Windows 10 to Force Updates

[Ekit]

I always install every new update, but I am VERY against mandatory updates. I think it opens a whole can of worms with ways to abuse the system by forcing bloatware and other shit on the user base.

 

[Olas]

So far the Windows 8 auto-updates have either been good or unnoticeable, so assuming Windows 10 is the same way I don't mind. I can see why some people would prefer they be optional, but frankly it's almost always going to be some background thing that improves security or stability that the average user wouldn't understand. It seems pretty crazy to think that you know better than Microsoft.

 

[MysticSlayer]

It would take me less than an hour to write an app to allow me to control when it updates...

That's great that you know how to do that, but how many people actually know how to do that? A vast majority of computer users (even Linux users from my experience) don't know how to do that. And since this is targeting Home users, it's targeting the people least likely to know that.

It seems pretty crazy to think that you know better than Microsoft.

It isn't that people understand Windows better than Microsoft. It is that people understand their current needs better than Microsoft. What if I don't want my Internet being taken up at the moment because of other stuff I'm doing? What if I want to wait a day or two to see if any problems arise? What if I recognize that the update doesn't apply to me personally for whatever reason? Microsoft may understand Windows better than almost anyone, but they do not understand everyone's personal needs better than those people do.

 

[Olas]

It seems pretty crazy to think that you know better than Microsoft.

It isn't that people understand Windows better than Microsoft. It is that people understand their current needs better than Microsoft. What if I don't want my Internet being taken up at the moment because of other stuff I'm doing?

I'm pretty sure the download would be either lowest priority, or would only happen when the computer is shutting down. I've never had my internet speed affected because of Windows downloading an update.

What if I want to wait a day or two to see if any problems arise?

Well, I guess you have to trust that Microsoft tests their updates before release. I won't deny that you have a point here, I guess you could always wait to restart your computer.

What if I recognize that the update doesn't apply to me personally for whatever reason?

Then why would you care? Also, that's an unlikely if.

Microsoft may understand Windows better than almost anyone, but they do not understand everyone's personal needs better than those people do.

That's what the control panel and personalization settings are for. You don't personalize your computer by selectively downloading updates. Besides, I'm pretty sure it makes things easier all around when Microsoft knows everybody is running the same software, rather than having 50 different versions based on different updates.

 

[Poetic Nova]

Well, more reasons not to "upgrade".

Don't want to risk bricking either of my laptops, who both have automatic updates dissabled for various reasons already.

 

[mad825]

What if I recognize that the update doesn't apply to me personally for whatever reason?

Then why would you care? Also, that's an unlikely if.

Erm, it's a almost certain if.

There are a lot of updates simply dedicated to fixing translations/symbols that you could set to make the world blow-up that a typical English speaking person wouldn't use. There are also updates fixes that related to hosting a server or a virtual PC.

Maybe early on in the development cycle it's going to vital however a year or 2 down the line it's going to be "why do I even need this?" kind of updates.

I'll give you an example from 2011 kb2534366 [https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/kb/2534366]-"0xC000009A" error message when you try to install Windows 7 SP1 or Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1 (more than 10 language packs installed) . I would like to mention that this was labelled as "important" and knowing someone who is trilingualed is a pretty rare thing.

 

[MysticSlayer]

What if I want to wait a day or two to see if any problems arise?

Well, I guess you have to trust that Microsoft tests their updates before release. I won't deny that you have a point here, I guess you could always wait to restart your computer.

That's quite an awful work-around. It doesn't account for things going wrong, like potential power outages, and completely ignores any user that wants to keep their computer off when not using it (or just at night). It also assumes that Windows won't crap out and restart for some bizarre reason, which is something I've seen happen plenty of times, even while people are giving presentations.

Also, what are people to do when they never want updates at all? Never turn off their computer?

What if I recognize that the update doesn't apply to me personally for whatever reason?

Then why would you care?

And why would I take an update to something I'd never use? It isn't something I like to do. If I can't remove it, I'd rather it just sit buried, not getting touched. Why would I need any more reason than that? It's my computer, not yours. (Note: "yours" isn't referring to you personally, just people in general).

Microsoft may understand Windows better than almost anyone, but they do not understand everyone's personal needs better than those people do.

That's what the control panel and personalization settings are for. You don't personalize your computer by selectively downloading updates.

Unless I want to have control over what's going on to the computer. As I've hinted at above, that's reasonably important to me. Sure, there are times that I'm going to have software installed once I get the computer, but even then, I'm often looking for ways to remove what I can and keep off what I don't want. Again, my computer, not yours.

Edit: Fixed some quoting mistakes.

 

[FalloutJack]

(A conversation between me and my Windows 7 Ultimate OS.)

"You know, as I sit her, Windows 7, I can't help but feel that this is as good as it's really gonna get."

Win7: I know how you feel, Jack.

"We've been through alot, you and I, on this gaming laptop. And we'll go through alot more together."

Win7: Good times...

"One day, though, this lappy will wear out and its parts won't be as good for my gaming needs as they use to be, possibly."

Win7: They stopped making your model keyboard, right?

