Microsoft Update stopped working in May

MU (http://update.microsoft.com) stopped working following a recent "up"-grade (just another downgrade actually). It was in May IIRC. Now when visiting MU, right after the "Checking if your computer has the latest version..." stage, the process stops with:

"The site cannot continue because one or more of these Windows services is not running... To make sure these services are running: ........."

followed with a list of 12 tasks to do by the customer (the one who paid a lot of money to Microsoft to do this very work).

1) First time I saw this, I first decided that this one was the one too much and that this time I would NOT perform this new layer of stupid useless complication.

I recall that WU (http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com), while officially claimed to SIMPLIFY the Windows update process, actually ADDED complications, to the point that it regularly stopped working on millions PCs.

Plenty people complained, MS would come with complicated workarounds that worked 2 times out of 3. Fortunately during all these years I applied a very simple trick that worked 100% of the times. Any try to suggest or only to show it to MS ended in the usual contempt for customers and refusal without knowing - in their well known acute case of NIH syndrome (Not Invented Here).

Then came MU (http://update.microsoft.com), officially claimed to simplify the update process for ALL the microsoftware(TM) on your computer. The previous flaw was partly corrected, but continued to plague many; fortunately my trick above continued to work 100% of the cases, including the ones when MU didn't. This situation worked flawlessly for a couple years.

Now MS not only adds another layer of gratuitous complications, but requires that THE CUSTOMER does the work FOR WHICH HE PAID MICROSOFT!!

Why doesn't MS make simpler, with a smaller number of simpler services, launching them without requiring the user to manually do the work? Is it so hard to, *at the right time*, ask the user his permission?

So I REFUSED this time to be once more the PAYING SLAVE of stupid bad workers at Redmont (I badly miss the small swift obliging efficient "micro-soft" Albuquerque company... or even the 1993 MS of Win 3.1 for WG). In ancient eras slaves didn't get paid, but at least they had not to pay!

2) After a few weeks I stupidly yielded and did the work requested by the MU page (make sure the 3 services "Automatic Updates", "Background Intelligent Transfer Service", "Event Log", are started; they were already). Unfortunately this didn't solve the problem. Hence I stopped visiting MU (My previous trick was, in this case, irrelevant, so I didn't try it 1st; only when writing this did I just verify that it actually doesn't work).

3) Today I visit again MU and I find that MS still didn't fix this service. I stop visiting it and keep my XP SP2 like it is. I am just reporting FWIW, just in case it meets a positive person at MS or in its NGs (in case there is one left).

4) OU (http://officeupdate.microsoft.com) also fails on the same PC, that has XP Pro, Office 2000 Pro.

5) The above is about my XP Pro laptop. MU and OU still work flawlessly on my good old W2KSP4 desktop. Yes I know, Most Vocal Posters will blame my laptop without thinking or searching any other hypothesis - this is one more reason why I didn't report earier and why I now stopped hoping any help from these once helpful NGs.

