I don't know but I think that there is a conspiracy happening .... day coming after night !
I think there is more than just a coincidence here !

I don't know but I think that there is a conspiracy happening .... day coming after night !
I think there is more than just a coincidence here !

Sorry about the double post something went wrong ... or did it ?
A whole heap of questions by Joe Wilcox and how come no answers ??
Could it be has absolutely NO PROOF !
And all his assumptions ... are just that ....assumptions !
I like the last sentence "Now I ask you: Are these events coincidental, or related?"
Talk about a mountain out of a mole hill, Joe has strung such a long bow out of this that he didn't even see the arrow !!

Joe, I am absolutely stunned by your comment.

The mission assigned to you is to climb over the roof top of Microsoft Reymond and report to us the events happened or going to happen in Reymond. That is why we called it 'Microsoft WATCH"

Instead , you meticulously point out version 7.0.6000.374 to 7.0.6000.381...

The malfuctioned WGA was yesterday news, please don't recyle old entries

What's maliciouss about asking a good question? Why are the M$ shills overly defensive? Joe might be on to something here!

Neil, Joe is asking a question and has made it abundantly clear he is not making anyu accusation. It's bad enough that you're prejudiced, but must you also demonstrate that you can barely read?

Maddog
With a site like yours, no wonder your statement as you are a "Linux Shill" !
Questions don't become fact just because they are asked !
When you ask a question it should be a reasonable one, rather than just a question for a questions sake, it should be thought provoking rather than just provoking the likes of you !
I love it when Joe asks these sorts of questions all the Linux Shills come out of the woodwork to say that they agree, next I suppose will be chips.

I think it's silly to sling mud over this. I don't see any assumptions in the article, just questions.

Nevertheless, I agree with Eder, this does seem trivial. The problem with the WGA failure is the WGA failure, no matter how it happened.

Joe MS knows what best for you how dare you question them or their methods. WGA is for your own good and if WGA fails your a pirate!
This is nonsense but thats is what MS defenders will tell you each and every time. Then they will even go further to defend WGA as MS right to do completely disregarding your personal privacy because you agreed to the EULA but will get all upset if spyware infects their PC's even though it was in the EULA of that shareware or freeware they downloaded.
WGA doesn't stop pirates in fact it does absolutely nothing to curtail piracy. It however does the following.
1. Punishes the legitimate customer
2. Adds unnecessary code to Windows
3. Adds additional updates
4. fails and requires patches and troubleshooting for a components that is not even required for the system to run.
Makes one wonder how pirates can live without these "advantages"

Now why else would would MS try to sneak an update though like they did? If you believe their explanation, then I have a bridge and swapland that you just need to buy.

When the M$ Shills cannot defend the actions of MS and only attack those who ask good questions, we as users should really be concerned.

The anwser is, of course the updates were all about gaining more control over
Windows systems out there for the purpose of the WGA. What else? I for one do not believe the lame explanation from M$ that it needed to update the updater for people who choose not to use the auto-updates features at all. Thats just bogus, from a company that has no credibility at all at telling the truth.

One slight prob there Joe.

I only got the .381 recently. On August 24th when I degenuined myself on that weekend I was still at .374.

Sorry, but just a coincidence.

