If I am allowed to, I would like to make a suggestion to anybody who may do anything about it. IMHO the first person who must have the legal right to enter into a computer is the individual who bought it and no one else, the same way as when a car or a house is sold. It was just so in the good old times, before the Internet was invented. Now this elemental legal principle is far, very far away.... Why the Internet and not me is the first to enter into my computer? Somebody is using something which belongs to me. This must be corrected, or will always be a source of permanent problems for everybody. Thanks.

???

Who else is using your computer?

Try a firewall, they're nifty.

We all now how smoothly Microsoft likes its operations to be. They've fouled up yet another good product.

Best thing about Microsoft, after it inevitably crashes, Linux can still pick up the your data and continue.

If all else fails "FORMAT C:" & REINSTALL

Funny, so can windows, even when linux fails to recover data windows can do it by reading dynamic volumes, raid stripes or ntfs (properly). Yes, linux will solve everything.

Microsoft has once again made my computing life more difficult. My PC's at home only get updated properly because of AutoPatcher. There are no broadband options where I live and trying to use Windows Update via dial-up is basically impossible. I guess it's really time to try out Ubuntu or SimplyMEPIS and see how it goes.

Yes, I will pay to see you switch to linux only to have you come back and complain about how nothing you would do on windows works anywhere remotely as well on linux.

Also, I've updated several PC's on dialup via windows update, it works just the same as on cable or dsl, only slower. So to say its impossible is wrong. I just recently updated my mother-in-law's PC and it took about 2.5 hours to download 190MB of updates. Heck, that can be accomplished by running it overnight and even then, it only needs to be done once after you install since the updates released each month are nowhere near that size.

short and sweet...any company has the right to control how it's software is handled...don't like it? It isn't communism.

Exactly. So what right do they have to shut down Autopatcher? Why didnt they just tell Autopatcher team that they have to remove all Microsoft's crap and thats it? No instead, knowing very well that they could simply kill the program along with anyone even thinking about using it ever again.

On this case, i cant see how Microsoft could have the right to do anything about the program itself. Its not illegal.

Wasnt all of microsoft's "crap" the point of this application thou? To distribute microsoft patches in a singular package? So, microsoft did have a right to do what they did, and are not wrong in this matter.

Oh come on it's just a small step compared to others in their quest for world domination.

Eventually the planet will be known as MS-Earth.
Get used to the idea >:)

I thought it was Google Earth.

Oh the name is, sure. In way i wish Microsoft got the name first, instead of the crappy "Microsoft VIRTUAL Earth" It would reflect reality so much better. I guess some would argue Google is not far off though.

http://windowsupdate.62nds.com/

Will do the job for the time being. not as well but what is anymore? MS is just all about control folks. if you take some of it away from them, they will nail ya for it every time... Big brother must see all so they can control your world.

It's the same as Windows update, and provides *none* of the functionality Autopatcher provided.

What are you smoking???

The only advantage would be the option of using something besides IE to do updates. Which that would be reason enough for me to use it if I were still using Windows.

Actually, its not the same. Windows update scans your system to see which updates you NEED, based on your configuration. The only thing this site does is scan your system to see if you have THEIR list of updates installed, taking no account of whether or not your system needs the update in question.

Seems Lunarsoft found out why they got the takedown notice from a Microsoft Employee.

Links:
http://lunarsoft.net/
http://lunarsoft.net/news-324.html
http://digg.com/microsof...Patcher_takedown_notice

again this clearly suggests that MS is hiding something,

EULA, come on, this has been around long before Autopatcher was even thought off,

why wait till now to start spouting EULA???

M.s .. You Guys Are a Big Dissapointment !!! I Alway thought That you would do Better Than this,,

Shame On You .. !!

It Sound's Like The Big BRother Bully, (M.S) wants to Bully The Little People About Again ..

To Think Of It Abit ... I bet Hitler Would Be Pround and Supportive of Microsoft bussiness Tactics and Methods, A Good Thing they wearn't Around 2gether at The Same Time ..

