Question about TimeZone Update Patches

[sam13484]

I think the following patches both deal with the new Time Zone changes:

KB928388

KB931836

Can someone tell me if both are needed, or the differences between them?

Thanks.

[jcarle]

I think the following patches both deal with the new Time Zone changes:

KB928388

KB931836

Can someone tell me if both are needed, or the differences between them?

Thanks.

If you Googled for your answer, you would quickly read the following for KB931836... "This update supersedes and replaces update 928388, released in November 2006.". Please take the time to do a little research before posting.

[erpdude8]

jcarle and sam13484,

The KB931836 updates for Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 replace the KB928388 and KB929120 updates.

So the latest update is KB931836. No need to install the older Timezone patches.

Also, a Windows 2000 version of the KB931836 update is available but Win2000 users will need to ask Microsoft support for it.

MDGx has a copy of the Win2k KB931836 patch here:

http://www.mdgx.com/files/2K931836.EXE

Not sure why MS has to require Win2k users to contact them for it instead of making it publicly available. geez.

Edited April 18, 2007 by erpdude8

[cluberti]

Not sure why MS has to require Win2k users to contact them for it instead of making it publicly available. geez.

Because it wasn't free - it was $4K. MDGx should probably at least consider taking those patches down, as they aren't even privates, they're pay-for-fix hotfixes.

[jcarle]

Because it wasn't free - it was $4K. MDGx should probably at least consider taking those patches down, as they aren't even privates, they're pay-for-fix hotfixes.

Are you serious?

Are we talking $4000 for development costs or $4000 to the end-users?

[cluberti]

Are you serious?

Are we talking $4000 for development costs or $4000 to the end-users?

Yes - these were NON-security updates, and thus were not publicly released. Customers wishing for DST patches (whether W2K or Exchange 2K) needed to pay $4K USD to get them (NT4 and Exchange 5.5 were more expensive, BTW, as they were out of even extended support).

[jcarle]

Are you serious?

Are we talking $4000 for development costs or $4000 to the end-users?

Yes - these were NON-security updates, and thus were not publicly released. Customers wishing for DST patches (whether W2K or Exchange 2K) needed to pay $4K USD to get them (NT4 and Exchange 5.5 were more expensive, BTW, as they were out of even extended support).

Umm... who in there right mind would pay $4000 just to be able to have the correct time in W2K? Wouldn't it just be cheaper to upgrade to XP?

[cluberti]

I hope that's not a serious question - there are customers out there still running 100s of thousands of NT4 boxes. 4K for patches they can deploy to all those machines automatically, or pay admins hourly (at whatever rate) to do it manually, to all 100s of thousands of boxes (there were other alternatives, but not as easy as a hotfix). Which is actually cheaper?

[jcarle]

I hope that's not a serious question - there are customers out there still running 100s of thousands of NT4 boxes. 4K for patches they can deploy to all those machines automatically, or pay admins hourly (at whatever rate) to do it manually, to all 100s of thousands of boxes (there were other alternatives, but not as easy as a hotfix). Which is actually cheaper?

To take the 15 mins to use a domain login script and adjust the system time using a valid NTP server?

[cluberti]

Don't think about it in "technical administrator" terms - it's the management that purchases things like this. Why? Because they see the bottom-line (saved money in time, and someone to choke if things go wrong, aka Microsoft).

[jcarle]

Don't think about it in "technical administrator" terms - it's the management that purchases things like this. Why? Because they see the bottom-line (saved money in time, and someone to choke if things go wrong, aka Microsoft).

Corporate bureaucracy will always puzzle me.