2007-09-17 22:58:24:610 1384 970 AU #############
2007-09-17 22:58:24:610 1384 970 AU ## START ## AU: Search for updates
2007-09-17 22:58:24:610 1384 970 AU #########
2007-09-17 22:58:24:624 1384 970 AU <<## SUBMITTED ## AU: Search for updates [CallId = {6388B43A-2B88-4587-AEA5-D07DFD08AD7F}]
2007-09-17 22:58:24:624 1384 1734 Agent *************
2007-09-17 22:58:24:624 1384 1734 Agent ** START ** Agent: Finding updates [CallerId = AutomaticUpdates]
2007-09-17 22:58:24:624 1384 1734 Agent *********
2007-09-17 22:58:24:624 1384 1734 Agent * Online = Yes; Ignore download priority = No
2007-09-17 22:58:24:624 1384 1734 Agent * Criteria = "IsInstalled=0 and DeploymentAction='Installation' or IsPresent=1 and DeploymentAction='Uninstallation' or IsInstalled=1 and DeploymentAction='Installation' and RebootRequired=1 or IsInstalled=0 and DeploymentAction='Uninstallation' and RebootRequired=1"
2007-09-17 22:58:24:624 1384 1734 Agent * ServiceID = {3DA21691-E39D-4DA6-8A4B-B43877BCB1B7}
2007-09-17 22:58:24:624 1384 1734 Setup Checking for agent SelfUpdate
2007-09-17 22:58:24:626 1384 1734 Setup Client version: Core: 7.0.6000.374 Aux: 7.0.6000.374
2007-09-17 22:58:24:626 1384 1734 Misc Validating signature for C:\Windows\SoftwareDistribution\SelfUpdate\wuident.cab:
2007-09-17 22:58:24:635 1384 1734 Misc Microsoft signed: Yes
2007-09-17 22:58:24:650 1384 1734 Misc Validating signature for C:\Windows\SoftwareDistribution\SelfUpdate\wuident.cab:
2007-09-17 22:58:24:658 1384 1734 Misc Microsoft signed: Yes
2007-09-17 22:58:24:667 1384 1734 Misc Validating signature for C:\Windows\SoftwareDistribution\SelfUpdate\wsus3setup.cab:
2007-09-17 22:58:24:675 1384 1734 Misc Microsoft signed: Yes
2007-09-17 22:58:24:684 1384 1734 Misc Validating signature for C:\Windows\SoftwareDistribution\SelfUpdate\wsus3setup.cab:
2007-09-17 22:58:24:693 1384 1734 Misc Microsoft signed: Yes
2007-09-17 22:58:24:742 1384 1734 Setup Determining whether a new setup handler needs to be downloaded
2007-09-17 22:58:24:745 1384 1734 Misc Validating signature for C:\Windows\SoftwareDistribution\SelfUpdate\Handler\WuSetupV.exe:
2007-09-17 22:58:24:756 1384 1734 Misc Microsoft signed: Yes
2007-09-17 22:58:24:756 1384 1734 Setup SelfUpdate handler update NOT required: Current version: 7.0.6000.374, required version: 7.0.6000.374
2007-09-17 22:58:24:757 1384 1734 Setup Evaluating applicability of setup package "WUClient-SelfUpdate-ActiveX~31bf3856ad364e35~x86~~7.0.6000.374"
2007-09-17 22:58:25:366 1384 1734 Setup Setup package "WUClient-SelfUpdate-ActiveX~31bf3856ad364e35~x86~~7.0.6000.374" is already installed.
2007-09-17 22:58:25:369 1384 1734 Setup Evaluating applicability of setup package "WUClient-SelfUpdate-Aux-TopLevel~31bf3856ad364e35~x86~~7.0.6000.374"
2007-09-17 22:58:27:234 1384 1734 Setup Setup package "WUClient-SelfUpdate-Aux-TopLevel~31bf3856ad364e35~x86~~7.0.6000.374" is already installed.
2007-09-17 22:58:27:235 1384 1734 Setup Evaluating applicability of setup package "WUClient-SelfUpdate-Core-TopLevel~31bf3856ad364e35~x86~~7.0.6000.374"
2007-09-17 22:58:29:035 1384 1734 Setup Setup package "WUClient-SelfUpdate-Core-TopLevel~31bf3856ad364e35~x86~~7.0.6000.374" is already installed.
2007-09-17 22:58:29:037 1384 1734 Setup SelfUpdate check completed. SelfUpdate is NOT required.

Neil wrote: Questions don't become fact just because they are asked!

Joe never said his suspicions were fact. Can't you read?

As usual, you engage in ad hominem arguments. They prove nothing except that you have no real arguments. Try some substance next time before you put on another spectacle.

its there, it happened, it did things, it was discovered, it wasn't ignored, its still there, its not going anywhere, it may still be doing things, it took a long time for an explanation, its still not explained properly.

there is nothing like a chronological order of events to explain things as they are objectively. keywords: chronological and objective.

just answer the question. no one needs to be defensive.

my honest answer is- its related.