M.s You Guys Are Not Nice Or Fair. You Are just Upset that AutoPatcher Does a far better Job Than yourself... I'm sure to Bet They (microsoft) is'r feeling EMBARISSED about the Fact that other pople could do a far better job than Themselves !!!

It shows... !!!

M.s ... Your Kind Of Bussiness Stinks Rotten !!!

Autopatcher saved me countless hours doing new PC builds. Looks like my billable hours are going up!

Do you remember this? I suppose many of you have read it before as I did (it has remained in the Internet for several years). Unwillingly it came to my mind just now when I was reading your comments:

http://www.linux.com/articles/25842?tid=19

Prophetic?

"Unwillingly it came to my mind just now when I was reading your comments:"

Whose comments, I wonder?

None in special and all together. The reading of them suggested me that it is being tried to keep tight the control over XP to avoid its survival when the moment comes, and I remembered this article written in october 2002 by the writer Richard Stallman. Well, you may read it yourself and you've got the right to have your own opinion about the author and the comment he makes, with my most friendly considerations. We are simply talking.

wow....... scary

Indeed, I remember reading that article. At the time I was still quite the Microsoft fan. I honestly thought the guy was just spouting a bunch of nonsense. I have to say that after having seen the way things have unfolded over the past few years that a lot of truth can be found in those words.

i think it's safe to say, that MS doen't even sneez without a plan,

I think we can all see them 4 years ago, talking about Autpatcher in some kind of board meeting, and what it means to them, and at the time, they all agreed to this "FOR NOW IT'S FINE, BUT IF AND WHEN WE DECIDE TO DO SO, WE'LL SQUASH THEM"

clearly MS has come to that point and done just that, it's also obvious Autopatcher now gets in there way for future plans, and I do feel that MS has got certain plans for the future, now I'm not saying that they may be working on a similar product like Autopatcher, in fact i very much doubt it, but i do feel they have reached a point where autopatcher does threaten there plans in a direct, or indirect way,

perhaps there worried that the company will eventually start to support Vista, who knows, what I am saying is, it's only now that Autopatcher is getting in the Way of MS, and this of course must mean MS is worried, or has some kind of plan that would be affected by Autopatchers Existence.

but the one thing i am curious about, how can a company be banned from distrubuting a un-altered file, as in, a file that has not been modified in anyway,

this too me sounds very suspicious as there are many sites offering MS patches, all over the WWW, and yet these are not affected, and are free to continue offering what this company is not allowed,

surely there must be some kind of law against that, picking 1 and not the others, discrimination comes to mind, i find it hard to believe how a company that actually helps MS, and actually offers 3rd party software with this package that improves on windows update service, be stopped after 4years of being allowed to run, again this can't be right either, allowing the company to run for 4 years without question, then suddenly be told that there now not allowed,

I reckon in the right hands, autopatcher could probably put up a very argumentative case if it did go to court, because MS would be forced to answer some very uncomfortable questions, and would also be asked have you made any effort to stop other programs and websites to shut-down there ability of distributing MS updates,
MS would obviously have to say no, and any decent judge would want to know why, before a fair judgement can be achieved, because discrimination is illegal, and if that so happens to be the reason there would be a possibility that this site (Autopatcher) may just get away with it on the understanding that MS updates do not get modified in anyway what so ever, and as we all know, they don't as most MS updates are digitally signed.

The problem is that autopatcher (discovered the newer xp revisions did this as well) included some hotfixes...that kind of kills any legal defense for autopatcher, unfortunately.

I think basically MS have been approached by others to kill it. You can't include free 3rd party apps and have a donate button. You've got Adobe stuff, Google stuff, Sun Java (and the unofficial 'Royale' Theme). It was a good basic idea that grew into something larger than itself.

You'd think Gates would sling them a few bucks and buy the thing off them if it worked so well.

I must say that autopatcher has always been something that was in a gray area as far as this goes.

