Auto-Patcher is down (gone).

[Bluefront]

As of Aug 29......by orders of Microsoft. All further development ceased, the main site is down, and apparently all the mirror sites will soon follow. It's a shame, particularly to people with dial-up connections. For years I got my updates by down-loading the Auto-patcher updates at work using a fast connection. Then I updated my computers at home. There is no way I can keep several computers updated using my dial-up. Auto-Patcher was a blessing. MS is acting dumb....as usual.

FWIW.....I was able to get the latest Auto-Patcher (Aug 07) yesterday. Get yours quickly before they all go (Google Auto-Patcher for the remaining sites).

I hope this not old news to you guys......I just found it yesterday. :brokenheart:

 

[Canterwood]

Yep I came across this last week.

Yet another absolutely brilliant non profit application bites the dust thanks to microsoft and their legal threats.

Shame on them tbh. :roll:

 

[Bluefront]

FWIW....there's a second thread on this same subject, posted a day after this one. To avoid this very thing, I just scrolled back to the date the story broke, and checked to see if there was anything posted about Auto-Patcher.

I'll admit to only checking the "operating systems" forum, but I guess it worked. Sometimes the search function will reveal similar postings, but not always. It seems to depend on how the key-words are listed/spelled.

 

[timswim78]

Originally posted by: Bluefront
FWIW....there's a second thread on this same subject, posted a day after this one. To avoid this very thing, I just scrolled back to the date the story broke, and checked to see if there was anything posted about Auto-Patcher.

I'll admit to only checking the "operating systems" forum, but I guess it worked. Sometimes the search function will reveal similar postings, but not always. It seems to depend on how the key-words are listed/spelled.

It's spelled "autopatcher," according to the official website: http://autopatcher.com/ That's why our searches did not connect.

Anyway, this really sucks. Updating computers with XP will be much more of a challenge from now on. It would be nice if MS made it easier to apply several patches at once, without having to reboot 48 times. Maybe MS will see that this product was being developed for a legitimate reason and will want to help out the nerds of the world.

Also, I guess that it would also be nice if the autopatcher guy could roll up the freeware "must-installs," like Flash, Shockwave, a PDF reader, Java, etc, as well as the various tweaks.

In any case, at least I have autopatcher through August 2007. That will give me a good running start when building XP machines from the ground up.

 

[mechBgon]

(Cliffs: you've had the power to do this yourselves all along)

Anyway, this really sucks. Updating computers with XP will be much more of a challenge from now on. It would be nice if MS made it easier to apply several patches at once, without having to reboot 48 times.

They did, actually. From WinXP SP1 onwards, qchain-type functionality is built in. You should be able to run all the patches you like.

Maybe MS will see that this product was being developed for a legitimate reason and will want to help out the nerds of the world.

Qchain was initially released for WinNT 4.0, so I think they already saw about 10 years ago. I used to maintain a fleet of Win2000 computers and would use Qchain at the end of a very large stack of post-SP4 patches and stuff (I didn't have an AD domain or SUS/WSUS would've taken care of this beautifully in-house, of course). Worked fine.

Example for a fresh Win2000 SP4 box with IE5 and WMP9 installed (not current anymore):

js56nen.exe /q
msjavwu.exe /q
832483.exe /Q
823353.exe /Q
msxml3.msi
WindowsInstaller31.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
dotnetfx.exe /Q
dotnet11SP1.exe /Q
dotnet11SP1hotfix.exe /Q
dotnet2.0.exe
dotnet2_patch1.exe
dotnet2_patch2.exe
Windows2000_Update_Rollup_1.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
894320.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
896358.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
896422.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
890046.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
901214.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
896727.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
893756.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
896423.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
899587.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
899588.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
896424.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
899589.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
900725.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
901017.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
905414.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
905749.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
908519.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
908531.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
911280.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
911564.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
912919.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
913580.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
914388.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
914389.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
917008.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
917422.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
917734.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
917736.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
917953.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
920213.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
920670.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
920683.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
920685.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
920958.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
921398.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
922616.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
923191.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
923414.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
923980.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
924191.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
924270.EXE /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
IE6.0sp1-922760.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
MDAC28.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
MDAC281.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
MDAC271.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
MDAC253.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
885492.exe /quiet /norestart /o /n
904706.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
839643.exe /quiet /norestart /o /n
905495.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
925486.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
911567.exe /quiet /norestart /overwriteoem /nobackup
917344.exe /Q
MSRT.exe /F:Y /Q
MBSA121.msi /quiet
qchain.exe

Also, I guess that it would also be nice if the autopatcher guy could roll up the freeware "must-installs," like Flash, Shockwave, a PDF reader, Java, etc, as well as the various tweaks.

