Print this article | E-mail this article | Comment on this article

Glitch Offers Peek at Windows Update 6

By David Worthington, BetaNews

April 6, 2005, 2:09 PM

Windows Update version 6 is not yet out, but Microsoft inadvertently flashed a sneak peek when a Knowledge Base (KB) support article intended for testers participating in the beta program was discovered on a public server. The article included the Window Update v6 downloadable bits.

A Microsoft spokesperson told BetaNews that WU v6 was still private and an error had been made. "The update on the KB article was part of the Windows Update v6 beta program and intended for beta testers. As you know, the WU v6 beta program began March 22nd to encourage testing and solicit feedback in preparation for the final release later in 2005."

Windows enthusiast site Neowin first caught wind of the KB article on Tuesday and posted screenshots of the service to its Web site.

Version 6 serves as the foundation for Redmond's upcoming all-in-one Microsoft Update service that will launch later this year. Microsoft Update unifies the company's patching services and will be the primary destination point for updates to Windows, Office, SQL Server and other applications.

Microsoft Chief Software Architect Bill Gates announced Microsoft Update during his RSA Conference 2005 keynote earlier this year.

Add a Comment (23 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

By distinguished

posted Apr 7, 2005 - 2:35 AM

I am not worried about it with better alternatives.

Score: 0

By utomo

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 11:18 PM

I hope Microsoft use it to stop the pirated version of Microsoft Windows and Microsoft office. give warning first and then stop the windows if the pirated user still use it.
I believe Microsoft can do it. otherwise they can loose money if they did not doit.

Score: 0

By gsbrock

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 4:44 PM

You can always check out the beta website: http://update.microsoft.com/windowsupdate/v6/

You can search and find it on Google

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 6:56 PM

I highly recommend people not do this unless they use beta capabile hardware. (as with most betas on betanews,) I betatested for the V5 version and it literally broke my machine. I could not install anything at one point, windows installer was broken and after three hours of troubleshooting I just rebuilt the box. WU is actually a component of the OS now, so betatest at your own risk...

Score: 0

By gsbrock

posted Apr 7, 2005 - 12:40 AM

Betatest at your own risk should be a given - as it is a beta... lol

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 3:37 PM

V5 is MUCH slower and less intuitive IMO than V4.

Score: 0

By 802dotjohn

posted Apr 7, 2005 - 8:44 AM

I have installed SP2 on at least 250 machines. I only encountered problems when TV Media was installed on the machine. (halt error on startup)
That is 2 out of 250. Microsoft does have a list of programs that have been known to loose functionality and/or cause your systems to loose functionality.
(http://support.microsoft...mp;product=windowsxpsp2)
It is not a complete list but may help someone out there. When deciding as to/or not to SP2.
I just wish i could dameware past the ICF that came w/ SP2. That is my problem with it.

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 3:55 PM

Very much agree. Plus you have to restart a total of 5 times to fully update Windows XP Gold...

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 4:36 PM

Actually, that's untrue if you pay attention to what you're installing and when. I just did a from-scratch install of Windows XP Professional on Monday and had the experience first hand.

I installed Windows XP Pro (sans service packs) on a clean hard drive, installed SP2 (from CD, admittedly), and ran Windows Updates twice... the first to select all the optional recommended components I wanted including Media Player 10. Then I ran it again to select the critical updates and drivers. Then I rebooted. I ran a 3rd time only to confirm that I had everything... 0 updates found.

Score: 0

By l0cks

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 4:58 PM

GoodThings2Life :

Most people don't install SP2. And I am not installing it on any XP I've touched. So V5 is in fact slow and takes several time to be fully patched.

Score: 0

By frankwick

posted Apr 7, 2005 - 11:16 AM

Most people don't install SP2? I don't believe that at all.

I have installed SP2 on ver 100 machines and have yet to encounter a single problem. The machines varied in age and environment. The ONLY thing I had to do was, for one company, allow BackupExec Remote Agent to run with the SP2 firewall.

There is nothing wrong with SP2 at all. The benefits FAR outweight any perceived problems.

I hate MS, but I can say that XP-SP2 is the most stable OS I have ever used.

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 7:35 PM

Most people? or do you mean most people you know?

If you do not install SP2, then you have no right to criticize or complain about the performance and/or security of your system and/or Microsoft.

They offer the updates... it is YOUR choice not to deploy them.

Score: 0

By spiffyjeff

edited Apr 7, 2005 - 4:29 AM

it is my choice not to risk breaking my computer, which installing SP2 might end up doing

Score: 0

By AlanRivaldo

posted Apr 7, 2005 - 10:03 AM

...and so would running your computer to begin with. So put your computer back into its box, and then into the closet.

Score: 0

By tbeckner

edited Apr 6, 2005 - 7:06 PM

I have 9 XP desktops, 3 servers (2-2003 SP1 (one SBS, not SP1),1-2000 SP4), 2 SQL Server 2000 servers SP4, Exchange 2003 SP1, Visual Studio 2003, a handful (24 or more) of major non-Microsoft applications, the kids have many current games (Doom3/Half-Life 2/EQ/WoW and many others) and all of the desktops have had SP2 installed from the date of release, and we have never had a problem. In addition, I have installed SP2 on a numerous other (over 50) machines and I have never had a problem, why are so many people against SP2? The machines run better and SP2 appears to be a very stable product. I also run Micrsoft SUS for patches and all of my machines (desktops and servers) ref to it for approved updates. Why all of this distrust?

