"Alan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I hadn't seen that post either Robin, but I'm downloading the updates
> manually at 9:25 PM, Eastern.
>
> And the NetFramework -- at 248 MB -- is taking forever to download. I just
> can't wait for it to begin installing. :>

The last edition of Windows Secrets (paid version) had a piece entitled,
"Just say no to this .NET 3.5 update," and then went on to discuss
patching problems. I'm not sure if I completely understand the
reasoning, but basically the reviewer found it an unnecessary patch
for the vast majority and a bit of a bait and switch, in that a patch
for 2.0, which is used in many business enterprise apps (Quickbooks for
one) is bundled into the 3.5 update. I haven't rebooted yet since the
download/install, but the NET download was actually something like 18MB
(I know it said 248), but took a little while to install, tho not
particularly long (home broadband).

Gene

someone wrote:
>I might have seen it, but it did not register. I don't know what
> netframework is. All I know is that I need it for some applications.
> Thanks.

See >
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.NET_Framework>

Hope this helps.

--
Randy
<http://msmvps.com/blogs/siljaline/default.aspx>

That one can take a long time to install. I've seen it take half an hour on
a server with no background scan running.


"someone" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:OkODt$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Shortly after 3 PM (EST), I downloaded the update without waiting for the
> auto to kick in. Net framework 3.5 was downloaded and installed, but the
> installation took forever. Almost two hours. Defender is scheduled to
> scan at 4 PM, and after 45 minutes of that scan, I canceled it, thinking
> that might have been a factor in the slowness. Finally, after the
> installation was complete, I had to restart.
>
> "Randy Knobloch" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:eVcwZ#(E-Mail Removed)...
>> I got three off WU using "Custom" - *pick-and-choose* for Advanced Users
>> Only !
>> As follows >
>> * - Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 7 for Windows XP
>> (KB961260)
>> * - Update Rollup for ActiveX Killbits for Windows XP (KB960715)
>> * - Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool - February 2009 (KB890830)
>>
>> A reboot Was required.
>>
>> --
>> Randy
>> <http://msmvps.com/blogs/siljaline/default.aspx>
>>
>>


--

installing takes longer than downloading
robin

"Alan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:#9s#NI$(E-Mail Removed)...
> I hadn't seen that post either Robin, but I'm downloading the updates
> manually at 9:25 PM, Eastern.
>
> And the NetFramework -- at 248 MB -- is taking forever to download. I just
> can't wait for it to begin installing. :>
>
> Alan
>
> "robinb" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> did you not see the post here for netframework? we all said that it
>> downloaded fast but took forever to install so what you saw was normal
>> robin
>>
>> "someone" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:OkODt$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Shortly after 3 PM (EST), I downloaded the update without waiting for
>>> the auto to kick in. Net framework 3.5 was downloaded and installed,
>>> but the installation took forever. Almost two hours. Defender is
>>> scheduled to scan at 4 PM, and after 45 minutes of that scan, I canceled
>>> it, thinking that might have been a factor in the slowness. Finally,
>>> after the installation was complete, I had to restart.
>>>
>>> "Randy Knobloch" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:eVcwZ#(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> I got three off WU using "Custom" - *pick-and-choose* for Advanced
>>>> Users Only !
>>>> As follows >
>>>> * - Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 7 for Windows XP
>>>> (KB961260)
>>>> * - Update Rollup for ActiveX Killbits for Windows XP (KB960715)
>>>> * - Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool - February 2009 (KB890830)
>>>>
>>>> A reboot Was required.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Randy
>>>> <http://msmvps.com/blogs/siljaline/default.aspx>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> The last edition of Windows Secrets (paid version) had a piece entitled,
> "Just say no to this .NET 3.5 update," and then went on to discuss
> patching problems. I'm not sure if I completely understand the
> reasoning, but basically the reviewer found it an unnecessary patch
> for the vast majority and a bit of a bait and switch, in that a patch
> for 2.0, which is used in many business enterprise apps (Quickbooks for
> one) is bundled into the 3.5 update. I haven't rebooted yet since the
> download/install, but the NET download was actually something like 18MB
> (I know it said 248), but took a little while to install, tho not
> particularly long (home broadband).

As a follow up, the same writer, Susan Bradley, warns against the NET
3.5 patch in the new edition of Windows Secrets for two new reasons: 1)
the .NET Framework Assistant can be installed inside Firefox without
the user's approval, and 2) on some machines, this .NET patch appears
to make the User Agent String in the browser so long that it causes
some sites to break. She says the second item has been reported on some
newsgroups and she's investigating it further. I haven't noticed any
unusual problems here since installing the patch, except the dailyshow
site loading in Opera 10a but hanging in 9.63. I have no idea if
that's related.

Gene

And one more from Windows Secrets: "ActiveX kill-bit patch zaps Visual
Basic apps." Based on reports she's seen, Bradley states that, "If
your organization's line-of-business programs use Visual Basic for
Applications (VBA) controls, one of this month's Windows patches [KB
960715] may cause [some of] your programs to misfire... Any
applications relying on msflxgrd.ocx may also be affected."

Gene


(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>
> > The last edition of Windows Secrets (paid version) had a piece entitled,
> > "Just say no to this .NET 3.5 update," and then went on to discuss
> > patching problems. I'm not sure if I completely understand the
> > reasoning, but basically the reviewer found it an unnecessary patch
> > for the vast majority and a bit of a bait and switch, in that a patch
> > for 2.0, which is used in many business enterprise apps (Quickbooks for
> > one) is bundled into the 3.5 update. I haven't rebooted yet since the
> > download/install, but the NET download was actually something like 18MB
> > (I know it said 248), but took a little while to install, tho not
> > particularly long (home broadband).
>
> As a follow up, the same writer, Susan Bradley, warns against the NET
> 3.5 patch in the new edition of Windows Secrets for two new reasons: 1)
> the .NET Framework Assistant can be installed inside Firefox without
> the user's approval, and 2) on some machines, this .NET patch appears
> to make the User Agent String in the browser so long that it causes
> some sites to break. She says the second item has been reported on some
> newsgroups and she's investigating it further. I haven't noticed any
> unusual problems here since installing the patch, except the dailyshow
> site loading in Opera 10a but hanging in 9.63. I have no idea if
> that's related.
>
> Gene