Guest Mark \(MCP\) Posted September 8, 2007 Posted September 8, 2007 It seems whenever some company or someone comes up with a great method of doing things for Windows, Microsoft has to ruin it. I liked AutoPatcher for updating Windows XP computers, especially when it has saved time and allows for updating XP computers that have slower connections. See: http://www.autopatcher.com/134
Guest Maincat Posted September 8, 2007 Posted September 8, 2007 Re: AutoPatcher "Mark (MCP)" <nipperspot-at-gmail-dot-com> wrote in message news:eCvSEqj8HHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > It seems whenever some company or someone comes up with a great method of > doing things for Windows, Microsoft has to ruin it. I liked AutoPatcher > for updating Windows XP computers, especially when it has saved time and > allows for updating XP computers that have slower connections. > > See: > http://www.autopatcher.com/134 > I've never used AutoPatcher - I've never heard of it before - but it does seem that Microsoft's objection was based on copyright. If that's the case, then what's the problem? We do believe in copyright don't we?
Guest Unknown Posted September 8, 2007 Posted September 8, 2007 Re: AutoPatcher What is so great about AutoPatcher? Does it block updating illegal Windows installations? Will it protect all of Microsoft's assets? What about Microsoft's copyrights? XP can be updated with slower connections. You mean dial-up? "Mark (MCP)" <nipperspot-at-gmail-dot-com> wrote in message news:eCvSEqj8HHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > It seems whenever some company or someone comes up with a great method of > doing things for Windows, Microsoft has to ruin it. I liked AutoPatcher > for updating Windows XP computers, especially when it has saved time and > allows for updating XP computers that have slower connections. > > See: > http://www.autopatcher.com/134 > > >
Recommended Posts