Slashdot Mirror
Another Windows 10 Update Causing Problems (windowsreport.com)
New submitter sexconker writes: The recently-released cumulative update for Windows 10 (KB3140743) is reportedly causing problems. Symptoms include crashes, BSODs, and the inability to boot, even in safe mode. The Windows 10 subreddit has many threads detailing the inability to boot. The only fix seems to be booting to a recovery ISO, uninstalling the update / rolling back, and hoping you don't get hit again. W10Privacy 2 claims to be able to (among other things) give Windows 10 users control over the automatic updates.
Windows isn't even worth the trouble as a gaming OS anymore.
#bringballmerback
The Amiga will rise again! (at least it works)
Windows 10 users should demand a refund! Oh, wait...
After the Win 8 mess, I'm sure Microsoft is hugely focused on reliability, and yet a series of errors with updates like this happen. Are they hitting a wall of unmanageable complexity? I ask this seriously - not as a Msft hater or as a troll, but I really wonder how/why it seems 10 is struggling. I no longer use Windows so maybe I'm missing out on something obvious to people more knowledgeable.
Don't step on the baby.
You get what you pay for
Never to return. Literally. I left the company in 2011. They were in utter turmoil and apparently still are. They missed the boat on mobile, ruined Nokia, produced a bad run of OSes, introduced privacy nightmares. Now, happy FreeBSD/OpenBSD user.
It really looks like MS needs to rethink the "You are going to take these updates no matter what" concept. I really feel for anybody that is running 10 and actually needs their computer to be reliable.
First they trick millions of people into "upgrading", then they consistently break their computers. The only good thing I can say about Windows 10 at this point is that it has increased my income. I could, at this point, change my entire business model to reverting computers to prior versions of Windows. I spend most of my time doing that now.
So, Satya, how's laying off your entire QA department working out for you?
"If there was a gay Afro-Puertorican Linux distribution, I'd give it a try" ~lucm
I switched to Linux in Windows 98 times already, but I'm curious to know how Windows is these days?
These update problems make me guess that it's the same than before: blue screen twice a day, you have to restart computer even after changing a small setting, laggy and slow desktop, malware quickly conquers your computer, driver problems, reinstall of operating system every month?
When you have to resort to third-party programs to restore and control basic OS functionality, and to stop your own computer from spying on you, then said OS has truly and irrevocably jumped the shark. It's time to bury Windows in a deep, dark hole, remember it for all the good stuff it brought to computing, try to forget about all the shit it foisted upon unsuspecting users, and move on to a less self-serving and traitorous alternative. Die, Microsoft - just die. Please.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
This is exactly why software-as-a-service is a bad idea. Being forced to always update to the latest version, whether you like it or not, only works if the latest version is actually better. Which is very rarely the case these days.
I'm so glad I didn't upgrade to Windows 10 from Win7. What a disaster.
On Windows 10 because one of their updates broke the start menu and all universal apps like edge and calculator. (No, sfc /scannow didn't fix it and DISM didn't either.) I'm just glad my main partition is Win 8.1 (with classic shell) because at least that one works. (I was thinking of a reinstall of my win10 partition but I guess I'll wait until Windows 10 gets out of alpha.)
Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
It would be nice, with all that telemetry data being collected, shouldn't MS be able to find broken patches on a mass scale, realize something is wrong, and do something about it a lot more quickly.
Breakage is not that common as you think. Always take the dark picture of Windows painted by open source fans with a grain of salt. Windows 10 is still an extremely stable operating system. Gobs of more stable than Linux.
The first rule of holes - When you're in one and you need to get out STOP DIGGING.
The recently-released cumulative update for Windows 10 (KB3140743) is reportedly causing problems.
No way, I simply cannot believe such a thing. That's unpossible!
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Modern app appers know that ONLY apps can app apps, so this is just Microsoft scrubbing the appy app of LUDDITE software!
Apps!
I was at a conference last year : an important speaker was scheduled to be the first one of the day.
He comes to the stage with his laptop (Windows 7), starts it up, and screams in disgust at the screen "Please do not power off your machine. Installing updates 1 from bazillion". He didn't have any copy of his powerpoint on a flash drive, and we didn't have Internet access.
No biggie, he switched place with the 2nd speaker. After the presentation, the update process still wasn't finished. Then came the 3rd speaker. After almost an hour, the speaker told us "Shoot, I should've hold the presentation without my laptop, now I've got a plane to catch. Well, see you next year!"
Breakage is not that common as you think. Always take the dark picture of Windows painted by open source fans with a grain of salt. Windows 10 is still an extremely stable operating system.
If by "stable" you mean "doesn't crash in a fiery ball of death", then you are correct.
However, stable and usable are not the same thing. Windows 10 is buggy and not getting any better.
THIS is why Windows Updates NEEDS to be under end-user control.
Because with mandatory updates, like this one, killing systems, Windows Updates becomes the world's first compulsory malware delivery system.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
It is slow on all three PCs which I have got. Is it because it is more secure and checking everything while operating?
But I do not get it completely, - isn't it supposed to be faster than previous versions? Maybe something wrong with my setups (which are quite standard)? What can I do to make the W10 run faster?
All these people who just allowed the free upgrade - none of them would have a recovery ISO, right? Is it downloadable if they even have a burner or know how to make a bootable USB drive?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
At what point do you just put your foot down and just say what you all are thinking?
This is MY computer and I will not accept forced TAMPERING with my system. Until I can sue them for destroying an important computer, I have no interest in any "updates".
Anyone remember updating computers without the internet using "update disks"? We need to get back to that now that they are simply moving too fast and trashing our systems with untested garbage.
Not everyone bought a computer to be bleeding edge. Some of us bought them for doing subversive things like engineering homebrew crypto or developing brand new personal privacy protecting software. We need them to work for life and death. Telling me to "just back it up" is retarded since that is downtime and I shouldn't have to have any downtime PERIOD.
When can you wusses put your foot down and help bring a mentality like mine back to the mainstream? I'm tired of having to argue all these points and wish you would all help educate common-folk you know about these issues. Stand the fuck up for yourself.
