update kees failing to install

Hi, I'm running windows xp home edition service pack 2. The only update
problem I've had is with this one I'm about to explain. I've tried to install
it a few times and it just keeps failing with error code ox800703436. It
downloads the update but cannot install it. The update is for silicon
image,Inc. storage ATI 437A serial ATA controller. Any help will be greatly
appreciated.
--
congoes girl

No experienced user would choose to install a hardware or driver update from
Windows Update. Forget about it.
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE, Shell/User, Security), Aumha.org VSOP, DTS-L.org

congoes girl wrote:
> Hi, I'm running windows xp home edition service pack 2. The only update
> problem I've had is with this one I'm about to explain. I've tried to
> install it a few times and it just keeps failing with error code
> ox800703436. It downloads the update but cannot install it. The update is
> for silicon image,Inc. storage ATI 437A serial ATA controller. Any help
> will be greatly appreciated.

--
congoes girl


"PA Bear" wrote:

> No experienced user would choose to install a hardware or driver update from
> Windows Update. Forget about it.
> --
> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
> MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE, Shell/User, Security), Aumha.org VSOP, DTS-L.org
>
> congoes girl wrote:
> > Hi, I'm running windows xp home edition service pack 2. The only update
> > problem I've had is with this one I'm about to explain. I've tried to
> > install it a few times and it just keeps failing with error code
> > ox800703436. It downloads the update but cannot install it. The update is
> > for silicon image,Inc. storage ATI 437A serial ATA controller. Any help
> > will be greatly appreciated.
>
>

Yeah I'll take you advice and forget about it, Thanks , Obviously if I was a
experienced user I wouldn'y be asking this question in the first place would
I. Can any one tell me why you would not choose to update this from window's
update as it eas window's update who found it for me and said I needed it
through auto upodates. As an unexperienced user I would like to learn why. So
thanks in advance. Perhaps P.A Bear could even elaborate on his answer. Just
an idea hey!
--
congoes girl


"PA Bear" wrote:

> No experienced user would choose to install a hardware or driver update from
> Windows Update. Forget about it.
> --
> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
> MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE, Shell/User, Security), Aumha.org VSOP, DTS-L.org
>
> congoes girl wrote:
> > Hi, I'm running windows xp home edition service pack 2. The only update
> > problem I've had is with this one I'm about to explain. I've tried to
> > install it a few times and it just keeps failing with error code
> > ox800703436. It downloads the update but cannot install it. The update is
> > for silicon image,Inc. storage ATI 437A serial ATA controller. Any help
> > will be greatly appreciated.
>
>

Bear was being rude, but he had a point.

It's partly chicken superstition, partly history and mostly a lot of
bad experience, but in general Microsoft "updates" for hardware items
in support of an established O/S like 32-bit XP tend to be several
releases behind those available on the manufacturer's support site,
and even then are not particularly well tested.

So what happens is that the user installs the update from Microsoft,
finds it doesn't address the immediate problem or causes new ones, and
then gets kicked immediately to the manufacturer who's first line of
defense once you get through to support is the universal "install the
latest driver."

So, Bear could have been civil and pointed out that when Microsoft
Update indicates a new driver is available for your hardware you
should "hide" that item and visit the manufacturer's support site to
obtain updates, et.al., from that source.

He also might have mentioned that unless you are having a specific
problem with the component or hardware subsystem the update applies
to, it is generally good practice to not fix something that isn't
broke.

Regards

On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 06:31:27 -0800, congoes girl
<> wrote:

>Yeah I'll take you advice and forget about it, Thanks , Obviously if I was a
>experienced user I wouldn'y be asking this question in the first place would
>I. Can any one tell me why you would not choose to update this from window's
>update as it eas window's update who found it for me and said I needed it
>through auto upodates. As an unexperienced user I would like to learn why. So
>thanks in advance. Perhaps P.A Bear could even elaborate on his answer. Just
>an idea hey!