Once they had the Vista version I bet what happened is they put those Vista hotfixes (mentioned in an earlier BN article) too early in there. They specifically stated that they are not to be provided except directly through Microsoft on the page where you download them. Then again--betanews (fileforum) provided them.

(EDIT) That would be because it just linked over to the MS download page, which is fine. Nevermind that.

http://www.ipetitions.co...Patcher/signatures.html

The petition to keep it alive. Please sign and pass forward.

Sorry, but petitions won't make the program any less illegal than it was. Thye Vista hotfixes were likely the straw that broke the camel's back.

Hmmm, I may have to update my Security Pack when I come back off honeymoon then. I've not updated it in a while since I got a life (and I am such a lazyass). But then again I do have a laptop (notebook) now and I don't see why I couldn't fit it in. It's never been in the same league as Autopatcher but there'd probably never have been an AP if it wasn't for my pack (although I can't prove it) and mine would never have existed without the original German version (I am not a programmer). No promises but I come back off my honeymoon mid-October so who knows. Very sorry to see AP go though - big mistake by Microsoft (although AP got carried away with what it could & should do).

Microsoft wants as much support and ease of use for XP to end as soon as possible to help them ram Vista down everyones throat.

AutoPatcher is part of the ease of use part of the equation and a easy target. So end of story, By By AutoPatcher.

Autopatcher is a quick, easy way to update a fresh Windows install. It is also a quick, easy way to update a fresh, pirated Windows install. MS knows this so I'm sure it had significant bearing in their decision to shutdown the service.

"Autopatcher is a quick, easy way to update a fresh Windows install."

Was.

Ah, yes, was :)

Hang on, I thought Microsoft could do no wrong here.

They can release 11 million faulty Xbox 360's, millions of faulty wheels and wireless adapters, and all you hear is "but they will fix them for free in about 6 weeks".

I don't understand how your comment has ANYTHING to do with this article...

Huh? Your comment has no relevance to this post. Wrong article bud. Go post that on xbox360fanboy or something.

It's also funny how he says "millions of faulty wheels" when it's actually a grand total of...50, out of 230,000. :)

MS Haters are so easy to spot.

I said millions of faulty wheels and wireless adapters.

Collectively, in their millions.

Still, if you have problems understanding basic English langauage, I know a good school.

You should be a politician. Your double-speak is unbeatable.

Wow.

I'm actually pissed off at Microsoft right now.

WTH were they thinking?

Control? Should have done it 4 years ago instead of allowing a large community of their customers to grow around it.

...or better yet, worked with the community to come to a better solution.

Your resident MS "shill" and "fanboy" is now *almost* hoping they throw the site back up with Linux Distros, Mac Patches, and mount an anti-MS PR campaign to take away just as many users as they've just pissed off.

...almost.

I like to think the guys at NeoWin (and AutoPatcher) are slightly more mature than that..

I see the motive why MS is doing this. You just dont know what else AP team put in there. For your safety, and for MS, it's best to put them down.

I am pretty sure someone will continue the AP project, the question is how safe will it going to be.

Eh...If they care so much about safety in 3rd party software, then they might as well make it a closed OS; that theory doesn't add up.

And in this example, it's unfounded mistrust. They've proven themselves to be reliable after all this time. What more could they do to get a lil' credit?

So do the Apple way?

Microsoft, please die. ty

Mmm. Nice flawed logic.

Without Microsoft there'd have been no AutoPatcher in the first place.

/Pedantic

You saw logic in that post?

at least he is polite - "please die"
and not just "die"
lol

He also said thank you.

He's got to be one of the nicest guys in the world....

Microsoft now has a product that actually works fairly well that does this and they make money off of it.

So now that there is something that is cutting into their revenue stream, they would of course do what they can to stop it.

I mean, why else would you pony up money for their software, if you can get something that does exactly the same thing (more or less) for free?

What revenue did AutoPatcher cut into? Was the free Windows/Microsoft Update web interface reeling it in, or perhaps free Automatic Updates? Or the free update rollup ISOs they release? If so, how?