THIS SITE IS SUCH A FLOP AND RESORTING TO RATHER STUPID WAYS AND SENSATIONALISM TO GATHER READERS AROUND AN ARTICLE. IF YOU DONT TRUST MS AT ALL AND BELIEVE WHAT THEY TELL US, THEN SWITCH TO LINUX OR MAC OS X. STOP MAKING A MOUNTAIN OUT OF A MOLEHILL AND BUILDING AN IMAGINARY BUBBLE OF FUD.

NO, WE WILL USE THOSE THAT WE WANT AND WE WILL ASK WHEN WE HAVE GOT DOUBTS BECAUSE WE AREN'T PUPPETS.

Susan wrote: "I only got the .381 recently. On August 24th when I degenuined myself on that weekend I was still at .374.
Sorry, but just a coincidence."

Maybe not, Susan. My theory is that Microsoft updated WGA to support Windows Update .381, which trigged invalidations of .374 or earlier. Your experience fits the theory.

Thanks,

Joe

Joe, I just had to comment on some of these posts. I am sure you are used to negative comments, but it does get ridiculous at times, doesn't it? You were just curious if there was a coincidence involving the Windows update update and the WGA failures, and since you weren't affected, you asked if anyone else could give you details of their experience. Some commenters get a little too uptight. You never hinted at a conspiracy. And though some feel the subject is too trivial, well, that is an opinion, and who's to say this problem won't happen again. Perhaps that is why you are curious to find out why it happened. And that is why I read you every day Joe. I like to know why things happen.

stiff neck 'n bucket drives ---
a side 'a hogtown blues a strip a' red bacon ---
Rein A Krack Link

i found this article through google's news search whilst trying to fix a problem on my system.

my system is telling me that i need to install an update for windows update, but when it tries to update itself... it fails. i've also come across a lot of forums with people who have the same specific problem.

it's not the same problem as what this article is about, but, since you asked, i would have to say they are related in some way.

Stealth Windows update prevents XP repair

http://windowssecrets.com/2007/09/27/03-Stealth-Windows-update-prevents-XP-repair

Micro$oft just can't seem to get anything right.

The reason this is a valid article is that just because THIS event is old news, if this was caused by Microsoft stealthily updating parts of the operating system without users permission then it points out even further why this should not be done.

Like with Eric K, I found this site performing a Google search to seek resolution of the same problem he is: last Tuesday evening I returned home to find my PC requesting a restart for an auto update that had downloaded while I was away. Immediately prior to the update all was fine. After the reboot I found IE7 would not start (Firefox did). Subsequently IE7 reverted to IE6; Windows Media Player 11 disappeared, reverting to WMP9 that will not complete installation and therefore not run; and I cannot install any Windows Updates that it's obvious my computer needs to reinstall. Unless I turn off the Auto Update service (a non-solution solution) my PC repeatedly asks me to reboot.

Microsoft offers but two responses: reboot the computer (duh), or delete the RebootRequired subkey in the Auto Upload area of the Registry. I delete the subkey and it returns again and again.

I emailed Microsoft for an assist and the response they gave me resulted in repeated blue-screen crashes. I wrote to tell the Tech but he's not yet responded despite my receiving an email saying I would receive a response within 24 hours.

I also called, spent an hour with Microsoft Tech Support, who told me eventually they didn't have the knowledge to resolve the matter, sent me over to Windows Tech Support, spent another couple of hours there, and eventually they told me Microsoft Research must review the matter. They also told me someone from Microsoft Tech Support would phone me on 10/8 with an answer to resolve.

It absolutely better not be "reinstall Windows XP" because Microsoft fouled up my computer.

I checked repeatedly for a virus, trojan or other nasty and find nothing. Everything points to the Auto Update that occurred on a Tuesday evening.

All I did was respond to an update that was downloaded from Microsoft. This is ridiculous.

It has been a long time since I had the problem I originally wrote about a couple posts above, but I thought I would mention the way I solved it. I had to reinstall the OS from scratch. Thanks Windows Update!