Versailles, Fri 11 Jul 2008 09:47:00 +0200

Michel Merlin wrote:
> MU (http://update.microsoft.com) stopped working following a recent
> "up"-grade (just another downgrade actually). It was in May IIRC.
> Now when visiting MU, right after the "Checking if your computer
> has the latest version..." stage, the process stops with:
>
> "The site cannot continue because one or more of these Windows
> services is not running... To make sure these services are running:
> ........."
>
> followed with a list of 12 tasks to do by the customer (the one who
> paid a lot of money to Microsoft to do this very work).
>
> 1) First time I saw this, I first decided that this one was the one
> too much and that this time I would NOT perform this new layer of
> stupid useless complication.
>
> I recall that WU (http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com), while
> officially claimed to SIMPLIFY the Windows update process, actually
> ADDED complications, to the point that it regularly stopped working
> on millions PCs.
>
> Plenty people complained, MS would come with complicated
> workarounds that worked 2 times out of 3. Fortunately during all
> these years I applied a very simple trick that worked 100% of the
> times. Any try to suggest or only to show it to MS ended in the
> usual contempt for customers and refusal without knowing - in their
> well known acute case of NIH syndrome (Not Invented Here).
>
> Then came MU (http://update.microsoft.com), officially claimed to
> simplify the update process for ALL the microsoftware(TM) on your
> computer. The previous flaw was partly corrected, but continued to
> plague many; fortunately my trick above continued to work 100% of
> the cases, including the ones when MU didn't. This situation worked
> flawlessly for a couple years.
>
> Now MS not only adds another layer of gratuitous complications, but
> requires that THE CUSTOMER does the work FOR WHICH HE PAID
> MICROSOFT!!
>
> Why doesn't MS make simpler, with a smaller number of simpler
> services, launching them without requiring the user to manually do
> the work? Is it so hard to, *at the right time*, ask the user his
> permission?
>
> So I REFUSED this time to be once more the PAYING SLAVE of stupid
> bad workers at Redmont (I badly miss the small swift obliging
> efficient "micro-soft" Albuquerque company... or even the 1993 MS
> of Win 3.1 for WG). In ancient eras slaves didn't get paid, but at
> least they had not to pay!
>
> 2) After a few weeks I stupidly yielded and did the work requested
> by the MU page (make sure the 3 services "Automatic Updates",
> "Background Intelligent Transfer Service", "Event Log", are
> started; they were already). Unfortunately this didn't solve the
> problem. Hence I stopped visiting MU (My previous trick was, in
> this case, irrelevant, so I didn't try it 1st; only when writing
> this did I just verify that it actually doesn't work).
>
> 3) Today I visit again MU and I find that MS still didn't fix this
> service. I stop visiting it and keep my XP SP2 like it is. I am
> just reporting FWIW, just in case it meets a positive person at MS
> or in its NGs (in case there is one left).
>
> 4) OU (http://officeupdate.microsoft.com) also fails on the same
> PC, that has XP Pro, Office 2000 Pro.
>
> 5) The above is about my XP Pro laptop. MU and OU still work
> flawlessly on my good old W2KSP4 desktop. Yes I know, Most Vocal
> Posters will blame my laptop without thinking or searching any
> other hypothesis - this is one more reason why I didn't report
> earier and why I now stopped hoping any help from these once
> helpful NGs.
>
> Versailles, Fri 11 Jul 2008 09:47:00 +0200


....

As many will tell you - ignore the title and symptoms listed in the article
referred to. Do method 1 and 2 and see if it fixes your issue whether or
not you repaired anything.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/943144
Try method 1 and try to update*.
If fails - try method 2 and try to update*.

*try to update:
- Visit http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/
- If it asks you to install anything before you see a selection of "Custom"
or "Express" - do so.
- Once you see the "Custom" or "Express" selection, choose "Custom".
- Scan for updates.
- When it lists what it finds - install the critical ones.
- You are generally safe doing the Optional Software Updates. I suggest
avoiding the Optional Hardware Updates completely.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

"Shenan Stanley" <> wrote in message
news:...
** big SNIP **

> - You are generally safe doing the Optional Software Updates. I suggest
> avoiding the Optional Hardware Updates completely.
>
> --
> Shenan Stanley
> MS-MVP

Why are you skittish about Optional Hardware Updates? Would not these
updates be the same ones offered on the manufacturer's website?

curious in Orlando,
- netlink

Shenan wrote:
<snipped>
> - You are generally safe doing the Optional Software Updates. I
> suggest avoiding the Optional Hardware Updates completely.
<snipped>

NetLink_Blue wrote:
> Why are you skittish about Optional Hardware Updates? Would not
> these updates be the same ones offered on the manufacturer's
> website?

They *may* be - but since the company has to submit the update for approval
and it goes through a sometimes lengthy process - by the time it gets up
there - it is likely a version or many versions behind the last release.
This has - in the past - caused people issues such as BSODs and worse.

