It's not just "on the safe side", win8.1+UD1 reports 9600.16610, most likely when the final release comes, you won't be able to install it, because it probably will only install on win8.1 reporting 9600.16384(like in the case of trying to install the MSU on the leaked build 9600.16596). Of course, you could always make a fresh install with the final release. AFAIK, if you set a restore point, it could restore totally back to the state prior to installing the MSU, and will report 9600.16384.
since these escrow updates can be uninstalled prior to the official update deployment I cannot see further risks. When unistalling escrow updates version goes back to 16384 but I'm not sure which procedure takes longer: restore point or uninstall. Didn't check yet
I read in the first post that it's not the final version, but I ask myself if it's the same situation of the leak of Windows 8.1 that was updated with the GA Rollup, or if it's like a beta, that I'll have to uninstall when the official release will becomes available. I also ask myself if I install these updates I will lose the activation of Windows and Office via Microsoft Toolkit 2.5 (WinDivert system) and if I will be able to continue using it after the installation. It may serve, I actually installed Windows 8.1 Enterprise x86 full updated and Office Professional Plus 2013 VL. Sorry my bad English, and, if possible, please answer me by very basic English. Thanks!
guess they will only release VL and enterprises with updates included for better deployment in big companies.
With the work on win 8.1 update almost finished hopefully, will we get some more news about office 2013 sp1. There was a blizzard of news in Nov 2013 about sp1 in early 2014, but since then nothing either from MS or in the media.
I tried with Kaspersky and "system restore" (restore c:\); with Eset, restore C:\. I think update 1 doesn´t like antivirus except windows defender. I update my windows 8.1. Pro, with no antivirus, except windows defender, and works. The only way. Regards.
The whole point of the new (over-engineered) SxS servicing system introduced in Vista is to tackle the dependency problem, so it doesn't surprise me that wz is wrong on this. Also, the SxS servicing system means that there shouldn't be any requirements with respect to install order. You may recall that there were instructions regarding installation order when the GA rollup was leaked months ago, and as it turned out, the installation order didn't matter one bit. I always take install order and dependency instructions with Windows updates with a grain of salt--in virtually all cases, they're actually not applicable.
all that AV crap is only biz for some big companies, slows down your machine and ALL of them cannot detect zero-day exploits. These are the dangerous ones and the signature needs to be updated to AV database. At that point it can be too late. All older signatures or the majority of them also can be found in the MS-AV machine that comes with the os and is updated on a daily base. This one does not affect os performance and has a very small footprint. If someone is afraid of catching something from the Internet he can use sandboxie and some brain, that's all
yep, the one which comes with the system, nothing more .... and I never had any kind of malicious stuff on any of my machines since W3.1
dammit. i was hoping to install 8.1 vl iso today but i guess i should hold out for 8.1.1 vl iso in a month or so