1 Reply Latest reply on Dec 19, 2014 8:56 AM by cwinning

    How does Shavlik Protect decide between patching a product or doing a version upgrade?

    Rookie

      I need to be able to determine, for each Product Name in Shavilk Protect, whether the product will be patched as much as possible while keeping the major version the same, or if the product will be upgraded to the next version.  For instance, I'm sure Shavlik will upgrade Flash 15 to Flash 16, but will not attempt to upgrade SQL 2008 to SQL 2012.  Is there a published list of rules that details Shavlik's behaviour in this regard?

       

      Thanks in Advance!

        • 1. Re: How does Shavlik Protect decide between patching a product or doing a version upgrade?
          cwinning CommunityTeam

          Hello,

           

          The answer to this is very nebulous, but this is what I can tell you.

           

          • We don't have a product list stating which products will be updated to a new versions. 
          • We do not update Microsoft products to newer versions.  This would mean we would not upgrade from SQL 2008 to SQL 2012 or Office 2003 to Office 2013.
          • We do offer version upgrades for Flash and some other 3rd party products.  One reason for this is some vendors release their products as new versions instead of patches like Microsoft does.

           

          Flash for instance:

           

          Flash version 13 is the earliest supported version of Flash. Any version of Flash before Flash 13 will be offered the latest version of Flash 13. Customers running the latest version of Flash 13 will be offered the latest version of Flash 13 only. They will not be offered a newer version of Flash (14,15 or 16) until Adobe stops supporting it.

           

          All customers running Flash version 14, 15 or 16 will be offered the latest version of Flash 16. The reason for this is Flash 14 and 15 are no longer available. All customers running Flash 16 will be offered the latest version of Flash 16.

           

          Thanks,

          Charles