Windows Update KB832483

Topic

New Reply

I have 3 W2K machines at work, and 2 XP machines at home. The latest Windows Update patch prompted me to install it last week (all 5 machines are set to download automatically and prompt to install), which I duly did. Since then, all 3 W2K machines (different hardware in each one – 1 Dell Optiplex, 2 self built) keep prompting me to install it, which I have done so 5 times on one of them. The installation history shows the patch to have been successfully installed, manually downloading the update doesn’t seem to make any difference either. Interestingly, neither XP machine has prompted me to install it more than just the once!
Any ideas as to how to stop this ****** patch from ‘bug’ging me this way?

Reply | Quote

Replies

Take a look at:

Post 330723 and consider abandoning the much glitched, conflicted, never fully developed Windows Update IV until Windows Update V (which Microsoft promises to make one heckuvalotbetter and I believe they will) is available to you in a few months. Meanwhile a very easy alternative to use without all this mess I continue to see–I’d take advantage of these 3 sites:

MS Security Notification Service
Microsoft’s Chronological Security Bulletin List
Microsoft Technet’s Security Bulletin Search

Correcting the Windows Update Problem:[/u]

319109: Windows Update Site Lists Updates That You Already Installed (Written for XP but applies of course to 2K)
Post 330435: Fix Windows Update Multiple Links and Sites.

SMBP

Reply | Quote

Turning off (or uninstalling) Windows Update sounds like a good idea to me, too.

But I’m looking for the answer to another question about KB832483. Is this the update that causes scrolling and page up-down functions to behave in bizarre ways? I remember that one of the recent updates did, and that by uninstalling it, the probelm went away. There was an article about the problem in one of Woody’s email newsletters (which I didn’t save of course!).

If 832483 is the “baddie” I don’t want to install it.

Reply | Quote

Betsy–

Here’s the thread we had on the scrolling problem. It was with Q824145 that came with the November Cumulative update not the January 13, 2004 update you reference hereKB832483 Microsoft Technet Download Bulletin. Create a restore point always when you install these things, because many including this one cannot be uninstalled:

Annoying New Problem after Update… (6 + Q824145)

hth,

SMBP

Reply | Quote

Betsy–

Here’s the thread we had on the scrolling problem. It was with Q824145 that came with the November Cumulative update not the January 13, 2004 update you reference hereKB832483 Microsoft Technet Download Bulletin. Create a restore point always when you install these things, because many including this one cannot be uninstalled:

Annoying New Problem after Update… (6 + Q824145)

hth,

SMBP

Reply | Quote

Yes there was a problem with that fix, but if you were go and get ALL of the critcial updates it will be fixed. But if you do not install all of them and are selective about installing them then you are NOT going to get things updated.

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Yes there was a problem with that fix, but if you were go and get ALL of the critcial updates it will be fixed. But if you do not install all of them and are selective about installing them then you are NOT going to get things updated.

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Betsy, I’d like to humbly disagree with SMBP about Windows Update. In spite of the problems various people have it is the best way for most users to get patches for their systems. You’d have a tough time tracking and finding non-critical but needed patches otherwise. Most users have neither the time, the background, the resources, nor the inclination to do all the footwork to find the fixes that they need. I’ve been using WU on systems at home and work (15 – 20) since it was fisrt released and can only recall one problem in all that time. IMHO, you should stick with it and hope the MS delivers on their promises about improvements in version V.

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

Joe,

I wholeheartedly agree with you. Windows Update may not be perfect but it is simple enough for most users to get it right most of the time.

StuartR

Reply | Quote

Have we considered the middle ground–that is, using Windows Update at regular intervals, but turning off Automatic Update? This is what I tend to do–gives me time to check out what those who have already tried a particular patch have to say about it.

Reply | Quote

A very sound suggestion. Most of us can survive without the patches for a few days whilst others find the buggy ones.

StuartR

Reply | Quote

A very sound suggestion. Most of us can survive without the patches for a few days whilst others find the buggy ones.

StuartR

Reply | Quote

Have we considered the middle ground–that is, using Windows Update at regular intervals, but turning off Automatic Update? This is what I tend to do–gives me time to check out what those who have already tried a particular patch have to say about it.

