Tuesday, February 12, 2008

On my Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit laptop, one of today's many Microsoft patches keeps prompting to be installed over and over, even after it indicates it is successfully installed. The patch in question is related to Microsoft Knowledge Base article KB937287, and is a prerequisite to Vista SP1, which is set to be made available next month.

Update 937287 is a prerequisite package that contains updates to the Windows Vista installation software. The installation software is the component that handles the installation and the removal of software updates, language packs, optional Windows features, and service packs. Update 937287 is necessary to successfully install and to remove Windows Vista SP1 on all versions of Windows Vista. This update will be available on the Windows Update Web site soon after the release of update 935509 and before the release of Windows Vista SP1. 

I ran the installation for all of today's patches which applied to my computer (twelve of them in total) and this one kept hanging around. Each time I restarted the computer, Windows Update again prompted me to start the installation. Confusing and frustrating after the fourth or fifth time, to be sure (reminds me of a joke about the definition of "insanity" heh).

updatethatwontinstall

I was able to resolve this problem by downloading the individual 64-bit patch from the Microsoft Downloads site and installing it manually. Note that the linked download location is for 64-bit Vista OS users only. Once I did that, the prompts stopped and it shows up in the installation list as successfully installed on the machine. In fact, the list now shows all of the installation attempts as successful, with a separate line for each try. Only the first try now shows "failed." Strange.

image

It's interesting that the KB article points out that this update will be required in order to install Vista SP1 via Windows Update when it is released, but not if you chose to download and install the service pack manually (as it will contain the fix). Extra interesting is that for this update I was unable to install it via Windows Update, but was successful with the manual install.

At any rate, there have been a flurry of posts on a variety of forums and other sites today where people were having this problem. Some people were recommending grabbing a leaked version of SP1 Refresh 2 via non-MS sites (read: not a good idea) and installing that, but for those who wish to wait and make sure they get what MS releases when they release it, this option is probably better for you.

If it works, drop a comment. Actually, be sure to comment if it doesn't work for you, too. :)



Add/Read: Comments [15]
IT Security | Tech
Tuesday, February 12, 2008 5:45:12 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
#  Trackback

Referred by:
install update 937287 from command line (www.google.com) [Referral]
589204708 (www.neowin.net) [Referral]
windowsupdate_800f0825 (www.google.ru) [Referral]
WindowsUpdate_800F0825 (www.google.ca) [Referral]
windows vista won't install mi pasport (search.yahoo.com) [Referral]
WindowsUpdate_800F0825 (www.google.ee) [Referral]
WindowsUpdate_800F0825 (www.google.com) [Referral]
WindowsUpdate_800F0825 (www.bing.com) [Referral]
937287 (www.google.com) [Referral]
"WindowsUpdate_800F0825" (www.google.pl) [Referral]
937287 (www.google.co.uk) [Referral]
"WindowsUpdate_800F0825" (www.google.fr) [Referral]
WindowsUpdate_800F0825 (search.yahoo.com) [Referral]
937287 non original (www.google.com.br) [Referral]
windowsupdate_800f0825 (www.bing.com) [Referral]
WindowsUpdate_800F0825 (www.google.fr) [Referral]
WindowsUpdate_800F0825 (www.google.co.uk) [Referral]
WindowsUpdate_800F0825 (search.yahoo.com) [Referral]
vista (search.live.com) [Referral]
WindowsUpdate_800F0825 (www.google.es) [Referral]
vista 937287 (www.google.com) [Referral]

More...
Tuesday, February 12, 2008 6:47:33 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
I had exactly the same problem with both my vista x64 machines, enterprise and ultimate editions. Installing the manual download made them both stop. Now just need to wait patiently for the SP1 download to hit.
anonymous coward
Tuesday, February 12, 2008 10:34:23 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Looped 4 mi, im trying it manualy right now
AFK
Tuesday, February 12, 2008 11:26:25 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Did work for me on Vista x64 Business N. Now I have about 12-times 937287 installed :)
MGO
Wednesday, February 13, 2008 1:57:46 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Got the same problem. Used your method to install it manually.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008 7:24:27 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Work for me also, on Vista x64 Business. Manual install fixes this problem.
Richmond Hill Tech
Wednesday, February 13, 2008 7:52:18 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Found this site from googling my problem. Your fix worked. Thanks.
Kneecaps
Wednesday, February 13, 2008 7:53:00 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Worked for me doing manual download on vista 64 ultimate!
Justin
Wednesday, February 13, 2008 12:47:12 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Thanks - you fixed my problem
abard
Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:25:03 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Thanks,
The downloaded patch worked for me too. Good thinking.
I probably would have tried looking for the download eventually once I remembered that the same kind of thing sometimes used to happen with XP.
Guy
Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:40:46 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Thanks dude - your method worked for me - vista x64 ultimate
Thursday, February 14, 2008 5:48:32 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Thanks mate, worked perfectly for me.
Henrik
Thursday, February 14, 2008 11:18:13 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
It works for me too.

Thanks.
Grouiiik
Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:16:44 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Had the same issue. Update finally loaded. Now my system date is lost. Everytime I boot. the year changes to 2408, and the system date in the bios reads 1/1/2004. Thoughts??
Dan
Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:18:43 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Dan -- Wow, that sounds like a system board battery problem. Can you manually reset the date to the correct one in the BIOS at boot and see what happens? You clock, if it's not getting battery power when the machine restarts, might be resetting to the default date and time.
Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:37:49 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
hey.. after finding what looked like a stand alone install for all os options and trying that only to have it fail lead me here.

thanks ..

now to see if i can fix the rest of this crappy os
Jesse
Name
E-mail
Home page

Comment (Some html is allowed: b, blockquote@cite, em, i, strike, strong, sub, sup, u) where the @ means "attribute." For example, you can use <a href="" title=""> or <blockquote cite="Scott">.  

Live Comment Preview