it, just about near all other products have warnings that with their use it can cause harm to some people. Heck, I saw on USA tv when I was there some TV commercials who promoted drugs, they also said what MIGHT be a side effect.. Also, if you do have a problem with your car, you got what is called INSURANCE, unlike with MICROSOFT products which everything you do is at your OWN risk.

Our site lost its server thanks to the latest update. Missing kernel. Our Technical Director RJ reckons somebody thought the best way to improve security was to stop the system booting at all.

You think Microsoft would care about what happened to JMO? of course not! why would they ? it's not THEIR fault that THEIR fix caused a business PC to stop booting! You maybe want to blame ME for "applying" that fix too ? After all, you are the one BLAMING me for everything!

NOW START READING CAREFULY AND SLOWLY

YOU were the one who attacked both me and vcd4ever because we had bad luck with their updates! and accused US for being at fault here. Which is rather strange considering the Windows Update is AUTOMATIC on just about all asspects of DOWNLOADING and INSTALLING the updates.

YOU were the one who couldn't care less if your nice bit of information has caused trouble for others, just because it didn't happen to you! But then you go around inventing things like saying I put words in your mouth ? and you never even said which words, cause I was quoting you on everything!

YOU were the one giving the "smartass" replies to everyone and kept doing the thinking that i'm blaming YOU for the faults. Which at NO stage I ever did such a thing! (please quote me!) And all I did was put a warning and even THAT made you go crazy about everything!

Lastly! not only I am the ONLY one here being attacked for my opinions by the very same ones who claim I attack them and FORCE them! And those individuals not only attacked but insulted me on every chance they got only because I disagree with them.

The ONLY reason no one got a "flag" from me, was because I don't involve my duties on the forum with personal insults at me, If this was at someone else, you can bet your ass there would have been quite a few flags by now so do yourself a favour and put a cork in it and start reading, Cause even I can read english and it's my second language!

[jtommyj]

Unlike jtommyj thinks, Drugs have Warnings on them, Alcohol has warning on it, just about near all other products have warnings that with their use it can cause harm to some people. Heck, I saw on USA tv when I was there some TV commercials who promoted drugs, they also said what MIGHT be a side effect.. Also, if you do have a problem with your car, you got what is called INSURANCE, unlike with MICROSOFT products which everything you do is at your OWN risk.

Sefy, everything you do in life you do at your own risk. What kind of crap argument is that ? You want to fly in a plane ? You do it at your own risk. You want to cross the street ? You do it at your own risk. You get into your car to drive to work ? You do it at your own risk.

Should you expect a safe flight ? YES Do planes crash ? YES

Should you expect to cross the street safely ? YES- Do people get hit by cars crossing the street ? EVERYDAY

Should you expect a safe ride to work ? YES - Do people die every day on their way to work ? YES

Should you expect Windows to work perfectly when updating ? Of course.
Do problems happen ? At least 50 times that I know of.

Just because something doesn't have a warning on it, is it safe all the
time ? I'm not sure if this is a language barrier issue, but "Use at your own risk" is what we consider a warning in the USA.

What else could MS say from a legal stand point ? This software is guaranteed to be flawless for 8 billion computers all around the world using 7 billion different configurations ? Red Hat Linux doesn't (see below).

You have unreasonable expectations because as others have stated earlier your axe to grind with MS. It really, really, shows.


And I'm sure that the people who lost their lives with defective cars really gave a rats a** about car insurance !!

And if you read the MS bulletins and disclaimers they ALSO say what might be a side affect, THAT IS WHY IT IS USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.

You have a choice ,and you can pick the lesser of 2 evils. Don't update, and risk the flaw ,or update, and risk a crash.

The same reason the USA commercial you saw today gave the warning was so you would know the possibility of a problem could exist if you take it so USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.

Don't take the drug and live with the problem, or take the drug and have a chance at another problem developing. Same scenario, pick the lesser of 2 evils and what works best for you and make your choice.

For every action or lack of action ,there is a risk involved.

Whether they spell it out for you or it is implied, it is there.

Sometimes, it just takes a little common sense and thoughtfulness.