Reply | Quote

Joe,

I wholeheartedly agree with you. Windows Update may not be perfect but it is simple enough for most users to get it right most of the time.

StuartR

Reply | Quote

I highly respect other opinions but I have to disagree. Compared with the time and the effort and the multiple annoyances that come with using Windows Update up through IV, I don’t feel you have a tough time tracking and finding non-critical but needed patches precisely because there are so few of them and they are in such few predictable categories. I’ve never seen anything more simple, more devoid of tracking anything, more devoid of any footwork, and more devoid of anything remotely resembling a tough time. You may not be able to recall one problem, but put Windows Update into Lounge Search and watch a very long list come up, and I can recall a lot of them for people. It’ll take you quite a while to read the threads.

If someone says the words update or hotfix to me and then uses the phrases “tough time tracking and finding non-critical but needed patches otherwise” and asks me what takes “the time, the background, the resources, nor the inclination to do all the footwork to find the fixes that they need” I have a very quick answer. Two entities–Using Windows Update as it’s configured right now and helping on the Lounge and on the Microsoft Windows Update newsgroup with the never ending problems of Windows Update.

In fact, if you subscribe to Technet’s free service Joe, and I imagine because of what you have had to oversee at work you are familiar with about every permutation and combination of Microsoft patch service and the many 3rd party ones, it is so inclusive that the categories outside don’t require a “time consuming hunt at all.”

Look closely at this. The servers are included, but I’m willing to bet that a lot of home users aren’t connected to those servers but they are there. What’s not?

Notifications Automatically Sent to Your Inbox (No Hunting Whatsoever) via Technet Notification and PGP Signed[/u]

Windows Yup
Office Updates Yup
Office Program Updates Yup
All Servers Yup
Windows Media Hotfixes Yup
IE Yup
OE Yup
Notifications on Spoofs of Microsoft that contain Trojans and or Worms or Viruses Yup

What do you have to go out and look for?[/u]

1) A new Win Media Player version once in three to six years
2) A new Movie Maker version once in three to six years years.
3) Rare Language Modifications

What’s on the Chronilogical Lists I Linked To in Case Someone Has to Reinstall the OS or a Restore Requires Replacing Updates[/u]

Every update or patch that’s been released.[/i]

What do you have to “hunt for that is time consuming?” I could spend a long time hunting for the answer to that. I am having to spend much more time thinking of anything I can put on the list that is time consuming that you have to hunt for. I could spend days, months and years because there just doesn’t seem to be anything that is not included with the short list of exceptions I named.

SMBP

Reply | Quote

SMBP, I think we had a similar discussion in another thread recently. Most users do not want to wade through e-mail notifications from MS or anyone else that there is an update available for some piece of software they are running. The more manual you make the process of notification, deciding whether an update is required, downloading and installation themore likely it is that it is not going to be done. IMHO, you are looking at this from the perspective of an avid power user who wants to know all the ins and outs of what is happening on his PC. Most people don’t want to know and don’t care. They only want something to be fixed when there is a problem. Despite all its warts WU is more than adequate for the vast majority of users. BTW, if you’d look at any of the MS newsgroups you’d think that any MS product is nothing but trouble. Take a look at the general groups for Win2k or XP. The VAST MAJORITY of users do NOT have problems with either the OS or the update process. Last, that does not mean that MS should not be held to account for problems, omissions, or missing features.

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

I agree fully with you that the more manual steps you add, the less compliance you are going to get, and since the overall objective is to make sure people get patched for safety and smooth functioning you are right there. Your perspective that the vast majority of users really do not have many large problems with the update process or the OS as a whole considering the vast complexity involved in writing and coordinating its code is accurate and important.

SMBP

Reply | Quote

Interesting to see all the various viewson WU! Personally, until this particular patch on W2K I have not had a problem with the system, and certainly find it useful to be notified of any so-called critical updates. In fact, I find it a little annoying that my Office XP installation does not do this, and I have to manually check for updates from time to time – once you get used to a little luxury, having to do remember to do it yourself is a pain!
Anyhow, I followed the advice given earlier, and tried manually downloading the update, at which point it would declare itself successfully installed. However, going back to the WU site would again tell me that I needed to install this CU, despite it being listed 7 times in the installation history. Rebooting obviously didn’t help, and the update was not listed under the section described in the Registry, although Service Packs up to SP5 were listed, which was a little odd a I have only installed SP4 – presumably updates later than SP4 are listed under SP5? A search of the whole registry for KB832483 drew a blank also.
Any ideas? It is a little odd that this is happening on 3 separate W2K machines all of which have differing hardware.

