Woody Leonhard of Infoworld summarizes the current state of Microsoft KB 2919355, the ambiguously-titled 'Windows 8.1 Update' (not to be confused with the update _to_ Windows 8.1).
In short: Microsoft has frozen two discussion threads on KB2919355 issues (after 103 and 116 pages of comments), and updated the Knowledge Base article with workarounds for seven major errors... some of which don't work.
In last week's Patch Tuesday, Microsoft changed their deadline for this Update until June (formerly they were requiring all Windows 8.1 and Server 2012 systems worldwide to have installed the Update in order to receive new patches).
Meanwhile, if you run a WSUS server, you may notice that the package for KB291355 (last reissued for the third time on 6 May) was apparently silently reissued over the weekend with a new release date of '15 May 2014', but there's no indication of any software updates in the KB article. The article revision number, however, now stands at '21.0'. Yes, twenty-one revisions. With no changelog.
Anyone else with interesting stories about your deployment issues with this Update?
Windows users don't HAVE to do that because Windows gets 10 years of support. If you can show me a single Linux OS that gets 10 years of support WITHOUT upgrading and WITHOUT requiring a support contract that costs several times what windows does? then I'll be more than happy to change the challenge. until then its not my fault Linux has such a short support cycle per release, even Apple offers longer than most distros per release.
show me a single Linux OS that gets 10 years of support WITHOUT upgrading and WITHOUT requiring a support contract
Can't do that. They travel in pairs.Scientific Linux -or- CentOS [google.com]This has been pointed out to you BEFORE and you continue to pound on your troll drum.
...and there are plenty of Windoze versions that have had far less than 10 years of support.
Name ONE Windows desktop, the subject at hand, that gets less than 10 years. And from the homepage of SciLi SL is a Linux release put together by Fermilab, CERN [scientificlinux.org] and various other labs and universities around the world. Its primary purpose is to reduce duplicated effort of the labs, and to have a common install base for the various experimenters. Our main goal for the base distribution is to have everything compatible with Enterprise, with only a few minor additions or changes. Examples of items that were added are Alpine, and OpenAFS.
Because it is completely reasonable for a home user to be doing grid computing and have specialty Enterprise hardware like $2000 printers. This is called moving the goalposts [tmrepository.com] with a bit of use distro X [tmrepository.com] thrown in which is extra hilarious since you had to choose distros whose xpress purposes are about as far removed from home desktops as my behind is to Pluto. Would you like to explain BTW how a distro designed for high volume servers and one designed for grid computing is gonna have drivers for home hardware like wireless cards and AOI printers? ?
So try to stay on topic which is home desktops NOT server or the Hadron mainframes,okay?
with linux, upgrades have always been freely available and modern versions often still run on old hardware, so while support for old versions of linux is available online, the demand would be a lot lower than for windows xp.
unfortunately with windows, you get free updates for x years until microsoft decides they want more money out of you. then they reskin, rename and resell . the only reasons why there is still demand for windows xp support at all is because users are sick of perfectly good computers being outmoded at the whim of a multinational, and they are reluctant to risk going from something that works to something that may or may not work.
even if your argument is technically correct, you just sound like an asshat.
So all you can respond with is name calling? Again explain EXACTLY how Scientific Linux is a comparable replacement for XP? or how dealing with no less than TEN upgrades, most of which WILL break multiple drivers, compares with any version of Windows?
The ENTIRE argument for Linux on the desktop can be summed up as "You should stop buying premade glasses because I have some sand right here!". The challenge is there, if Linux is ready for the desktop surely expecting it to work for half the time Windows gets is not unreasonable? If it can't even muster half the amount of support without breaking then it simply isn't ready,end of story. And being 'free' means exactly nothing, by that logic I should be able to come by and smash out your car windows every 6 months because "hey I left replacement windows on the grass". The entire "free upgrades" arguments completely ignore that 1.- The users time is NOT free, 2.- VERY few users have the skills to debug drivers, 3.- Even less of those have the bash skills required to fix the often incomplete or non functional drivers given on the forums, 4.- All of that time and effort will have to be repeated next "free" upgrade.
