Alan Bourke wrote: > Charlie Coleman wrote: > >> Really? You missed the whole auto-update thing - MS making changes even if >> you have allow auto-updates turned off? >> >> > You mean where Windows Update was updating itself and not anything else, > because: > > "any user who chooses to use Windows Update either expected updates to > be installed or to at least be notified that updates were available. > Had we failed to update the service automatically, users would not have > been able to successfully check for updates and, in turn, users would > not have had updates installed automatically or received expected > notifications. " > > OK, they should have done it a better way but it wasn't applying > security patches and the like without consent. >
I'd love to see a counterpoint to this, because I don't have the time to waste on it....but it sure sounds like a koolaid thingee.... _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
