What's on the grocery list?

re: What's on the grocery list?

joscon [Microsoft] — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 13:29:42 GMT

To answer #1 above, a lot of people do unsupported things with their images in regards to how they actually build them. That tends to cause a lot of issues down the line.

re: What's on the grocery list?

Drewfus — Sun, 20 Feb 2011 01:01:33 GMT

1. How are people botching deployment so badly that updating never works? Are they disabling services or doing something wrong with permissions? Bad WSUS config?

2. Understood, although i'm struggling to determine what these XP compatible methods are that people are still using, given that so much has changed.

3. Understood. theitbros.com/sysprep-windows-7-third-party-anti-virus

re: What's on the grocery list?

joscon [Microsoft] — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:05:12 GMT

I see what you're getting at Drew and the answer to whether that would be better is....maybe. And that's an honest answer. Ideally, I would like to see all updates applied online because I can track whats happening easier when they fail as opposed to offline installations where my only inclination of a problem is after the fact.

The nicest thing about offline installation is that it does remove other code from getting in the way of the installation of the update. In this way, both MS and third party code never gets a chance to interfer. Realistically though, the problems I see that are servicing related tend to be on a couple of things:

1. Bad image deployment. This is the most common and the easiest to spot because updates simply never install on the systems. It's a little harder when only pieces of the image have gotten corrupted.

2. Unsupported methods of installation. This one is a little tough for me to explain because as a Microsoft engineer, I know what I can and cant do when you call me. As a person who understands what those who work in the "real world" have to deal with, I know what you have (or dont have) at your disposal. Usually though, we'll see issues where someone is scripting installations of updates, using old methods that worked in XP and dont work now, etc, most of which come down to being unsupported on our end and result in problems. If you can, use something like WSUS or another product to manage an environment and its a little less problematic.

3. Third party code. This is the normal suspects, anti-virus, encryption software, etc. Finding and resolving these isnt always hard but the problems caused can be tough to figure out.

re: What's on the grocery list?

Drewfus — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 03:07:29 GMT

Joseph, regarding servicing component corruption, and other servicing related problems, how much of it is ultimately due to running updates online, and inherent difficulties related to this, as opposed to all other problems? I hope that sentence is meaningful.

Put it this way - suppose Windows could offer the system administrator the option of running all MSU updates offline. When CBS determines its time to reboot the system, the boot order is temporarily changed, so that the system boots into a PE/RE environment (installed during setup). From here, updates are applied offline by DISM or related APIs. On completion, system reboots into Windows. Would that hypothetical scenario conceivably make updating more reliable, faster, or both?

re: What's on the grocery list?

joscon [Microsoft] — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 12:02:18 GMT

Thanks for the feedback.

re: What's on the grocery list?

someone — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:31:59 GMT

As an end user, here's what I feel about the NT 6 OSes: Servicing absolutely sucks - every aspect of it sucks. Performance, I/O that goes on to apply to single update and the bloatedness of WinSxS sucks. The slowdowns and waits it causes at logon and logoff suck. The inability to slipstream sucks. The time it takes to install or uninstall an update sucks. And the very reason for which it was designed - reliable servicing sucks. Many of my Vista systems often get stuck in the endless loop state while installing updates and most often service packs fail to install and roll back at 99%. Even Windows 7 SP1 beta and RC is failing on my new RTM installation after 99%. With XP, I could install 10+ updates in less than 2 mins using a simple batch script and I could install a service pack in about 10 mins. Servicing is one of the key reasons why in spite of migrating to Windows 7, I absolutely hate the product and curse the people who designed it. If you didn't have to uninstall updates, the Windows 2000/XP INF update.exe-based servicing was problem-free and very reliable. Sorry for ranting again but this is how I feel about the product.

And mark my words. Around the time Windows 7 SP1 releases, there are again going to be far too many users who systems get botched up while installing the service pack or they will be unable to install the SP at all. And unable to obtain one that has SP1 slipstreamed. Around the time a service pack releases, it has now become customary to clean install the RTM copy (for those who aren't fortunate to get access to a slipstreamed image).

Please wait while Windows configures... but I don't want to wait. I don't want Windows gobbling up my disk space every few days. I want to be able to install service packs in maximum half an hour like I can on the decade old Windows XP. I have cumulative service packs. I have /nobackup back. I also want /passive switch back. I want the speed of update.exe. How can a single component degrade so much in a single release from XP to Vista?