If I'm not mistaken, AutoPatcher might actually have Saved them money in bandwidth costs... not like they're hurting for it!

Maybe I'm still not awake enough yet to get what you're saying.

Good point in another's comment earlier: MS couldn't really guarantee the safety of it's customers' machines without control over AP, and there are some 3rd party options in the AP installs that, if improperly configured, could cause some trouble.

Personally, I'll miss it... Preferred it to slipstreaming updates immensely!

MS couldn't really guarantee the safety of it's customers' machines without control over AP, and there are some 3rd party options in the AP installs that, if improperly configured, could cause some trouble.

Agreed, but it would have been far better to work with the community than to shut it down. They could have found ways to ease the concerns while still making AP available.

Pissing off a large community of your customers is not a good idea.

MS has a product that either ties into Systems Management Server or some new product that allows you to setup a local copy of the Windows/MS Update. This way - all of the patches get downloaded to your server and you can choose how/when to push them to your internal clients.

This gives corporate IT groups a chance to test the patches before pushing them out to desktops/servers. Or allowing a user to just grab a patch without first having it tested to see if it breaks any internal software. (And from experience I can say that this has happened more than once and IT is left scrambling to fix the problem. In one big thing I remember there was an update to ADO that got sent out via Windows Update that changed the way ADO handled handled things. They adjusted the spec to either meet what it was supposed to do, or they changed it - either way it caused our apps to fail.)

They charge for this product - that's where I was going with it. I'm too lazy to go look for the product name (not too lazy however to type all of this )

This is called SUS and is not widely available to the general public, nor is it a stand-alone product one could use without first buying a product that includes SMS.

AP is an entirely different service aimed at an entirely different crowd.

IT shops still used SMS/SUS because it allows much more control and security.

SUS became WSUS and is a free download. WSUS does not require SMS and I use it at work.

Heh..

That's what I get for not using it. ;)

Yet, another reason for skipping Microsoft products - at least i think that !

That stinks since on a tech side this was a wonderful tool. Updating workstaions with a slow WAN link was never an issue with updater. Oh well hopefully something similar will come out soon.

XP Service Pack 3..

This is the responsible option.

Who knows what "extras" these hotfix pacakges include.

Poor Microsoft, Vista is a certified failure considering how much time, money, and effort went into it. It's no wonder that Dell sells more XP machines than Vista.
Then there's Xbox, MS has lost billions on that one, serves them right for trying to compete in the gaming market.
Google practically owns the internet which is another sore spot for Bill Gates.
And lets not forget FireFox. Anyone that actually tries FF will never use IE again.
Then there's OpenOffice. I bet MS would love to send them a cease and desist letter as well.
Microsoft is just bitter over its own strategic mistakes and is taking out it's anger on defenseless entities like Autopatcher.
Classic case of "sour grapes".

???????

Actually, I've tried firefox and used it for over a year, but ended up moving back to an IE-based shell. It was just quite a bit faster, didnt use as much memory (about 1/4 of firefox), and provided me with known compatibility on all websites except those from firefox fanatics that BLOCK IE intentionally just to prove a point. Firefox is a good product, however, its just way to resource hungry and this hasnt changed from the .1 version of (fireberd was it?)

Understandable. However, anyone who is serious about using the web will not regret using Firefox, even with the cost of being "slower".

It takes quite a bit of effort to find the right extensions/addons. Personally ive been extremely happy with Firefox, using addons that simply makes things a lot easier AND secure. What i mean by secure is that i have the control over if or not website is allowed to run scripts client side (NoScript) or being able to generate and use unique strong passwords(PasswordMaker) for each forum/website/whatever with just a click of a button. Do i even need to mention Greasemonkey? If you dont know about Greasemonkey, then im betting you dont really know, or care, what Firefox is about.

In sort, Firefox needs the user to know what he or she is doing. Thats quite large part of people using the internet whos not really fit to world of "Firefoxing". :)

You left out AdBlock Plus... but I digress.