Thank you so much you have fully answered my question and politely, I will
take your advice with much gratitude.
perhaps Bear might like to read this little thought and any one else for
that matter....
"Be kinder than necessary, for everyone you meet is fighting some kind of
battle".
--
congoes girl


"Ron Morse" wrote:

> Bear was being rude, but he had a point.
>
> It's partly chicken superstition, partly history and mostly a lot of
> bad experience, but in general Microsoft "updates" for hardware items
> in support of an established O/S like 32-bit XP tend to be several
> releases behind those available on the manufacturer's support site,
> and even then are not particularly well tested.
>
> So what happens is that the user installs the update from Microsoft,
> finds it doesn't address the immediate problem or causes new ones, and
> then gets kicked immediately to the manufacturer who's first line of
> defense once you get through to support is the universal "install the
> latest driver."
>
> So, Bear could have been civil and pointed out that when Microsoft
> Update indicates a new driver is available for your hardware you
> should "hide" that item and visit the manufacturer's support site to
> obtain updates, et.al., from that source.
>
> He also might have mentioned that unless you are having a specific
> problem with the component or hardware subsystem the update applies
> to, it is generally good practice to not fix something that isn't
> broke.
>
> Regards
>
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 06:31:27 -0800, congoes girl
> <> wrote:
>
> >Yeah I'll take you advice and forget about it, Thanks , Obviously if I was a
> >experienced user I wouldn'y be asking this question in the first place would
> >I. Can any one tell me why you would not choose to update this from window's
> >update as it eas window's update who found it for me and said I needed it
> >through auto upodates. As an unexperienced user I would like to learn why. So
> >thanks in advance. Perhaps P.A Bear could even elaborate on his answer. Just
> >an idea hey!
>

This is my first visit to this discussion group. I hope more members are like
Ron and not Mr. Bear. Maybe he was just having a bad day. :-)

Thanks for the explanation, Ron.

Russ
--
The young men know the rules.
The old men know the exceptions.
---Oliver Wendell Holmes


"Ron Morse" wrote:

> Bear was being rude, but he had a point.
>
> It's partly chicken superstition, partly history and mostly a lot of
> bad experience, but in general Microsoft "updates" for hardware items
> in support of an established O/S like 32-bit XP tend to be several
> releases behind those available on the manufacturer's support site,
> and even then are not particularly well tested.
>
> So what happens is that the user installs the update from Microsoft,
> finds it doesn't address the immediate problem or causes new ones, and
> then gets kicked immediately to the manufacturer who's first line of
> defense once you get through to support is the universal "install the
> latest driver."
>
> So, Bear could have been civil and pointed out that when Microsoft
> Update indicates a new driver is available for your hardware you
> should "hide" that item and visit the manufacturer's support site to
> obtain updates, et.al., from that source.
>
> He also might have mentioned that unless you are having a specific
> problem with the component or hardware subsystem the update applies
> to, it is generally good practice to not fix something that isn't
> broke.
>
> Regards
>
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 06:31:27 -0800, congoes girl
> <> wrote:
>
> >Yeah I'll take you advice and forget about it, Thanks , Obviously if I was a
> >experienced user I wouldn'y be asking this question in the first place would
> >I. Can any one tell me why you would not choose to update this from window's
> >update as it eas window's update who found it for me and said I needed it
> >through auto upodates. As an unexperienced user I would like to learn why. So
> >thanks in advance. Perhaps P.A Bear could even elaborate on his answer. Just
> >an idea hey!
>

I think I should say - not that Bear needs me to defend him - that he
is very active here and helps a lot of people, the information he
provides is accurate and (sharply) on point and he is tenacious in
pursuing solutions. He may not have the nicest online persona, but
he's a far cry from the worst, too.

Since this your first visit here I think I should warn you that the
key to success with newsgroups and other online fora is to remember
that no matter what it looks like, it's simply not about you.

I'm pretty sure Bear didn't sit down and tell himself - "Oh Boy! Just
what I've been waiting for all these years...a chance to personally
and intentionally insult, abuse and denigrate the hell out of Congoes
Girl! Whoopee! And, even if he did, it's his problem and there's
nothing she or I or anyone else can do about it from here, anyway.

It's just the way things are. Personally, I blame public education and
the absence of compulsory military service, but that's just me.

And Girl needs to remember that, too. It simply wasn't about her. She
needs to get her head around that or she's going to spend a lot of
time writing whiney little notes. Now, she was perfectly correct to
call Bear out over his lack of explanation and I commend her for doing
so...if you're going to tell people what to do you owe it to them to
tell them why.

On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 07:41:27 -0800, sporty12
<> wrote:

>This is my first visit to this discussion group. I hope more members are like
>Ron and not Mr. Bear. Maybe he was just having a bad day. :-)
>
>Thanks for the explanation, Ron.
>
>Russ