Cumulative Security Update (KB912812)

Can someone please tell Microsoft that the (KB912812) update for Internet
Explorer is the most annoying update ever. Now whenever you roll over a flash
object on a webpage you get an annoying border around it and a tag that
explains that you are rolling over an activeX control. Also Quicktime movies
are seen as activeX controls and need your permission to play with a dialog
screen.

In my opinion this ruins the whole web experience. It used to be seemless.

Microsoft need to create a patch to change (KB912812) back to a normal web
experience.

I think M$ have posted at patch for this... look at...

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/917425

I have not yet installed any of the April Updates which seem to have
loads of problems...


=======On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:38:01 -0700, Dustin Liquid <Dustin
> wrote:=========

>Can someone please tell Microsoft that the (KB912812) update for Internet
>Explorer is the most annoying update ever. Now whenever you roll over a flash
>object on a webpage you get an annoying border around it and a tag that
>explains that you are rolling over an activeX control. Also Quicktime movies
>are seen as activeX controls and need your permission to play with a dialog
>screen.
>
>In my opinion this ruins the whole web experience. It used to be seemless.
>
>Microsoft need to create a patch to change (KB912812) back to a normal web
>experience.

Thanks Richard......I will try this patch. But I still don't know what MS is
thinking with these latest updates. Are they trying to discourage people from
using Flash or Quicktime on their sites?

"Richard Schafer" wrote:

> I think M$ have posted at patch for this... look at...
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/917425
>
> I have not yet installed any of the April Updates which seem to have
> loads of problems...
>
>
> =======On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:38:01 -0700, Dustin Liquid <Dustin
> > wrote:=========
>
> >Can someone please tell Microsoft that the (KB912812) update for Internet
> >Explorer is the most annoying update ever. Now whenever you roll over a flash
> >object on a webpage you get an annoying border around it and a tag that
> >explains that you are rolling over an activeX control. Also Quicktime movies
> >are seen as activeX controls and need your permission to play with a dialog
> >screen.
> >
> >In my opinion this ruins the whole web experience. It used to be seemless.
> >
> >Microsoft need to create a patch to change (KB912812) back to a normal web
> >experience.
>
>

I believe this patch contains IE behavior modification because of
onfringment litigation against M$...

If true, it's another example of M$ sneaking in non-security
modifications in "security patches"...

========On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:32:01 -0700, Dustin Liquid
<> wrote:========

>Thanks Richard......I will try this patch. But I still don't know what MS is
>thinking with these latest updates. Are they trying to discourage people from
>using Flash or Quicktime on their sites?
>
>"Richard Schafer" wrote:
>
>> I think M$ have posted at patch for this... look at...
>>
>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/917425
>>
>> I have not yet installed any of the April Updates which seem to have
>> loads of problems...
>>
>>
>> =======On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:38:01 -0700, Dustin Liquid <Dustin
>> > wrote:=========
>>
>> >Can someone please tell Microsoft that the (KB912812) update for Internet
>> >Explorer is the most annoying update ever. Now whenever you roll over a flash
>> >object on a webpage you get an annoying border around it and a tag that
>> >explains that you are rolling over an activeX control. Also Quicktime movies
>> >are seen as activeX controls and need your permission to play with a dialog
>> >screen.
>> >
>> >In my opinion this ruins the whole web experience. It used to be seemless.
>> >
>> >Microsoft need to create a patch to change (KB912812) back to a normal web
>> >experience.
>>
>>

917425 is a temporary, compatibility patch & the behavior after installing
912812 is intentional. See
http://msmvps.com/blogs/spywaresucks.../20/87056.aspx & ff.
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE, Shell/User, Security), Aumha.org VSOP, DTS-L.org

Richard Schafer wrote:
> I think M$ have posted at patch for this... look at...
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/917425
>
> I have not yet installed any of the April Updates which seem to have
> loads of problems...
>
>
> =======On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:38:01 -0700, Dustin Liquid <Dustin
> > wrote:=========
>
> > Can someone please tell Microsoft that the (KB912812) update for
> > Internet Explorer is the most annoying update ever. Now whenever you
> > roll over a flash object on a webpage you get an annoying border around
> > it and a tag that explains that you are rolling over an activeX
> > control. Also Quicktime movies are seen as activeX controls and need
> > your permission to play with a dialog screen.
> >
> > In my opinion this ruins the whole web experience. It used to be
> > seemless.
> >
> > Microsoft need to create a patch to change (KB912812) back to a normal
> > web experience.

C'mon my dearest Bear,
You can't be serious! You mean you think M$ intentionally
released a critical update for the purpose of breaking people's
computers?

<*((((><{


PS: You owe an apology to Feundi

In the last exciting episode on Fri, 14 Apr 2006 01:21:28 -0400, "PA
Bear" <> wrote:

>917425 is a temporary, compatibility patch & the behavior after installing
>912812 is intentional. See
>http://msmvps.com/blogs/spywaresucks.../20/87056.aspx & ff.

<*(((><{ <*(((> wrote:

> You can't be serious! You mean you think M$ intentionally
> released a critical update for the purpose of breaking people's
> computers?

Yes, as a result of the Eolas patent claim against Microsoft.

--
Robin Walker [MVP Networking]

Oh, I see. As a result of M$'s illegal infringement of somebody
else's patent, they had to release a "critical" update that screwed
their customers a second time.

Why don't they say so in their "bulletins?" Why don't they tell us
that the "critical" update is designed to get M$ to stop behaving
illegally, and and by installing it, no additional security will inure
to the customer, and that the customer must be prepared to obtain
software for functionality elsewhere. And then tell us where,
elsewhere.


<*((((><{





In the last exciting episode on Thu, 25 May 2006 11:55:20 +0100,
"Robin Walker [MVP]" <> wrote:

><*(((><{ <*(((> wrote:
>
>> You can't be serious! You mean you think M$ intentionally
>> released a critical update for the purpose of breaking people's
>> computers?
>
>Yes, as a result of the Eolas patent claim against Microsoft.

Stay outta my pond, Fishy!

<*(((><{ wrote:
> C'mon my dearest Bear,
> You can't be serious! You mean you think M$ intentionally
> released a critical update for the purpose of breaking people's
> computers?
>
> <*((((><{
>
>
> PS: You owe an apology to Feundi
>
> In the last exciting episode on Fri, 14 Apr 2006 01:21:28 -0400, "PA
> Bear" <> wrote:
>
> > 917425 is a temporary, compatibility patch & the behavior after
> > installing 912812 is intentional. See
> > http://msmvps.com/blogs/spywaresucks.../20/87056.aspx & ff.

You've been sarcastic to me and so I have to get even.

<*((((><{



In the last exciting episode on Thu, 25 May 2006 20:01:41 -0400, "PA
Bear" <> wrote:

>Stay outta my pond, Fishy!
>
><*(((><{ wrote:
>> C'mon my dearest Bear,
>> You can't be serious! You mean you think M$ intentionally
>> released a critical update for the purpose of breaking people's
>> computers?
>>
>> <*((((><{
>>
>>
>> PS: You owe an apology to Feundi
>>
>> In the last exciting episode on Fri, 14 Apr 2006 01:21:28 -0400, "PA
>> Bear" <> wrote:
>>
>> > 917425 is a temporary, compatibility patch & the behavior after
>> > installing 912812 is intentional. See
>> > http://msmvps.com/blogs/spywaresucks.../20/87056.aspx & ff.