And here is the legal page from Red Hat Linux for you

Disclaimer
THIS WEBSITE AND ALL CONTENT, MATERIALS, INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS AND SERVICES ARE PROVIDED ON AN "AS IS" AND "AS AVAILABLE" BASIS. YOUR USE OF THIS WEBSITE IS AT YOUR OWN RISK. RED HAT MAKES NO WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE FUNCTIONALITY OR USEFULNESS OF THIS WEBSITE. RED HAT DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. RED HAT DISCLAIMS LIABILITY FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, PUNITIVE OR OTHER DAMAGES, OR LOST PROFITS, THAT MAY RESULT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, FROM YOUR USE OF THIS WEBSITE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY DAMAGE TO COMPUTER SYSTEMS, HARDWARE OR SOFTWARE, LOSS OF DATA, OR ANY OTHER PERFORMANCE FAILURES, OR ANY ERRORS, BUGS, VIRUSES OR OTHER DEFECTS THAT RESULT FROM OR ARE ASSOCIATED WITH USE OF THIS WEBSITE.

RED HAT MAKES NO WARRANTY THAT, (I) THE SERVICE WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED, TIMELY, SECURE, OR ERROR-FREE, (II) THE RESULTS THAT MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE USE OF THE SERVICE WILL BE ACCURATE OR RELIABLE, (III) THE QUALITY OF ANY PRODUCTS, SERVICES, INFORMATION, OR OTHER MATERIALS PURCHASED OR OBTAINED BY YOU THROUGH THE SERVICE WILL MEET YOUR EXPECTATIONS, (IV) ANY ERRORS IN THE SOFTWARE WILL BE CORRECTED, OR THAT THIS WEBSITE, ITS CONTENT, AND THE SERVER ON WHICH THE WEBSITE AND CONTENT ARE AVAILABLE ARE FREE OF VIRUSES OR OTHER HARMFUL COMPONENTS.

ANY MATERIAL DOWNLOADED OR OBTAINED THROUGH THE USE OF THIS WEBSITE IS DONE AT YOUR OWN RISK AND YOU WILL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO YOUR COMPUTER SYSTEM OR LOSS OF DATA THAT RESULTS FROM THE DOWNLOAD OF ANY MATERIAL.



INFORMATION CREATED BY THIRD PARTIES THAT YOU MAY ACCESS ON THIS WEBSITE OR THROUGH LINKS IS NOT ADOPTED OR ENDORSED BY RED HAT AND REMAINS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE THIRD PARTY.

I counted 2 "at your own risks'

[Sefy]

@jtommyj, you missed the WHOLE point here! weather there is or isn't any risk, on just about every other product it is implied, after all, who doesn't hear about citizens sueing because they hit a sidewalk that was crocked ?

The point is, even on toys you have warning of chocking hazards, even if they are not exactly ment for eating. The FACT is there ARE warnings! it's irrelevent weather you take a risk or don't. The issue is there is a warning on something they MAY cause problem. Which is ALL my fault was at doing!

I Put a fair warning!

I'll give you an example, if you have a product and you get an update which gives you a warning about lets say, it may raise some compatibility issues, and you have another product which doesn't give you any information on any problem which may arrise, you are most likely to use the second one for the reason you would think it's safer since no warning was given regarding it.

I Always take risks for MY actions!

But it's a pity people tend to not take responsibility for their own actions and that includes Microsoft! When you go to the doctor and he gives you a medicine, HE is the one taking responsibility, cause you CAN sue him for all the problems that medicine may cause you!

Windows is a COMMERCIAL product (as you propably know) that you buy and you EXPECT warranty on it, however, the only warranty is, that YOU use it at your OWN risk. Thank god it doesn't kill you or this would have been a whole different story.

This WHOLE thread is because of one reason!

I made the FAULT of putting a warning that the Latest Updates crashed my PC in several attempts, so YOU and your Commrads decided i'm an idiot or other nice nick names. And you put words in my mouth and you twist all I have said. I Dislike Microsoft, true, but has NOTHING to do with this thread about simply putting a warning that the update COULD cause a fatal error!

"If it didn't happen to me, then it's your fault!"

That's the Logic that seems to go around with the "big shoots" here on this thread. So because I have experienced, and thousands of others did, then it's our fault for using an AUTOMATIC installation which my only fault was thinking it was safe to update my system in regards for a critical security.

