AutoPatcher no longer allowed


Recommended Posts

Fake in as much that it didn't come from the AutoPatcher team. There were a couple of underground groups releasing unofficial updates, but these should not be used unless you're willing to to trawl through each update, verifying the digital signatures, and examining the modules to make sure that they don't do anything malicious... which is a pain in the arse and the time you spend doing that could just be spent updating via Windows Update to be honest.

i dont know if its legal in this form but im gonna post the torrent link to the "sep07" patch that u D/L so u can judge...

http://www.mininova.org/tor/895287

and btw this is the AUG07 patch

http://www.mininova.org/tor/853482

kindda has the same name...

thats why i though the sep07 was official

ok but what do u think about that patch?

It was compiled by a group of people who wanted to keep the project going underground. I can't vouch for its integrity, and I don't have the time to go through inspecting digital signatures.

why not make this statement on the main page, so people know before they waste their time signing up into the forums?

just as retarded as microsofts themselves

You mean like Page News item that was pinned for that week?

Or like this pinned thread redirect from the very topmost item on the main Forum page?

Or how the Neowin-sponsored Autopatcher site has this information?

Anything like those methods, you think?

Well this is another reason that I just don't understand Microsoft. I do understand their reasons though. I hear he is making another version that downloads the files straight off Microsoft's site so it would be genuine.

I could be completely wrong here but perhaps the real reason behind this is SP3 (for XP)? as in since SP3 is essentially just all the updates for XP from SP2 onwards and nothing new (correct me if I'm wrong) and they feel AP would undermind SP3 so they decided to stop AP?? but this is only what I think so take with a grain of salt.

They were making a profit off the cds/dvds they sold, thus they were reselling Microsoft code and making a profit.

I'm guessing if they hadn't made the CDs and SOLD them, they probably wouldn't have drawn ire (or, at least not yet). How is Microsoft not allowing an unlicensed 3rd party to resell their code "pulling crap"? If you resold Citrix hotfixes (for a profit, no less) on CD, would it not be OK if Citrix forced you to stop?

  • 2 weeks later...
They were making a profit off the cds/dvds they sold, thus they were reselling Microsoft code and making a profit.

I'm guessing if they hadn't made the CDs and SOLD them, they probably wouldn't have drawn ire (or, at least not yet). How is Microsoft not allowing an unlicensed 3rd party to resell their code "pulling crap"? If you resold Citrix hotfixes (for a profit, no less) on CD, would it not be OK if Citrix forced you to stop?

Shipping/cost of CDs != free.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.