Software developers assure me that CI and unit tests make software quality perfect, and bugs aren't possible anymore.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
It's interesting how cumulative updates have taken a big role in Windows 10. Large packs of updates that service many things. Also it's supposed to make upgrading a fresh OS installation a bit more convenient.
If you want to take a look under the hood, Microsoft provides a list of files (CSV) that KB3140743 patches.
Seriously? Does anyone actually expect Windows to:
- Improve its security? (Check the record of history.)
- Reduce its phoning home? (Check its steady increase.)
- Break its co-dependence with the US government (j/k)
- Start supporting end users, instead of content creators?
- Start focusing on user privacy? (Zero precedent for it.)
- Stop changing UI with each release? ("MS knows best.")
The list of reasons why using Windows is a bad idea is enormous, and only growing. There is not the slightest likelihood that anything will ever improve for end users, because that simply isn't Microsoft's focus. Its requirements are set by entirely different needs, the great majority of them being diametrically opposed to end-user needs.
As you have probably guessed by now, I am going to suggest that everyone, and I mean everyone, move to open source operating systems. Yes I know, they have problems of their own (lots of them!), but those problems are solvable given enough user pressure. The problems of Windows are not solvable, ever, because MS is not on your side.
That is the speaker's fault. He had updates scheduled and when he shut his machine down, he left it in a state of "partly updated" so that it finished updating when it was turned on.
It also sounds like he has a REALLY crappy laptop with a slow HDD, which he shouldn't if he is a "really important speaker".
Frankly, the speaker was unprepared. This is not Windows' fault, this is his.
I suppose the telemetry can't run if the machine is unbootable.
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
Phesh! You only need to look at ROI to say yes. Your competitors are already on board with us, so it's your choice to miss the boat!
You have 5 minutes to decide, moron.
At least I had a stable wireless connection with 8.1. When I installed 10, it worked for awhile, but after several updates, it stopped working. A reboot would restore it for a short time then it crapped out. I had hoped the new version would fix it but, if anything, it made it worse to the point where I have to operate with a cable if I want to connect. In addition, they still didn't fix the problem where my custom mouse profile won't load automatically at boot time. Every boot, I have to go to the mouse settings panel and manually select my custom profile. Every fucking time.
Damn, I miss XP
Some misguided manager probably thought that removing the safety net from users' hands would motivate the engineers to produce 100% correct updates.
or that isn't what the telemetry is for
Don't worry, Microsoft will update your BIOS next!
I can see nothing wrong with this.
Enjoy your new brick.
I'm sure you can take it into the Microsoft store, and get a 12.99 discount on a new computer running Windows 10 as compensation.
It may not be Windows Fault, But I assure you, I can do almost whatever with my Linux laptop while it transparently updates itself. IT'S Microsoft fault to be years behind a FREE OPEN SOURCE OS on a basic functionality Like automatic updating.
Thursday afternoon my network went away. Farted around with it, then it spontaneously rebooted. When it came back up it gave the infamous "installing updates, please wait". Did another reboot or two, 20 minutes later I was back in business.
It farked some of my chrome settings, and went back to Edge for PDF viewing. Other than that haven't noticed any other problems.
To be honest, I wish I'd never "upgraded" to Win10. It's prolly the biggest pain in the ass I've ever run. Nothing major, except for the "I'll reboot when I want to, sod off", but lots of little problems.
Notice how Chrome gets updated all the time and no one complains. Actually, has a bad chrome udpate ever and I mean ever broke any plugins?
There is no QA since MS laid off the team and the OS is not modular enough to handle all these updates without breaking something. Major changes shouldn't be happening so quick and Windows update is the worst offender. FYI I am now talking about it not working on a fresh install!!? Not an update breaking something after a few months of use.
I support users so this means I have to know and use this POS day in and out. Folks 2016 is well under way and Windows 7 EOL is coming for me professionally at work. It is Jan 2020 so this means by 2019 in just 3 short years Windows 7 needs to go bye bye and meet XP and Windows95 in the light.
MS has paid off Intel not to support anything but 10 in skylake by next year and then will turn around and say LOOK NO PROBLEMS 1 BILLION INSTALLS == least buggy OS EVER. Shoot I put in my surface to teh MS store and they put in Windows 10 agaisn't my will for just a screen replacement. No Windows 8.1 will not install on a surface pro 3 as they use a custom image.
In my professional career in 7 years of XP and 7 only twice as Windows update EVER caused a problem in these legacy systems. WIth 10 it breaks freaking every month. Why?
MS needs a new framework that is stable, QA, and is designed modular wise to not break during an update. ASAP. My job is going to be on the line if I migrate to 10 in 2 years and things break every 3 weeks. Well Billly Gates was the one who fucked it up and they worked fine before he f*cked with it ... etc ... endrant
In the end as a tech professional and fellow geek this is sad to prefer ancient operating systems. It shouldn't be like this and no Linux for me and work is not an option read my job description above? Can MS turn this?
http://saveie6.com/
It says "Try Ubuntu" on the screen.
I have no problems. (But - but the hackers and trojans and etc etc) Heh, i'll take my chances.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Installed on March 1, four days ago. So far I've had no problems, but I'm running an install that's completely fresh after I switched from HDD to SDD.
In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king--and the two-eyed man is a heretic.
I mean, when you gut your support and testing staff, and turn your customers, pardon me consumers, into your beta testers.
Developer, "We can release it, but it could cause machines with x hardware to BSOD."
Marketing, "Release it, we have install quotas to meet."
Nadella, "See people love Windows 10 because y number of machines have installed it."
Presenter was clearly an idiot.
A few years back we were having our Sprint Review meeting. I was sitting at my laptop, ready to take control and do my part of the presentation. And while I was waiting, the machine suddenly decided that it needed to reboot to finish applying updates. I still don't know why it chose that moment - at the time I wasn't even aware of any pending updates. I am guessing that ITS shoved something down which caused the reboot.
I ended up going to a different machine and doing my presentation from there.
Since then I have learned to do "net stop Windows Update" when I am getting ready to make a presentation.