*Always* get your hardware drivers from the hardware manufacturer - that way
you are guaranteed that you are getting the latest version from someone who
has a vested interest in keeping you happy with the product you are
downloading the driver for. JMHO.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

(Sorry for forgetting that reply for a while - with a benefit: MU now tested OK for 3 more weeks)
---

Thanks a lot Shenan Stanley MS-MVP! Glad to see there are still helpful people around (I actually still hoped!). "Windows Update Agent" fixed Microsoft Update. Here is how:

On Fri 11 Jul 2008 15:32:53 +0200:

- Method 1: problem unchanged.
- Method 2: downloaded/installed WUA (Windows Update Agent), then MU worked.

So MU installed SP3, then after restart MU installed a dozen more updates. I continue to refuse:

- WMP11
- IE7
- WS4 (After all the problems with WDS3 I want to wait before trying WS4)
- "Backup your system" (now that the net is stripped from freedom of expression, it's no more worth backups)
- "Close all open programs" (XXI-st century, Multi-Tasking, hundreds apps running, "OS" unable to list them)
- "read the EULAs" (none would hold water 1 minute before a real court - assuming such a court still existed)

but I accepted everything else (including of course approving the unread EULAs); all succeeded, unless as usual:

- the optional HW (in my case: Darfon - Other Hardware - Bluetooth Devices - published 7 Sep 2007)
- the 2 never-working "Security Update for .NET Framework" (v1.1sp1 kb928366, v2.0 kb928365)

After 3 weeks now, MU still works OK. Thanks a lot Shenan.

Versailles, Fri 1 Aug 2008 11:19:10 +0200


----- Parent Message (links are clickable) -----
From: Shenan Stanley <>
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof....windowsupdate
Message: news://msnews.microsoft.com/OyNbT9z4...TNGP03.phx.gbl
Sent: Fri 11 Jul 2008 05:17:28 -0500 (10:17:28 GMT)
Subject: Re: Microsoft Update stopped working in May

As many will tell you - ignore the title and symptoms listed in the article referred to. Do method 1 and 2 and see if it fixes your issue whether or not you repaired anything.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/943144
Try method 1 and try to update*.
If fails - try method 2 and try to update*.

*try to update:
- Visit http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/
- If it asks you to install anything before you see a selection of "Custom"or "Express" - do so.
- Once you see the "Custom" or "Express" selection, choose "Custom".
- Scan for updates.
- When it lists what it finds - install the critical ones.
- You are generally safe doing the Optional Software Updates. I suggest avoiding the Optional Hardware Updates completely.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html


----- Parent Message (links are clickable) -----
From: Michel Merlin <>
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof....windowsupdate
Message: news://msnews.microsoft.com/elUlOpy4...TNGP05.phx.gbl
Sent: Fri 11 Jul 2008 09:47:00 +0200
Subject: Microsoft Update stopped working in May

MU (http://update.microsoft.com) stopped working following a recent "up"-grade (just another downgrade actually). It was in May IIRC. Now when visiting MU, right after the "Checking if your computer has the latest version..." stage, the process stops with:

"The site cannot continue because one or more of these Windows services is not running... To make sure these services are running: ........."

followed with a list of 12 tasks to do by the customer (the one who paid a lot of money to Microsoft to do this very work).

1) First time I saw this, I first decided that this one was the one too much and that this time I would NOT perform this new layer of stupid useless complication.

I recall that WU (http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com), while officially claimed to SIMPLIFY the Windows update process, actually ADDED complications, to the point that it regularly stopped working on millions PCs.

Plenty people complained, MS would come with complicated workarounds that worked 2 times out of 3. Fortunately during all these years I applied a very simple trick that worked 100% of the times. Any try to suggest or only to show it to MS ended in the usual contempt for customers and refusal without knowing - in their well known acute case of NIH syndrome (Not Invented Here).

Then came MU (http://update.microsoft.com), officially claimed to simplify the update process for ALL the microsoftware(TM) on your computer. The previous flaw was partly corrected, but continued to plague many; fortunately my trick above continued to work 100% of the cases, including the ones when MU didn't. This situation worked flawlessly for a couple years.

Now MS not only adds another layer of gratuitous complications, but requires that THE CUSTOMER does the work FOR WHICH HE PAID MICROSOFT!!

