Hello, There has been some debate in the Moderation and Administration team about the removal of Leaked Updates (Before MS officially release them) and Packaged Updates (Updates bundled in a executable format). We couldn't reach a majority decision so hope as this is your forum, you may be able to help us. We couldn't be successful without you and your vote really does count. Please vote in the poll and leave a comment if you wish. Merry Christmas #Edit 1- One vote each and cannot be changed. Make a wise choice. #Edit 2- Please give reasons if giving the answer "No". The poll will run at least until the end of this year.
Yes. Updates are tested and released when MS want them to be. Therefore Leaked Updates are pointless. Packaged Updates also could be made with Viruses...
Please do not remove them. Code: Moderation Request: Please post a reason in this poll if giving a negative vote.
they should be limited. Aka not having 1034 different packs, however im sure lots of people want to have them. Removing leaked updates is (almost) like eventualy removing SP1 when it will leak before it will become "generaly" avilable. Or like removing any leaked stuff for that matter (since most of that stuff was "not aproved by MS" for every day usage)... however like i said it just should be "limited". I personly dont "need" them posted here, since i have my own sources, but im sure for lot of people this is THE source. all leaked win7 beta builds where pointless as well? all leaked office2010 builds are pointless as well? SP1 when it leaked before offical beta will be pointless as well? MSE beta/Live Wave4 (eventualy) is pointless as well? Ye this are "only updates", but its kinda same crap... Its not pointless for some, if someone doesnt want them, then they can simply dont reply in those 2 or 3 topics each month about this "updates".
I vote for "remove" you only need updates from windows updates. Installing leaked updates is a good way too mess your computer up. keep up the good work MDL. Merry Christmas
Thank you for your opinion Solor. I think that those products need updates in beta stages. Windows 7 is a retail product now and isn't being tested.
i have to disagree with this. one of the updates could address an issue with your machine.. and it should be up to the user whether or not to install the update in the first place and arent most of them going to be in SP1?
don't see any reason to pull them... not recently but I've spent hours looking for an update that MS will not provide through public channels. updates like those are generally system specific and most users wouldn't need. if a user is installing it just because it's out there and available then it's on them if it messed up their system. regular public ms updates can screw up your system just as easily...
I voted YES to remove. Just as how we advocate for using images/ISOs from reliable sources with known hashes, these patches cannot be validated similarly. The updates will come in time when MS is ready with them so no need to rush potentially untested updates ... may do more harm than good.
I have never touched any of the updates made available here... if i need one i download it from Microsoft... these post/topics are useless in my opinion
they can be validated with the official ms digital signature but most ppl either A. dont know how to take the time to look or B. dont know how to check for a digital signature
Anything you download and install on your computer prior to official release is suspect. All to often they are still fine tuning the update rite up to release date. You take a big chance in bricking your system. YES - REMOVE
I fall in the "A" category, care to share how to validate leaked patches? I'm thinking that ANY file can be hashed, but of what value is validating the hash of a file that wasn't intended to be used just yet?
Hi, I understand and share your opinion. However, regarding the examples you provide (W7 Beta, SP1, Office 2010 etc.) there is something you miss: they all have official hashes provided by Microsoft, which certify their authenticity. Here we are talking about software for which Microsoft doesn't provide hashes yet. Without hashes, we can't trust the software. It can include trojan horses, rootkits, backdoors, spyware, botnets, keystroke loggers, etc. Who knows? Antivirus might never detect them. Software is based on trust. You install Microsoft software because your trust it (you shouldn't but it's not the topic ), if you don't trust the source or don't have an infallible cryptographic hash value provided by the trusted source, you shouldn't use the so called software.
I don't really care what other people do, as long as they take their actions into account if they encounter problems later on. But I am sick to death of hearing about these unofficial updates. I vote yes to remove, but this should exclude updates which ARE official but are just request only - you know, the ones Microsoft haven't released to Microsoft Update, but for people who have very specific problems, they release patches that they've made so far which solve the problems.
These patches are for very specific issues and you can just request the update through MS support... why not use those...download is much faster then the rapidshare crap eg: KB976092 for SmartCard Corruption / KB976972 for USB issues with NVidia Chipset
I've voted yes. People are coming to here with issues. I want to exclude an unofficial update could be the cause for it. They don't disappear from the net, they do from MDL only. I personally never install unofficial updates. I never have had an issue a unofficial update has resolved. Also most support teams are advising to wait for 'the next official' update to resolve an issue. I have never heard from an advice to install an unofficial update. If I would have to ask for one I would go for M$ site.