Microsoft Pulls Troubled Vista Update
|
News Brief: One of two Vista Service Pack 1 prerequisite updates is no longer available. What a relief! |
Microsoft TechNet forums started to buzz with trouble late last week, after update KB937287 caused some Vista PCs to either fail to properly boot up or enter an endless boot up loop.
I got zapped by the update on Friday. Luckily, Vista's startup repair utility fixed the problem. Many other Vista users weren't so lucky.
Late this afternoon, about four days after my request for information, Microsoft released a statement:
"We've received reports that some customers may be experiencing an unusual reboot cycle after installing KB937287, the servicing stack update we released last week. To prevent further instances of this issue, we temporarily stopped automatic distribution of the update and are investigating solutions to the problem. We believe this problem only impacts a small number of customers. We are working to identify possible solutions and will resume automatic distribution again after we address the issue."
I can't recall a time when Microsoft acknowledged any problem causing trouble to more than a "small number of customers." How does Microsoft define "small?"
Microsoft's Nick White also blogged about the beleaguered update. His assurances are more soothing at least. He recommended that on afflicted PCs that customers use System Restore to fix any problemor they could call Microsoft for assistance.
The prerequisite update problem means that I will wait longer before applying Service Pack 1, which is available to me through MSDN. For anyone looking for advice: wait. SP1 will be there later.
The pre-SP1 update problem is a warning that Microsoft had good reasons for holding back the service pack from mass distribution. Microsoft has said that SP1 causes some driver failures during installation. If one of the prerequisite updates causes so much trouble, what can Vista users expect from SP1?
In my household, the unscientific failure rate is one third. Two Vista PCs installed the pre-SP1 updates without major trouble (other than errant Bluetooth mouse weirdness). The other PC couldn't boot up. I suppose one is a small number. But what is one out of three?


Comments (25)
Nice shot, Microsoft, right in the foot. Again.
Sure, I'll hand over my Windows XP when they pry it from my cold dead hard drive.
Posted by mgo | February 19, 2008 9:11 PM
Alright...well, at least they had the guts to admit they did something wrong and try to remedy the situation as best as possible until they could get it completely fixed...they could have just left it...I mean, yea...could be worse.
@mgo...it's only a matter of time...
Posted by thatguy | February 19, 2008 9:47 PM
Ouch, I wonder if it took off Microsoft's Big Toe on this one -- But again, this isn't the first time it has happened, is it?
Posted by Douglas S. Taylor | February 19, 2008 9:52 PM
Does Microsoft employ quality assurance software testers who run test plans before an update is pushed? How does this get past testing?
Posted by JM | February 19, 2008 10:00 PM
This is feeling more and more like MS is just throwing stuff against the wall to see if it sticks. Paul Thurott once described Longhorn as "a train wreck", which he retracted upon later builds, but IMO this is an accurate description of MS' development process at this time.
What's the point of all the new, productivity-oriented software development releases they have (.Net), if MS themselves decide that snafus like these are a more attractive alternative to dogfooding their own framework and leading by example? Will it take an Xbox-like mea culpa to the tune of $1 billion to make apps/OS realize that at some point, their heads must roll when they botch the flagship over and over again?
Posted by Keith Patrick | February 19, 2008 10:32 PM
This is what you get when a company has a split personality and has to resort to stopgap efforts to fill a technology deficit they can't seem to bring themselves to admit they have. The industry has to be the ones to tell themselves Microsoft doesn't have the goods.
Gee. Took long enough.
When they started gutting Longhorn in 2004 and when they had to delay Vista for the big "rewrite" fiasco of 2006, the industry should have shaken off the moneyed opiates and "incentives" journalists receive to puff the smoke up the blind customers' butts.
I still wonder what it's going to take for "journalists" to start asking the hard hitting questions of the Microsoft principals.
Can't think of any food ones? How about: "HEY BALLMER, WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?" Want one for Ozzie? "HEY OZZIE! WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO EARN YOUR PAY?"
Gee. Maybe I could be a journalist. Ya think?
Posted by Pedro Panza | February 19, 2008 11:14 PM
Not to jump to MS defense all the time, but look at the hardware base out here. There are infinite possible hardware combinations, how could MS possibly test an update against EVERY possible combination? It's no wonder there are driver conflicts. Driver conflicts are this days equivelent of DLL Hell.
BTW...the pre-SP1 updates worked flawlessly on my T61 Thinkpad.
Posted by Emspilot | February 20, 2008 6:25 AM
Emspilot:
If virtualization is done properly and that means granular virtualization you don't need to have specific drivers written for every piece of metal you install on a machine. The drivers should be virtual and not built on a specific code base.
THAT is what Microsoft was trying to do years ago and they failed to do it. The big question is where and how did they fail? How is it the biggest and richest and baddest failed to grasp the true nature of virtualization?
And I DO mean FAILED.
Posted by Pedro Panza | February 20, 2008 9:23 AM
Just for comparison, I've done 5 Vista SP1 updates from the .iso image from TechNet and have had no failures. These systems were a combination of laptops and desktops from Dell, Sony and Lenovo.
Posted by SLoweCSL | February 20, 2008 9:40 AM
Emspilot: Good point, except MS decides to redesign their driver architecture for almost every single release (this from the same company that won't rewrite their 10-year old shell because there's too much of an investment in the existing code). Stable drivers can be extremely difficult to write (esp kernel-mode), and it's that much more difficult when your coding against a constantly-changing spec.
