Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: How Will You Handle Microsoft's New 'Cumulative' Windows Updates? (slashdot.org)
Microsoft's announced they'll discontinue "individual patches" for Windows 7 and 8.1 (as well as Windows Server 2008 R2, 2012, and 2012 R2). Instead they'll have monthly "cumulative" rollups of each month's patches, and while there will be a separate "security-only" bundle each month, "individual patches will no longer be available." This has one anonymous Slashdot reader asking what's the alternative:
We've read about the changes coming to Windows Update in October 2016... But what happens when it's time to wipe and reload the OS? Or what about installing Windows on different hardware? Admittedly, there are useful non-security updates worth having, but plenty to avoid (e.g. telemetry).
How does one handle this challenge? Set up a personal WSUS box before October to sync all desired updates through October 2016? System images can work if you don't change primary hardware, but what if you do? Or should one just bend the knee to Microsoft...?
Should they use AutoPatcher? Switch to Linux? Or just disconnect their Windows boxes from the internet... Leave your answers in the comments. How do you plan to handle Microsoft's new 'cumulative' Windows Updates?
How does one handle this challenge? Set up a personal WSUS box before October to sync all desired updates through October 2016? System images can work if you don't change primary hardware, but what if you do? Or should one just bend the knee to Microsoft...?
Should they use AutoPatcher? Switch to Linux? Or just disconnect their Windows boxes from the internet... Leave your answers in the comments. How do you plan to handle Microsoft's new 'cumulative' Windows Updates?
++
Linux user since more than 5 years.
But unfortunately thats not a solution for everybody.
We'll see what happens, but for now I've taken the precaution of using WSUS Offline to download all updates as of today. If I ever need to install Windows 7 again I have my original disc (and backed up ISO on cloud storage) and I can use the update installer from WSUS Offline to apply the updates I downloaded without ever needing to put the computer on the Internet. (And yes, this tool lets you add specific updates to an exclusion list so that they don't get installed).
Pretty much the same here. I won't deal with it. I have been running Debian for over 10 years so that I don't have to deal with shit like that.
I keep a Windows VM somewhere for the days where I absolutely need Word or Excel. I don't remember when is the last time that VM was updated.
Its like you've never heard of backups. FFS, your wifes photography business sounds like it runs on one windows 7 computer.
A windows update that toasts your 'photo editing environment' is less likely than a variety of hardware failures. I'm sure, since you are clearly so conscientious about the reliability and accessibility of this environment, that you have a proper backup solution in place.
So.. in the unlikely event of an update fiasco... roll back, and carry on...
For a large enterprises, where it actually makes sense to lab test an update before rolling it out this doesn't work... but for 'your wifes photography business' I can't really figure out what you are trying to accomplish.
And EVEN the enterprise guys can still lab test before letting the cumulative update through to production... and hold it up if there is an issue. (Although its less clear how they resolve a problem.) But that is a whole other situation.
Microsoft hotfixes were never "individual" in the first place.
There are two servicing branches for Windows. GDR and LDR. GDR is what used to go out on Windows Update. LDR is for changes that are considered more risky, and is a superset which also contains GDR changes. All changes are cumulative, per binary. Once you install an LDR fix, that binary stays on LDR branch until a service pack is applied.
At service pack time, GDR and LDR branches are merged.
There's no such thing as an "individual" Microsoft patch. All binaries are patched cumulatively; the only question is what cumulative version you have installed for a given binary.
All that's changed is that they don't want to actually document bugs that are fixed in the hotfixes in detail, and they want to force everyone to more or less the same patch level, because 90% of the time, customers having problems are running old bits that aren't being tested by Microsoft any more. There's an ongoing religious argument over "patch to the latest" vs "don't touch it to keep it stable". But in truth, if you hit a new, unfixed bug, and Microsoft created a new hotfix for you, or even if you just install the latest security update, you were always forced to accept all the cumulative changes between the patchlevel you were at, and the new hotfix you are installing. It's just that at the moment the heavy handed "force em to patch" faction has the upper hand at Microsoft now.
