Slashdot Mirror
Windows 10 Updates Are About To Get a Lot Smaller To Download as Microsoft Switches To Differential Patching (theverge.com)
Microsoft currently distributes major Windows 10 updates -- Anniversary Update, for instance -- as essentially full operating system installs, going as much 4GB in size. But that is changing starting today (for some users). From an article on The Verge: Microsoft has been promising smaller updates to Windows 10, through various methods, for what feels like years, but the company is now starting to test a new Unified Update Platform (UUP) that will make a big difference. "One of the biggest community and customer benefits of UUP is the reduction you'll see in download size on PCs," explains Bill Karagounis, a Windows program manager. "We have converged technologies in our build and publishing systems to enable differential downloads for all devices built on the Mobile and PC OS." Differential downloads only include the changes that have been pushed out since you last updated a Windows 10 PC. This new change will debut with the Windows 10 Creators Update that's expected to arrive in March, but Windows Insiders can start testing the technology in today's latest build update for mobile devices. Microsoft will start rolling this out to PC builds later this year, alongside HoloLens devices. Xbox One devices running Windows 10 won't benefit from UUP as Microsoft distributes operating system updates to consoles using different methods.
I thought Microsoft got rid of program manager 20 years ago.
I wont care until you switch do Debian style package management. It 2016! There is no reason why a operating system should be dozen of gigabytes with no modularity and applications can't be upgraded easly. FFS MICROS~1 GET YOUR SHIT TOGETHER.
Anniversary update killed my computer - it was totally unstable after update. It removed all drivers and set them to Microsoft driver.
Back to windows 7 for now.
Breaking News: Cumulative Updates Grow In Size And Become Unwieldy
With MS's stupid cumulative updates I had to stop approving Windows 10 "critical" updates because I lost the ability to vet individual updates before they were applied to computers: maybe KB123 is a good thing to have while people have reported problems with KB789, so to save myself from dealing with the latter I have to block the former. I haven't actually approved a single one of those updates since then. Not to mention the hassle it was to update/fix WSUS to deal with the new patching scheme.
UUP is going to mean more hassle, I'm sure. But if the patches are broken back down again individually and simply delivered in a single cumulative as-needed update, there's no way WSUS would be able to manage every possible combination, so WSUS would have to receive the individual updates too... right? Then it's just a software update to manage the new deployment system, right?
What a relief, a proper troll that's been missing from /. for too long.
Welcome back!
Bet you $50 MS fucks up the first patch royally leading to a much larger than average patch to hot-fix the differential issue.
I recently helped a friend who kept having Windows 10 chew through all his Verizon bandwidth. They live in a rural area and are unable to get DSL, so they're on Verizon's 5gig a month plan. The Anniversary update along with all the live tiles, Update sharing and telemetry information sharing, completely wiped out their monthly bandwidth limit.
I turned on the metering controls to help with that, but this is even better.
So lets get this right, it's 2016 and instead of downloading complete replacements for the OS at 4GB a piece, we're saving a few hundred meg? Shouldn't these be even smaller? like individual files and executables? maybe even diffs of those files? Is there really any reason they couldn't adopt a mechanism like deltarpm to push updates?
I'm sure those ISP's with datacaps are foaming at the mouth that those caps are gonna be slightly harder to hit now...
During the time that Windows 10 checks to see IF there are updates, my computer gets a bit jerky. So I spend that time updating all of my servers, one at a time. Webserver, mailserver, database server, the toy server with VMs of other distros like CENTOS... I can download and install updates for about 6-7 servers in the time it takes for Windows to decide IF there's an update for it to install.
I think it's time for microsoft just to go ahead and embrace yum or apt and figure out how to make an update system that doesn't suck.
This is different how from analyzing your computer against a list of patches & replacements, then downloading and installing only the ones needed ... as done in all versions of Windows before 10? Except that as a user you have no control over the results and the process - must accept what's given.
© Starcraft Blizzard
...that they use bsdiff.
OH GAWD
I can't wait to see how they manage to fuck this one up.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Congratulations on Windows Update finally making it to the 1980s.
As i refuse to run their crap.
It took MS so many years to implement an however obvious differential patching, that says a lot about the code modularity and team management. One could bet and expect the next updates to be problematic.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Needed to test the "Edge" browser... booted up my colleagues windows 10 drive at 3pm, left it there installing updates without asking and went back to do work, thinking about how 90's it feels to have to wait for a computer to boot for such a long time.
I left at 6pm... it was still installing updates, it's not a slow computer and it's on a fast network, I have no fucking idea how people put up with that shit - how do you get anything done. Imagine having an important video conference and not being able to attend because windows decides to install updates for the rest of the day.
Windows 10 uses a cumulative patching system. To update a Windows 10 out-of-the-box install to this month's updates you only need this month's update, not every single update that has been released since that CD was made. That's a huge change from previous versions.
