|
|
Why oh why was this feature not made available? If it is, can someone please
explain how to do so. Example: I have several older computers running XP
Pro that I don't want to install IE7 on. If I install IE7 on them they
become so slow that they are unusable and some legacy programs will cease to
function with IE7 installed. So I put them in a group I call "No IE7". I
would like to decline the update for IE7 to that group so I don't see them as
"needing" the update all the time. Is there a way that this can be done
without declining the update for all current and future computers I add to
the domain? Thank you for your help.
|
|
"Pappy" <Pappy[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5C1F7A3D-6096-482C-B193-D8941AF9E2E2[ at ]microsoft.com...
[Quoted Text] > Why oh why was this feature not made available?
Because you misunderstand the difference between the term DECLINE and NOT
APPROVED.
> Example: I have several older computers running XP
> Pro that I don't want to install IE7 on.
A legitimate desire, no doubt.
> So I put them in a group I call "No IE7".
Makes perfect sense to me!
> I would like to decline the update for IE7 to that group so I don't see
> them as
> "needing" the update all the time.
Aha.... yes.. the standard "It shows me everything that's needed but not
approved" problem.
> Is there a way that this can be done
> without declining the update for all current and future computers I add to
> the domain?
Create a Custom View under the Updates node called "XP with No IE7".
Configure it to show the status of "Updates approved for a specific group"
and select the "No IE7" group. Select "Updates are for a specific product"
and select "Windows XP". And, if desired, select "Updates are in a specific
classification" and select the classifications you're concerned with. Now,
go back to the "Updates" node, and look at the new pie chart labelled "XP
with No IE7" -- see how pretty and all green it is. :-)
For example, I have two standard views in my system called "Approved CritSec
Updates" and "Approved Other Updates". The former ("Approved CritSec
Updates") is enabled for all active groups (not including Unassigned
Computers, my UnderConstruction group, or my test group), classifications
"Critical Updates" and "Security Updates". This is the primary pie I look at
on my screen. If it's all green, everything else is busy work. If it's 3/4
yellow (like it is tonight), then I go searching for the computer(s) that
haven't been updated.
--
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP
Independent WSUS Evangelist
MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007)
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D095EB07B36E
Everything you need for WSUS is at
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/technologies/featured/wsus/default.mspx
And, almost everything else is at
http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
.....
|
|
Thank you Lawrence for your advice but I already knew how to do that. You
could have been a little less sarcastic though. I did not misunderstand the
difference between the terms Decline and Not Approved I understand them very
well. All I want is a simple way to tell the GUI that I know the updates are
not approved for that specific group and to stop telling me that the
computers in that group need updates.
Your solution prevents the "needed" updates from showing up when you are
viewing the pie charts in the Updates node but but when you are viewing pie
charts in the computer groups node it still shows those computers as needing
the updates. That is where the problem lies and confusion can set in. This
confusion can quickly get out of hand as new updates are released by MS or
when I need to prevent other upgrades from being installed for the group. I
should be able to simply decline updates at the group or even computer level
so I don't get bothered by it anymore. I shouldn't have to see they are
needed in one view and not needed in another view. This could be solved by
allowing me to approve or decline the installation for specific groups which
really it makes sense. I don't know why MS would give me the option to
approve per group but not decline per group.
The legitimate desire for not putting IE7 on these computers is that they
are old and slow. They barely handle XP. I tried putting IE7 on them and
they were unusable. They will be upgraded in the future so that is not a
concern. I'm glad my "NO IE7" makes perfect sense to you, I thought of that
one all by myself.
[Quoted Text] > Aha.... yes.. the standard "It shows me everything that's needed but not
> approved" problem.
If this is such a standard problem then that shows the way the GUI was
designed did not have the end user in mind. I shouldn't have to make custom
views to show something as basic as this. When I look at the pretty little
pie charts they should clearly tell me at a glance what updates are needed by
computers based on what has been detected AND (key word and) what I have
approved/declined for installation depending on group membership.
"Lawrence Garvin (MVP)" wrote:
> "Pappy" <Pappy[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5C1F7A3D-6096-482C-B193-D8941AF9E2E2[ at ]microsoft.com...
> > Why oh why was this feature not made available?
>
> Because you misunderstand the difference between the term DECLINE and NOT
> APPROVED.
>
>
> > Example: I have several older computers running XP
> > Pro that I don't want to install IE7 on.
