A translation to a person in charge of patch management.

re: A translation to a person in charge of patch management.

Joe_Raby — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 01:57:47 GMT

BTW: Do you ever notice that if you use Quicktime and install the (default option) Apple Software Update, that only the iTunes+QT package is listed? I honestly think that the thing doesn't even track QT updates, but only iTunes ones. If you only use QT, take my advice, and DON'T INSTALL APPLE SOFTWARE UPDATE - it does nothing for those that don't want iTunes.

re: A translation to a person in charge of patch management.

Craig Brown — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 12:19:33 GMT

Apple have crossed the line with this one. Where does it end?

Say I have an antivirus program when I update is it OK for said company to install all there other software. If I take, for example, Symantec. I currently run Backup Exec on my server. Would it be OK for Symantec to install all there other server based programs (admittedly they would be trial versions) when I do this. Clearly the answer is NO.

I would just like it if there was a simple way for end users to keep there systems up to date with the applications they do have installed. It been a long time, if ever, since I have seen a fully patched home user system. If im lucky they have Windows update turned and may even be updating there virus scanner but undoubtly they will have insecure applications such as older versions of java, flash, quicktime just to name a few.

This has to stop. It is impossible for end users to keep a machine

re: A translation to a person in charge of patch management.

Matthew Clapham — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 03:36:51 GMT

Apple sure doesn't understand enterprise usage scenarios even though some of their technologies are used in an enterprise (e.g. QT). It'd be nice if they could hop on board the WSUS train or something like that. I got so sick and tired of the Apple updated fiascos, I kicked it out of the home network. No content is so compelling as to put up with that. Furthermore, even in environments where the user doesn't have administrative rights the Apple Updater tries to push updates (and it isn't anywhere near as smoot an experience as Windows Update on Vista).

Also, I'd much rather have IE or Firefox as a browser than Safari. The former two browsers have been around much longer and have their security improvements much further along (with IE 7 in Windows Vista being the best given the protected mode). Last I heard, Safari was still reinventing some of the same bugs that IE had fixed back in the version 5.5 days.