Cannot get update 1.0509 to install

[Richard [466628]]

I downloaded MSFT Anti-Sp since it came out. I applied
the first Beta upgrade and there was recently a second
Beta upgrade released at the link below. I installed it
twice (Wizard said successfully). From this link:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...a2-6a57-4c57-a8bd-dbf62eda9671&displaylang=en

Here's the confusion that is unfortunately sometimes so
typical of people on the Redmond campus.

1) The link says it will upgrade. It of course does not.

"If you are using a previous version you can simply
upgrade to the refreshed version. The version number of
the refreshed version is 1.0.509. To check the version
number, click About Microsoft AntiSpyware. on the Help
menu."

2)My version stays as Antispyware Beta 1 Microsoft
AntiSpyware Version: 1.0.501.

3) If I need to reboot to complete the upgrade install
there was no information either on the Wizard as their
usually would be or on the download information.

Is anyone having any trouble upgrading to this second
refreshed Beta 1.0.509 because running it several times
doesn't get it changed to that version.

Tia,

Chad Harris

 

[cabrooks]

Hi Richard,

I just "upgraded" my MSAS to 509 and I was instructed to
reboot. Once I rebooted I checked the version and it was
509.

Good Luck

 

[Dan Becker]

I've got to think that someone made a mistake when they
built the beta 2 installer.

I had the same experience as the poster below.

I then downloaded a fresh copy from the URL below, which
says it is beta 2 and should display version 1.0.509. I
installed it on a freshly imaged computer which has never
had any MS AS (or Giant AS, or any other AS on it). Once
installed, it still reports itself as Beta 1, version
1.0.501, with definitions version 5685.

When I check for updates, it goes to defs 5691, and says I
have thoe most recent software installed.

 

[Guest]

Possible tip - I've always skipped Genuine Windows
Validation. I tried doing it, but either I made a typo or
MS doesn't like the # that Compaq stuck on the bottom of
my system. (I'm betting on the former, it's tough to read
those #'s upsidedown...)

 

[Bill Sanderson]

I think we are probably seeing a server in the download farm which isn't
synched.

Please check the properties of the file you downloaded. On mine, which
installs .509, the date of the Microsoft digital signature is February 10th.
--
FAQ for Microsoft Antispyware:
http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

I've got to think that someone made a mistake when they
built the beta 2 installer.

I had the same experience as the poster below.

I then downloaded a fresh copy from the URL below, which
says it is beta 2 and should display version 1.0.509. I
installed it on a freshly imaged computer which has never
had any MS AS (or Giant AS, or any other AS on it). Once
installed, it still reports itself as Beta 1, version
1.0.501, with definitions version 5685.

When I check for updates, it goes to defs 5691, and says I
have thoe most recent software installed.

 

[Bill Sanderson]

Shouldn't matter. I've done a number of installs of .509 today mixing the
methods--some validated, others not, depending on whether I was working
remotely and could remember whether I'd already done validation on the
particular box.

 

[Chad Harris]

I tried eveything. Add/Remove, rebooting, and I even though 501 was gone
from Add/Remove's entry, I couldn't install uninstall 501 throughout the
day. It wouldn't get off my machine. I didn't try to go after files and
folders or go after it in the registry like you have to so often with Norton
manual uninstalls, but I was ready to.

Then, I was able to download what must have been corrected at the the
servers. The Wizard for 509 is different and I was able to upgrade without
rebooting this time.

Will be interesting to see what differences there are.

Thanks for the clues to do this.

Chad Harris

 

[Bill Sanderson]

I'm interested in what's different, myself. It's easy to notice how they
fixed the issue where scans stopped when you clicked away, but I really
haven't noticed much else.

'course I spend all my time hanging out here rather than actually testing in
a rigorous manner.

 

[Chad Harris]

Two pretty basic or surface objections I've had with it (interface
fine/should list the malware it has in its refernce data base and doesn't
really context malware and it could--has a link to do it that isn't working
yet) are:

1) It's inconvenient to have to close all IE Windows to boot the spyware
2) It averages about 30,000 plus CPU units when I run it and I'd like that
to be lessened.

Chad Harris
_________________________________

 

[Bill Sanderson]

Does the new build change the CPU usage? They mention performance
improvements. I don't see any performance issue on the machines I've worked
with, but I know some posters here see significant impact.