Microsoft gives business users more time to install Windows 8.1 Update

Microsoft gives business users more time to install Windows 8.1 Update

Summary: Microsoft enterprise users now have until August, instead of May, to move to the 'Update' versions of Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 and Windows Embedded 8.1 in order to continue to receive future fixes and updates.

SHARE:

Microsoft is giving business users running Windows 8.1 and Windows Server 2012 R2 a few additional months to apply the recently released updates for those operating systems.

windows81updatedeploy

According to an April 16 post on the Springboard Series blog, business users now have until August 12 instead of May 13 to move to the Windows 8.1 Update and Windows Server 2012 R2 Update in order to continue to receive security and other patches, fixes and updates. Those same extended deployment date also apply to Windows Embedded 8.1 Update.

Microsoft officials announced last week when Windows 8.1 and Windows Server 2012 R2 Updates arrived that all users would have to move to that version of the operating system by May 12, which is the next Patch Tuesday.

The new, later deadline applies to users deploying the Updates via WSUS, Windows Intune or System Center Configuration Manager. From the post:

"In order to receive future updates, all customers managing updates using WSUS, Windows Intune, or System Center Configuration Manager have until August 12th to apply the new updates. For those that decide to defer installation, separate security updates will be published during the 120-day window."

The original May 12 deployment deadline still applies for "consumer customers," however. From today's blog post:

"For our consumer customers, the Windows 8.1 Update is a required update to keep Windows 8.1 devices current. It will need to be installed to receive new updates from Windows Update starting on May 13th."

Microsoft officials note that users with Automatic Update already turned on don't need to worry, as the Windows 8.1 Update will automatically install in the background before May 13.

Microsoft officials also noted in today's post that they have resolved the Windows Server Update Services (WSUS) issue that affected some users attempting to install Windows 8.1 Update, Windows Server 2012 R2 Update and Windows Embedded 8.1 Update. 

Topics: Windows 8, IT Priorities, Microsoft, Security, IT Policies

About

Mary Jo has covered the tech industry for 30 years for a variety of publications and Web sites, and is a frequent guest on radio, TV and podcasts, speaking about all things Microsoft-related. She is the author of Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft plans to stay relevant in the post-Gates era (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

67 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Well done Microsoft!!

    So you have now realised what a crass decision it was to try and force Enterprise users to either install the update or face losing access to further patches in little more than a month. Adding an extra couple of months will no doubt appease the few Enterprise users that have migrated to W8.
    So having realised that mistake now all you need do is admit that forcing a Phone UI onto desktop users was an equally crass thing to do thus appease the huge majority amount of your consumer users by reverting to a usable interface with a 'proper' start menu!!
    The Central Scrutinizer
    • Update 1 is distributed through Windows Update.

      In other words, Update 1 is AN UPDATE.

      They're not losing access to future patches by sticking to 8.1.

      The only way that they'll be alienated is if they willingly CHOOSE not to update their computers.

      The only requirement change between 8.1 and 8.1.1 is that the latter has LOWER requirements than the former.
      ForeverCookie
      • You don't continue to receive updates if you don't..

        update from 8.1. But instead of a Service Pack which gives you 2 years, you now only have 30 days, and 120 days for businesses. Ridiculous if the update bricks your PC.
        MidnightDistortions
  • Microsoft gives business users more time to install Windows 8.1 Update

    Businesses should already be on the latest update. This is sort of like Microsoft Windows XP where businesses are getting too lazy to upgrade when in the long run it would only help them out. A 120 day extension does seem fair for those few businesses who have exceptional needs. Should be plenty of time to update and we hopefully won't hear of any last minute panics from those businesses.
    Loverock.Davidson
    • More comedy moments from Loverock!!

      You really have no clue do you.... It's not about businesses being 'to lazy to upgrade'
      This is a fairly major set of 'updates' that need thorough testing by organisations to ensure that other applications and set ups aren't going to get broken, possibly causing huge amounts of lost productivity\income for them.... There are more weighty considerations at hand here than whether your flashing weather info tile doesn't work properly after the upgrade has been applied....
      The Central Scrutinizer
      • Thanks, Scrutinizer

        You saved me keystrokes. They CHANGED PROCESSORS which are compatible, in Update 1. So what else did they change? My Xeon is compatible with 8.0, but now it won't be with the Update. I wasn't planning on converting the Xeon machine anyway, but as soon as I read someone else with a Xeon couldn't apply the Update 1, that's when I finally decided to nix Win8 altogether.

        Will slide in some internal drives that I can slide out, in the same i7 laptop, put 8 on it and then remove it until and unless MSFT gets its act together. Given this horrible way they have now trashed their Win8 loyalists, I don't suspect I'll be doing that insert-and-remove task, anytime soon.
        brainout
        • You run a Xeon based PC?

          will the motherboard except a Core 2 Quad (if you're running the Xeon 3370 or similar, LGA775)
          William.Farrel
          • I'm sure it will run Core 2 Duo, Mr. Farrel

            but it's a Xeon quad, 5150, technically a Pentium III, of course. But my complaint wasn't really about me, but about another ZDnet poster here who also had a Xeon, not sure which kind. He had updated to 8.0, and found that Update 1 wouldn't go with that processor. So my complaint was ostensibly about me, as a representative; the impetus was his own post. I forget where it is now, probably in the post last week about 8.1 Update 1's insistence that you can't get further updates from Microdaft unless you have installed Update 1.

            This is cruel. It's been daft, senseless, unfair to the shareholders and the customer; but now, it's just flat cruel of MSFT to treat its few Win8 LOYAL customers this way. Getting worse, every day.

            Whatever goodwill MSFT has left among its customers, partners, developers, is dwindling fast. If I treated my clients similarly, I'd have none by now.
            brainout
          • Here's a question -

            Would you shortchange all your customers to accommodate 1 or 2?

            It comes down to making the best you can for the most people, not the 2nd or 3rd best for all the people.
            William.Farrel
          • Here's another question

            What would you do if Windows 8 stopped working on your PC because of the update and you need that update to continue to receive updates?

            Yeah, either stay on W7 or go to Linux because W8 just went from bad to worse.
            MidnightDistortions
          • Found the link, Farrel

            This is an update to my post 'I'm sure it will run Core 2 Duo' -- when I wrote that post, I couldn't find the article mentioned about the other Xeon user who had his processor blacklisted under Update 1.

            Just now, I found that link: http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-1-users-its-time-to-move-to-windows-8-1-update-7000028157/ .
            brainout
          • I agree. I realize that a group of Xeon processors lost support

            when certain abilities (necessities) where added to Windows, so I'm not denying that.

            I was just curious as to whether the motherboard could run a CPU with those capabilities.
            William.Farrel
          • Xeons and 8.1 update

            I would bet that any Xeon earlier than the very nice Socket 775 Quad Core Xeons won't run Win 8.1 Update.
            ben_myers
        • 8.1 is tied to hardware?

          Microsoft is scrutinising who can apply the 8.1 update, based on hardware? I did some searching and see that is definitely true. Wow. I see people mentioning 64-bit, 32-bit, one being compatible for some processors and others not. That's extremely confusing and to those who actually use Windows, I wish you the best of luck. This is one of the many reasons I dumped Windows many years ago, because of the confusion among versions (with its flawed 32-bit 4+ GB RAM limitation) and tight grip Microsoft tries to keep over the hardware we buy. It's bad enough that Microsoft has strong-armed PC vendors in to Secure Boot with Windows 8 to try and keep its grasp on desktop hardware. Thankfully there are other options like GNU/Linux, where I can get back to using my computer and not have to worry about these things.
          Chris_Clay
          • 32-bit and 4GB ain't all Microsoft's fault

            It's Intel that built the ~4GB limit into 32-bit instructions. So whether it's Windows or your favorite Linux distro, a 32-bit OS will address something less than 4GB and more than 3GB.
            ben_myers
      • Centralized updates - Killed by Chrome/Firefox

        The software load image issue you refer to was killed a long time ago. No one can PRACTICALLY stabilize images any more. I think that the side-by-side loading of DLLs has made it much less of an issue than it was in the day.
        PMC-CON
    • Loverock you are crazy

      I make my living in the Windows space. No large enterprise is going to take updates and install them without putting them on a test machine first. For some like 8.1 Update the testing can easily take many months after they get RTM. The only way they could have complied with Microsoft's time limit would have been to treat 8.1 Update as an emergency bug fix, where it "all hands on deck, do nothing but test this".

      I make my living from Windows, but I told multiple clients to tell Microsoft to shove it with there time limit, and look for alternative OS'es.
      oldsysprog
      • Confused

        Help! Can any of you experts tell me where Windows 8 basic (or is it '8x') fits in here? My girlfriend had it ready installed on her new laptop and I have been struggling to help her get to use it (thank God I went from XP to 7!)

        Does her version become 8.1 through the automatic updates she is currently receiving, or what? And can anyone tell me what the size of such an update might be? (She is currently sharing my 3G connection!)

        Thanks, Bob Lewis
        bobcglewis
    • "Business should be on the latest update"

      Mr. Davidson, first be aware that KB2919355 wasn't on WSUS as there was a bug in the implementation so the only way businesses could be on 8.1 with 2919355 would be to install it manually and after doing so it would orphan your 8.1 machines that would no longer be able to talk to the WSUS server.
      Secondly a prudent patcher does not deploy updates until testing.

      So this is not laziness by businesses but just making sure that they don't have machines they no longer can manage.
      Bitzie
    • Not this easy in the real business world

      In the real world, upgrades are not just done haphazardly without thorough testing first. With hundreds or even thousands of applications used by businesses, applying updates like this is not as simple as upgrading a random home PC. 120 days sounds like a lot, but testing applications against new versions and patches can be very time consuming and can take a lot of effort. That's why businesses standardize on a platform and stick with it for as long as they can, except for security updates and such.

      I don't think it's a case of being "too lazy to upgrade", but more a financial matter let alone the possibility of having to upgrade hardware because newer versions of Windows above XP are more bloated and require WAY more resources in order to run efficiently, not to mention application compatibility. I don't think I've ever seen Windows "compatibility mode" actually work. I've seen Wine on GNU/Linux work better from Windows version to version.
      Chris_Clay