Posted by Keith | February 20, 2008 12:23 PM
Yes, writing stable software is hard work. If it was easy, little girls would do it. Ballmer has thousands of people on the payroll supposedly engaged in development activities for Vista. From the looks of things lately, the lower decks aren't happy with the officers or the direction of the vessel. Maybe those $60 stock options have some bearing on crew morale.
Posted by jacko | February 20, 2008 3:49 PM
Joe the update wasn't exactly pulled. I spent an hour plus on the phone this morning with Microsoft support getting the KB937287 removed from my computer because of an error. Basically they had me restore my computer to a previous time, installed all the Microsoft updates I took in on the 13th again. Then Microsoft update showed the offending KB937287, which Microsoft update installed all by itself. The tech pointed out that the KB937287 update now has to be installed by itself, not like it was when I installed it on the 13th. Anyway everything seems to be working fine so far. take care
Posted by Rodger | February 20, 2008 6:03 PM
Sometimes it pays to be a procrastinator...it comes in handy when trying out new software. There always seem to be glitches that need to be fixed.
Posted by N.Walter | February 21, 2008 12:46 PM
Looks like that new copy of XP Pro I just got on eBay for $130 is going to come in handy.
Posted by Tronguy | February 21, 2008 1:06 PM
I applied Vista SP1 to my Acer C314XMi tabletpc, and my home built PC, both running Vista Ultimate without any problems.
I've been fortunate with Vista. I've not had any major issues, other than some DRM'd training videos that won't run on my laptop because of the video driver/hardware and Vista's built-in DRM. Acer has no plan for upgrading the video driver, so I run my training video in a W2K VM - works great!
Thank goodness.
Posted by Darrick | February 21, 2008 1:51 PM
What will this mean for Dimdows 7? After all, that's going to be built on the Vista foundation, isn't it? So if that foundation is shaky, won't that spell trouble for the new version?
Or they could go back to XP and start again, but given it took six years to get something useful out of that approach, won't that just lead to further delays?
Posted by Lawrence D'Oliveiro | February 21, 2008 6:40 PM
Lawrence: It is built on Vista, but MS has been going through a major cleanup of the kernel, etc (it sounds like Sinofsky is putting Windows on an Intel-like tick-tock cycle to minimize Vista(or Prescott)-like disasters. Unfortunately, there's only so much cleanup Windows can endure - the "MinWin" kernel is supposedly around 25 MBs in size. I think the answer for them is to move to a clean-room OS (like Singularity), and have a hypervisor-based compatibility mode to keep the core OS more pure. That being said, with the exception of SQL Server, MS has been incredibly gun-shy when it comes to rewriting their products for the sake of cleanup (I personally *do* believe in rewriting, and I don't even have the kind of testing resources MS has)
Posted by Keith Patrick | February 22, 2008 1:42 PM
Two months after the death loop update was "pulled," it arrived in my computer and promptly sent it into loop-land. Apparently, MS did not work out the bugs before resuming automatic updates with it. Apple store, here I come.
Posted by Jimbo | April 9, 2008 10:04 PM
Jimbo.....same thing happened to my daughter's laptop the day they released the "fixed" version. Still trying to get booted up as it's an HP with no CD-ROM install.
Since most of my existing software won't work on Vista anyway, I'll be looking at to Apple for my next desktop.
Posted by RLC | April 22, 2008 12:03 PM
Hm... Weird, I have no problems with that update, normally boots up, no random reboots. Works PERFECT!
Posted by Ripiz | April 26, 2008 11:08 AM
Well, thank you for this awful service pack that ruin my system. Now I am an owner of a big paperweight. Before you all decide to send any kind of service pack out to the masses, rather than thinking of your bottom line, you should really think about how this is suppose to improve anything. I am going to warn anyone running Windows Vista to not install the service pack.
So yeah unfortunately I was one of those who system was ruined and now it does not boot up. Thanks for nothing.
Posted by James A | July 4, 2008 1:57 AM
everytime i get a microsoft up date my computer crashes spent over 9 hours a day with rwch support people finally had to wipe my whole system clean of it and start over from scratch when i blocked all downloads it manages to sneak in during shutdown or start up with it nasty viruses and infections and the loss is incalcuable also when it wants to up date against my wishes it just shuts off by itself and me in the middle of a big project next computer will be totally microsoft free as much as humanly possible and many friends and buisness associates have the same problem what can one do to prevent them from totally ruiniong my computer and related things
Posted by STEVE | September 11, 2008 3:40 PM
i am also a victim of microsoft downloads my computer crashes every time i get one even after blocking down loads it even turns itself off to accept them even if i am in the middle of a big project my next computer will be 100% microsoft free as willall my friends and buisness associates the loss to us is incalcuable
Posted by frank flibbage | September 11, 2008 3:52 PM
hi always when i want make update for my vista home premium i have message that it is not possible due to code 80244019. i do not know where is a problem because until now it was all ok, i was trying uninstall my antivir and firewall and still no result other pages on internet i can open all computer running well only i cant do update is something blocked or what it can be? please help me somebody because i do not want reinstall vista thank you
Posted by martin | November 16, 2008 7:50 AM
I get stuck in a non-bootable loop if I turn on windows auto updates, so I have had to turn them off. I would prefer to have the updates, but I have to restore everyday if I turn it back on. I found this site, but it doesn't really tell me how to fix the problem, so if someone knows, please comment. To comment on one of the above postings, other than money, why fix something that works....XP was a wonderful OS and I wish I could go back.
Posted by SteveD | March 29, 2009 10:10 PM