So excuse me for not being Microsoft and wanting to put a risk warning!

ADDON: Since you added that Linux Warning, lets do a bit of Comparison!

1 - Linux is made by NON profiting individuals / Microsoft is a Corporation
2 - Linux is freely distributed and has warnings / Windows is Commercial!
3 - Red Hat sells you a CD and Books service and the OS is a free usage!

So when you download Linux it IS your own risk and you expect NOTHING from it. Compared to Windows which you PAY for and DO expect updates which will NOT kill your PC after applying them! Get the Difference here ?

Besides, you just proved my point, even Red Hat which distrbutes a FREE OS gives warnings, which was THE ONLY thing I am to blame here for only ASKING to put a warning! Is that SO difficult to do ? instead of bashing me and blaming me for doing updates ?

Why don't you blame Israel for existing, then nobody would hate Israelies!

[jtommyj]

Sefy, I understand what you are saying but Red Hat Linux says the same thing. See above. An what about all the other companies you do pay for the SW ?

No software company takes on any responsibility. Every time you load a new software, or update one,there is the disclaimer.

Norton, McAfee, Adobe, Red Hat Linux, MS, it's all the same.

Abit and Tyan do it when I update my bioses. It is at your own risk.

You seem to be a knowledgeable and experienced person in this field, that is why I don't understand your reasoning as if MS is doing something that other SW companies aren't by not taking responsibility.

Do we know for a fact that MS knew that the patches would crash a machine when they first went out ? How could they until it happened ?



It is common practice in the software industry because there are too many variables.

I guess we should end this as friends now.

We can both be men enough to agree to disagree.

[Sefy]

@jtommyj, you again misunderstood me. I know THEY put a warning, but the issue here was that Johnny here got pissed that I PUT a warning! I trouly do think you should re-read the start and see who really is at fault here. Cause so far i've been bashed and insulted by 4 or 5 people and I was called an idiot.

For what reason ? for putting a warning ? That their Update Crashed my PC, then the fault must be mine, I am the one who DID something wrong, not the fix itself. So because it didn't happen to Johnny, then he starts saying i'm blaming HIM for it! which I never did at any place!

Lastly, you cannot compare a FREE product with a COMMERCIAL product when it comes to support. You EXPECT more for something you paid and not from somethong you got for FREE. There is a MAJOR difference between the two when compared to each other.

When you buy a new part for your car, do you NOT get a warranty on it ? When you buy your PC, do you not have a 1 (or 3) years warranty on it ? And if something goes wrong, you get service for it! What do you get when Windows kills your important Data ? you get "use at your own risk" notice.

PS: I have no issues with you or anyone else, even with those who insulted me repeadly and tarnished my technical knowledge.

[jtommyj]

And here is MAc OS/X disclaimer which is commercial and you do pay for:

Disclaimers
APPLE DOES NOT PROMISE THAT THE SITE OR ANY CONTENT, SERVICE OR FEATURE OF THE SITE WILL BE ERROR-FREE OR UNINTERRUPTED, OR THAT ANY DEFECTS WILL BE CORRECTED, OR THAT YOUR USE OF THE SITE WILL PROVIDE SPECIFIC RESULTS. THE SITE AND ITS CONTENT ARE DELIVERED ON AN “AS-IS” AND “AS-AVAILABLE” BASIS. ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THE SITE IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE. APPLE CANNOT ENSURE THAT ANY FILES OR OTHER DATA YOU DOWNLOAD FROM THE SITE WILL BE FREE OF VIRUSES OR CONTAMINATION OR DESTRUCTIVE FEATURES. APPLE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY WARRANTIES OF ACCURACY, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. APPLE DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL LIABILITY FOR THE ACTS, OMISSIONS AND CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTIES IN CONNECTION WITH OR RELATED TO YOUR USE OF THE SITE AND/OR ANY APPLE SERVICES. YOU ASSUME TOTAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR USE OF THE SITE AND ANY LINKED SITES.
YOUR SOLE REMEDY AGAINST APPLE FOR DISSATISFACTION WITH THE SITE OR ANY CONTENT IS TO STOP USING THE SITE OR ANY SUCH CONTENT. THIS LIMITATION OF RELIEF IS A PART OF THE BARGAIN BETWEEN THE PARTIES.
The above disclaimer applies to any damages, liability or injuries caused by any failure of performance, error, omission, interruption, deletion, defect, delay in operation or transmission, computer virus, communication line failure, theft or destruction of or unauthorized access to, alteration of, or use, whether for breach of contract, tort, negligence or any other cause of action.