So I am not serious about using the web because I dont use firefox? What a great conclusion. Opera far outperforms firefox and IE, but I dont use it because I cant make it my own (no 3rd party support). IE is quick and I can customize it. Firefox is a good product, dont get me wrong, however you have to deal with it using 2-3 times as much memory and resources compared to other products. Opera blows firefox out of the water but I just cant use it yet.

I have the same control over my browser with many addons that have been available years before firefox came about. Yes, some of them cost money, but I only spend money when the product far outperforms the freeware alternatives, which half of the products I use do. Despite the misconception amongst most OSS fanatics, Free does not always equate to better. Yes, I can use ad block to remove content,or I can use a far superior product (Ad Muncher) and remove the content with greater ease, a more scrutinized list, and more customizability. This program also takes away the need for noscript since it has a remove script function BUILT IN. I dont have a need for greasemonkey, but I am sure there are and have been alternatives to it prior to firefox.

And as for your last statement, if firefox requires users to know what they are doing, then why promote it as a replacement for IE? I know what I am doing and have had some of the best training in the world thanks to the US Military and the units I've belonged to, however, it doesnt take a genious to use firefox so I think your claim is false.

You know, considering AP has install of WGA as part of the options, it's dissappointing that MS takes this approach. It doesn't hack IE7 or others.. you still must have legal windows for those installs to work.

But for many techs, Autopatcher provide a quick way to update boxes that were out of date without having to make them slurp away at our bandwidth for every PC that comes in.

For those of us that find ourselves often in rural communities, or amongst poorer places in a city.. try downloading 200+ MB of "updates" over a 56k line. 3 years ago, MS tried the idea of putting out an "update CD" now that's dead. At a recent TS2, a Microsoft speaker PRAISED autopatcher as an example of using QFE chaining, which MS shows OEMs.

What a change of heart. Nothing better then to make life harder for those that try to support your product.

I couldn't agree more with every statement you made. Well said.

I agree also .......... I live in a rural area...56k is fast all i can get 28k

I guess thats changed!

Q: Is AutoPatcher legal?
A: Yes, Antonis Kaladis (our project manager) once spoke to a Microsoft employee and apparently they know about us but don't care what we do! The AutoPatcher project has been going strong since 2003 and never had a sniff of trouble from Microsoft.

Its just like all this open source talk from Microsoft ive been reading about for awhile now. Just like the saying goes. "Keep your friends close but your enemies closer" seems to be true for Microsoft. They arent shy about talking BS and back stab when it is convient for them.

Sneaky bas****s.

I remember reading that ...... what last year ?
so M$ can renig on statements and agreements?

so M$ can renig on statements and agreements?

Unless it's a signed contract? You bet.

Microsoft will destroy XP with Windows update....
(funny how XP used to run so much better before all of the updates)

Dont know what you are talking about, XP runs just fine, if not better, than it did when I first installed it years ago.

yeah, I still have my original disc MS gave me. I use to do the install and then do the updates but now it's common to slipstream your service pack and hotfixes into your install disk. But this service simplified that process on multiple machines and they took it way!!!

Yes, Autopatcher was very helpful, however, I can see why microsoft made them take it down. Many of the patches released are not for general public consumption and that includes several that were put into autopatcher. Only microsoft's patch detection engine on windows update can properly detect the updates that each individual pc requires. Installing patches that arent needed often results in more problems.

Damn, and the whole time I thought I was agreeing with you about how the patches increased the performance and piggy backed on slipstreaming. You must feel like arguing with someone, huh?

Not really arguing, just more restating my point because I dont want someone attacking me for saying something I wasnt. This site has a tendancy for people to attack at random for someone posting an honest view.

Yet another great move by the Microsoft PR monkeys! Fresh bananas for all!

Sucks. Great people, great service, as AP provided huge help to me on some upgrades. Kicked in several donations to the AP guys and considered it money very well spent--what they have been doing is a public service and MSFT should be thanking and paying them, not shutting them down.