Reply | Quote

Thanks for all the opinions and advice about WU. For now, I’ll keep it active because I’m certainly one of the users who won’t bother searching for updates as my non-Microsoft program versions will attest.

Reply | Quote

Thanks for all the opinions and advice about WU. For now, I’ll keep it active because I’m certainly one of the users who won’t bother searching for updates as my non-Microsoft program versions will attest.

Reply | Quote

Adwills–

My information is that Microsoft offersWindows 2000 SP4 as the latest Win 2K SP. There is no SP5 for Windows 2000 right now. The only SP5 I know of is for Windows NT 4.0. Office XP is up to SP2 and MOS 2003 is preparing SP1 for release–I don’t know how fast, but they have a team working on it.

If you want to make certain that you have a Service Pack installed on a 2K machine, and it is not listed in Add/Remove where I would expect all service packs and most but not all hotfixes and patches to be listed go to the place where they are recorded/registered in the Win NT, Win 2K and Win XP Registry:

Hive: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE
Key: SOFTWAREMicrosoftWindows NTCurrentVersionHotfix

Were you looking here in the registry? Let me know and I’ll try to help you make sure it’s in. Also let me know what you mean by the reference to an SP5 or SP4. If you’re talking the Win 2K OS–SP4 is the latest version of that. If I didn’t address all your questions let me know.

SMBP

Reply | Quote

SMBP Yes, I have SP4 installed and have never looked for or tried to install an SP5 from anywhere, but under SoftwareMicrosoftUpdatesWindows 2000 I have SP1, SP4 and SP5 listed. Like I say, updates listed under SP5 I assume to have been released after SP4, so presumably will be included in any SP5 later, so are listed here in the registry?
Looking in the other area of the registry you mention there is no mention of the offending update, and I did try searching the whole registry without success, for KB832483, Q832483 and just 832483 On my XP machines where it has installed successfully, it is listed under SoftwareMicrosoftUpdatesDataAccess
Any ideas?

Reply | Quote

Okay. I see what you mean. Microsoft frequently (I haven’t had time to document this particular tack in Win 2K) will list hotfixes in Add/Remove and the registry key below after a particular SP with the next SP number in them, and I would expect any hotfix to appear in the registry but I’m not sure if that convention will show up there. I know that in Windows XP hotfixes after SP1 have had SP2 in their name configuration in add/remove programs–in anticipation of SP2’s later release. Not every hot fix lists there (the recent Direct X hotfixes for example), but most do. You might also try here which often lists the hotfixes by Q name when you expand the branch and look at the list:

HKEY CURRENT USERSoftwareMicrosoftWindowsCurrentVersionUninstall

You can also try the registry keys listed in Post 301142.

Also there are 3rd party utilities like Aida32 or one I especially like for tracking Hotfixes in an NT kernel registry–Hotfix Control 1.1.4.

Let me know what you find–hth.

SMBP

Reply | Quote

Bizarrely, the problem seems to have gone away. I installed the latest patch for IE6 that the automatic updater prompted me to install, and all 3 W2K machines (so far) no longer prompt me to install the KB832483 update. Bizarre, but I’m happy with the outcome so far.

Reply | Quote

Appreciate the followup–glad things are working.

SMBP

Reply | Quote

Appreciate the followup–glad things are working.

SMBP

Reply | Quote

Bizarrely, the problem seems to have gone away. I installed the latest patch for IE6 that the automatic updater prompted me to install, and all 3 W2K machines (so far) no longer prompt me to install the KB832483 update. Bizarre, but I’m happy with the outcome so far.

