Why isn't Windows updated more often?

[jackc]

A dumb question perhaps, but I was just wondering. Is it just too complicated to release more frequent updates/bug fixes? That doesn't seem like a very satisfactory answer, I really don't know.

 

[hodgjy]

Windows releases updates almost every week. They are individual fixes. Service packs, on the other hand, aren't really "new" fixes, but rather are rollups that are easier to deploy on newly configured systems.

 

[Eidorian]

Patch Tuesday works for me.

Not to mention all the Internet Explorer, Office, .NET, Windows Media Player, and Visual Studio updates.

 

[jackc]

Windows releases updates almost every week. They are individual fixes. Service packs, on the other hand, aren't really "new" fixes, but rather are rollups that are easier to deploy on newly configured systems.

Gotcha, I don't use Windows on my own computer so I thought the service packs were the updates. It seemed like people were waiting for SP1, why would that make a difference then in most cases?

 

[kkat69]

Gotcha, I don't use Windows on my own computer so I thought the service packs were the updates. It seemed like people were waiting for SP1, why would that make a difference then in most cases?

Service Packs can sometimes and often does, introduce new things. Like new bugs

The 'urban legend' regarding windows service packs is either every odd or even number (I can't remember which one) introduces more features and obviously more bugs and the next one fixes most of the ones introduced.

Normal updates happen all the time. Service Packs are usually new things (although not much that users can get excited over), more fixes, and a roll up of previous fixes.

 

[steveza]

The golden rule at Microsoft is that OS service packs (SP's) should not contain any new code. In other words SP's should not introduce new functionality, only fixes. Some exceptions to this were XP SP2 and Windows 2003 SP1 which included updated firewall software. New features are normally released via optional downloads in Widows Update or from the MS download centre.

 

[kkat69]

The golden rule at Microsoft is that OS service packs (SP's) should not contain any new code. In other words SP's should not introduce new functionality, only fixes. Some exceptions to this were XP SP2 and Windows 2003 SP1 which included updated firewall software. New features are normally released via optional downloads in Widows Update or from the MS download centre.

Yah, actually before that was about the time the 'urban legend' (for lack of a better expression) surfaced. Prior there wasn't a download center and things were optional yet hard to find and some made their way into SP's with a notable exception "power toys" but some things were introduced in SP's prior to XP.

Heck I really don't care much anymore since Apple Software update does all my software updates now

 

[steveza]

Heck I really don't care much anymore since Apple Software update does all my software updates now

I still have to use MS OSs and probably will for many years to come. It pays the bills for the foreseeable future

 

[kkat69]

I still have to use MS OSs and probably will for many years to come. It pays the bills for the foreseeable future

Same here, since I'm a C# developer I'm stuck, but that's why my company provides me a laptop BUUHAHAHAAAAAAAA (I wish they'd give me a MBP) but yah, I do patch up my windows box and remote desktop in for my C# dev at home unless I do it on my laptop.

 

[The Flashing Fi]

The golden rule at Microsoft is that OS service packs (SP's) should not contain any new code. In other words SP's should not introduce new functionality, only fixes. Some exceptions to this were XP SP2 and Windows 2003 SP1 which included updated firewall software. New features are normally released via optional downloads in Widows Update or from the MS download centre.

Windows Vista SP1 also updated the kernel to the one used in Windows Server 2008.

This didn't happen with XP.