You might be interested in this utility for non-commercial uses. Or simply build a batchfile that runs the installers (see the example in italics above). Personally, I don't consider Shockwave or Java "must-installs," more like superfluous attack surfaces, but whatever.

In any case, at least I have autopatcher through August 2007. That will give me a good running start when building XP machines from the ground up.

You can maintain your own stash of WinXP patches. It's very simple to do; just use a fresh WinXP SP2 installation as "bait" and run Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer on it after installing IE7 and WMP11 (if desired). Baseline Security Analyzer gives you a list of necessary patches, with individual patch download links. Collect the patches, run them using a batchfile (without reboots), and there you go. Every month, go get the latest ones from here, and add them to your collection. Tada, now you're the AutoPatcher dude

If you take the time to run them with the /? switch once, you can grab the command-line options to run them in silent/unattended mode to save you hassle over the long run. The example batchfile above shows how that would look.

 

[Bluefront]

Yeah you don't have to re-boot after each patch install, just once. But Autopatcher made the process painless. It was just like a new service pack, that you could get once a month or so. You did not have to run the MS spyware to accomplish the same thing.

 

[timswim78]

mechBgon

You've demonstrated that all of these things can be done without autopatcher. Thanks for taking the time to go through the details.

However, no solutions seem as simple as autopatcher was. Everything was nice and simple, rolled into one easy-to-use application. I think your post demonstrates how the MS way requires more time and learning than the autopatcher way.

I am sure that there are reasons for it not happening this way, but it really annoys the "average consumer" that he or she has to reboot multiple times to get all of the most recent patches on a clean XP SP2 install via Windows Update.

Also, I don't think MS is the only company with this situation. After a clean install of OS X, I sometimes have to boot multiple times to get all of the Apple system software up to date.

 

[Nothinman]

After a clean install of OS X, I sometimes have to boot multiple times to get all of the Apple system software up to date.

If that's true it's just plain incompetence on Apple's side because most unix systems allow you to do things like delete, replace, etc open files so the only thing that you should ever have to reboot for is a kernel update. Or maybe part of their windowing system since it's proprietary I have no idea how easy it would be to restart it on it's own.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: timswim78
However, no solutions seem as simple as autopatcher was. Everything was nice and simple, rolled into one easy-to-use application. I think your post demonstrates how the MS way requires more time and learning than the autopatcher way.

I think if you asked Microsoft what the "MS way" is, they'd tell you "just enable Automatic Updates when installing WinXP and be done with it." Not that I'm suggesting you stop there, of course.

I am sure that there are reasons for it not happening this way, but it really annoys the "average consumer" that he or she has to reboot multiple times to get all of the most recent patches on a clean XP SP2 install via Windows Update.

I'd bet that most "average consumers" never install WinXP. That was done for them by Dell/HP/Gateway/Emachines. If rebooting a computer as many as OMG, 3 times! is too much trouble, then I don't know what to say, except they need to order a pizza and relax a bit

 

[Nothinman]

I'd bet that most "average consumers" never install WinXP. That was done for them by Dell/HP/Gateway/Emachines. If rebooting a computer as many as OMG, 3 times! is too much trouble, then I don't know what to say, except they need to order a pizza and relax a bit

From what I remember it's a lot more than 3 if you're starting out pre-SP2 and just let WAU do whatever it wants to do.

 

[nerp]

How often does someone really need to install Windows anyway? I suppose if you're doing repairs you might have to do it regularly. But for the average joe with an XP box -- if you're reinstalling windows multiple times a year, you've got other problems.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

I'd bet that most "average consumers" never install WinXP. That was done for them by Dell/HP/Gateway/Emachines. If rebooting a computer as many as OMG, 3 times! is too much trouble, then I don't know what to say, except they need to order a pizza and relax a bit

From what I remember it's a lot more than 3 if you're starting out pre-SP2 and just let WAU do whatever it wants to do.

I haven't tried recently. If someone wanted my recommendation on how to go about that, however, it's on record here, halfway down the page. Install SP2 directly from the full-file installer, reboot, and now you're at the starting line and can choose your preferred method (auto-updates, Microsoft Update site, MBSA, WSUS or the method I showed in my first post).