Reply | Quote

Okay. I see what you mean. Microsoft frequently (I haven’t had time to document this particular tack in Win 2K) will list hotfixes in Add/Remove and the registry key below after a particular SP with the next SP number in them, and I would expect any hotfix to appear in the registry but I’m not sure if that convention will show up there. I know that in Windows XP hotfixes after SP1 have had SP2 in their name configuration in add/remove programs–in anticipation of SP2’s later release. Not every hot fix lists there (the recent Direct X hotfixes for example), but most do. You might also try here which often lists the hotfixes by Q name when you expand the branch and look at the list:

HKEY CURRENT USERSoftwareMicrosoftWindowsCurrentVersionUninstall

You can also try the registry keys listed in Post 301142.

Also there are 3rd party utilities like Aida32 or one I especially like for tracking Hotfixes in an NT kernel registry–Hotfix Control 1.1.4.

Let me know what you find–hth.

SMBP

Reply | Quote

SMBP Yes, I have SP4 installed and have never looked for or tried to install an SP5 from anywhere, but under SoftwareMicrosoftUpdatesWindows 2000 I have SP1, SP4 and SP5 listed. Like I say, updates listed under SP5 I assume to have been released after SP4, so presumably will be included in any SP5 later, so are listed here in the registry?
Looking in the other area of the registry you mention there is no mention of the offending update, and I did try searching the whole registry without success, for KB832483, Q832483 and just 832483 On my XP machines where it has installed successfully, it is listed under SoftwareMicrosoftUpdatesDataAccess
Any ideas?

Reply | Quote

Adwills–

My information is that Microsoft offersWindows 2000 SP4 as the latest Win 2K SP. There is no SP5 for Windows 2000 right now. The only SP5 I know of is for Windows NT 4.0. Office XP is up to SP2 and MOS 2003 is preparing SP1 for release–I don’t know how fast, but they have a team working on it.

If you want to make certain that you have a Service Pack installed on a 2K machine, and it is not listed in Add/Remove where I would expect all service packs and most but not all hotfixes and patches to be listed go to the place where they are recorded/registered in the Win NT, Win 2K and Win XP Registry:

Hive: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE
Key: SOFTWAREMicrosoftWindows NTCurrentVersionHotfix

Were you looking here in the registry? Let me know and I’ll try to help you make sure it’s in. Also let me know what you mean by the reference to an SP5 or SP4. If you’re talking the Win 2K OS–SP4 is the latest version of that. If I didn’t address all your questions let me know.

SMBP

Reply | Quote

Interesting to see all the various viewson WU! Personally, until this particular patch on W2K I have not had a problem with the system, and certainly find it useful to be notified of any so-called critical updates. In fact, I find it a little annoying that my Office XP installation does not do this, and I have to manually check for updates from time to time – once you get used to a little luxury, having to do remember to do it yourself is a pain!
Anyhow, I followed the advice given earlier, and tried manually downloading the update, at which point it would declare itself successfully installed. However, going back to the WU site would again tell me that I needed to install this CU, despite it being listed 7 times in the installation history. Rebooting obviously didn’t help, and the update was not listed under the section described in the Registry, although Service Packs up to SP5 were listed, which was a little odd a I have only installed SP4 – presumably updates later than SP4 are listed under SP5? A search of the whole registry for KB832483 drew a blank also.
Any ideas? It is a little odd that this is happening on 3 separate W2K machines all of which have differing hardware.

Reply | Quote

I agree fully with you that the more manual steps you add, the less compliance you are going to get, and since the overall objective is to make sure people get patched for safety and smooth functioning you are right there. Your perspective that the vast majority of users really do not have many large problems with the update process or the OS as a whole considering the vast complexity involved in writing and coordinating its code is accurate and important.

SMBP

Reply | Quote

SMBP, I think we had a similar discussion in another thread recently. Most users do not want to wade through e-mail notifications from MS or anyone else that there is an update available for some piece of software they are running. The more manual you make the process of notification, deciding whether an update is required, downloading and installation themore likely it is that it is not going to be done. IMHO, you are looking at this from the perspective of an avid power user who wants to know all the ins and outs of what is happening on his PC. Most people don’t want to know and don’t care. They only want something to be fixed when there is a problem. Despite all its warts WU is more than adequate for the vast majority of users. BTW, if you’d look at any of the MS newsgroups you’d think that any MS product is nothing but trouble. Take a look at the general groups for Win2k or XP. The VAST MAJORITY of users do NOT have problems with either the OS or the update process. Last, that does not mean that MS should not be held to account for problems, omissions, or missing features.

