Bork Tuesday, Any Problems Yet?

Just updated two W7x64 machines.

First I carefully reviewed the list of proposed updates, finding that, as usual, some previously hidden updates had reappeared. I read this thread and some of the links provided (Woody On Windows rocks!), did some Googling to see what was up with some of these offerings, then went ahead with the download/install after unchecking 3-4 updates on each machine. I only created restore points, but did not do the Macrium image as I often do on Bork Tuesday.

So far, all seems well. Thanks guys for the contributions on this thread!

 

Were you laughing at my sarcasm or the article itself?

FYI: Some users are reporting that this KB has just been resent to them today as a recommended update (pre-checked optional update). The plot thickens !

 

I have not read about any borking yet for the Feb Updates on the internet.

 

Sorry to report that the icon cache rebuild solution did not work for me, stapp. The icon breakage took place again after updating on both computers, and reinstalling Chrome was what repaired it. Deleting IconCache.db and rebooting resulted in no change.

Once again, ongoing Bork Tuesday problem to report... every month the MS updates break my desktop Chrome shortcut icons, effectively changing them from the familiar red/yellow/green/blue ball to a blank, white page icon. The only way I have been able to repair the breakage is to reinstall Chrome. This shortcut icon change happens on two W7x64 computers.

 

Thanks, man. I appreciate the effort. Reinstalling Chrome takes all of about 2 minutes, but it's a mystery I'd like to solve.

 

I just installed the four .net Feb Updates for Win 7 but it did not tell me to restart the computer.

 

I just got a update i think from 2012 after installing the feb updates..It is KB2640148

 

Woody Leonhard ‏@woodyleonhard
What little we know about recommended Windows 7/8.1 update KB 3123862. "Do ya feel lucky, punk?" @infoworld WoW http://www.infoworld.com/article/3031391/microsoft-windows/what-little-we-know-about-recommended-windows-781-update-kb-3123862.html?nsdr=true…

 

Woody Leonhard ‏@woodyleonhard
Office 2010 patch KB 3114750 clobbers Outlook Calendar (again). Midnight appointments get garroted. @infoworld WoW http://www.infoworld.com/article/3032206/microsoft-windows/office-2010-patch-kb-3114750-clobbers-outlook-calendar-again.html?nsdr=true…

 

I didn't, I don't and I won't.

 

http://www.sevenforums.com/news/391...-windows-security-update-release-summary.html

 

Susan Bradley at Windows Secrets always recommends holding back on updates relating to kernel-mode drivers for a couple of weeks pending her further recommendations, and that includes KB3134214 this week.

 

After recent Borkdates history - I hold back on them all for 2 or 3 weeks.

 

Yep so do I.
It wouldn't shock me if M$ would try to put Win 10 updates in the Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool update.

 

Or longer.

 

Don't give them ideas!

 

Do you guys hold back on the updates classified as "important" or "critical"? Or just the "recommended" and "optional" ones?

 

Ok, given how things have been, I guess that makes the most sense. Thanks.

 

Same with innocent looking Windows Update Client updates.

Does anyone of you know (know, not think) whether Windows Update Client updates are cumulative, in the sense that each Windows Update Client update not only contains new changes (such as fixes or improvements) but also contains the same as the previous versions?
Does anyone of you know of any documentation that sheds any light on that question?

I ask because of Windows Update Client versions like the December 2015 version, of which the documentation says "This update enables support for additional upgrade scenarios from Windows [7 or 8.1] to Windows 10 [...]". Because of that, I did not install Update Client December 2015.
But what about Windows Update Client February 2016? That only says "This update contains some improvements to Windows Update Client [...]". Maybe that is fine, but perhaps I wouldn't like Microsoft's so called improvements.
If Windows Update Client updates are cumulative, then installing the February 2016 version would probably also give you the December 2015 contents, "enables support for additional upgrade scenarios [...] to Windows 10", which I don't want at all.

The thought that perhaps Windows Update Client might be cumulative, arose with the July 2015 version.
The Windows Update Client June 2015 documentation was the first that mentioned applying DisableOSUpgrade = 1. The Windows Update Client July 2015 documentation doesn't say anything about applying DisableOSUpgrade = 1. Nevertheless the documentation "How to manage Windows 10 notification and upgrade options" (KB3080351) refers to Windows Update Client July 2015 as required for applying DisableOSUpgrade = 1 by Group Policy, and it does not refer to Windows Update Client June 2015.

That gave me the idea that Windows Update Client might be cumulative, in the sense that each Windows Update Client update also contains the same as the previous versions.
But I have found no documentation that confirms that thought.
Neither have I found any documentation that disclaims that thought.

So I just don't know, and that is why I am asking you - Does anyone know of any documentation that says whether or not Windows Update Client updates are cumulative?

Of course I could keep Windows Update Client October (or was it November?) 2015 as the last allowed Windows Update Client version, but I can imagine that one time there could be some new Windows Update Client version that contains some required fix.

 

This has been my policy for some time now with MS :-

1] Windows Updates set to "Never Notify Me"

2] Bork Tuesday , I check this thread like always .

3] After a MINIMUM of two weeks quarantine , I check for updates manually.

4] I only ever pay attention to updates labelled " Security " , and maybe " Important "

5] Then I check here again , and other places ( eg Woody Leonhard ) looking out for the Habitual Offenders ,
...... coming back to us with " false noses , wigs , and fake beards " .

But it is still way more trouble than it's probably worth !

I've never had cause to change this routine , and I doubt I ever will ..... but I'm seriously thinking of
permanently making it step 1 ( above ) , and leaving it at that !

 

That's a wise policy.