Unbuntu was installed on a antique single core Turion laptop won't wake up from sleep properly (loses keyboard and trackpad). Then Ubuntu completely screws the pooch by going default on Unity, which made a very usable old machine (as long as you turn off sleep) to "slower than Windows." Coming from a camp that promotes itself as the un-Window, it's still got a lot of clinks to work out and a lot of soul searching to do on Unity.
I'm am, but I'm on Debian.
I have no issues with Ubuntu Linux as a desktop operating system used for typical web browsing, email, chatting, listening to streaming audio, watching streamed and non-streamed videos, etc. Truth be told, I could easily transition back to console-mode applications for 99% of the things I do with the computer.
I was visiting a customer site, and as part of our on-site upgrades we connected the PC to the local network to bring Win7 up to speed on the latest updates. Most importantly, the security updates to protect against USB-born viruses.
It took an hour and a fucking-half for these updates to finish. Mother-fucker.
It's the 21st century, an operating system should be able to multitask. Should also be able to load DLLs, EXEs etc into memory and keep using them while replacing the binaries on disk, all in the background, at idle priority, and at the end ask whether to reboot now or later. And of course a laptop should be able to sleep or hibernate rather then shutting down in the middle of an update.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
It also sounds like he has a REALLY crappy laptop with a slow HDD
Or there was a bugged update which hanged the process and they should have powered off the computer earlier. I have seen quite a few of those, especially on machines that happen to apply like 3-4 month worth of updates at time.
You made all of that up. It's so stupidly obvious that I don't know why anyone would have modded you anywhere but down for it.
I've made quite a living over the past 20 years fixing networks built around windows, so I'm grateful to Microsoft for making a product that needs constant hand-holding.
But it's 2016 - apart from games, why is anyone using windows?
Sure, 15 years ago, Windows was the cheapest, easiest option - and lots of software required windows. Today, lots of stuff runs in the cloud, Chromebooks are easy and cheap, mobile devices are very powerful - even a $600 mac mini is bordering on affordable.
My best guess is that all these people running windows are simply doing so out of inertia. Is putting up with the headaches of windows really easier than learning something else?
Not really. MS has totally screwed up Windows Update.
Malicious Software Detection tool runs and scans your disk as a stupid update. I literally see people who haven't taken control of Updates away from Microsoft spend 30 or more minutes waiting for their laptop to shutdown so they can go home.
Laptops are shutdown so they can be carried away. NOW! not when MS is done futzing around.
Same thing with boot. I boot so I can get work done! Not so that some crappy updater can tell me that there's an Adobe Reader update available and I just need to re-reboot my computer before I can do whatever it is I turned my computer on to do.
That is the speaker's fault. He had updates scheduled and when he shut his machine down, he left it in a state of "partly updated" so that it finished updating when it was turned on. It also sounds like he has a REALLY crappy laptop with a slow HDD, which he shouldn't if he is a "really important speaker". Frankly, the speaker was unprepared. This is not Windows' fault, this is his.
Certainly it was his fault. What was he thinking relying on Windows to hold something that was mission critical to him. Just kidding. Sort of.
Seriously, the important question is not whether the speaker was partial responsible for the debacle, the question is whether people want an OS that behaves that way or if they want an OS that is easier to use.
I've been working with computers for over 40 years (can't believe it has been that long). I'm most comfortable when I feel like I'm in control of the machine and not the other way around. That's why I mostly use Linux. I admit, Linux is not for everyone. The opposite extreme from Linux is Apple's iOS. I bought a used iPad and I'm fine with it too. I like to drive but I don't mind if someone else drives as long as they are competent at it and don't make me want to jump out of the car or hold on for dear life.
I now have three Windows 8.1 machines that I have been using to test Linux distros and Linux UEFI booting. Windows really is the worst of both worlds. It grabs control of the car and then immediately drives it into the ditch. If Windows creates an NPE (negative play experience) when it is used on small, underpowered laptops with a hard drive then it should not come pre-installed on those machines. Blaming someone who uses the pre-installed OS on a computer they bought is kind of silly. If the OS is going to take the driver's seat then it needs to do it with such ease and competence that I don't have to worry about it just like I don't have to worry about the hardware (most of the time).
On Linux I don't have to wrestle for control because it is easy for me to take control. I don't have to wrestle for control with iOS (on my iPad) because I can easily do what I want to do and let the OS do the driving. With Windows I often want to wrestle for control (don't do that update now dammit!) but I always lose.
We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
-- Anais Nin
Take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
I remember a few years ago at a conference in Europe one of the keynote speakers had flown in from the US for her talk. Half way trough the laptop decided it was 4am US time or something and shutdown to apply all the patches it had queued up. The laptop took about 15 minutes to do it's thing---quite a chunk out of a hour long talk. Fortunately the schedule was reasonable gentle for that conference so she and the following speaker weren't really badly put out by it.
Anway it was pretty amusing. All the Linux users instantly started to wear exceptionally smug expressions.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
After reading all of the comments here I thought I'd check what my computers update status was. It said that there was a restart pending to install KB3140743. I clicked Restart, the computer ran updates and came back fine. Now I've even typing this comment on the computer which just installed KB3140743! O'well, no exciting BSOD for me.
I was at a conference last year : an important speaker was scheduled to be the first one of the day.
He comes to the stage with his laptop (Windows 7), starts it up, and screams in disgust at the screen "Please do not power off your machine. [...] Well, see you next year!"
That's brilliant! Often, speakers can attend conferences free of charge, where otherwise it would be pretty expensive. This strategy offers a perfectly believable way to get to attend for free without having to go through the effort to prepare a presentation.
He was perfectly prepared. The presentation was on: How to screw up your presentation, and Learn From My Fail.
In all seriousness, I hope he didn't get paid for presenting.
I can't upgrade my Dell XPS 15 (L502X) laptop to reliable use of Windows 10 and Dell suggests not to upgrade. Dell's website shows this device hasn't been tested for Windows 10 and there are other sites reporting bad things happen when it is converted to Windows 10. I'm currently a happy camper running Windows 7. Although this laptop is thick and heavy compared to those ultra thin, lightweight XPS 15s now available, it built like a tank, is more than fast enough, the screen is fabulous and I've never had a problem with it. Maybe I'm lucky to have it but I'm not sure what my choices will be is four years when MS stops providing security updates for Windows 7.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
I've never really had any issues with Windows 10. About the only issue I have with 2 machines running it, is one of them refuses to sleep automatically after the set period of idle. Still trying to figure that one out, but other than that, works good. Guess I'm just lucky.