And I'm sorry that you don't like my tone, I personally don't like lies being sold as truth when they are trivially proven false. Its been 7 years, pick your poison and show me that I'm wrong. The sad part? You are rushing to defend an OS that won't even pass muster on what should be the most simple test on the planet! The challenge requires NO exotic hardware, NO money out of pocket, frankly less time that you and the other FOSS advocates expect MY customers to spend on your OS, and less than half the support level of Windows. Why are you willing to defend a product that can't even give you half of what the competitors do? Even OSX has 5 years of support, is your time really worth so little to you?
At the end of the day if it passes its ready, if it doesn't its not, it can't get simpler than that and moving the goalposts won't change the fact you are defending an ecosystem that can't even accomplish what Win2K did 14 years ago and that is an easily proven fact. Feel free to call me names, won't turn straw into gold nor will it make any Linux last half the time of Windows without trashing itself. I've run the tests, seen it with my own eyes, so why not try it yourself? Worried that I may be telling the truth?
you know... you're right... all us open sores freetards are just stupid
anyone who still uses windows xp is waaaay smarterer, than most of the fortune 500 companies that have invested in linux, not to mention all the ignorant fossies that should quit wasting their time with a dead hobby OS and develop for a *real* awesomer OS like windows xp
now where's my blue crayons... i'm hungry
Than you for proving my point, when given a chance to prove once and for all that you are right? you resort to name calling, why? because you know as well as i do that Linux can't even muster a frankly piss poor 5 years of updates without taking a big shit all over its own drivers. What fascinates me is why people like you are willing to defend something with such a poor level of support. You seem intelligent, is your time worthless? Do you have self esteem issues? Do you have some compulsion to root for an underdog even if its bad?
I guess that is one more advantage over Linux, Windows users don't take shit like a battered housewife, when Windows comes out with a shit version we have a fit and actually get things changed. See Windows 9 shaping up to be Windows 7 with a slightly fancier start menu for instance. Whereas Linux users just won't stand up for themselves, they get shit on with piss poor support, a bad driver model, alpha quality software like Pulse and instead of doing what would be best for the OS and having a bloody shitfit and demanding better you rush to defend it with TMs like ItsFreeYouCantComplain [tmrepository.com] and YouJustDontUnderstand [tmrepository.com].
But you still haven't answered my questions...why won't you accept the challenge? Are you standing here admitting you are defending an OS you can't even update for half the windows support cycle without it breaking? Why do you think an OS that you, an experienced Linux user, can't get to update for even half the time of a Windows support cycle is a worthy replacement for any Windows OS? If you believe I'm wrong its trivial to prove, take the test and post the results to YouTube. The challenge has stood for 7 years, nobody has been able to do it and THAT frankly says more about Linux than I ever could. It works on servers because the hardware is ancient and I doubt if there is more than 400 server drivers required for every server kit ever built, it works in embedded like cellphones because you only have to make it work once, but semingly otherwise intelligent guys like you will rush to defend a half baked piss poor excuse for desktop support because....hell i don't know, maybe you think you are "sticking it to teh man!" or your time truly is worthless.
Dude, just stop feeding the troll.
I've been reading Hairy's BS posts for at least a year now between /., Linux Insider and Soylent. No one paid him any attention on /. so he moved over here to be a dick instead. Just ignore him and he'll find some other site to troll his waste of time challenge on.
How EXACTLY is this a troll mods? Both the Windows and Linux support cycles are well known, here is Windows Vista's cutoff date [wikipedia.org] and here is the cutoff date for the version of Ubuntu released the same quarter [wikipedia.org].Windows Vista? Gets security updates until Apr 11,2017...how long WAS Ubuntu Edgy Eft supported? Apr 25 2008!
So mod me down all you want, it won't change reality and the reality is The Linux version got only two years of support to Vista's 10 which makes the Hairyfeet Challenge 100% valid because a Windows user DOES NOT HAVE TO UPGRADE to get 10 years worth of support, Linux? Well if most distros follow Canonical's lead (which many of the user friendly distros do, since they are based on Ubuntu) you would have had to upgrade over 10 times to equal LESS support than Windows gets! And I'm sorry but you can't throw the "just use LTS!" counter as Canonical themselves says LTS is not for home users but for BUSINESSES that require LTS. If you want to throw in LTS then we have to count Windows Server and embedded (which gets even longer support cycles) because like LTS its made for corporate NOT home users which was the topic under discussion.