At the moment, you are in a situation where use of the application isn't
going to be possible.
This probably isn't a big issue since, of course, you wouldn't be using a
beta application on production equipment. You've time to do the planning
and make decisions that will enable you to be in a supported configuration
(or not) by release.
--
"siemens" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:194055D5-799C-41B6-AEAF-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Bill, thank you for your update. however, my problem, is now and not at
> the
> end of this year or with our nedwork admin.
>
> my issue is that i can not get the latest updates for Windows Defender.
> The
> fact that this is done via SUS (which is supported today by Bill Gates and
> his people) and that it will potentially (based on whatever evidence you
> have) in the future not be suported by Billy (and that my IT dept need to
> upgrate to WSUS) has absolutely nothing to do with my issue.
>
> Am I missing something or are you just trolling?
>
>
>
>
> "Bill Sanderson" wrote:
>
>> Sus has a very limited lifetime ahead:
>> ---
>> Software Update Services
>> Microsoft will continue to support Software Update Services (SUS) 1.0
>> until
>> December 6, 2006. Microsoft will no longer support SUS 1.0 after this
>> date.
>>
>> SUS 1.0 will no longer synchronize or provide new updates after December
>> 6,
>> 2006. Additionally, as of August 24, 2005, you can no longer download SUS
>> from the Microsoft Web site. We recommend that you upgrade to Windows
>> Server
>> Update Services (WSUS) before December 6, 2006.
>>
>> ------
>> Let's hope that your network admins are on their toes and have a WSUS
>> rollout planned.
>>
>> --
>>
>> "siemens" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:C1AC4F09-8BF6-427B-97CC-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> > "So that updates will be more efficiently and invisibly handled, I
>> > think.
>> > "
>> >
>> > But I can not get the update, 'cause we use SUS for it! So how is this
>> > more
>> > efficient for me? I have to wait, thus my file definitions will mostly
>> > be
>> > out of date. And I can not get the updates anyway!
>> >
>> >
>> > "As I've said in other messages--Microsoft doesn't want to step on the
>> > toes
>> > of
>> > the folks administering your network and deciding what apps they want
>> > running on it."
>> >
>> > But I can not get the update for the MS software, 'cause we use SUS for
>> > it!
>> > So how is this not stepping on the toes of people administering our
>> > network?
>> > They have to now grant me the access so that I can update MS Software.
>> > But
>> > all ok, cause they have small toes!!
>> >
>> > And this is why I think MS just wants me to use their competitor's
>> > product.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "Bill Sanderson" wrote:
>> >
>> >> So that updates will be more efficiently and invisibly handled, I
>> >> think.
>> >> As
>> >> I've said in other messages--Microsoft doesn't want to step on the
>> >> toes
>> >> of
>> >> the folks administering your network and deciding what apps they want
>> >> running on it.
>> >>
>> >> I haven't seen a recipe for manual updating yet--it's clear that the
>> >> definitions are at some point in a .msi file which resides in the
>> >> \program
>> >> files\windows defender folder--I haven't seen anyone try a process of
>> >> running an msiexec /x remove of one version and then substituting a
>> >> new
>> >> version from an outside source and running it to install.
>> >>
>> >> We should be about due for new signatures, in the next day or two.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >> "siemens" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> >> news:7A4EF3DA-9F94-4D5F-9839-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >> > ok. I have the same issue. my updates are provided via SUS.
>> >> > Individual
>> >> > updating via Windows Update is NOT permitted. What else will work?
>> >> > (I
>> >> > use
>> >> > to use Beta 1 = AntiSpyware, and never had any issues......why this
>> >> > now.
>> >> > WHY??) Unless you want me un-install and use your competitor's
>> >> > product.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > "Bill Sanderson" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Windows Defender's native update capability is routed via
>> >> >> AutoUpdate.
>> >> >> It
>> >> >> is
>> >> >> expected to get signature updates via WSUS--such updates are
>> >> >> available
>> >> >> on
>> >> >> that platform via a new class provded since mid-January--which
>> >> >> needs
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> be
>> >> >> enabled by the administrator.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If your updates are provided via SUS, the automatic update is
>> >> >> looking
>> >> >> there
>> >> >> for the signature updates, and not finding them.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Individual updating via Windows Update, if that is
>> >> >> permitted--should
>> >> >> work.
>> >> >> --
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Gopakumar Sheppillayar" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >> >> > yes, it is centrally controlled. but individual updates are also
>> >> >> > allowed.
>> >> >> > BTW, i'm doing the update from the defender main screen (click on
>> >> >> > check
>> >> >> > for updates button) . when i don't see the error, it displays
>> >> >> > that
>> >> >> > there
>> >> >> > are no updates available. even then, the status screen says the
>> >> >> > definitions are 27 days old.
>> >> >> > -gopa
>> >> >> > "Bill Sanderson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>> >> >> > message
>> >> >> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >> >> >> Are you running on a managed network where updates are centrally
>> >> >> >> controlled?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Have you visited Windows Update to see if signature updates are
>> >> >> >> offered?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Gopakumar Sheppillayar" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>> >> >> >> message
>> >> >> >> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >> >> >>> the update fails with the error code 0x8024402c
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> occationally it succeeds (displaying a status mesg that there
>> >> >> >>> are
>> >> >> >>> no
>> >> >> >>> updates available) but still the warning doesn't disappear.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> the defender is running on a XP SP2 IBM centrino notebook
>> >> >> >>> any fix or workarount?
>> >> >> >>> --Gopa
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
|