Apple reserves the right to do any of the following, at any time, without notice: (1) to modify, suspend or terminate operation of or access to the Site, or any portion of the Site, for any reason; (2) to modify or change the Site, or any portion of the Site, and any applicable policies or terms; and (3) to interrupt the operation of the Site, or any portion of the Site, as necessary to perform routine or non-routine maintenance, error correction, or other changes.

[jtommyj]

I Just love those Microsoft Lovers, notice what you said "make use of it at their own risk" I wonder why the "risk" is there. Maybe for Microsoft not to ever take responsibility for their own updates. Terrorists of the Web is what they are.

If I had to go by a Microsoft Supported OS, they barely give any true support to any of their OS's, you wanna hear about support ? check IBM's OS/2 Warp 3 and 4, how old are they ? lets see, Warp 4 is from 1996, and wow! it is not even being sold, but STILL being supported!

Now if Microsoft Supported their OS like that!

Oh, so the guy with 95 is not qualified, how about me then ? or maybe only if I put the next disasster you call an OS (namely XP) on my PC, you would say i'm entitled to "Try upgrading to something a bit more up to date and then you'll be in a better position to comment"

Well, i've installed a bit more then "dozens" of OS's by MS and with loads of Different Hardware settings, and i've seen it crash over and over again, oh and "Simply stating that a machine wouldn't boot after applying an update provides nothing useful as it does not indicate what may have caused the problem to begin with" is completly false.

Why ? Cause if a system worked SMOOTH just UPTO that update, then it's obviously the fault of the update. Fact ? i've restored the system from an Image file, worked flawlessly, ONLY updating the Critical Windows Updates and the system would not load the next boot. And i've tried it 3 times just to make sure.

Of course you will not take responsibility, cause hey, it's not your fault that a Microsoft Update crashes a user's PC, it's their own risk to take. No One is forcing anyone to use ? Now that's really original! like we got much choice in the matter, try going with a different OS and you will be forced by the programs to switch back.

Then you'd say it's not Microsoft's fault! or is it ? Maybe being a MONOPOLY gives them the power to dictate to others what to install or not, after all they use their monopoly power to take over IM's and Office and Browsers and Media Playing, and hey, if they can't win in a fair competition, they are just gonna integrate it into their OS to make sure you use it if you want or not.

So don't try to impress me with how many dozens of systems you updated, cause more chances that I updated a heck lot more then you did in only a day.

Sefy, with all due respect, your post early on was the first inflammatory post I read, stating people who didn't have your particular problem or tried to guide you to the fact that just because you had problems doesn't mean everyone will are "Microsoft Lovers", Microsoft is "Terrorists of the Web", etc., because someone didn't agree with your point of view. I especially find the term "Terrorists of the Web" extremely offensive due to recent world events in Spain and Riyadh, and the terrorist attacks in the rest of the world including my great country.


There were also a few people who originally tried to guide you with more techno-babble that is over my head about the kernal and instead of even acknowledging it may be a problem, you took offense when they tried to see if there could have been another underlying cause to why your 50 machines crashed but not everyone's machines did. Your machines must have something in common that could have been a clue, but you summarily stated that because you and others had a problem that it is automatically MS fault. Not exactly open minded. No one said it is YOUR fault ,but maybe all the people who are having the same crash have an AMD 760 chipset for example, or a VIA 266 chipset, or an NForce2 or this or that or whatever. It would have been more helpful to say that you had a Tyan brand mb, with this type of chipset or whatever so people who had similar software set-ups could be safer. But instead it was "MS sucks because their auto update crashed my machines. 50 of them. OK- what type were they ? Some more useful info than 'MS SUCKS", you know ?



You can't always use the profile because many people don't update them.

And I see by your profile you have an Nforce MB if it is up to date. I have an Abit NF7-S and NVidia haven't got the IDE drivers right for this thing since I got it. So I use the serial ATA. And you weren't overclocking when your kernal wouldn't load 3 times were you ? That happened to me when I upped the FSB too high when I used the IDE channel on my NF7-S and the memory timings were too tight.