In all truth, if you open the old Control Panel (you can search for it via the start menu), it just looks like Windows 7 underneath the new UI. And as far as privacy, I'm 2 PC's out of what, a billion installs? I turned off what can be turned off and whatever is left... Does anyone really think a human being is looking at what MY PC is submitting? I highly doubt I'm that important, and if I am, I think I'd be flattered honestly.
Bottom line for me is.. it works. Runs all my crap (and I run a lot of stuff, like cygwin, VMWare, various dev tools, games, libreoffice, and on and on) and seems to be stable (I've never had it crash or do anything weird other than that one machine refusing to sleep automatically.) So I really just fail to see the uproar over this thing. Again guess I'm just one of the lucky people.
Not really, people that just aren't willing to acceptbugs and crashes need to get th fuck off the beta builds and stick to consumer builds (i.e. not the insider builds).
It's very hard to learn and understand MS products including their server product and features when you have tutorials written(vague and ambiguous) by academics for academics. It's same issue with troubleshooting MS errors in any of their products. You look at the logs(very cryptic) in the "Event Viewer" and you end up searching the EventID online only to come to MS website with cryptic description of the issue and solutions. My guess, they are trying to earn more revenue from selling their books which are a little bit better but too time consuming.
With linux, in the past I had multiple video issues with ubuntu, so I went to the ubuntu forum and found all the solutions in plain english in 20 minutes or less but with MS you spend hours or even days.
Is it crashes to your bios to move its boot loader up to first position without your permission.
Then I have to change it back if you are not in front of the machine to sip disk check this happens.
I just will not leave my linux mint the only boot loader.
You delete the windows from the bios it will put it right back.
"Are they hitting a wall of unmanageable complexity?" No, my view is that Microsoft has hit a wall built of many years of technically incompetent top management.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer was called "Monkey Boy". The January 16, 2013 issue of BusinessWeek magazine has a large photo of Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer (now replaced by Satya Nadella) with the headline calling him "Monkey Boy". See the BusinessWeek cover in this article: Steve Ballmer Is No Longer A Monkey Boy, Says Bloomberg BusinessWeek. The BusinessWeek cover says "No More" and "Mr.", but that doesn't take much away from the fact that the magazine called Ballmer "Monkey Boy" -- on its cover.
Worst CEO in the United States: Quote from an article in Forbes Magazine about Steve Ballmer: "Without a doubt, Mr. Ballmer is the worst CEO of a large publicly traded American company today."
Another quote: "The reach of his bad leadership has extended far beyond Microsoft when it comes to destroying shareholder value -- and jobs." (May 12, 2012)
Who would want to work for "Monkey Boy"? Microsoft is apparently not able to hire socially competent people. Apparently Satya Nadella was chosen because he was the least annoying person. However, he does not seem to me to be the kind of person who can handle the enormous conflicts inside Microsoft.
This is my guess: Someone at Microsoft said, "Google and Facebook are collecting data about customers and selling it; let's do that also." So Windows 8 was designed to try to sell "Apps", as though Windows was a particularly trashy cell phone operating system. I was shocked when I first saw the Windows 8.1 GUI. Utterly incompetent. Now Windows 10 is apparently trying to imitate Google Android, which has become more and more invasive.
People who have work to do have already learned the GUIs they need. Even if the design is imperfect, that's what they know. They don't want wild changes.
It's scary. In the last few months, Windows 10 has been shown again and again to be sloppily designed and implemented, as well as being spyware.
Judging from comments on Slashdot, people try to find some technical reason for Microsoft's policies. They apparently have difficulty imagining that Microsoft managers are as incompetent as they are.
Some links:
Windows 8: NSA Backdoor Exploit in Windows 8 Uncovered (Aug. 22, 2013)
Windows: NSA "backdoor" mandates lead to a computer-security FREAK show Quote: "Microsoft Windows OS vulnerable to hackers, thanks to National Security Agency requirements." (March 6, 2015)
Windows: NSA Built Back Door In All Windows Software by 1999 (June 7, 2013)
Windows 10, Microsoft hiding what it is doing: Microsoft has no plans to tell us what's in Windows patches. Quote: "Each update is a black box, and it's going to stay that way." (Aug 21, 2015)
Windows 10, Microsoft takes even more control: Windows 10 is spying on almost everything you do -- here's how to opt out (July 31, 2015) But, of course, Microsoft can change the spyware to a
...is a way of directly running graphics cards, full speed (direct PCI access), from within a Virtual Machine - and then I can ditch Windows forever, and just run the few Windows things I need in a virtual machine.
It's already possible in some VM's, to directly run a second graphics card like this, with some hacking - what we need, is to have this kind of virtualization built-in somehow, so that it can be shared/switched between VM and primary OS.
It's the 21st century, an operating system should be able to multitask
Multi-task replacing parts of itself? Yeah, right.
Updates KB 3140743 and KB 3139907 installed routinely on both my four year old 64 Bit HP desktop (Win 10 Pro Build 10586) and 32 Bit HP Stream 8 tablet (Win 10 Home Build 10586). I've seen no problems with performance or stability, no problems with programs like Edge or the 64 bit Firefox beta.
There are something like 200 million Win 10 installations out there.
How many of them will be successfully updated over the weekend with their users barely aware that anything unusual had happened?
The problem with Windows is the way it handles file access.
Under Linux, when you delete a file it's removed from the directory listing, but it's still there on disk. Any program that was using the file continues using the now 'deleted' file.
So an updater can delete a file that's in use and write a new version of the file. Programs that run from that point on use the new file, programs that are still running from before the update keep using the old, deleted file. That's what lets updates quietly run in the background.
They are dead to us as consumers.
Windows 10 wrecked havoc on my family of ASUS business laptops.
Waited months after the initial update. Tripled checked the manufacturers website.
Windows did the updates and EVERY time the system tried to boot up or down there was some crazy problem. Then add all the updates that never transparently fixed anything - more bloatware.
The main issue was all the new services that switched on that destroyed productivity and NOWHERE at MS was anyone knowledgeable about how to fix what should have been easy things.
Rolled back what I could to Windows 7. Fresh install. Had to installed all programs. Thank God I still had my data.
Now I can actually use my computer and software.
With computers like this who needs computers?
I literally went back to pencil and paper for two weeks - like business disaster recovery.
Linux in our future.
Windows 10 is a joke and nothing more than glorified spyware.
Maybe a pro should always be on top of how updated their machine is. Maybe. But the average person should not need to be watching for that. It is a stupid pain in the backside to find, just as one needs to shut down, that there are an hour and a half of updates, and one is told not to power off. A genius piece of customer relations, that.
Don't step on the baby.
Better isn't sufficient. You also need compatible with all older programs.
There are a large number of people who are dependent on certain particular programs, and if they stop working the system is useless.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Stable? I haven't had a crash in the last decade, and I frequently update my system. Of course, I do periodically do a fresh install, but that's because I like to clean out old cruft when installing a new version, not because I need to.
I will admit that Debian testing used to crash badly once or twice during the development cycle, but that hasn't happened recently, and I never had that happen with stable.
That said, there are a lot of distros out there, and probably some of the pay less attention to stability. Still, why should someone be forced to choose stability over cutting edge software (or the other way around)?
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
I understand where you're coming from but I think this highlights why microsoft forced updates on windows 10. Users just want to turn their machine on to do X then turn it off. Update notices get in the way of that so users delay or prevent them so the updates never end up getting installed. Then their machine gets infected by a billion malware cause they haven't updated in over a year so their machine is full of holes. You say you just want to get work down now so don't bother you with updates but the updates need to be installed at some point so when is a good time for you?
Whose needs are more important, the users or the OS's? Who is serving who? Obviously Microsoft doesn't give a flying fuck about user needs, whether potential or actual.
So everyone has to be a sysadmin now and it's their fault if they are not?
Just because it's a mistake you would not have made does not mean that it is fine to blame the user and not a flaw of the product.
So I had a glitch in the windows store, the first time I tried to use it (to buy a music album) but the microsoft engineer suggested I run a powershell command to reinstall windows store, which completely borked it and now the store app don't run at all.
Now I don't know of the microsoft engineer just gave me really bad advice, or if something that should have fixed my original problem was messed up by other issues with this windows update.
The only 'fix' I have been able to find on the googles involves downloading a windows 10 iso and doing a in-place reinstall of the O/S. Something I have no inclination to do whatsoever. Do I really need the windows store app to be operational? Is there any dependency on it that I have not noticed yet?
While all that mess was going on, I installed iTunes and purchased the album I was looking for.
If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.
I understand where you're coming from but I think this highlights why microsoft forced updates on windows 10. Users just want to turn their machine on to do X then turn it off. Update notices get in the way of that so users delay or prevent them so the updates never end up getting installed. Then their machine gets infected by a billion malware cause they haven't updated in over a year so their machine is full of holes. You say you just want to get work down now so don't bother you with updates but the updates need to be installed at some point so when is a good time for you?
Well, you could, y'know, try using the update method described as the one that Linux uses--I will admit it does need to be rebooted, but I suppose that's so everything can be gotten using the new version of the file as I saw no detectable changes in shutdown/bootup in the process.
If you have your update process be buggy & annoying, and are prone to pushing out patches that should have M$ ordering paper bags by the boatload for pretending they'd even finished alpha testing? You should not be surprised if users reasonably decide that updating is not a Good Idea.
The problem is--and you could find this out from the summary, really--is that this is the alleged consumer build that's having these kinds of problems.
sarcasm = on
I guess maybe it's my fault for loading up horseshit like steam on an otherwise clean install of Win 10
sarcasm off.
Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
No it isn't. It is the insider builds, i.e. people that have selected getting beta builds.
That's the techie's answer to the question tho. For a normal user that doesn't know and doesn't want to know (aka grandma) they don't prevent updates because they keep up with the tech news and know it might break something, they prevent updates because they get in the way of the photos they want to upload to facebook or whatever. You said "have your update procress be buggy & annoying" but to the normal user the very existence of the update system itself is the annoyance. They don't want to be bothered by updates, ever. Window 10 forcing updates is a direct result of people not installing updates on all previous version of windows, stop and think about that for a minute.
You can't multitask in the middle of replacing your graphical environment. Well, the OS can but you won't be doing much.
I multitasked yesterday while upgrading KDE to a new point-release.
A turning point was reached some months ago in my years-long struggle to get my wife off Windows when she saw me doing updates with YaST and could not believe how fast they were. Now she's on a Mac and still going on whenever she has an update about how Windows updates took her *hours*.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
And you're obviously a butthurt 14-year-old if that's the best comeback you have.
And just a very few shills posting AC to helpfully point this out to us... Yeah, right.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
So everyone has to be a sysadmin now and it's their fault if they are not?
Nice strawman you have there...
If you're going to give an important presentation, make sure you have everything you need ready to go.
Next you'll say he forgot to bring his power cord a that is the laptops fault somehow.
And decided to apply chaos monkey testing to its instances to check whether it is resilient.
Telemetry sky net works, we are doomed.
I literally see people who haven't taken control of Updates away from Microsoft spend 30 or more minutes waiting for their laptop to shutdown so they can go home.
If your laptop is taking 30 min to run Windows Update, then perhaps it is time to replace your 15 year old laptop with something designed this decade.
Even with a hard drive and not a SSD, it shouldn't take that long.
It took an hour and a fucking-half for these updates to finish. Mother-fucker.
Perhaps a SSD is called for, along with a computer newer than 15 years old?
Even my Core2Quad doesn't take that long to do a complete Windows install, much less updates
Every time I receive a update I realize I am a beta tester where my previous issues might get fixed, but then I get the grief of realizing new issues and waiting for the next update to fix those. This ideal is a mess and again I am so glad the only thing I use Windows PC for is gaming. That in itself is a mess these days with Windows 10. I am so sorry I ever upgraded from Windows 7. With Windows 10 I have now become a perpetual beta tester.