The downside of this is that cumulative updates have gotten much larger over time. October's update clicked in at around a gig. That is a lot of data to move around on a network. With this change the computer only pulls down the differences between the last time it patched and today. The hope is that this will take some of the pain out of patching.
Full disclosure, I work for Microsoft in an unrelated group.
Since Windows is a collection of bajillion files, it seems logical that security and bug fixes would only have to replace files changed, yet upgrade downloads were gigantic, approaching the size of an entire OS.
Now it appears MS is confessing that they have been doing it the blunt low-brow way: the entire OS, or something close, came down for every upgrade all this time.
Imagine the collective bandwidth wasted on all that: it alone may have increased Earth's temperature by a degree or two. Does MS own bikini stock or something? I would guestimate Windows updates have made up between 10 to 40 percent of all Internet traffic. Seems a Yuuuuge MS blunder. Am I missing something?
Table-ized A.I.
They really messed it up Windows Update. It has ruined my 3D prints, and has kept me from leaving places with my laptop.
Taking away the user's ability to delay updates, was bull$hit.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
Some intern spent 5 minutes changing this one command, saving the whole world (including his employer) a few billion dollars over the next few years.
And that intern's name was .. Donald Trump 2020!
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
...is the joy you get from scrubbing the filthy thing off your computer once and for all.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
You used the word fefnicute. Aren't you aware that has anti-semitic roots?
Shame on you! Shame!
Does this mean a higher CPU/RAM cost for patching windows 10 systems? Diffing files isn't free (as in system resource usage, or work-beers). So there are fewer MB of patch files to chew through, but more chewing to do. I'm probably naive to assume there's a net benefit to it since it's been chosen by our *evolent overlords going forward.
what this really means is you will not be able to cache updates via HTTP
honestly I do not know why they have NOT used plain HTTP to download the objects (fall back to https/p2p if needed and have them as options) this would make caches so much faster
(yes verify those objects via cryptographic hash obtained via DANE and TLS )
honestly why cant Microsoft , Apple and Linux/BSD all agree on the transport mechanism (I propose HTTP) this would make life and speed better for everyone
regards
John Jones
They have managed to fuck up regular updates for years, differential updates are going to add even more brokennes
The other option, as several Slashdot users have recommended, is to move to an area where DSL, cable, or fiber is offered:
The smaller the update the easier it becomes to identify what has changed, making un-patched systems easier to hack. This isn't big deal for home users as they are force-fed windows updates whether they want them or not but enterprise customers have the option to defer updates until they have been tested fully. This is a problem for corporate folks running win 10 enterprise on a laptop that goes home and/or travelling with them where they don't have the benefit of a strong firewall between them and a would-be blackhat.
I have a couple of smaller, cheaper laptops with Windows 10 on that keep nagging to apply a pending update.
They are only a few months old.
But telling them to proceed just results in them downloading about 5 gigs data, and then giving up because they don't have room on their small SSDs.
This has happened several times, and is a pretty big waste of bandwidth.
We have put hardly any non-OS data on them. They just can't handle the updates, out of the box.
Does this chance mean they might be able to finally update?
Are you seriously suggesting that the proper "fix' for Microsoft removing the option to schedule update downloads is to move to another location to change ISPs? Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?
I'm not where I am because I like the shitty internet, but I also wasn't complaining about my ISP choices here. I can mostly deal with the internet being terrible, but it's incredibly frustrating to lose huge chunks of my limited bandwidth cap to an OS update removing my ability to schedule future updates to certain times of day. That was a massive fuck-up on Microsoft's part, and it's inexcusable.
And your suggestion is to move so that my situation is more amenable to Microsoft's whims?! It would have been more reasonable to suggest I consider using a different OS. I actually dual-boot on most of the systems already so the situation isn't as bad as it could be, since on those Windows isn't the primary OS. It's still a problem on the couple that can't be switched away, though, and frustrating because it shouldn't be one at all.
PS: I may not agree with your suggestions but I do appreciate that you took a moment to respond. I generally expect my comments to get ignored since I quit logging in years ago and few people bother talking to the ACs. :)
Real patching is replacing a code:
jmp 0xfffae0
with
nop
nop
nop
nop
or in hex of x86 CPU: 0x90909090
That's just a 3 byte update to fix a bug, not a 10 MB patch! 10 MB or 10,485,760 bytes bandwidth on my LAN is worse than a worm.
Did MS finally shell out for a license for RTPatch?! That only took 25 years.
Another slashvertisement...
You mean after 40 years of OS updates they are only now doing this?!?!?!
I always wondered why Windows updates were so huge and bloated, and now I know.
Are you seriously suggesting that the proper "fix' for Microsoft removing the option to schedule update downloads is to move to another location to change ISPs?
