Error message 80070490

I found this on Google! Problem solved!!!

"Gleeman" wrote:

>

>

> "Engel" wrote:

>

> > Hello Jake,

> >

> > 80070490

> > http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=80070490&qt_s=Search

> >

> > http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&rls=SUNA%2CSUNA%3A2007-17%2CSUNA%3Aen&q=80070490&btnG=Search&meta=

> >

> > http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=80070490&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

> >

> > http://www.google.es/search?hl=es&q=80070490&btnG=Buscar+con+Google&meta=

> >

> >

> >

> > 0x80070490

> > http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=0x80070490+&qt_s=Search+Groups

> >

> > http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&rls=SUNA%2CSUNA%3A2007-17%2CSUNA%3Aen&q=0x80070490&btnG=Search&meta=

> >

> > http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=0x80070490&btnG=Search&meta=

> >

> > http://www.google.es/search?hl=es&q=0x80070490&btnG=Buscar&meta=

> >

> > Good luck

> > --

> >

> >

> > "Jake" wrote:

> >

> > > I'm getting the "Windows could not search for new updates" and

> > > returned error code 80070490 in the window. I've tried restoring to a

> > > previously-successful 'windows update' restore point but the problem

> > > persists. There doesn't appear to be any reference in the Microsoft Knowledge

> > > Base to this particular error code. Any ideas on the problem and how to

> > > resolve it? Thanks.

> > >

> > > Ian

> > >

> > >

>

> Or he could try:

> http://www.google.se/search?hl=sv&q=windows+update+error+code+80070490&meta=&btnG=Google-s%C3%B6kning

> Where this post is currently rank two.

>

> Here's a newsflash to all you help people by telling them to look things up

> on google-newbies. The posts you reply to may very well end up getting

> indexed by google. I suppose you don't realize what this means... it means

> that I get stuck in google loops every time I try to sort out an error

> because cluless chap x tells person b to look something up on google. Stop

> doing it right now. You're the ones causing a problem for thousands of

> people. Having multiple threads all over the webb resolving the same problem

> would not be an issue. Having multiple unresolved threads pointing to

> multiple unresolved threads now there's the bitch.