For now, you can still find it on softpedia:

http://download.softpedi..._Aug07_x86_ENU_Core.exe

Don't know how long it will last though...

"Microsoft lawyers have billions at their disposal. Neowin has ad revenue. Geez, I wonder who would win?"

Those with the money, make the laws. RIAA, anyone?

Maybe Microsoft is going to come out with their own software for this? Maybe better than:

http://technet.microsoft...en-us/wsus/default.aspx

That stinks...my repair company would use autopatcher to quickly update new boxes, as our internet there isn't all that fast. Now it'll take twice as long, and time is money :\

Though I bet a some new community might try to fill its place, thats what always seems to happen with these things.

I have no doubt any number of companies could do a 10 times better job at doing Microsoft's job, this is just one example. The sad thing is these companies don't even make all that much money, nothing like what this fat, overweight, gimp monkey called microsoft can do. Basically all their are doing is stealing all the banana's and all these other companies that would truly bring innovation to the operating system on the pc get stuck with the peels.

I really do hope Microsoft takes a fall in the next decade, they need competition, really really bad. They have no reason to do much of anything, just look like they are doing something. Take their time, do it wrong, over price not much room for that when you have cut throat competition. So the rest of the industry continues to go broke, microsoft moves into new areas, lets existing areas stagnate and they fail at most other areas too, office and windows are all they have that make money.

Watch those two fall, and microsoft will go down in a ball of flames. I hate a company like them, at least other companies have good PR, pretend they are there for their customers and are not PE no 1. They have the worst relationship with developers prices are through the roof and well what else is there ? Think its jealousy? No, I think its called working well with others. When people practically have no other choice then to use windows, they should have a responsibility to do good things, be fair, be ethical and they don't do any of those things well.

If they don't break them in 2 or 3 companies and watch it happen overnight.

Microsoft couldn't have made a better move. It's better for them not to have another business supporting Windows, when those people could be helping people switch to Linux.

I just knew this will happen. Shame really. The devs should have prepared for this, since it was so obvious. Not that would have nessarily made any difference.

Now, if they have problem with others providing download for patches, why does sites like softwarepatch.com still keep distributing them. They've been at it since 1999 or so.

Microsoft has some pretty deluded indivituals working for them.

I'm certainly not a happy camper. Yeah, yeah, piracy and all. Folks skirting WGA. Yes, it's a problem. But so is not having a tool like this at your disposal.

Too bad MSFT doesn't just hire these folks to keep producing the tool and distirbuting it to Validated consumers and Volume License folks.

Hear Hear!

I administrate the lan at office and got 3 networked pc's at home, Autopatcher saved me lots of expensive (in South Africa) ADSL-gigs, It is a pity to be losing such a valuable service, Microsoft can learn much from Autopatcher way of doing.

Just another case of "the man" wanting total control over consumers computers.

I agree with you. IMHO with their products life and death in our machine is totally in their hands. I love freedom and not to be in the hands of "the man", if I only have the opportunity to enjoy that privilege....

It's such a shame, as AutoPatcher is so useful for updating my old Win2000 test box that can longer handle Windows Update (don't ask).

Autopatcher funded by ad revenue, supplied support for the end user where microsoft failed.

What does this tell you about microsoft?

This latest move may have made them even more enemies, the correct approach should have been a Christian approach, and that is to humble thy self, they should have gotten together with these guys (Autopatcher) and worked out a joint venture or something of that nature.

But Microsoft it seems has the love of money$$. money is their god and directs the company, and you become like your god, and they have, greedy and cold. trusting no one and devouring anything in their path. well, at least tying too.

Call me confused but what does microsoft have to gain, monetarily, from this? You dont pay for microsoft update, so its not like they are gaining revenue from this.

I am not saying this move is right, by any means, but I just dont understand what money they will gain from this.

They don't want XP to last that long, in spite of working up an SP3... in addition to unlicensed copies being able to be updated so easily.