Why doesn't MS make simpler, with a smaller number of simpler services, launching them without requiring the user to manually do the work? Is it so hard to, *at the right time*, ask the user his permission?

So I REFUSED this time to be once more the PAYING SLAVE of stupid bad workers at Redmont (I badly miss the small swift obliging efficient "micro-soft" Albuquerque company... or even the 1993 MS of Win 3.1 for WG). In ancient eras slaves didn't get paid, but at least they had not to pay!

2) After a few weeks I stupidly yielded and did the work requested by the MU page (make sure the 3 services "Automatic Updates", "Background Intelligent Transfer Service", "Event Log", are started; they were already). Unfortunately this didn't solve the problem. Hence I stopped visiting MU (My previous trick was, in this case, irrelevant, so I didn't try it 1st; only when writing this did I just verify that it actually doesn't work).

3) Today I visit again MU and I find that MS still didn't fix this service. I stop visiting it and keep my XP SP2 like it is. I am just reporting FWIW, just in case it meets a positive person at MS or in its NGs (in case there is one left).

4) OU (http://officeupdate.microsoft.com) also fails on the same PC, that has XP Pro, Office 2000 Pro.

5) The above is about my XP Pro laptop. MU and OU still work flawlessly on my good old W2KSP4 desktop. Yes I know, Most Vocal Posters will blame my laptop without thinking or searching any other hypothesis - this is one more reason why I didn't report earier and why I now stopped hoping any help from these once helpful NGs.

Versailles, Fri 11 Jul 2008 09:47:00 +0200

The HW updates proposed by MS have always been scarce, probably because carefully selected.
For a couple years from the beginning, they were very safe and useful.
In the last years they have become apparently less reliable and less useful, probably for the reasons you are pointing (process too complicated resulting in verification flawed, and in "update" being outdated before published).

Then the very purpose of MU proposing HW updates (i.e. user could rely on it hence save time and risks) is missed. Hence MS should IMO, either review and overhaul the whole MU HW process, or remove it entirely. Otherwise the current situation is only hurting at the same time MS, its users, and all the intermediates (MVPs and other "volunteers").

Versailles, Fri 1 Aug 2008 11:19:35 +0200


----- Parent Message (links are clickable) -----
From: Shenan Stanley <>
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof....windowsupdate
Message: news://msnews.microsoft.com/ecBtU624...TNGP05.phx.gbl
Sent: Fri 11 Jul 2008 10:55:44 -0500 (15:55:44 GMT)
Subject: Re: Microsoft Update stopped working in May

> Why are you skittish about Optional Hardware Updates?
> Would not these updates be the same ones offered on the manufacturer's website?

They *may* be - but since the company has to submit the update for approval and it goes through a sometimes lengthy process - by the time it gets up there - it is likely a version or many versions behind the last release. This has - in the past - caused people issues such as BSODs and worse.

*Always* get your hardware drivers from the hardware manufacturer - that way you are guaranteed that you are getting the latest version from someone who has a vested interest in keeping you happy with the product you are downloading the driver for. JMHO.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html


----- Parent Message (links are clickable) -----
From: NetLink_Blue <>
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof....windowsupdate
Message: news://msnews.microsoft.com/udOKTe24...TNGP05.phx.gbl
Sent: Fri 11 Jul 2008 08:05:33 -0700 (15:05:33 GMT)
Subject: Re: Microsoft Update stopped working in May

> - You are generally safe doing the Optional Software Updates.
> I suggest avoiding the Optional Hardware Updates completely.

Why are you skittish about Optional Hardware Updates?
Would not these updates be the same ones offered on the manufacturer's website?

curious in Orlando,
- netlink


----- Parent Message (links are clickable) -----
From: Shenan Stanley <>
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof....windowsupdate
Message: news://msnews.microsoft.com/OyNbT9z4...TNGP03.phx.gbl
Sent: Fri 11 Jul 2008 05:17:28 -0500 (10:17:28 GMT)
Subject: Re: Microsoft Update stopped working in May

As many will tell you - ignore the title and...