"Yeah... I'll have to replace it with a new machine, with a harddrive measurable in terabytes, a whole new graphics and sound card, ram you could bust open a castle with, and all the trimmings."

Win7: What about the OS?

"What, indeed? If only Microsoft developed one... But, as I said, this is as good as it gets. Cheers, man."

Win7: Cheers, Jack.

(My next laptop will have Windows 7 whether Microsoft likes it or not, because it doesn't look like they'll be making anything good anytime soon.)

 

[Olas]

What if I recognize that the update doesn't apply to me personally for whatever reason?

Then why would you care? Also, that's an unlikely if.

Erm, it's a almost certain if.

There are a lot of updates simply dedicated to fixing translations/symbols that you could set to make the world blow-up that a typical English speaking person wouldn't use. There are also updates fixes that related to hosting a server or a virtual PC.

Maybe early on in the development cycle it's going to vital however a year or 2 down the line it's going to be "why do I even need this?" kind of updates.

I'll give you an example from 2011 kb2534366 [https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/kb/2534366]-"0xC000009A" error message when you try to install Windows 7 SP1 or Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1 (more than 10 language packs installed) . I would like to mention that this was labelled as "important" and knowing someone who is trilingualed is a pretty rare thing.

My point wasn't that it was unlikely that the updates wouldn't be important. My point was that it's unlikely that you, the end user, will be able to KNOW that the updates won't be important. Unless someone wants to spend their time carefully reading up on each update to understand exactly what it will do and how it will affect them, I think it's unlikely that this will be the case.

 

[Olas]

What if I want to wait a day or two to see if any problems arise?

Well, I guess you have to trust that Microsoft tests their updates before release. I won't deny that you have a point here, I guess you could always wait to restart your computer.

That's quite an awful work-around. It doesn't account for things going wrong, like potential power outages, and completely ignores any user that wants to keep their computer off when not using it (or just at night). It also assumes that Windows won't crap out and restart for some bizarre reason, which is something I've seen happen plenty of times, even while people are giving presentations.

Since I use a laptop, power outages don't really scare me, and I can always put my laptop into sleep mode if I want to save power. I've also never had windows (or at least windows 8) "crap out" on me the way you describe, at least that I can remember. I'm not saying it's not possible, but I just don't think it's a major concern, like... at all.

Also, what are people to do when they never want updates at all? Never turn off their computer?

Keep using WindowsXP.

What if I recognize that the update doesn't apply to me personally for whatever reason?

Then why would you care?

And why would I take an update to something I'd never use? It isn't something I like to do. If I can't remove it, I'd rather it just sit buried, not getting touched. Why would I need any more reason than that? It's my computer, not yours. (Note: "yours" isn't referring to you personally, just people in general).

I'm not a software engineer (yet) but I'm pretty sure it would be a nightmare for Microsoft if every user had a different set of updates installed. If you know exactly what everyone has, with no ambiguity, I imagine it would make troubleshooting problems easier by an order of magnitude. This is good for both Microsoft AND you.

I'm not sure why you're so resistant to the idea of updates that have zero impact on you. My computer installed an update today when I turned it on, I barely even noticed it.

Microsoft may understand Windows better than almost anyone, but they do not understand everyone's personal needs better than those people do.

That's what the control panel and personalization settings are for. You don't personalize your computer by selectively downloading updates.

Unless I want to have control over what's going on to the computer. As I've hinted at above, that's reasonably important to me. Sure, there are times that I'm going to have software installed once I get the computer, but even then, I'm often looking for ways to remove what I can and keep off what I don't want. Again, my computer, not yours.

Edit: Fixed some quoting mistakes.

I'm not sure what you're even referring to anymore. What "control" do you want over your computer that you can't get through the control panel or options menu's? I would encourage people to uninstall bloatware, and personalize their PC as much as possible. But I don't think avoiding OS updates is a smart way to try to do that. If the update adds a feature you don't like, there's probably a way to disable it.

 

[Hoplon]

Seems unlikely that I can still play Witcher 3 and Dark Souls on my PC without having to redownload if I upgrade.

So my response would be...


Oh... shit.

You can do exactly that, it's a upgrade not an reinstall, also why is you OS drive the same as your storage drive? WHAT FRESH MADNESS IS THIS!!!!!... sorry.

 

[mysecondlife]

Seems unlikely that I can still play Witcher 3 and Dark Souls on my PC without having to redownload if I upgrade.

So my response would be...


Oh... shit.

You can do exactly that, it's a upgrade not an reinstall, also why is you OS drive the same as your storage drive? WHAT FRESH MADNESS IS THIS!!!!!... sorry.

WUTEVER WUTEVER I DO WUTEVER I WUNT.

 

[visiblenoise]

I always install every new update, but I am VERY against mandatory updates. I think it opens a whole can of worms with ways to abuse the system by forcing bloatware and other shit on the user base.

I was going to say that I've never had any problems accepting all the Windows 7 updates, but I hadn't considered bloatware. Which, if Windows 7 is any indication, will probably be minimal. But the fact that they're planning this Windows Store crap worries me a bit.

