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?
So your counter is Its Free You Cant Complain [tmrepository.com]? Really? And I'm the USER, explain to me why I should give a rat's ass whether these guys get paid or not? Why is it my concern? YOU are the advocate, I've walked into your shop...sell it to me, give me ANY reason why I should choose YOUR product over Windows or OSX.
And ya wanna know what is really fucking sad? That if you and the other Linux advocates here were to take just a few seconds to think frankly you'd be horrified at what you are arguing in favor of....I mean do you even realize that you are arguing in favor of Linux not being able to update itself for a lousy 5 years being acceptable....really? Its a fricking Operating System, the absolute bare minimum we should be wiling to accept from an Operating System is that it be able to apply its own security updates without breaking!
To me that is what is fascinating about the whole thing, I've gotten death threats, been called every filthy name you can imagine, even had a cyberstalker for the better part of two years for DARING to post a challenge that only requires Linux to update itself without dying, that is really ALL Linux has to do to beat the challenge, simply have a working system with wireless at the beginning of the test and a working system with wireless at the end of the 5 years simulation...yet the Linux fans act like I asked Linux to do the most impossible test, that this can't be fair, how dare you ask Linux to do something that Windows has been able to do for the better part of 14 years! Its an outrage!
So your counter is Its Free You Cant Complain? Really? And I'm the USER, explain to me why I should give a rat's ass whether these guys get paid or not? Why is it my concern? YOU are the advocate, I've walked into your shop...sell it to me, give me ANY reason why I should choose YOUR product over Windows or OSX.
I'm not arguing that they're going to be the same quality. That's my point. You seem to be expecting them to be the same quality. If you want a job well done, you shell out some cash. As for me trying to sell you Linux, I'm sure you're aware of the arguments for and against already, so I doubt anything I say would make a difference.
I mean do you even realize that you are arguing in favor of Linux not being able to update itself for a lousy 5 years being acceptable....really? Its a fricking Operating System, the absolute bare minimum we should be wiling to accept from an Operating System is that it be able to apply its own security updates without breaking!
I never said I was against updates. You were the one saying you wanted professional support right here, right now, and perfect, for no money. If you won't shut up about your precious challenge, I started out my last install on Quantal Xubuntu, did 2 dist-upgrades, and am going to do another one one of these weekends. Granted I have a desktop so no wireless is involved, but everything still works with minimal jiggery-pokery after the initial month of intermittent command line-fu. But I think we've already established that your anecdotes are the only ones with value, somehow.
blah blah blah repeating the Challenge for the 14th time only using bold now
I'm sure somebody else has done (and succeeded at) your precious challenge already. That you keep repeating it over and over and over makes me suspect this more strongly, actually. ("The Big Lie" [wikipedia.org], which seems to also be a favorite tactic of the political talking heads these days)
But I just Godwinned myself, and was arguing with a troll all along, so whatever. Oh, and you can take your smug TM Repository link and shove it, too. I'm done.
Show me where I said "professional support", unless you are arguing that ONLY a "professional OS" can APPLY ITS OWN UPDATES WITHOUT BREAKING which if that is the case then what do you call Linux? A hobby OS?
And the rules are simple and state clearly WIRELESS REQUIRED because i haven't dealt with a system in 5 years that didn't have wireless, nobody wants ugly wires running through their house. if you want to just change the rules you might as well add no sound and video as well, since you are removing the worst offenders. if you stick with nothing but bash then Linux never breaks!
So do what you like, you've already ignored the rules so it really proves nothing, after all if i ignore sound I can get Win 7 on a P2, doesn't prove that its usable. And if you don't like the challenge? Fell free to ignore it, Linux has stayed in the same spot for 20 years, lower than JavaOS last i checked, so its not like anything either of us says or does will matter. Final food for thought...even though Linux cost nothing and the netbook was designed around "Linux friendly hardware" what happened the SECOND that MSFT offered them XP? the OEMs ran away from Linux as fast as they could, but why? Because the drivers didn't stay workinge [theinquirer.net] so people brought them back [laptopmag.com].
And you still ignored my question...name ONE thing that makes it somehow better than Windows and OSX? its not cost because at $99 for 10 years that is less than a burger a year so no value there, its not source because non programmers have no use for it, so name one thing that would make it worth all the breakage and mess for? And isn't it funny how its always the supposed "enlightened" FOSS advocates that resort to name calling? Why is that? Afraid your argument hold up to scrutiny so you have to try to flame instead of arguing on the merits?