It's the 21st century, an operating system should be able to multitask.
More importantly, it's a computer, it should not do things without me telling it to "just to be helpful".
Mi Windows experience form Windows 7 and forward have been a lot like getting help from a 5 year old.
I understand the good intention but things would go a lot smoother if it didn't try to help me.
It's the 21st century, an operating system should be able to multitask.
Given Microsoft's reliability when focusing only on one task I think it's way to early to try and get Windows to do two things at once.
It's specifically the malicious software removal tool that takes forever.
It's scanning the files on your hard disk, the time this takes depends on what kind of data and how much of it you have on your computer.
I was referring to the process itself, though the fact they do push out OS-breaking patches to the general public makes the confusion understandable...and the fact it is reaching them is more than a bug, because yeah, they want it to just work. They don't want to be bothered by bad updates, and they don't want Windows Update behaving like a 'helpful' virus by hijacking their computer suddenly to install updates and sometimes let them do nothing else while it happens. They wanted to post pictures to Facebook, or email Grandma, or work--and instead they're sitting there for who-knows-how-long waiting for their computer to finish updates. This is what will get them to turn off updates, permanently.
If they were techies, they'd still run them, but by hand and after a suitable delay to ensure that they know what updates to not install. Updates done well fix things you want fixed, and if you're a techie you are aware of this.
The Linux method sounds pretty good as a way to get around it: It can run silently in the background, no need to be hard to distinguish from malware or a virus, and if the need for reboots is kept to a minimum you can probably get away with having it do something like a polite popup letting you know to reboot the computer sometime soon and swapping the wallpaper to a "REBOOT ME!" notice. As long as it takes about the same time as a normal shutdown and reboot, the normal user may never see any reason to want to disable updates--especially if OS-breaking ones are kept to a minimum, and the suggested method might enable having a quick rollback method built in.
Windows 10 forcing updates is a direct result of Microsoft pushing out bad updates to the general public and an updater that works like malware or a virus, stop and think about that.
You don't need any special tools or programs to disable Windows Update in Windows 10 Home. Just go into Services and disable the Windows Update service itself. Best plan is to keep it disabled until a few weeks after each major update (when you know that the update won't bork your system), turn it back on, do the update manually, then turn it off again until after the next month's Patch Tuesday. Put an icon for Services on the desktop to make life easier. In addition, make sure you enable setting a restore point during a Windows Update in case something still goes wrong.
Remember: Paranoia means never having to say you're sorry!
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
You are reminding me of Daniel Stone's "truth about Wayland" presentation where he "forgot" his video cables and never redid the presentation properly for web consumption.
While you and I would expect the situation due to the experience of dealing with many computers it's a bit much to expect end users to anticipate such a situation.
The windows update on 10 and previous versions fits much of your description of linux update systems. ( I was going to spend some time pointing what the differences were but then I realized it should be obvious and I was too lazy anyway. ) Really the problem is not that microsoft doesn't do it but that they don't do it as well as other systems do. If windows 10 didn't have buggy updates and if reboots didn't take longer it would fit your description almost perfectly.
The longer shutdowns are obviously just poor design that have been around since windows 95 if not earlier. As for the buggy updates some of it is the lack of QA staff, but a lot of it is also the massive install base. Yes I know that answer is trite and nobody seems to believe it for whatever reason but it's true. and I'll put forth my own anecdote as proof. The buggy update that's the cause of this post on slashdot didn't happen to my windowns 10 machine at all, in fact none of the buggy updates that have been reported on slashdot have affected me at all. Not to say everything has been perfect because there was one update that caused a game I play to stop working (it also broke some other programs for other people). But slashdot never reported that buggy update because it didn't affect a lot of people which kind of sums up my point. There are a billion different configurations of windows so an update is pretty much guaranteed to break one of them. Microsoft is apparently unable to to find and fix all these broken configs before they push the update out. Whether that's due to incompetence, laziness or lack of money I'll leave up to other people to speculate on.
People will probably call me a shill if I try to talk about this any more (if they haven't already) so I'll just leave it here.
Ah, so that is what happened to my kids computer. It is the only one I put 10 on, yesterday it would not boot, just the blue screen asking if I want to repair. I fixed it with windows 7. I knew forced updates was going to burn me, I have been burned several times in the past by their stupid driver updates. As long as I always turned those off I really never had a problem.
I reccomend this http://ultimateoutsider.com/do... as a way to stop win 10 from infecting an otherwise healthy win 7 install
Fair enough... but if you care about performance in 2016, you're on a SSD and then it doesn't take that long...
In any case, if people would keep their machines up to date, this wouldn't have been needed, but since people DON'T do that, this is what we get.
Either leave your machine plugged in at home so it can update at 3am, or run updates manually at a time you prefer, or accept it.
Linux & Wine. Lots of your old XP hardware will work too.
I think you missed entirely that the differences are the problem: I can leave somebody vastly happier with a Linux box despite them being a user by your definition of a user with it pretty much configured to do background updates. If it's not one meant for as much uptime as possible--I've used a few boxes as basically more human-friendly voicemail, as it's more likely to reach me--then you wouldn't even need the user to ever know, and you might well design it to only do the notifications of reboots being wanted if it notices it's on a system that spends most of its time up.
The fact that Windows has the longer shutdowns and bootups--and, I should note, I've flat-out watched people have even Win10 spontaneously reboot itself for updates--is exactly what encourages people to block updates. How much blunter do I need to be about bad design being why the problem exists? Invisible, seamless updates is good design precisely because it does not encourage users to block updates.
My experience is that yeah, I've only been hit once by a buggy update--but it only takes being burned once, and if you have it so the old versions of the files hang around in the system you could have it so rolling back a bad update is painless. I suspect if you were willing to put the effort in, you could even do it so it happens relatively automatically after a failed post-update boot, meaning that once you've rolled out the new update system it would take a spectacularly horrible update to actually leave somebody burned & the time sufficient to ensure you or somebody close to you experiences such might be longer than a lifetime, even without necessarily improving the QA process.