But XP still has at least 2 years before its end of life cycle, so again, I dont see this as a push for them to make money. Windows 2000 stopped mid last year, as far as updates go, but that was after their defined lifecycle which has been in place for some time now. In fact, it was even extended.

A computer is not a car or a washing machine. It is an important part in your everyday life. Many of your memories, many of your thoughts, many of your interests, are preserved there like if they were letters in a drawer. You should have the right to preserve your documents as you like it and not to be forced to learn computing again and move everything away. What if Shakespeare had fixed a lifecicle for his works? Lifecycle means only that they have the right to force you to buy again. I agree with the end of the term of support, but, regarding the future, please respect my will if I want to keep using my old computer and the free market of hardware parts.

Force you to buy again? Funny, my father is still running windows 98 just fine and it works for him and his office since he works from home (telecommuting). He has not been forced to upgrade. And are you saying that cars and washing machines arent important parts of your everyday life? I know many people who depend on cars, and almost everyone depends on a washing machine to get their clothes clean. Shakespeare's works also never expired or required upgrading, in the computer environment however, you have to upgrade to stay current. If the computer industry didnt upgrade, we would still be running windows 3.1 and wouldnt be where we are today.

And are you saying that cars and washing machines arent important parts of your everyday life?

...or don't ever need to be upgraded??

OK, I think I couldn't live without my new car and my new washing machine. I love progress and technical developement: nothing is for ever, and happily we are not any more in the old 3.4 times. I use the newest whenever I can afford it. But on the other side I feel happy with my grandmother, I love my old car from the sixties and I love my old computer of the last 6 years, almost a mechanic friend of mine, even when now I need to work with a new one. The only thing I demand is to be allowed to live my own way and avoid underground procedures to kill any of them. Ads must be enough to increase sales. It would not be pleasant if anybody were allowed to tell you "You must be buried because your lifecicle is ended". I thank you both for your attention.

Again, who is forcing you to upgrade? If what you have works, why change? As I said above, my father runs windows 98 with office 97 and it work beautifully for him. He can afford to upgrade, but he CHOOSES not to. Microsoft hasnt come up to him with a gun and forced him to upgrade, he has made a choice not to just yet. That doesnt mean he wont upgrade, but if he does, it will be his choice.

Windows 98 SE is always in your hands, because you get into internet or out of it whenever you want. All the others (2000, XP, 2003, Vista, 2008) connect with the net in the loading process and you can't get out of it unless you unplug the connection, and then the computer doesn't work properly. You are always in their hands.

Somewhere else in this forum I've just found this link, which describes in a certain manner my fears:

http://www.linux.com/articles/25842?tid=19

"All the others (2000, XP, 2003, Vista, 2008) connect with the net in the loading process and you can't get out of it unless you unplug the connection,"

Application control software firewall. Your computer will not stop working if you block explorer.exe or restrict how svchost.exe connects. You can even disable the dns service in XP and restrict lookups to your apps that need internet access.

I dont know exactly WHAT you are referring to, however, I can simply disable my network connection at will. Its not very hard in any OS. Just right click the network connection, choose disable and I am off the internet in Windows 2000/xp/Vista. I still dont see what this has to do with the article either. Microsoft isnt limiting your computer by forcing it to be connected to the net. I've seen nothing that you mention that has FORCED me to be online when I didnt want to, and the computer functions fine.

Could there be "backdoors" opened during the loading process before the firewall is active and not detectable afterwards? It is only a question, I don't hava the slightest idea about this.

There could be, but don't put on your Tinfoil hat just yet.

If such a thing existed, it would have been detected by corporate hardware and software firewalls long ago.

Thank you for your answer.

np.

Dear Metshrine: I only try to understand the meaning of the decision to shut down Autopatcher, and this takes me somewhere else: IMHO they want to keep a tight grip on XP in their own interest. You say "I can simply disable my network connection at will...". They know everything about your OS, you only know what you are allowed to know. Just wait and see. Your father is a wise man!