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

I highly respect other opinions but I have to disagree. Compared with the time and the effort and the multiple annoyances that come with using Windows Update up through IV, I don’t feel you have a tough time tracking and finding non-critical but needed patches precisely because there are so few of them and they are in such few predictable categories. I’ve never seen anything more simple, more devoid of tracking anything, more devoid of any footwork, and more devoid of anything remotely resembling a tough time. You may not be able to recall one problem, but put Windows Update into Lounge Search and watch a very long list come up, and I can recall a lot of them for people. It’ll take you quite a while to read the threads.

If someone says the words update or hotfix to me and then uses the phrases “tough time tracking and finding non-critical but needed patches otherwise” and asks me what takes “the time, the background, the resources, nor the inclination to do all the footwork to find the fixes that they need” I have a very quick answer. Two entities–Using Windows Update as it’s configured right now and helping on the Lounge and on the Microsoft Windows Update newsgroup with the never ending problems of Windows Update.

In fact, if you subscribe to Technet’s free service Joe, and I imagine because of what you have had to oversee at work you are familiar with about every permutation and combination of Microsoft patch service and the many 3rd party ones, it is so inclusive that the categories outside don’t require a “time consuming hunt at all.”

Look closely at this. The servers are included, but I’m willing to bet that a lot of home users aren’t connected to those servers but they are there. What’s not?

Notifications Automatically Sent to Your Inbox (No Hunting Whatsoever) via Technet Notification and PGP Signed[/u]

Windows Yup
Office Updates Yup
Office Program Updates Yup
All Servers Yup
Windows Media Hotfixes Yup
IE Yup
OE Yup
Notifications on Spoofs of Microsoft that contain Trojans and or Worms or Viruses Yup

What do you have to go out and look for?[/u]

1) A new Win Media Player version once in three to six years
2) A new Movie Maker version once in three to six years years.
3) Rare Language Modifications

What’s on the Chronilogical Lists I Linked To in Case Someone Has to Reinstall the OS or a Restore Requires Replacing Updates[/u]

Every update or patch that’s been released.[/i]

What do you have to “hunt for that is time consuming?” I could spend a long time hunting for the answer to that. I am having to spend much more time thinking of anything I can put on the list that is time consuming that you have to hunt for. I could spend days, months and years because there just doesn’t seem to be anything that is not included with the short list of exceptions I named.

SMBP

Reply | Quote

Betsy, I’d like to humbly disagree with SMBP about Windows Update. In spite of the problems various people have it is the best way for most users to get patches for their systems. You’d have a tough time tracking and finding non-critical but needed patches otherwise. Most users have neither the time, the background, the resources, nor the inclination to do all the footwork to find the fixes that they need. I’ve been using WU on systems at home and work (15 – 20) since it was fisrt released and can only recall one problem in all that time. IMHO, you should stick with it and hope the MS delivers on their promises about improvements in version V.

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

Turning off (or uninstalling) Windows Update sounds like a good idea to me, too.

But I’m looking for the answer to another question about KB832483. Is this the update that causes scrolling and page up-down functions to behave in bizarre ways? I remember that one of the recent updates did, and that by uninstalling it, the probelm went away. There was an article about the problem in one of Woody’s email newsletters (which I didn’t save of course!).

If 832483 is the “baddie” I don’t want to install it.

Reply | Quote

Take a look at:

Post 330723 and consider abandoning the much glitched, conflicted, never fully developed Windows Update IV until Windows Update V (which Microsoft promises to make one heckuvalotbetter and I believe they will) is available to you in a few months. Meanwhile a very easy alternative to use without all this mess I continue to see–I’d take advantage of these 3 sites:

MS Security Notification Service
Microsoft’s Chronological Security Bulletin List
Microsoft Technet’s Security Bulletin Search

Correcting the Windows Update Problem:[/u]

319109: Windows Update Site Lists Updates That You Already Installed (Written for XP but applies of course to 2K)
Post 330435: Fix Windows Update Multiple Links and Sites.

SMBP

Reply | Quote