Micrososft has told an alternative to Windows Update to stop what they are doing, providing packages of multiple updates for Windows and Office.

The people behind AutoPatcher were concious of the time between Service Packs in Windows and that this made it very inconvenient to save patches to use again on multiple computers. Most updates are available as a download from Microsoft rather than through the Automatic Updates software but this can lead to tens of files, and the hassle of installing them in the right order.

Despite the convenience of what AutoPatcher was offering, I think Microsoft was justified in this action. Updates make really fundimental changes to the inner working of Windows and so must be completely trustworthy.

I'm not accusing AutoPatcher of creating malicious code, or suggesting that they were any more open to hacking attacks than Microsoft, but I don't know who they are, where they are based or what their accountability is. I might be able to find out their address by running a WHOIS command on the website but where does that leave me if an update goes wrong?

For these reason I think that downloading updates from a source other than Microsoft introduces an element of risk that I think is unacceptable.

Now I recognise the frustration of having to download updates to new installs or computers that haven't been updated for a long time. I've done it twice in the last month but at least I know where the updates are from and that they are authentic.

Ultimately, if you don't trust Microsoft to provide updates or won't use Internet Explorer for this single tasks for which it is required, why are you using Windows at all?

This news has caused some spirited discussion in the office so keep reading for different opinions.