 

[Bluefront]

Rebooting is no problem.....the problem is getting the updates in the first place. Not everyone can get DSL. Not everyone has cable......like me. Try down-loading just the security patches every month using a dial-up connection. I could kiss my telephone good-by forever.....

If I could get broad-band for a reasonable price I would......too bad I cannot. I suppose I can down-load individual patches at work, but what a hassle just to keep up. MS obviously doesn't care about the little people, and their little problems..... :thumbsdown:

 

[Nothinman]

I haven't tried recently. If someone wanted my recommendation on how to go about that, however, it's on record here, halfway down the page. Install SP2 directly from the full-file installer, reboot, and now you're at the starting line and can choose your preferred method (auto-updates, Microsoft Update site, MBSA, WSUS or the method I showed in my first post).

This was a few months ago and the drive XP was on has died since then so I could be wrong but from what I remember it doesn't even install SP2 as the first thing so you end up installing a bunch of pointless patches and if you click yes every time you're asked to reboot you'll be there all night. No doubt there are ways around that but WAU should be smarter than that.

 

[nerp]

Automatic updates makes a lot of sense for users on dialup, then. Just set it to start doing it at midnight or so after you've gone to bed. But I can feel your pain. Managing updates on dialup sure is tedious.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: Bluefront
Rebooting is no problem.....the problem is getting the updates in the first place. Not everyone can get DSL. Not everyone has cable......like me. Try down-loading just the security patches every month using a dial-up connection. I could kiss my telephone good-by forever.....

If I could get broad-band for a reasonable price I would......too bad I cannot. I suppose I can down-load individual patches at work, but what a hassle just to keep up. MS obviously doesn't care about the little people, and their little problems..... :thumbsdown:

I can sympathize, since my mom's WinXP system is on dial-up. When I go over there to check up on it, I usually bring the latest month's patches along on my flash drive. However, I don't see downloading those patches as an exorbiant hassle. The solution you seem to prefer is to re-download a large all-inclusive patch every month, when you really need just a few small ones.

As a practical solution for your scenario, I suggest doing what I do: go to this page, click the Read the most recent advance notification or the most recent security bulletin summary link, get the patches for this month that apply to your rig, and save them to your flash drive or a CD to take home.

In the case where you have to do eleventy billion updates (fresh build), let the system run online overnight to pull the patches? I mean, you DON'T have to sit there and watch it every second

 

[Canterwood]

Originally posted by: mechBgon


I can sympathize, since my mom's WinXP system is on dial-up. When I go over there to check up on it, I usually bring the latest month's patches along on my flash drive. However, I don't see downloading those patches as an exorbiant hassle. The solution you seem to prefer is to re-download a large all-inclusive patch every month, when you really need just a few small ones.

Actually Autopatcher offered a Full update, IE: All the patches and fixes post SP2, or a monthly upgrade pack of only that months updates.

So if you had the full pack for May for example, then you could just run the June, July, Aug update packs thereafter, which results in a much smaller download.

There is nothing that is as easy or convienient to use as Autopatcher was, and why Microsoft killed it is beyond me. :frown:

 

[mechBgon]

and why Microsoft killed it is beyond me. :frown:

If I were Microsoft, I wouldn't want third parties redistributing my software to the public either.

There is nothing that is as easy or convienient to use as Autopatcher was

And we're all entitled to ease and convenience, no matter what. Heaven forbid that we should have to, like, download five things instead of one thing. That would require clicking the mouse a whole bunch, and stuff. And turning on Automatic Updates is SO difficult.

 

[Nothinman]

If I were Microsoft, I wouldn't want third parties redistributing my software to the public either.

Why not? The patches are signed for a reason, right?

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

If I were Microsoft, I wouldn't want third parties redistributing my software to the public either.

Why not? The patches are signed for a reason, right?

If I set up a site with a bunch of Google advertising, then start giving away bundles of Microsoft's patches for "free" (in violation of the EULAs, incidentally)... see where that's going? Oh, and oops someone has hacked my downloads server and Trojanized my files... well that's too bad, I'm busy selling those Google ads. Hmm, maybe I should put up a Donations Welcomed link too...

Take a look at section 5d of a Vista EULA, and you can see that for whatever motives, Microsoft doesn't seem to want their software being pimped by just anyone. *shrug* That's their call, and no one has to use their software if they don't want to, as you know better than most.

