Auto-patcher, Microsoft Want To Shut Down!

[Guest Reimar]

Microsoft Legal defies logic today by forcibly removing a free and trustworthy software package which makes updating Windows more convenient and accessible.

AutoPatcher, for those who don't know, was an impressive Windows community project that combined publically available Windows hotfixes and security updates each month to form a single package that could either be installed in a batch or burned on to an CD. To those who regularly format their computers or fix other people's computers (for which I share you pain), AutoPatcher not only saves bandwidth but precious time downloading each individual update from Windows Update.

It is not hard to imagine AutoPatcher violated some clause in some terms of service somewhere, but why Microsoft would act on it, and act on it now is unbelievable. If AutoPatcher could be as "malicious" as Microsoft suggests, then why haven't they acted on it sooner?

View Full Article: Long Zheng's Blog

Edited August 29, 2007 by Reimar

[RKASA]

auto patcher has a work around for WGA and they didn't remove it. Hiese is good with MS and works with them. It goes online and does WGA, if not it won't load or install a key is sent from MS to run it everytime. You just don't have to download the 300mb in files.

[Guest Reimar]

auto patcher has a work around for WGA and they didn't remove it. Hiese is good with MS and works with them. It goes online and does WGA, if not it won't load or install a key is sent from MS to run it everytime. You just don't have to download the 300mb in files.

Here it's talking about the Auto-Patcher from MS itself and not a "third" party one. The MS Auto-Patcher didn't go "around" the WGA checkand will works with legal key only.

But the article is talking from the fact that MS will discontinue the Auto-Patcher. And that is a very bad advantage for Service Engineers, Administrators and Systembuilder!

I had use the Auto-Patcher from MS for several years now and if MS stop with the development of new one, means for me to isnvest much more time to update the systems from my customers. The only alternativ for me is to build my own Auto-Patcher which will need alot time as well.

[RKASA]

No its not the same MS site its autopatcher.com and they use mirror sites and exchange files with other sites read the

Here are some of the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) about AutoPatcher. at that web site and you can see they operate without using MS update site. The MS site for system admin. people is still running. Its to hard to for most people to use, but hiese provides an MS approved script which downloads from MS update site not mirror sites. You have to use MS update once with the script then it can do that part from cd with contect to MS update. Future running of the script rebuilds the cd ISO but only from MS update site with the WGA.

They have a line in FAQ at autopatcher.com "Antonis Kaladis (our project manager) once spoke to a Microsoft employee and apparently they know about us but don't care what we do!" Thats no offical MS site, and I think now MS did care.

[Guest Reimar]

RKASA:

I wouldn't use third party software for my customers system while all of the software it's running there are legal! And I wouldn't take the risk to get with some third party products, which claiming to be legal and under authorization, some unsecure or even danger programs!

I'm responsible for the system of my valued customers and have to garant the secure and save of all data!

In fact all of the software used by my customers are legal and there is no point to use other than 100% legal Updates or whatever!

My customers paying monthly fees for my service and I haven't any loss of Data or system break down('s) because of unsecure (Virus/Spy/pirated/Malware or other) within the last 4 years! I believe that is a very good result.

To use third party upgrades or whatever on corporate legal systems is in my opionion danger and I would never do!

How many software "dealers" on the Internet claiming to be legal and in the real how many are really legal?

For pivate use I don't mind even to use pirated software but for corporate customers it's a different "game"!

And what's the real meaning of: "Antonis Kaladis (our project manager) once spoke to a Microsoft employee and apparently they know about us but don't care what we do!"?

It just mean that a Project Manager was talking to some (which kind of) Employe! That should mean something? That's meaning: NOTHING! May that employe was resposible for to clean the toilets?

Cheers!

[RKASA]

And what's the real meaning of: "Antonis Kaladis (our project manager) once spoke to a Microsoft employee and apparently they know about us but don't care what we do!"?

It just mean that a Project Manager was talking to some (which kind of) Employe! That should mean something? That's meaning: NOTHING! May that employe was resposible for to clean the toilets?

Thats my whole point. Who is he talking about? Antonis Kaladis is the project manager of autopatch.com He want you to beleave he is connected to MS. He is not. Thats why MS shut them down. The system admin site for MS is on MS server links to it are provided in updates home page. You can build slipstream disks at their archive.

[cdnvic]

Autopatcher has never been associated with Microsoft. "Windows Community" means developers that create software that works with Windows, it doesn't mean they have any formal association with Microsoft. I don't know why you keep pushing that idea.

[RKASA]

I am not dogging autopatchs intent or quality of patchs, just process they where told to change. A part of the issue they leave out.

Posted by Antonis Kaladis on August 29th, 2007 | 60 Comments

Today we received an e-mail from Microsoft, requesting the immediate take-down of the download page, which of course means that AutoPatcher is probably history. As much as we disagree, we can do very little, and although the download page is merely a collection of mirrors, we took the download page down.

The use of mirrors and a download page is the problem, autopatch scripts must use MS archive to build disk, thats what I mean by connected to MS, and there is the sys admin site at MS which also can also be used. I don't think autopatch had any bad intent. It s just that auto building patch scripts must run off the MS server as source of patchs. Thats what Hiese does. They could do that too, but they don't want to I guess. I think they should be able to do this but MS has 9/10 of the law, it owns the patchs.

You nor I would ever do it, but some people using the mirrors can exploit the WGA work around, which is harder to do if using the MS source server. Back in april I was at MS update forums and was told I could use an autopatch, but look for one that uses MS update source, one that connects direactly to MS servers. That is how I found Hiese.

[Guest Reimar]

This time MS get not so easy done what they want: the community start's to "fight" back! Ok, the result will maybe nothing or nothing will change the decission from MS but it will not that easy as all times.

Read what start's to going on:

""

Community fights back for AutoPatcher Posted by Dave Legg on 30 August 2007 - 18:02 · 109 comments & 5612 views if (!window.netshel_ord) { netshel_ord=Math.random()*10000000000000000; } if (!window.netshel_tile) { netshel_tile=1; } document.write(''); netshel_tile++; Microsoft's move this week to close down the AutoPatcher project, a project well known and supported here on Neowin, that allows users to update their computers without requiring an internet connection, has met with cries of outrage from members of the Neowin community, and IT professionals from around the world.

Since the initial take-down messages were sent out, and contact was made with both the Neowin administrators, and the project managers of AutoPatcher, Microsoft have fallen silent on the issue, leaving the community with little explanation about the reasons behind their action.

As seen by the number of responses the the news articles, and forum topic here on Neowin, and the news item posted on AutoPatcher's official website, the community is taking this issue very seriously, and are unlikely to let it rest without a full explanation from Microsoft officials.

In a display of support for AutoPatcher, one fan and Neowin member, M2Ys4U, took it upon himself to make a solitary protest outside Microsoft's UK HQ building in Reading this afternoon. As he wasn't permitted to enter the campus, he made a stand outside the gates, displaying his 'Save AutoPatcher' sign for about an hour, before being asked to move on by security.

Whilst Neowin.net does not officially endorse such a protest, we are pleased that it remained peaceful and nobody had to get hurt.""

Source: Neowin

[RKASA]

Maybe if its set up in a secure way that only honest persons like yourself could use a shared system for professional IT people, then MS would give some sort of permission. Maybe if they know of or have a list of users and they can monitor alittle more whats going on. I know patchs need to be easy for people with lots of PC s to care for. Then MS could save alot of bandwidth too.