>
> A legitimate desire, no doubt.
>
>
> > So I put them in a group I call "No IE7".
>
> Makes perfect sense to me!
>
>
> > I would like to decline the update for IE7 to that group so I don't see
> > them as
> > "needing" the update all the time.
>
> Aha.... yes.. the standard "It shows me everything that's needed but not
> approved" problem.
>
>
> > Is there a way that this can be done
> > without declining the update for all current and future computers I add to
> > the domain?
>
> Create a Custom View under the Updates node called "XP with No IE7".
> Configure it to show the status of "Updates approved for a specific group"
> and select the "No IE7" group. Select "Updates are for a specific product"
> and select "Windows XP". And, if desired, select "Updates are in a specific
> classification" and select the classifications you're concerned with. Now,
> go back to the "Updates" node, and look at the new pie chart labelled "XP
> with No IE7" -- see how pretty and all green it is. :-)
>
> For example, I have two standard views in my system called "Approved CritSec
> Updates" and "Approved Other Updates". The former ("Approved CritSec
> Updates") is enabled for all active groups (not including Unassigned
> Computers, my UnderConstruction group, or my test group), classifications
> "Critical Updates" and "Security Updates". This is the primary pie I look at
> on my screen. If it's all green, everything else is busy work. If it's 3/4
> yellow (like it is tonight), then I go searching for the computer(s) that
> haven't been updated.
>
> --
> Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP
> Independent WSUS Evangelist
> MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007)
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D095EB07B36E
>
> Everything you need for WSUS is at
> http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/technologies/featured/wsus/default.mspx
>
> And, almost everything else is at
> http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
> .....
>
>
>
|
|
"Pappy" <Pappy[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9030D14C-C80D-4B39-AA4C-AD9AC322429A[ at ]microsoft.com...
[Quoted Text] > Thank you Lawrence for your advice but I already knew how to do that. You
> could have been a little less sarcastic though.
My apologies. There was no sarcasm intended, and I'm afraid, upon re-reading
my post, I'm unable to identify where any might have been perceived.
> All I want is a simple way to tell the GUI that I know the updates are
> not approved for that specific group and to stop telling me that the
> computers in that group need updates.
And I explained the solution: Create a Custom Update View. Works like a
charm!
> Your solution prevents the "needed" updates from showing up when you are
> viewing the pie charts in the Updates node but but when you are viewing
> pie
> charts in the computer groups node it still shows those computers as
> needing
> the updates.
Yep.. and nothing in my solution stated, or implied, that there was any
possible solution for use in the =Computers= node.
> That is where the problem lies and confusion can set in. This
> confusion can quickly get out of hand as new updates are released by MS or
> when I need to prevent other upgrades from being installed for the group.
> I
> should be able to simply decline updates at the group or even computer
> level
> so I don't get bothered by it anymore.
Well, ya can't, and that's a fundamental design parameter of the product.
Declined means NEVER GONNA INSTALL NO WAY NO HOW and is *NOT* a group
specific configuration option. Not Approved means THIS GROUP isn't going to
install, but I might want to change my mind.
There's no further point in discussing *this* particular consideration,
because I'm fairly confident that there's not a hope in the world that
"Decline By Group" will ever be in the feature set. It's redundant, and
pointless, IMO.
>> Aha.... yes.. the standard "It shows me everything that's needed but not
>> approved" problem.
> If this is such a standard problem then that shows the way the GUI was
> designed did not have the end user in mind.
You can think what you want... but the conversation has been going on for
six months now. Try researching the history via Google Groups in this
newsgroup, and then I'll be happy to continue the discussion once you're up
to speed on the whole story. Be sure to research the discussions about the
negative side effects of hiding the "Needed/Not Approved" updates from the
console, while you're at it.
The fact is, there's an even split, methinks, on whether this is a "good"
thing, or a "bad" thing. The original reaction was that it was a "bad"
thing. Now that I've thought about it for six months, I wouldn't change a
thing. I think that it's critically important that the 'dashboard view'
makes me immediately aware that everything is *not* perfect, than
artifically lead me into believing that it is.
> I shouldn't have to make custom
> views to show something as basic as this.
It's all a matter of personal preference.
> When I look at the pretty little
> pie charts they should clearly tell me at a glance what updates are needed
> by
> computers based on what has been detected AND (key word and) what I have
> approved/declined for installation depending on group membership.