 

[Kaymish]

well it would save time i have my PC to auto update asap though it is sort of annoying when it resets in the middle of a game or anime marathon im on SSD so it takes less than a minute to boot so its not that bad and ive only ever had small issues with the updates breaking the .net framework but that is an easy fix
and it will give MS an incentive to get the updates right first time or people will have a massive conniption

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

It isn't exactly 100% new that Windows 10 would force install updates for Home users [http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_10-win_upgrade/does-windows-update-force-install-of-optional/3b477ecc-e3c6-405c-bef8-7bdcc657b2bb] (so it won't affect Pro, Enterprise, and Education users), but it has also begun to come out that people won't be able to bypass this feature [http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/07/windows-10-updates-to-be-automatic-and-mandatory-for-home-users/]. You are able to control the restart, but that's about it. Now, this isn't exactly new for a desktop OS, as I'm pretty sure Chrome OS already does this, but that's a really minor player in the market. It certainly isn't on Windows's level.

I was just wondering what other people think of this. Most people I know probably wouldn't care about this so long as they can prevent an automatic restart, but I was wondering what other people's views on it were.

Would there be anything stopping people from just disabling the update service? That's what I've been doing since XP, I disable all the services I don't need like windows updates, windows firewall, windows defender, security center (I don't need a fucking anti-virus installed), etc.

 

[renegade7]

I don't see why anyone felt it necessary to upgrade past Windows 7, honestly, given the shitshow that is Windows 8.

But at times like these, what with Microsoft perpetually trying to find new ways to make sure that you don't personally own your computer, I'm so glad my main OS is Linux.

 

[MysticSlayer]

It isn't exactly 100% new that Windows 10 would force install updates for Home users [http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_10-win_upgrade/does-windows-update-force-install-of-optional/3b477ecc-e3c6-405c-bef8-7bdcc657b2bb] (so it won't affect Pro, Enterprise, and Education users), but it has also begun to come out that people won't be able to bypass this feature [http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/07/windows-10-updates-to-be-automatic-and-mandatory-for-home-users/]. You are able to control the restart, but that's about it. Now, this isn't exactly new for a desktop OS, as I'm pretty sure Chrome OS already does this, but that's a really minor player in the market. It certainly isn't on Windows's level.

I was just wondering what other people think of this. Most people I know probably wouldn't care about this so long as they can prevent an automatic restart, but I was wondering what other people's views on it were.

Would there be anything stopping people from just disabling the update service? That's what I've been doing since XP, I disable all the services I don't need like windows updates, windows firewall, windows defender, security center (I don't need a fucking anti-virus installed), etc.

As far as I know, it's Microsoft's intention that it shouldn't be shut off. Whether or not that means it will be possible through some work-around is another matter.

That said, as long as you stay away from the Home edition, then there should be a better level of control.

Keep using WindowsXP.

Sorry, I mean to specify non-security updates. I can understand the logic in trying to force a security update. I'm just not sure why they had to lump non-security updates in with it.

I'm not a software engineer (yet) but I'm pretty sure it would be a nightmare for Microsoft if every user had a different set of updates installed. If you know exactly what everyone has, with no ambiguity, I imagine it would make troubleshooting problems easier by an order of magnitude. This is good for both Microsoft AND you.

The thing is, this doesn't affect certain versions of Windows 10, so it isn't like Microsoft isn't already dealing with potentially different update statuses.

And yes, I'm fully aware that someone can just get one of those versions and the problem is over. I'm more here out of interest of why someone would/wouldn't want the forced updates.

I'm not sure why you're so resistant to the idea of updates that have zero impact on you. My computer installed an update today when I turned it on, I barely even noticed it.

Sorry if I was coming across as..confrontational...? That wasn't my intention. The intention might just be getting lost because Internet.

Anyways, I'm used to having a good level of control over updates. Personally, I wouldn't want to give that (or any control I currently have) up, especially since I've had multiple situations where I did exert that control, and it is rarely some major hindrance to me. At most, it takes a minute to determine what I do/don't want to update or if I want to put if off until the next day.

What "control" do you want over your computer that you can't get through the control panel or options menu's?

Well, now that you mention it...No, I'm not going there.

 

[zumbledum]

It pleases me , every screw up and mistake every inconvenience its all baby steps to the day were willing to trash windows and use something else , then as one we can turn around and give M$ the finger for the 20 year ass fucking.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Would there be anything stopping people from just disabling the update service? That's what I've been doing since XP, I disable all the services I don't need like windows updates, windows firewall, windows defender, security center (I don't need a fucking anti-virus installed), etc.

As far as I know, it's Microsoft's intention that it shouldn't be shut off. Whether or not that means it will be possible through some work-around is another matter.

That said, as long as you stay away from the Home edition, then there should be a better level of control.

It's Microsoft's intention that you don't turn off anything, use Internet Explorer, use Bing, etc. If Windows updates are a service like past Windows, then you can simply disable the service which is a pretty basic thing for most users.

 

[ForumSafari]

Also I've never had a Linux update break anything.

Then you got lucky, apache updates have a filthy habit of changing how config files are laid out. We had a fun one a while ago where we utterly lost a SLES box on reboot due to it nuking most of the file system. Fun times.