Sparda Posted July 10, 2006 Share Posted July 10, 2006 I don't use windows autoupdate on any of my computers becasue frankly it sucks balls (Like the Auto sucks the left ball here and the update sucks the right ball here). I was going to compile a list of esential update for windows my self and then scriptify them. It instantly ocured to me that peopel have probably done this alredy. I googled and found AutoPatcher. I was just wondering if any body has used it befor and found it reliable, or if there is a better sollution then AutoPatcher? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debianuser Posted July 12, 2006 Share Posted July 12, 2006 or if there is a better sollution then AutoPatcher? just switch to linux and forget about AutoPatcher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparda Posted July 12, 2006 Author Share Posted July 12, 2006 You know thats not the answer. You have to put up with windows in certian cercumstances... such as playing games, and where you do have to put up with windows, you have to find a better way of doing what you need to do rather then the microsoft way which usualy sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debianuser Posted July 12, 2006 Share Posted July 12, 2006 You know thats not the answer. You have to put up with windows in certian cercumstances... such as playing games, and where you do have to put up with windows, you have to find a better way of doing what you need to do rather then the microsoft way which usualy sucks. well i always run a linux distro on my computer and yes with windows. I usally patches windows with windows updates and mainly use it for some program "photoshop - flashmx", however when i get on a wireless network, or public wap access, I switch of course to linux - who's stupid... with all the tips given in the IPTV shows you better be careful windows is a good os when it's unplugged from the network and isolated - isolated? - so not much security patches to apply to it. huh? :twisted: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insidiea Posted July 12, 2006 Share Posted July 12, 2006 I've used auto patcher on my windows box. By default, it installs a bunch of little apps and makes some weird registry edits that I didn't care for. Just make sure to deselect the stuff you don't want. The security updates are nice though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparda Posted July 12, 2006 Author Share Posted July 12, 2006 Just to finish up this thread, AutoPatcher worked well. No problems, I stoped it from installing the crap (including windows media player 10 of course) and it's all good. My computer now has all security updates upto June of this year, whcih seems to be the only problem with AutoUpdater, it will always be slightly out of date. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jalada Posted July 13, 2006 Share Posted July 13, 2006 or if there is a better sollution then AutoPatcher? just switch to linux and forget about AutoPatcher Dude Sparda asked whether Autopathcer is reliable, and if there's a better solution, and you just say "Use Linux". You could answer that about anything, but it's not a help is it?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debianuser Posted July 13, 2006 Share Posted July 13, 2006 or if there is a better sollution then AutoPatcher? just switch to linux and forget about AutoPatcher Dude Sparda asked whether Autopathcer is reliable, and if there's a better solution, and you just say "Use Linux". You could answer that about anything, but it's not a help is it?! true bro!.... true :roll: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaKo Posted July 13, 2006 Share Posted July 13, 2006 Hey, what ever badness you ascribe to Winwoes Update, it sure beats FreeBSD's, CVSup & portupgrade commands... 8 hours of code scrolling past... then an error message and you have to start again lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparda Posted July 13, 2006 Author Share Posted July 13, 2006 ports is good, makes it easy to compile the source so it's 'more native' to your computer. If you know some thing is going to take a long time to compile you might want to consider using packages (pkg_add) insted of compiling from source. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaKo Posted July 13, 2006 Share Posted July 13, 2006 True, pkg_add is damn good. But my main reasons for using the ports and compling my own are 1: i'm learning more about how *nix function in general, & 2: its an ancient dual p3 system so i'm trying to squeeze every last iota of performance out of it. Plus, the prepackaged Azureus didn't work, had to compile it before it would see the Java VM on my box. But i'd still contend that MS has the best patch delivery system i've seen on a desktop OS (mainly because they need it lol). Does autopatcher deliver the goods on corp. XP? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.