I think you're asking for way too much detail at a "dashboard" level. The
COMPUTERS node shows status BY GROUP, and the members in that group, and
totally disregards the approval status of the update. It's a very simple
statement: "Hey, there are computers in this group that are not fully
updated. You might want to check this out." That is what Status Reports are
designed to be used for.
--
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP
Independent WSUS Evangelist
MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007)
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D095EB07B36E
Everything you need for WSUS is at
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/technologies/featured/wsus/default.mspx
And, almost everything else is at
http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
.....
|
|
Lawrence, I'm sorry if you can't see the sarcasim of your posts maybe the
word sarcasim is too harsh, my appologies. But it sure seems to me the way
you quote a line of the message than follow it up with phrases like "A
legitimate desire, no doubt" or "Makes perfect sense to me!" it sounds like
you are talking "down" to to the person who is asking the question. I've
seen other posts from you that have the same undertones.
[Quoted Text] > And I explained the solution: Create a Custom Update View. Works like a
> charm!
It is a solution that I had already tried but is not quite what I was
looking for and that is why I posted my question.
> Yep.. and nothing in my solution stated, or implied, that there was any
> possible solution for use in the =Computers= node.
I never said your solution would work in the computers node, in fact I said
it doesn't work for the computers node. Which is another reason I asked the
question (because one view shows me everything is fine and the other view
shows me everything is not).
> Well, ya can't, and that's a fundamental design parameter of the product.
> Declined means NEVER GONNA INSTALL NO WAY NO HOW and is *NOT* a group
> specific configuration option. Not Approved means THIS GROUP isn't going to
> install, but I might want to change my mind.
"...fundamental design parameter of the product." Do I sense a little
tunnel vision here? Think outside the box. Everything else I've seen about
this version of WSUS is great except this lack of ability.
Again you are trying to tell me what Declined and Not Approved means. I get
that....I always did. If I have a group of computers that I know I am NEVER
GONNA INSTALL NO WAY NO HOW, then why on earth would I want to be constantly
reminded that they need those updates? Geesh if I wanted to be nagged about
it on a daily basis I would have stayed married.
I use Not Approved for that very reason. and I leave that choice as the
default setting for the not assigned computer group as well as the All
Computer Group (although I might change my mind on the latter).
> There's no further point in discussing *this* particular consideration,
> because I'm fairly confident that there's not a hope in the world that
> "Decline By Group" will ever be in the feature set. It's redundant, and
> pointless, IMO.
Redundant and pointless? I'm glad it's your opinion. I understand you
might think it is pointless but redundant? How is it redundant? How is
telling the software not to show me computers that need updates that I don't
want installed redundant? I think it is redundant to tell me these computers
need these updates when I know the updates are needed but I don't want them
installed.
> I think you're asking for way too much detail at a "dashboard" level. The
> COMPUTERS node shows status BY GROUP, and the members in that group, and
> totally disregards the approval status of the update. It's a very simple
> statement: "Hey, there are computers in this group that are not fully
> updated. You might want to check this out." That is what Status Reports are
> designed to be used for.
I'm asking for too much detail at the dashboard level? Hmmm I guess I
should have a gas gage that tells me I've got a full tank of gas or an empty
tank of gas with nothing inbetween. Sure I could guess how much gas I have
left but then I have to keep track of things like when did I put the gas in
the car? How far have I driven? Stop and Go traffic or highway miles? Oh to
hell with it I'll just keep driving until the gage shows empty. Maybe I'll
make a speedometer that says fast and faster. Then when the cop asks "do you
know how fast you were going?" I can say I was going fast but I could go
faster.
I've searched google and I've searched this forum and I can't find one
legitimate reason for not being allowed to decline an update for a specific
group of computers when I know I am NEVER GONNA INSTALL NO WAY NO HOW. Which
leads me to ask another question....If I know I am never gonna install no way
no how, why does it give me the option to approve it after I've declined it?
Now declining an update for the all computer group might not be a good idea
then it would go away forever but If I had the ability to decline an update
for a specific group of computers and I decide later that I want to approve
the update I could move one of the computers to the unassigned group (where
it would be flagged as Not Approved because everything in that group is Not
Approved) and the update would then be detected as needed again. Then I
could re approve the update for the group in question and move the client
back to the group so it gets the update installed.