I do not agree with the person who called you an idiot and I do believe he apologized and edited the post.

Johnny C-Note basically said to each his own.

I'm done on the thread. I hope in the future you have better luck with your updates

[JohnnyCNote]

Sefy

Stop beating a dead horse. Next time I post a message regarding a software update, I will do it in exactly the same way I've done it before. All of this has been for nothing, except to set a new record for fastest growing thread that should never have been more than 1 page.

Or you could always come to Florida and sue me. It would be good for a laugh....

[Sefy]

@jtommyj, let me first explain simply as I can and then i'll reply to that last quote you made of me, ok ?

Only on Johnny's 4th post did he put a message saying "at their own risk" in a long post which of course he pointed out no system ever crashed on him for a faulty update. Which is to say in other words to the one he replies to "it's your fault the machine crashed" and what I replied to that you quoted.

so the making it simple: You put news regarding updates, put the warning too

Regarding my reply which you called "inflammatory" was not directed at any person and saying it's their fault. I stated my opinion on MS and their conduct and their products. I did not insult or say their inexperienced or lacking in any manner as was repeadly implied towards me.

If you take noticed the Original post, there are LOTS of emoticons there, as to say i'm being "funny" and not overly serious. In NO WHERE written or implied by me did I insult because someone didn't agree with your point of view as you claim.

Those you mentioned who tried to "guide" me, did nothing but try to insult my intelligence and knowledge. By talking "down" to me as if I was some sort of a fool who doesn't know what he is doing. As for those 50 PC's it's irrelevent what they are, cause they are completly different machines and don't really have much in common! if they were identical, i'd fault the PC, that is common sense.

Regarding the insults, I don't really care about the guy who called me an idiot. I'm more referring to those who were more insulting my intelligence and experience then specificly calling me names.

JohnnyCnote only said to each his own after saying vcd4ever is not even entitled to an opinion since the computer stats written are for Win95b. And then he went about accusing me for saying it's HE's fault for the problems which I never said it. But he kept insisting I did at every 3rd post of his.

So to make a long story short, I have no problem with people disagreeing with me or my opinion, it's when they start insulting my intelligence with a dumb remark is where I draw the line. Cause I can say the same thing you did, they are not open minded about what I have to say, which is why they bashed me. I was talking in General "Microsoft Lovers" and they were refering to me in specific.

That's the Difference.

PS: I see you re-edited regarding the "Terrorists" well, sorry, I don't take it back, Terrorists attack the free world, and that is what Microsoft are for me, they attack the free www and destroy everyone that doesn't agree with them or stands in their way, same things Terrorists do. And funny you didn't mention Israel in the terrorists attacks, cause we have more of them then ANYONE in the world has! So i'm very much entitled to comparing MS to Terrorists, I have more experience in that department then anyone here as i've already survived 3 bus explosions from terrorist attacks here.

@JohnnyCNote, then next time I see you posting news again with warning, I will again reply with a warning if I find any about what you post. Since you couldn't care less.

[jtommyj]

I think you are being overly sensitive, but that is my opinion.

You being a technical person and all ,I would expect more "technical" details about exactly what patch did what to your system. There were 4, weren't there ? This is what you posted:

.

You wanna hear critical issues ? I downloaded their latest Security Critical Fixes, and my Windows 2000 wouldn't boot up! it kept crashing on NTOSKRNL

Now THAT is critical!
Thank god I had a Ghost image to restore everything again!

How did that help anyone ? Which fix was it ? You being technical minded, you surely narrowed it down, didn't you ?

I don't know, I just thought if you were warning people you would be more specific about what you are warning them about.

Sefy please read closer. While I didn't specifically mention Israel by name,I did say the "rest of the world" which does include Israel.

And you are wrong. You have no right to compare MS to terrorists just because you live in that area of the world any more than I have a right to attack every person of Arab descent because a few terrorists flew planes into buildings in my country.

It is in poor taste and disrespectful to people who have lost loved ones to REAL terrorists in Israel and anywhere else.

When MS starts car bombing and killing innocent victims, then you may make the comparison.

[JohnnyCNote]

Sefy

Can we just agree to disagree and leave it at that?