Score: 0

By Tenoq

posted Apr 7, 2005 - 2:30 AM

Why are they against SP2? That's simple:
1) Security Centre nonsense.
2) Crazy built-in wireless (although I think SP1 started that)
3) Even worse Bluetooth - it completely screwed Widdcomm when it came out, and I would still hack it out of any install of SP2 on my machines. It won't even support Headset profiles, with all the headsets I've tried.
4) Driver incompatibility. I'm still waiting for an SP2 compatible driver for my soundcard. If I install it's driver on SP2, rundll32.exe is disabled. CRITICAL FLAW. Admittedly this isn't necessarily Microsoft's fault (what did they do to my driver b/w SP1 and SP2 tho?), but it's still a good reason not to install it.
5) What's the advantage of SP2 over SP1, if you already run a real firewall program?

Score: 0

By horsecharles

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 7:54 PM

It's like Norton products, MacAfee, Windows ME, etc. some have never had a problem & swear by the product, some totally the opposite.

I avoid Windows Update as much as possible-- not for privacy or licensing reasons, but because it sometimes causes system problems(not very often, but one time-consuming troubleshoot is more than enough in one lifetime, esp. in a business environment) prefer to utilize BigFix, or wait for the patchers like nLite or Autopatcher XP to issue upgrades...

For SP2(and all patches / upgrades in fact), and even for the 2K / 2K3 counterparts, i recommend that folks slipstream themselves-- go to MSFN & look up that aptly-named thread(basically create a re-install disc combining the original windows install package plus sp2 & any other MS and/or third-party upgrades/apps/tweaks), and/or do it just using nLite or Autopatcher XP... this fixes / evades a lot of SP2 & Windows Update known issues -- and is especially useful for multiple computers: in one fell swoop can do the whole network..

Score: 0

By ConceptJunkie

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 9:41 PM

I've never had problems with WIndows Update until it comes to driver updates. In my experience more than half the time the driver updates have made things worse or caused the item to stop working. I don't know why this might have been, but I only update hardware drivers from the manufacturer.

WRT SP2, it's always worked fine for me. It's nice to see MS unifying their updates, seeing as how there were something like 7 different (and often incompatible) versions of Office 2000 SP1. And they thought breaking up MS would have been a "punishment"?

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 7:32 PM

Indeed... Our college campus spent last August and September doing a forced rollout to over 1200 computers on our network with very few SP2-related issues-- all of which were simple driver or software incompatibilities that were resolved with an update from the vendor.

A majority of SP2 related problems arise because people are too lazy, uneducated, or stubborn to update their software and keep their PC's clean of virus/malware.

Score: 0

By jdee

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 10:24 PM

What the hell is everyone's problem with SP2? You can choose NOT to use it.

Score: 0

By horsecharles

posted Apr 6, 2005 - 11:17 PM

Greetings, interplanetary traveler!! How's life in the Andromeda Galaxy?
BTW not if you wish to use windows update starting april 12 on.......

Score: 0

By terminalx

edited Apr 7, 2005 - 1:07 AM

and that will be another debate in itself..boo hoo they are making me update...which sounds like a good idea unfortunately there are still thousands of users who are using sp1 and have the little reminder to update windows and have no idea what it is (one guy asked me if they charge you to update it) the majority of people who do not update their windows are typically the ones infested with spyware and complaining that its microsofts fault...no one forced them to use their product and no one forced them to d/l everything active x either or not read the license agreements of unknown programs (kazaa being number one on that list)

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

posted Apr 7, 2005 - 10:44 AM

Finally, some smart posts here! TV media is the biggest reason for SP2 install failures (that's my opinion, but based on experience it is likely correct regardless). Any time you install a service pack you take a risk--it practically rewrites your entire OS. Many spyware programs and those cheap 'free' antivirus and anti-spyware programs can disagree with service packs. The fact is though, if you have tons of spyware on an XP system and upgrade to SP1 you have just as many problems as you would trying to update to SP2. The service pack isn't the problem--the incompatible software is. If XP came out in 2003 and SP1 came out instead of SP2, even with the same SP1 updates there would be just as many ignorant lazy cry-babies as there are now. And for God's sake if the firewall is a problem disable it!

Score: 0

Nov 21 - 6:51 PM ET Coalition urges better laws for e-mail and cell phone privacy

Nov 21 - 6:42 PM ET How is Internet advertising faring in this bad economy?

Nov 21 - 6:15 PM ET From out of the Amazon Cloud, an AWS winner emerges

Nov 21 - 5:20 PM ET Mufin music finder enters public beta, adds widgets

Nov 21 - 5:01 PM ET Google launches its SearchWiki semantics plug-in

Nov 21 - 4:57 PM ET Asus previews a slimmer, less costly Eee PC

Nov 21 - 4:32 PM ET New Adobe Media Player ushers in AIR 1.5

Nov 21 - 2:11 PM ET AT&T to add Pantech's low-cost C630 phone to 3G lineup

Nov 21 - 1:11 PM ET iPhone gets firmware 2.2 update

Nov 21 - 11:51 AM ET The Dell surprise: Higher earnings on lower revenue