As far as using status reports I've used them for years. The status report
is wrong if it contains conflicting information or if it keeps telling me
information that is incorrect. A status report should contain the
information I need to rapidly make a decision. If the status report is
telling me "Hey you might want to take a look at this some computers need
updates" and I go and take a look at it only to find out it is old
information or information that I have visited many times in the past then
that is redundant and a waste of time. In fact it could lead me to believe
that all is well in WSUS land because I get used to it telling me computers
need updates and I get tired of it telling me about the same updates so I
don't go check it out. It's kind of like the MVP who cried wolf. Having the
software tell me some computers need updates over and over again day after
day when I already know they are "needed" is REDUNDANT!
I must say you did answer my question and I thank you. Have a good day and
I'll be looking forward to the ability to decline updates on a group and or
computer level in version 4.
"Lawrence Garvin (MVP)" wrote:
> "Pappy" <Pappy[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9030D14C-C80D-4B39-AA4C-AD9AC322429A[ at ]microsoft.com...
> > Thank you Lawrence for your advice but I already knew how to do that. You
> > could have been a little less sarcastic though.
>
> My apologies. There was no sarcasm intended, and I'm afraid, upon re-reading
> my post, I'm unable to identify where any might have been perceived.
>
> > All I want is a simple way to tell the GUI that I know the updates are
> > not approved for that specific group and to stop telling me that the
> > computers in that group need updates.
>
>
> And I explained the solution: Create a Custom Update View. Works like a
> charm!
>
>
> > Your solution prevents the "needed" updates from showing up when you are
> > viewing the pie charts in the Updates node but but when you are viewing
> > pie
> > charts in the computer groups node it still shows those computers as
> > needing
> > the updates.
>
> Yep.. and nothing in my solution stated, or implied, that there was any
> possible solution for use in the =Computers= node.
>
>
> > That is where the problem lies and confusion can set in. This
> > confusion can quickly get out of hand as new updates are released by MS or
> > when I need to prevent other upgrades from being installed for the group.
> > I
> > should be able to simply decline updates at the group or even computer
> > level
> > so I don't get bothered by it anymore.
>
> Well, ya can't, and that's a fundamental design parameter of the product.
> Declined means NEVER GONNA INSTALL NO WAY NO HOW and is *NOT* a group
> specific configuration option. Not Approved means THIS GROUP isn't going to
> install, but I might want to change my mind.
>
> There's no further point in discussing *this* particular consideration,
> because I'm fairly confident that there's not a hope in the world that
> "Decline By Group" will ever be in the feature set. It's redundant, and
> pointless, IMO.
>
>
> >> Aha.... yes.. the standard "It shows me everything that's needed but not
> >> approved" problem.
>
> > If this is such a standard problem then that shows the way the GUI was
> > designed did not have the end user in mind.
>
> You can think what you want... but the conversation has been going on for
> six months now. Try researching the history via Google Groups in this
> newsgroup, and then I'll be happy to continue the discussion once you're up
> to speed on the whole story. Be sure to research the discussions about the
> negative side effects of hiding the "Needed/Not Approved" updates from the
> console, while you're at it.
>
> The fact is, there's an even split, methinks, on whether this is a "good"
> thing, or a "bad" thing. The original reaction was that it was a "bad"
> thing. Now that I've thought about it for six months, I wouldn't change a
> thing. I think that it's critically important that the 'dashboard view'
> makes me immediately aware that everything is *not* perfect, than
> artifically lead me into believing that it is.
>
>
> > I shouldn't have to make custom
> > views to show something as basic as this.
>
> It's all a matter of personal preference.
>
>
> > When I look at the pretty little
> > pie charts they should clearly tell me at a glance what updates are needed
> > by
> > computers based on what has been detected AND (key word and) what I have
> > approved/declined for installation depending on group membership.
>
> I think you're asking for way too much detail at a "dashboard" level. The
> COMPUTERS node shows status BY GROUP, and the members in that group, and
> totally disregards the approval status of the update. It's a very simple
> statement: "Hey, there are computers in this group that are not fully
> updated. You might want to check this out." That is what Status Reports are
> designed to be used for.
>
> --
> Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP
> Independent WSUS Evangelist
> MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007)
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D095EB07B36E
>
> Everything you need for WSUS is at
> http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/technologies/featured/wsus/default.mspx
>
> And, almost everything else is at
> http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
> .....
>
>
>
|
|
|