If you don't understand that this problem existed in the first place precisely because of bad design, and isn't going to be fixed without fixing the design, I'm not sure how to help you except by suggesting you consider learning some of the psychology involved in what makes a design good or bad & why it matters. Their 'fix' done by fiat instead of by implementing a good design means I find myself stuck helping people learn how to find the version of Linux that best suits their needs because they don't want to deal with things like their computer deciding to reboot without letting them save their work while they're working on a major paper. (Remember, they're users: don't assume they have it set to save automatically or save manually as they work.)
I rolled back to Windows 7 about a week ago.
After upgrading to Windows 10, my Linux system with an admittedly older kernel could no longer mount a directory I shared from Windows.
Windows 10 was a little faster booting up and going into standby mode, but I found many things to be more of a hassle.
But the lack of control of the system was what made me decide that Windows 10 just wasn't for me.
When you give software companies full control of hardware you own, you'll eventually regret it.
I think you're the one that doesn't understand what I'm talking about. I'm not defending windows or saying it's fine. I was merely trying to explain how and why its update system works the way it does and what microsoft's though process was.
Sorry, but Wine takes a long time to catch up to MSWind changes...or at least it did when I switched. And it DOESN'T handle timing dependent changes at all.
Now I'll grant that my comment is based on MSWind95 compatibility, which it never sufficiently attained, but I've no reason to believe that it's any better today. Wine is fine for certain applications, but those tend to be precisely the applications that aren't usually broken by system upgrades.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
This is not Windows' fault, this is his.
No, it's Windows fault.
Blaming the victim, I see.
I always checked the "don't install without my say-so" button on updates, and recently I still got hit with a batch of updates I had not OKed. I don't know how that happened, but at least it didn't downgrade the W7 laptop to Windows 10. The default is that Microsoft decides when you update (and they've removed the opt-out provisions in W10).
This means that, unless you know what you're doing, your system will update automatically, and this is by Microsoft's design. Any consequences of this are consequences of Microsoft's policy. The speaker was probably using Windows 7 exactly as Microsoft intended. Further, you don't know how powerful the laptop was, or how many updates were backed up.
So, you think that anyone who uses a Windows laptop should be required to know the details of how Windows operates, and schedule around Microsoft's demands, and/or buy an arbitrarily powerful system on the chance that Microsoft wants to take it over for a while.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Blaming the victim, I see.
Who, Microsoft? Because the user didn't bother to bring his machine in a prepared state for his presentation?
I don't know how that happened, but at least it didn't downgrade the W7 laptop to Windows 10.
Allow me to be blunt... anyone who makes such a comment really, really needs to get out more...
Calling Windows 10 a downgrade over Windows 7 is just being a Microsoft hater and is wearing blinders. In basically every respect, Windows 10 is an upgrade over Windows 7. While there may be corner cases where 7 remains useful, they are just that, corner cases. Such cases exist for Windows 98 and Windows XP as well, but that doesn't make Windows 7 a downgrade over those choices.
Further, you don't know how powerful the laptop was, or how many updates were backed up.
It doesn't matter... If you are showing up for a professional presentation, it is your job to show up with equipment that works. With Windows, this is not hard to do, simply make sure your machine is fully updated and ready to go. Frankly, if you are being paid to do this sort of work, you should bring two computers, because stuff happens.
Anyone who blames their gear for not being able to get their work done is just making excuses.
So, you think that anyone who uses a Windows laptop should be required to know the details of how Windows operates
Yes, they should. Know how to use your tools, or find someone who does and have them prepare it for you. But just "assuming it will somehow all work out" is very unprofessional.
Dogmatic much?
The victim I was referring to was the speaker who was blindsided by Microsoft's updates. He counted on his computer to work, and it didn't, because Microsoft made certain decisions. He couldn't have made sure it was updated the night before with Windows 10, because Windows 10 will download and install updates when it darn well pleases. If he'd had two computers, both might have been overwhelmed with updates. It would appear that Windows is an unreliable operating system, and should be replaced by something better suited for the guy who just wants to get stuff done.
I don't know how well my W7 laptop would work with W10. I've seen reports of problems with upgrades. While W10 is a considerable improvement in many ways, the UI is not clearly better and my new W10 laptop has given me some problems the W7 one never did. The "upgrade" software Microsoft is pushing is malware, according to every objective definition of malware I've seen. It's downloading gigs of software whether the user wants it or not, and tries to induce the user to just install it.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
The victim I was referring to was the speaker who was blindsided by Microsoft's updates. He counted on his computer to work, and it didn't, because Microsoft made certain decisions. He couldn't have made sure it was updated the night before with Windows 10, because Windows 10 will download and install updates when it darn well pleases.
Windows 10 Pro with updates deferred, then run the night before, would not have had this problem. Anything approaching the end of deferral would have been updated the day before, anything more recent would still be on deferral and would not run at a critical time.
There is a solution, people simply don't want to use it or know about it. They would rather blame someone else rather than themselves for not being prepared.
Pro exists for a reason.
The "upgrade" software Microsoft is pushing is malware, according to every objective definition of malware I've seen.
Then you're not reading the right ones, because it isn't malware as far as I'm concerned. It is tracking what programs you install and run, it is key-logging what you type into Cortana, it is tracking what web sites you visit to create a profile of a user. It then assigns that profile and that log to a random machine ID and uses it to build a pattern over time. But it doesn't do any of this in secret, this information is well known.
It will allow Microsoft to build a better Windows over time, knowing what people are really doing with their computers. It isn't malware because it is upfront about what it is doing and it was my choice to install it. Some of the features can be turned off, but perhaps not all. Welcome to 2016, Apple and Google aren't really much of an improvement here, for whatever that is worth. You could make some "Year of the Linux" argument, but lets be honest, Linux had the chance 15 years ago and blew it, it will not happen now for many reasons, few of them technical.
I have had ZERO problems with Windows 10. It works better than previous versions, and was FREE. Stop the moaning.
So, Windows is acceptable for someone who pays for the Pro edition, and then learns what it does and does not allow it to do? How impressive.
