Earth to Microsoft
Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-025
XP has such a patch. A friend of mine went on Windows Update yesterday and it attempted to download 867 MB worth of patches. Last I checked, my windows installation was about 1.5GB. Why in hell should I download a patch more than 50% the size of my OS?
YOU don't have to. You can have the little patch. I as a system administrator want one giant one so I don't have to figure out what version is installed on 300 machines.
It sounds to me like you're not a very good system administrator, if you'd rather deploy a mammoth patch across the network than targetted, smaller ones. If detecting browser version is such an issue for you, perhaps you need some training.
score one muppet.
Yes. You want to deploy a half gig patch over a 50 meg one, and I'm the idiot.
sysadmin - 99.9% of the sysadmins bitchnmoan any time MS has a giant patch/package that needs to be distributed - that's why there are a million small patches.
Allow me to elaborate. No one seems to mind when MS raises memory and cpu requirements by orders of magnitude, but God forbid I want to have a single large patch called from a server rather than a small on on a LAN.
You only have 2000 machines and you can't deal? You ought to feel lucky you still have a job.
"Yes. You want to deploy a half gig patch over a 50 meg one, and I'm the idiot."
Well, I think the problem is more the lack of frequency of the big patches. MS does occasionally roll a bunch of fixes into "big" packages - usually Security Rollup packages and Service Packs. They are infinitely more convenient than the little patches - if for no other reason than you have to reboot only once for a big package, and sometimes many times for little patches (depending on what they are.)
Muppet and sysadmin, you're both hilarious. It's like watching Itchy and Scratchy reruns.
Muppet, he had 95, NT and 2000 machines. In sysadmin's defense. Microsoft is now only starting to get a handle on management tools to manage their machines. Their product MOM was aquired from someone else and is now being rewrittent to scale better.
In fact we have two products now Systems Management Server (SMS) 2003 which is targeted at the software deployment piece of the puzzle (the issue being discussed here) and Microsoft Operations Manager (MOM) 2005 which targets the alerting and system awareness piece of the puzzle. Together these two products will be integrated to form System Center 2005 in a few years.
SMS 2003 can be trusted to administer servers. I personally have not seen any problems with it causing servers to fail. Like they say with Microsoft, 3rd times the charm, and I think they finally got it right with SMS 2003.
Don't worry about it... it was a concern at my old job, but not now, thx.
Fog Creek Home