It is not a proper fix. But in the long run, there is no truly proper fix for proprietary software other than uninstallation. Switching to an ISP with at least a double digit cap works around not only Microsoft's squandering of bandwidth but also that of websites that have both video ads and anti-adblock.
Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?
Apparently a dozen other users of Slashdot don't.
They'll change windows update in every way they can think of before they'll even think of bringing back the "install updates and shut down" perfection from Windows 7.
I haven't updated my Windows 10 PC in over two weeks because it always asks immediately after I unlock it to use it, so I dismiss it then forget. Bad enough that it takes a group policy just to make the auto-reboots stop.
Linux still does it better in terms of updating software.
They also need to fix the whole random download it whenever it feels like its ready to download, it would be nice to download the updates when i want not when Microsoft wants, also i should be able to decide if i dont want to install a specific update as updates have been known to break things previously
It is not a proper fix. But in the long run, there is no truly proper fix for proprietary software other than uninstallation.
True enough. I use Linux as my primary OS everywhere I can, so on my systems Windows gets stuffed onto a rarely-used partition, if it's installed at all. (It's sometimes useful to have an install around for a few reasons, though I don't use it for anything). I prefer controlling my system, rather than having it be on loan from MS. Not every system in the house is mine, though, so I unfortunately still have to deal with the bullshit regardless of my own preferences.
Switching to an ISP with at least a double digit cap works around not only Microsoft's squandering of bandwidth but also that of websites that have both video ads and anti-adblock.
It's actually kind of amazing how much bandwidth normal browsing can take now, even with aggressive blocking of ads and video. You can load a normal-seeming page that's using 50+mb of images without even noticing, because nobody designing sites gives a fuck any more. I saw a site recently that used over 100MB of images and crap. It's gotten insane.
One thing that's changed is, despite the caps still being ludicrously low, the modems used by satellite providers are faster. It's like the 4G mobile data + low caps problem, where you can eat through your cap stupidly quickly without even noticing because you don't see the site loading slowly and go "oh, this site is shit, time to close the tab." Instead, you load it and then wonder why you're suddenly down 100mb of yoru cap.
Apparently a dozen other users of Slashdot don't.
Touché. Doesn't mean they're not idiots, trolling, or clueless for suggesting it, though. The people making those statements usually have never been to an area where it's an issue. It's easy to talk out your ass about something you've never dealt with personally. I've seen both sides of it, because I've also lived in cities where it's impossible to even imagine this sort of problem really existing. But there are places where broadband is not only not possible to get, but moving isn't even a viable option because even if you're willing, you'd have to move too far away. Hell, I can't even get cell reception here, and reception is nonexistent even in much of the town itself. Yet there's a Verizon store trying to cell you phones that won't fucking work in half the town, lol.
Satellite's annoying and I hate using it, I won't deny that. The latency is frustrating and the ridiculously common downtimes (in weather both fair and foul) is maddening. However, it would still be tolerable if the caps were at least vaguely in line with the reality of using the internet. They're not, though, and likely never will be because there's no requirement for it. The satellite ISPs meet the FCC's requirement for being classified as "broadband", so that's it. Until bandwidth caps are codified into the broadband reqs, people in areas that can't get DSL, cable, or better are never going to get better.
Oh almighty have mercy upon us common folk, Microsoft is actually trying to reduce the size of something. I don't believe it until I see it. I still remember the XP installations that consumed just up to about 500 MB of space and if that's not enough for an operating system then banana it.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Jiddu Krishnamurti
A couple of months ago I'd gotten sufficiently fed up with Android that, when my Android tablet decided to reset itself again, a week or so before I was going on a trip, at the same time that Fry's had an Ematic Win10 tablet on sale, that I'd give Windows tablets a chance. The one I bought had 32GB of flash (plus a microSD card slot), and had 15.9GB of that free. I ran Windows Update, which told me that Anniversary Update was available and needed 16GB of free space; turns out that doesn't mean 15.9, nor 16, nor 16 with an empty 64GB SD card - I had to drag&drop enough different things over to the SD card to get about 18-19GB free on the built-in to get the update to run. But once it had enough space it ran cleanly.
The latest outrage from MS is that the email account I registered it with had the form "username+tag@domain.com", and MS has decided that to protect me from losing access to the account if I forget the password, they need to VERIFY that by sending it an email, which never arrives because they're confused by the "+tag" in the name field, so when I tried to add a different email by answering a bunch of bogus security questions with the same answers as last time, they sent the "VERIFICATION" email to the new address, I clicked on it, and the first thing it does is demand that I re-verify it by having them send a code to the old address. I have not given them a phone number to call, since I have no interest in giving them my real information; I'm tempted to borrow a burner for that, or see if they can send the code by audio to a VOIP system or something.
(That's not even counting that Windows 10 tablet mode is pretty lame, and works much better with a keyboard, and the nice ergonomically designed keyboard that came with the tablet died after about a month, but that's more a symptom of what you get for $70 on sale.)
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks