Is it advisable to install 99 critical updates at the same time?

[TomRiddle7]

Windows update was accidentally turned off for my windows 7 pc over a year ago. Now that I realize this and check, there are 99 critical updates waiting to be installed. But I'm afraid that trying to install that many at once is likely to cause a problem and mess up my pc. I already seem to have SP1 installed. Since updates can be dependent on each other I don't know if it's advisable to install them separately either.
So any advice or suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks

 

[Brink]

Hello Tom, and welcome to Seven Forums.

Usually it's safe to let Windows Updates to install any updates selected by default first, then repeat until all are installed.

Hope this helps,
Shawn

 

[NoelDP]

Personal Preference....
install all the Security Updates for Windows first - reboot
install Updates for Windows - reboot
Install .NET updates (3.5 first, reboot, then 4/4.5 and reboot)
Install others
Install Office/etc updates

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

There are almost as many preferences for how to install large numbers of updates as there are people installing them but the one most agree on is to not install them all at once, no more than ten at a time. I've had good luck installing 10-15 at a time. I just start with the bottom (the oldest) 10-15 and work my way up. Any that are unchecked by M$, I leave 'til last.

 

[whs]

Since I am lazy I always install them all in 1 chunk (I even check the ones that were unchecked). Had to face large numbers a few times on reinstallations of Vista and Windows 7 (for friends who had no images). This 'brutal' approach always worked. But that does not mean that it will work for you.

 

[NoelDP]

That approach works well if you have a good internet connection and standard components - and nothing else installed
Unfortunately it's not a common triumvirate :-(

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Since I am lazy I always install them all in 1 chunk (I even check the ones that were unchecked). Had to face large numbers a few times on reinstallations of Vista and Windows 7 (for friends who had no images). This 'brutal' approach always worked. But that does not mean that it will work for you.

I used to do that until I got burned once (back when I built my present machine) and had to undo what had already been installed and start over. Now, I'm a wee bit more paranoid.

I've yet to have anyone confirm it but I suspect the reason M$ leaves some updates unchecked is the checked ones need to be installed before the unchecked ones.

 

[strollin]

I have installed large groups of updates many times when setting up after a new install or reinstall without issue. To me, it's far more time consuming to do it in chunks. I will start the update process and then go to bed. When I wake up in the morning everything is installed and I don't have to keep going back again and again to get all the updates completed.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

...I don't have to keep going back again and again to get all the updates completed.

I just do my updates while watching TV and go back to it during the commercials. For me, it's no biggie.

 

[whs]

...I don't have to keep going back again and again to get all the updates completed.

I just do my updates while watching TV and go back to it during the commercials. For me, it's no biggie.

No commercials on my TV here in Germany.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

...I don't have to keep going back again and again to get all the updates completed.

I just do my updates while watching TV and go back to it during the commercials. For me, it's no biggie.

No commercials on my TV here in Germany.

Well, I'm cheap and don't use cable TV. Except for a few really obnoxious ones (and, sadly, they are increasing), I actually like commercials; they support the free programming I'm getting (remember, I'm cheap), some are actually entertaining (the recent Foster Farms singing chickens were a stitch), they provide an opportunity to take a break (skip to my loo, snag a snack or drink, attend to M$ updates :sarc:, etc.), and inform me of new products and services (the latter is actually huge for me).

 

[whs]

The commercials are the main reason I never watch TV in the US - besides the fact that the news are of zero information value. I only have basic cable because the wife wants to watch her sods on the three major networks.

Here in Germany I pay $25 for about 350 channels from some 30 or 40 countries and organizations such as the EU - most are commercial free. At least I can double check any news report from the angle of different countries - you have to, of course, speak or at least understand the languages. The Iranian and Arabic channels are beyond my capabilities. But then there is always Al Jazeera in English - probably the best news channel in the world.

 

[richnrockville]

FWIW: on a brand new installation, I always let er rip. All at one time. The biggest gotcha is that ms in it's infinite whatever sometimes uses a pop under to ask you to agree to install some update and it just sits and waits forever.

On the newest updates on my workhorse Toshiba, I always make an image to an external drive so that I can recover if one of ms's updates screws up.

Rich

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

FWIW: on a brand new installation, I always let er rip. All at one time. The biggest gotcha is that ms in it's infinite whatever sometimes uses a pop under to ask you to agree to install some update and it just sits and waits forever.

On the newest updates on my workhorse Toshiba, I always make an image to an external drive so that I can recover if one of ms's updates screws up.

Rich

The "gotcha" for me when I built my machine back in March was, partway in, the update process froze and I couldn't get anything to happen until I deleted what had updated and started over, this time in smaller bites. Not much fun but safer.

 

[grits]

There are almost as many preferences for how to install large numbers of updates as there are people installing them but the one most agree on is to not install them all at once, no more than ten at a time. I've had good luck installing 10-15 at a time. I just start with the bottom (the oldest) 10-15 and work my way up. Any that are unchecked by M$, I leave 'til last.

I didn't realize that they were listed 'old to new' starting from the bottom. I thought it had more to do with kb numbers but just looked at mine & it looks like the numbers are not in any order.

 

[NoelDP]

KB numbers are issued at the start of a project, not at the release of the resulting patch - which is why it often seems that patches are out of order by KB number (and why there are a lot of KB numbers apparently unused)

Having said that, I don't believe that the WU listing is in strict date order or strict KB number - although I wouldn't like to put money on any particular order at all.
It's all basically irrelevant anyhow - Windows will install whatever updates are offered and accepted providing the requisites are met.

 

[TomRiddle7]

Thanks for all the replies. I was looking at the list of updates windows wants to apply and as noted the KB numbers are not in order, but that may not matter. What worries me is that when I highlight each update the right panel shows the date it was published and those seem to be in random date order. So trying to do them chunks of say 15 at a time, if I started from the bottom working up, they would not be applied in date order and some that were published earlier would be in other chunks.
One could hope that if an update is attempted which has a missing prerequisite it would automatically apply the prereq fist. But it probably just fails. How can I find out why an update failed? Thanks

 

[Diddlededum]

Just make sure you backup using Macrium (see forum sticky) first in case you screw up!

I "normally" would just do all updates at once unless reinstalling an image due to an update failure in which case I'd do all the earliest ones first, the majority of updates come out on the same day which is on the screen somewhere as you click each one so you can scroll quickly through and find ones of a particular date.