The malware I was referring to is not the telemetry, which however is not up front about what it's doing. It's the software on my W7 laptop that has downloaded gigs of software I don't want, and attempts to get me to install it.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
So, Windows is acceptable for someone who pays for the Pro edition, and then learns what it does and does not allow it to do? How impressive.
If you use your computer for work, you should be on Pro.
If you use your computer for work, you should know how the computer works, or have someone on staff who does.
The malware I was referring to is not the telemetry, which however is not up front about what it's doing. It's the software on my W7 laptop that has downloaded gigs of software I don't want, and attempts to get me to install it.
Well then it is Windows 7 that is the issue, not 10! Solve your issue today and upgrade to 10! :)
All kidding aside, I'll grant you the point that downloading Windows 10 to be installed in the future is a bit much. Not everyone is on an unlimited connection and not everyone has tons of drive space, so fair point there.
On the flip side, outside of the extreme edge cases for specific needs to be on a specific Windows version, everyone really should upgrade to Windows 10. There is no reason to stay on 7 for the vast majority of users. Microsoft might be pushing a tad hard, but since they are giving 10 away, I give them a few points back for that choice.
For most users, this is a very minor concern. Maybe to you it is important, and if so, fair enough, but it is worth noting that to the vast majority of users, this would be item number 437 on their "give a crap list" and it just doesn't rank attention.
You're expressing your personal opinion as if it were fact. Pro gives you advantages over Home, but I've never heard anyone else say that anyone who uses their computer for work should be on Pro. There are lots of reasons why Pro might well be worth it, but I've never seen any warning against using Home.
Moreover, we don't know that the speaker did this sort of thing often enough to justify another computer.
It's not a big deal, but it is a genuine problem with Windows.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
You're expressing your personal opinion as if it were fact.
In fairness, your comments about Windows 10 being a downgrade over Windows 7/8.1 were along similar lines. :)
In any case, I don't think it is opinion in this case, I think it is indeed a fact, when it comes to Windows 10. Let me explain:
Pro gives you advantages over Home, but I've never heard anyone else say that anyone who uses their computer for work should be on Pro.
I would have agreed with you on Windows 8.1 and before, it didn't matter then. Windows 10 is the first version for which it matters and the first version that I suggest to professionals that they use Pro. The primary reason is the ability to defer updates to a time convenient to you.
Windows 10 Home does updates whenever it darn well pleases, which doesn't matter much to your average Home user that doesn't make money with their computer and often has it left plugged in over night (when it will update at 3am) and thus never notice the updates.
Windows 10 Pro allows updates to be deferred, so if you are traveling or doing work with your machine where it MUST be available for you at specific times, then you should have updates deferred and manually run Windows Update once a week at a time that works for you. If you do this, you won't be stuck like the presenter was.
It's not a big deal, but it is a genuine problem with Windows.
In fairness, it is a genuine problem with users who refuse to learn anything about computers or keep their machines in good working condition.
This new "forced updates" thing came about due to millions of people never running Windows Updates, running botted and infected machines, and then blaming Microsoft for crappy Windows Security.
I will say that I'd like to see a bit more notice given of large updates and the ability to defer them for one week, in the event that it is not a good time. If you turn your computer on and a big update is scheduled, it could come up with a box saying "large update to Windows read, run now, or run tomorrow/next week?" with a note saying "if you defer this now, you will not be able to defer it again after a week, run Windows Update manually to update at a time that works for you."
Of course, even THAT is too complex for your average computer user, who as I said above, doesn't want to learn how a computer works. Which is probably why Microsoft didn't do it.
I see we aren't disagreeing as much as I thought.
The problem with Windows updates and the Home edition is new, and has not been well advertised. "Windows 10 Pro - It Won't Screw Up Your Presentation" comes to mind as an advertising slogan, but that may just be me.
I also question whether it's a problem with users. Last Windows 7 box I bought (and am retiring because the video's getting a touch flaky) came with automatic updates checked. If the problem is that users are going into the Control Panel to disable automatic updating, it's for a reason, and Microsoft needs to consider what that reason is.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
I see we aren't disagreeing as much as I thought.
I imagine much of the "disagreement" on forums such as this comes down to the poor use of text to communicate. In person, you have instant feedback, you have body language, and you have the "tone" in the voice that says as much as the words do.
I like to think that most people are actually quite reasonable, or at least would behave reasonably regardless of their feelings, in person.
The problem with Windows updates and the Home edition is new, and has not been well advertised. "Windows 10 Pro - It Won't Screw Up Your Presentation" comes to mind as an advertising slogan, but that may just be me.
Yea, that is kinda funny. :)
I actually understand the frustration behind the "anti-MS" crowd, I just think that it is funneled into pointless rants that won't fix anything and don't help the situation. Thus my comment about the "upgrade Windows 10 to Windows 7" comment, I find that to be unhelpful, since staying forever on Windows 7 is not a reasonable option in the long run.
I also honestly don't think nearly as many people in the world care about all this as it would appear from reading forums like SlashDot and Reddit. These places attract the very vocal, but most people just aren't that tuned in to it.
If the people unhappy would, instead of ranting, register a web site like "www.changewindowsupdatestooptional.com" and get people to sign it and post comments on it, that might be more helpful than anything ranted about here.
Linux, for better or worse, is not going to displace Windows. We could debate the technical merits all day, it doesn't change the reality of the situation. The time and energy would be better spent trying to get MS to change, rather than calling them M$ and feeling smug. :)
Upgrading from W10 to W7 currently makes sense, as long as the computer will be replaced by 2020; at least it makes more sense than arbitrarily slapping W10 on old boxes. I don't want the OS on my W7 laptop to change, for example.
For me, it comes under the heading of things I don't like but aren't going to do anything serious about, since I figure I have to pick my fights and decide what's important. The basic problem is that Windows is a monopoly, and people are going to use it pretty well no matter what, so we're all vulnerable to whatever stupid thing Microsoft decides to do. If Linux actually did displace Windows (such as if I managed to get a favor from the magic OS fairy, that being about as likely as any other reason), there would at least be competition between distros so that couldn't happen.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes