Samsung Cripples Windows Update To Prevent Incompatible Drivers

jones_supa writes: A file called Disable_Windowsupdate.exe — probably malware, right? It's actually a "helper" utility from Samsung, for which their reasoning is: "When you enable Windows updates, it will install the Default Drivers for all the hardware no laptop which may or may not work. For example if there is USB 3.0 on laptop, the ports may not work with the installation of updates. So to prevent this, SW Update tool will prevent the Windows updates." Too bad that the solution means disabling all critical security updates as well. This isn't the first time an OEM has compromised the security of its users. From earlier this year, we remember the Superfish adware from Lenovo, and system security being compromised by the LG split screen software.

Comments

What?

[DanJ_UK]

You've got to be fucking shitting me?

Re:What?

[taustin]

I am not, in fact, a lawyer, but I do know how to use Google (unlike so many here). For instance, I can, without any adult help, open up my web browser, and type in http://www.google.com/ and go to a convenient search engine. In the search box for that search engine, I can type in "eula struck down as unconscionable" and click on the button labeled "Search." And get results such as

this, which talks about Bragg v. Linden Research, Inc., in which Linden's TOS (specifically, the arbitration clause) is struck down as unconscionable not once, not twice, but at least three or four different times and ways ("procedural unconscionability" and "substantive unconscionability" in two different ways, and then again on the latter after Linden amended it).

Wired also covers Gatton v. T-Mobile, again on an arbitration clause, and ruled unconscionable both procedurally and substantively. Also unconscionable for prohibiting class action lawsuits, because "that form of litigation is often the only means of stopping and punishing corporate wrongdoing." It also discusses Douglas v. U.S. District Court, which is about changing the terms of a contact after it has been signed, and which was ruled unconscionable. Gatton is often cited as recognizing that all click-wrap license have an element of unconscionability that must be considered by the court.

This has a link to this", which is a ruling on McKee v. AT&T, ruing their arbitration clause unconscionable.

Note that these are the first three results on the search, and the fourth is on McKee v. AT&T again.

Also note that these are all different courts, state and federal, all over the country.

Unconscionability is an affirmative defense - the defendant has to demonstrate why the contract is unconscionable, but it does, in fact, happen, and more importantly, it took me, literally, less than ten seconds to find example (and five of that was waiting for the browser to open.)

To quote the third link, you may now feed my cats for a week.

Terrible twos

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Samsung: You're terrible programmers!

Microsoft: No, you are terrible programmers!

Kids, kids, you'really both terrible.

Wow ...

[gstoddart]

So, basically they have shit hardware or shit drivers, and the only way they can think of to fix this is to prevent your operating system from trying to apply updates?

This sounds like incompetence all the way around, and is on-going proof of why I hate OEM laptops. Because they fill them with so much garbage.

It seems like every time I hear anything about Samsung, I find myself thinking "nope, I would never buy their crap".

And, once again, corporations put their own crappy "innovation" ahead of the needs of their customers.

Pathetic.

If true then Samsung is dead to me

[sjbe]

If true then I guess I won't be buying any Samsung computers anytime soon. A company that stupid simply isn't worth doing business with. Add this to the Samsung TVs that listen to your living room and the bloatware on their Android devices and I pretty much can't see any reason to buy from Samsung these days.

I've lost track of how many times I've been burned

[msobkow]

I've lost track of how many times I've been burned by a driver update from Microsoft that turned out to be incompatible with my hardware, likely because Windows Update misidentified my hardware as compatible with the driver. I no longer install any drivers through Windows Update, but instead go to the vendors sites and get them straight from the source.

Fortunately, the drivers are always optional updates, so you can just flag them as hidden and ignore them.

Re:Uhhhh

[H0p313ss]

"Sign in to the dashboard with your Microsoft account,"

No, go fuck yourself. Give me control over my updates/drivers inside the OS and don't make me sign up for your fucking spam in order to have a WORKING operating system.

The linked page was for hardware developers to submit their drivers to Microsoft so that they can be included in updates.

But I'm sure you realized that...

and I thought Linux had driver issues

[davydagger]

Linux might have some slight incompatiblity with an ever shrinking list of now obscure hardware. But when it works, it works. There is nothing this fucked up about linux drives. At worst, a few of them simply don't have the features we'd like, but nothing catastrophic.

Tha's a tough one there...

[Minwee]

Surely there must be a way to have avoided this.

Maybe Microsoft should set up some kind of... Lab. To certify the Quality of Hardware for Windows. And maybe they could make it really simple for vendors like Samsung to send them copies of drivers for certification so that Windows Update would be aware that they existed.

And maybe, instead of demanding millions of dollars in fees for this service, they could charge something simple up front like just $250 and then not cause any more problems. Then Samsung would have been able to run through a quick certification process and avoided all of this trouble.

Man, why does Microsoft make it so hard for vendors to get their devices supported?