I still use Windows 7. It is what my company uses and I have to maintain a certain degree of compatibility. I also create content, both for myself and for the company I work for. I've avoided MS updates for years simply because Microsoft has proven time and time again that they cannot be trusted, and guess what. Everything still works. My non-Microsoft applications do not mysteriously uninstall themselves after an update, the driver for my printer/scanner does not suddenly stop working because it is not "the latest" available, and my anti-virus software has, so far, kept me reasonably safe from malware attacks. I consider myself lucky in that regard, but it is worth the risk in my opionion to avoid all the known spyware and software issues created by MS updates. I don't need my flightstick driver to stop working simply because it is not signed by Microsoft.
As part of my work I sometimes have to do on-line research. I do not need to see targeted ads for stuff I do for work. Just because I sometimes go to certain medical websites does not mean I have a medical condition, visiting a gun manufacturer's website does not make me a gun nut, and looking at the latest thing that Boeing is up to does not make me a pilot or a world traveller. I don't need to waste my time digging through spam for pills, guns, or airline fare "special" offers. If I'm actually interested in any of those things I'll do the research myself. I'm not going to buy stuff simply because I received a "targeted" scam.
rankly, if this finally fixes the issue where windows 7 searches windows update for hours taking 100% of a core and 1-2GB of RAM in the process then I'm all for it.
Microsoft broke windows update on purpose here. The solution is to (1) disable windows update (2) reboot (3) download the june (?) update to windows update via web browser (4) install it (5) now download the latest windows update via web browser (6) install that too.
Now it will work again.
One of the reasons I was recommending people to upgrade to windows 10 was for this issue alone
Thats why they broke it on purpose.
"His name was James Damore."
At the beginning of this year I purchased a new Mac Pro because I have never owned a Mac or used OS X before, so I thought it was high time to become proficient in OS X and I planned to become a full-fledged Apple convert.
Overlooking the fact that the Mac cost about three times the price of a Windows PC with the same technical specifications, the first thing I noticed after setting it up was that I could not control the master volume on my monitor with built-in speakers from the desktop interface. I thought that I was simply not familiar with the OS yet, but no, after extensive research it turns out that OS X cannot do volume control through an HDMI cable.
The second thing that bugged me was that I could not open a fresh instance of Safari in full screen mode by default. Surely such a basic function must be supported and I am just a dumb newbie who cannot figure it out... No, it is impossible in OS X.
Third, I noticed that the USB ports were really finicky. Sometimes upon booting up the computer the mouse or the keyboard would not be recognized, and I would have to pull out the connector and plug it back in. About half of the USB ports had this issue, while the others generally worked fine. It did not help that I am very obsessive about cable management and picky about which ports I keep devices plugged into. At first I thought the issue was with my mouse and keyboard, but it persisted even after trying out several other mice and keyboards. It turns out that according to Apple support forums it is a 'non-issue' common to many if not all Macs. Something to do with the hardware voltage or whatever. I found out that my friend's Mac mini does the same thing.
Finally, I simply did not like the file management in OS X. I know that Mac users swear by it, and from all I read going in I expected some kind of a magical experience that feels second-nature. Unfortunately that was not the case, and it turns out I prefer Windows file management much more.
I sold the Mac last month and I do not miss it. I am not one of those people fanatically taking a side in the childish Mac vs. 'PC' debate, in fact I genuinely tried to become a Mac convert and wanted to see the good in it, but in the end it simply was not for me. One of the biggest disappointments was that when I researched all of the issues listed above, many of the complaints and technical support debates dated back to the mid-2000s and nothing has been done to address them. Maybe they are not really even issues and in fact function that way by design, but I wish Apple would at least explain the reasoning behind them.
Perhaps Linux will be next for me.
My quibble is that there are many who want to run Windows but say they need to run Windows, when they very likely don't.
A good rule of thumb is that if you have to run Windows because of old mission-critical software then it is probably easier to get it going under Wine than on Windows 10.
Microsoft used to keep new versions compatible, but not so much anymore.
They have broken the compatibility so much that pretty much all old games sold on gog.com is wrapped with dosbox, even those that worked fine on XP.
This is just Microsoft's way of removing your ability to cherry pick which updates you will install, and which ones you won't.
This allows them to wrap one of those Windows 10 upgrade updates into a critical bug update so you have to choose.
Kinda like how Congress wraps their stupid little pet projects and other bullshit that would never pass muster in a million years into a general budget or defense budget bill.