 

[timswim78]

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: timswim78
However, no solutions seem as simple as autopatcher was. Everything was nice and simple, rolled into one easy-to-use application. I think your post demonstrates how the MS way requires more time and learning than the autopatcher way.

I think if you asked Microsoft what the "MS way" is, they'd tell you "just enable Automatic Updates when installing WinXP and be done with it." Not that I'm suggesting you stop there, of course.

I am sure that there are reasons for it not happening this way, but it really annoys the "average consumer" that he or she has to reboot multiple times to get all of the most recent patches on a clean XP SP2 install via Windows Update.

I'd bet that most "average consumers" never install WinXP. That was done for them by Dell/HP/Gateway/Emachines. If rebooting a computer as many as OMG, 3 times! is too much trouble, then I don't know what to say, except they need to order a pizza and relax a bit

I'm going to disagree with you here. Several people that I know, including grandmothers and grandfathers, call the manufacturer for tech support and the manufacturer tells them to reinstall the OS. Also, rebooting three times is a big deal when there is 20-40 minutes (or longer) between each reboot.

Enabling automatic updates is fine, as long as you don't mind waiting days and days for your computer to be fully patched, and as long as you don't get messages telling you to reboot when you are in the middle of something.

 

[timswim78]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
...WAU should be smarter than that.

You hit the nail on the head!

 

[Nothinman]

If I set up a site with a bunch of Google advertising, then start giving away Microsoft's patches for "free" (in violation of the EULAs, incidentally)... see where that's going? Oh, and oops someone has hacked my downloads server and Trojanized my files... well that's too bad, I'm busy selling those Google ads. Hmm, maybe I should put up a Donations Welcomed link too...

Who cares if your files get trojaned cause the patches will still be fine or fail the signature check. And if that person can make money by just redistributing MS' own patches then obviously they're onto something and MS is doing something wrong, people should get their patches direct from MS because they want to not because MS forces them.

Take a look at section 5d of a Vista EULA, and you can see that for whatever motives, Microsoft doesn't seem to want their software being pimped by just anyone. *shrug* That's their call, and no one has to use their software if they don't want to, as you know better than most.

I won't deny that it's MS legal right to stop anyone from illegally redistributing their software but when it happens it's usually for a reason. The fact that Autopatcher had a big enough userbase for MS to notice them should give them a hint that their current patch distribution and installation methods aren't good enough.

 

[Bluefront]

Sure sounds easy....get the automatic updates at midnight. Heh....my phone line connection is so poor that I rarely connect over 28kps. Even then the connection is dropped every twenty minutes or so. Changing the ISP never helps. I get a poor connection here....and the phone company won't do anything about it. I can hardly ever get a large down-load, without sitting right at the screen and watching things. Sometimes an auto-reconnection will connect at 9.8kps.

Autopatcher was the only way to stay up-dated for me. Thanks again MS.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
Who cares if your files get trojaned cause the patches will still be fine or fail the signature check.

The patches can all be legit and you could still slip one extra one in there. In the case of my batchfile technique, it would just require one more line in the batchfile and one more executable in the package. Doing a quick Google search for "Trojanized Linux Distro" showed I'm not the only one who's ever thought of this.

The fact that Autopatcher had a big enough userbase for MS to notice them should give them a hint that their current patch distribution and installation methods aren't good enough.

I'll suggest they start publishing update rollups. Nothin ventured, nothin gained

I'm going to disagree with you here. Several people that I know, including grandmothers and grandfathers, call the manufacturer for tech support and the manufacturer tells them to reinstall the OS. Also, rebooting three times is a big deal when there is 20-40 minutes (or longer) between each reboot.

Now tell me, did those manufacturers' techs tell Mr. and Mrs. Average to use AutoPatcher? And why is it a big deal to reboot the computer a few times at intervals, in the middle of a Windows installation that you'll probably do once every few years? I can think of much more tiresome things... commercial breaks in your TV shows, having to put gas in your car, and so on.

If you reinstall Windows often enough for this to be a sore spot, then set up a batchfile like I suggested. If you're always reinstalling on the same computer, use imaging software; I have one system that gets reimaged 2-5 times a day (it's a malware-harvesting rig), and I'd have no one but myself to blame if I were doing fresh Windows installs every time. 15000rpm Cheetahs make this rather quick

Autopatcher was the only way to stay up-dated for me.

So you're saying that you cannot use the method I suggested (downloading the patches to your flash drive and taking them home)? Why not?