Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Says Windows 10 Spring Creators Update Will Install in 30 Minutes (bleepingcomputer.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Microsoft has announced that the upcoming Windows 10 major feature upgrade -- dubbed the Spring Creators Update -- will take around 30 minutes to install, unlike previous variants that took between one and two hours to complete. This boost in installation time is attributed to work engineers have done on the "Feature Update" process -- the name Microsoft uses to refer to its bi-annual major OS updates. Microsoft says that this Feature Update process actually consists of two separate phases -- the "online" and "offline" stages. During the "online" phase, the user's computer downloads the necessary update files and executes various operations in the OS' background without affecting the device's battery life or system performance.

101 of 173 comments (clear)

  1. Amazing by 110010001000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Those are some amazing engineers. They developed a way to download data and run system operations without using any CPU or energy. Simply amazing.

    1. Re:Amazing by freeze128 · · Score: 2

      It doesn't affect the "battery life", but may affect the current battery charge. And, you can do your other operations while the computer is idle, therefore not affecting your current CPU usage.

    2. Re:Amazing by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

      Weird. What is so special about these CPU operations that they don't affect the battery (life or charge), or cause an idle computer not to change its current CPU usage? This must be some new amazing engineering stuff!

    3. Re:Amazing by ricky-road-flats · · Score: 1

      Not too amazing, really - I read it as they don't do anything unless the PC's plugged in (so maybe it charges slightly slower, I'll grant you that), and they run everything at low priority so it won't impact on anything the user is doing. Sensible really, along with doing as much as possible before the reboot phase which obviously does impact what the user can do with the PC. Those boys get a lot wrong, but no harm in credit where it's due.

    4. Re:Amazing by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      That is pretty cool. It isn't like while Windows updates itself it affects the user.

    5. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Background tasks. If they only execute while on AC power they won't affect battery life. And if they're using the Windows equivalent of the 'idle' niceness setting then they'll only execute when the CPU and IO aren't doing anything else so strictly speaking they will increase CPU load but the user won't ever notice because they'll always have priority.

    6. Re:Amazing by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      There is times where the CPU is normally Idle, so that is when it can do the update, and normally while the computer is being idle, there is a certain amount of processing that can be done that will not drain its energy. A transistor even giving out a 0 bit is still using energy. That said, The claim that it will not use additional battery life is dubious. It may not be noticeable. If your laptop has a 4 hour charge, it will last 3 hours and 58 minutes. As it may write the data before the drive spins down, and shorten the spin down timeout at amount less.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    7. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The user has never had priority with Windows 10.

    8. Re:Amazing by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      If they only execute while on AC power they won't affect battery life.

      Thank you captain obvious. Why would they make such an obvious statement? The implication is that they don't affect battery life WHEN RUNNING ON BATTERY, because obviously they wouldn't if you're on AC power. Do'h. Do you think they need to say "our unwanted upgrades won't make your laptop heavier", or "our forced reboot after an undesired update won't make your coffee get colder"?

      then they'll only execute when the CPU and IO aren't doing anything else so strictly speaking they will increase CPU load but the user won't ever notice because they'll always have priority.

      And that brings us back to the issue of battery life, because even if they execute while the CPU is otherwise idle they'll be using power -- when the computer is on battery -- and that shortens battery life. The issue isn't "you won't notice us raping your computer with unwanted upgrades", it is "you're sucking down the battery I need later while doing it". And "you're doing it" is an issue all by itself.

    9. Re:Amazing by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      A transistor even giving out a 0 bit is still using energy.

      What passes for nerds today. Really. A static data bit doesn't consume much energy. It is changing ones to zeros and zeros to ones, with the associated charges on the explicit and implicit capacitances of the circuitry that consumes the power. That's why a faster computer consumes more energy. That's why computing something instead of being idle consumes more power.

      That said, The claim that it will not use additional battery life is dubious.

      It's Microsoft. When is any of their claims not dubious?

      As it may write the data before the drive spins down,

      Another energy sink: moving the drive's heads for spinning rust. Or writing to an SSD. Just writing data to disk means it uses more power than normal.

    10. Re:Amazing by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Ok, it temporarily disables the spyware while it is installing. Net 0 effect.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    11. Re:Amazing by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Not too amazing, really ... Those boys get a lot wrong, but no harm in credit where it's due.

      Yeah, it's not like Macs, Linux, Android, iPhones, and pretty much everyone else wasn't already doing this years ago. And WOW!!! 30 minutes for an update? I'm shocked it takes so long.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    12. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft Says Windows 10 Spring Creators Update Will Install in 30 Minutes WHETHER YOU WANT IT OR NOT!

      FTFY

    13. Re:Amazing by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Nope, they aren't good at all. They are only setting the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\TEMP_DEBLOAT to 1 while the install happens.

  2. Awesome! by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But more important: How long will the rollback to a usable system take?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Awesome! by cyberchondriac · · Score: 2

      Yeah, they kinda forgot to add the "whether you want to or not" disclaimer...

      lol "forgot".. yeah, that's it.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    2. Re:Awesome! by tepples · · Score: 1

      Turned my 8 month old 900 dollar dell laptop into a piece of junk.

      What was Dell's reply when you sought warranty service?

    3. Re:Awesome! by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      As long as it takes you to install Linux, or at least Windows 7.

    4. Re:Awesome! by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Call MS?

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    5. Re:Awesome! by tepples · · Score: 1

      Because that's what Microsoft expects of its OEM licensees.

    6. Re:Awesome! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The problem is games. As odd as it may sound. What keeps most people chained to Windows is that their games don't run (properly or at all) on Linux without jumping through more hoops than they can. It's still not trivial to run games on Linux so they "just work". Especially when dealing with some of the more insanely DRMified junk from EA or Ubi.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  3. Hard Links? by omnichad · · Score: 1

    Sounds like the install process involves changing so many files, that just creating a duplicate Windows folder with hard links to unchanged files and pre-copying the new files would make the process go a lot faster. On reboot, just rename Windows to Windows.old, rename temp directory, and move updated registry and user settings into place.

    Why just about every single file needs to be replaced during these upgrades is the real question.

    1. Re:Hard Links? by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the install process involves changing so many files, that just creating a duplicate Windows folder with hard links to unchanged files and pre-copying the new files would make the process go a lot faster. On reboot, just rename Windows to Windows.old, rename temp directory, and move updated registry and user settings into place.

      Why just about every single file needs to be replaced during these upgrades is the real question.

      Monolithic build..

      Microsoft has an impressive super sized monolithic code base.. It is engineering wise impressive they can make it work, and impressingly stupid they are still doing it that way.

    2. Re:Hard Links? by DarkRookie · · Score: 2

      10 is no better than 7

      10 is worse than 7 for even reason you listed above.
      There is no point installing 10 unless its force upon you.

      --
      The millennial that doesn't like most of the stuff designed for millennials.
    3. Re:Hard Links? by Monster_user · · Score: 1

      The fact that just about every single file needs to be replaced isn't very surprising. This is a major update. Like a Service Pack, or a full operating system upgrade. In the Linux world this would be upgrading to the latest release of the distribution, particularly in the Ubuntu world where 6 months is the release cycle. apt-get dist-upgrade. It is why I switched to LTS releases.

    4. Re:Hard Links? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Great, so now you can change the DNS servers via a single super secure command line? I'll bet that doesn't get hacked.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    5. Re:Hard Links? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      There is no point installing 10

      FTFY

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    6. Re:Hard Links? by mcswell · · Score: 1

      Actually, Win10 introduced one useful feature that made me update both my computers for: the Linux subsystem. I use it all the time for Python and (La)TeX. Yes, Python and LaTeX run under Windows, but having the Linux utilities (grep, sed, make,...) just makes it so much easier. I used to use CygWin, but this is just better.

    7. Re:Hard Links? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      So essentially every attacker for every version of Windows? In case you're behind the times, Windows is a clusterfuck wrt security. If you can execute any code on a windows machine, you can effectively own it, at least as of just 6 months ago.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  4. Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by elgholm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Windows 10 Fall Creators Update has so far managed to completely brick (no kidding!) 6 of my 9 computers (with genuine windows).
    Only 3 of them has not received the unfixable* blue-screen-of-death when installing the Fall Creators Update.
    (*Yes, unfixable, the update destroys the partition, and there's no way to get it back, you can fake-create it back, but the update then destroys is again, and again.)

    I've had to roll back 3 of them to Windows 7, and 3 of them is still broken, since I haven't had the time yet to complete reinstall everything on them. I'm thinking "Linux", and throwing away my Windows licenses.

    So... Now you're giving me "Spring Creators" you say?
    Lovely.

    I thought the flu season only happened once per year.

    1. Re:Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by omnichad · · Score: 1

      *Yes, unfixable, the update destroys the partition

      Haven't seen that. Have seen drive letters get swapped around, USB keyboards and mice stop working, and all sorts of other things. Most I've seen were eventually fixable - but involved manually uninstalling updates using DISM in the preboot environment.

      Do you dual-boot? GPT or MBR? Any strange hardware? Genuinely curious.

    2. Re:Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      Man I must have owned a horseshoe factory staffed by leprechauns in a previous life because I've never had any of these types of issues with any of my Windows boxes, physical or virtual.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    3. Re:Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by elgholm · · Score: 1

      No, no dual-boot. Most computers were upgraded from Windows 7 at some point though.

      When I've been googling the errors, if I remember correctly it's around 2-3 different 0xCODEs you get, I've stumbled upon forum-posts upon forum-posts discussing this. I'm not alone. I guess there's more than 1 million people affected, probably, world wide. They all seem to eventuelly give up at some point, and format the harddrive and just install from scratch - which I've done one of my sons the computers, and the shit update bricked it again, 2 times! Never again. Most people in the forums have given up and actually BOUGHT new computers instead. Horrible.

    4. Re:Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by elgholm · · Score: 1

      I wish I've also owned that same horseshoe factory. Didn't know that was a requirement though.

    5. Re:Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by elgholm · · Score: 1

      Just to clarify. Most of the issue seems to be with the partition being in GPT, and with a special "size" of the rescue- vs. os-partition.

      I'm a programmer myself. And if my shitty install couldn't handle a special situtation I would probably try and identify it BEFORE doing the installation. I guess I will never work at Microsoft.

    6. Re:Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Amazing you even made it that far after an upgrade from 7. Of most of the computers I've dealt with, a clean install was required around the first anniversary update because it would fail to ever install - but not break anything.

      Buying a new computer would be silly, since a clean install would also fix it.

    7. Re:Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by omnichad · · Score: 2

      Most of the issue seems to be with the partition being in GPT, and with a special "size" of the rescue- vs. os-partition.

      Have seen this, but with earlier releases. If you could roll it back / repair and make the system partition at least 500MB using something like GParted it will usually upgrade just fine.

      Yeah, I think they just plain assumed that nobody installed Windows 7 in EFI mode because the hardware support was limited when 7 first came out. Because 7 only made something like a 100MB system reserved partition when it partitions the drive.

    8. Re:Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by ControlsGeek · · Score: 2

      I finally had to install Fall Creators update last night and my Start Menu is configured with garish tiles that I don't want and that I cannot delete. The database of tiles is 'corrupt' and the repair tool refuses to fix it.

      I want Windows 7 back not Spring Creators update. I want to get work done not be 'Creative'.

    9. Re:Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by omnichad · · Score: 1

      On the same subject, I've seen what you had with OS X. The computer had no recovery partition, so it somehow decided to wipe the main OS/user partition and replace that with a recovery partition during the update. And overwrote user data. And then couldn't find anywhere to install the OS update. Had to use data carving with PhotoRec just to get their photos back.

    10. Re:Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by ControlsGeek · · Score: 1

      Thank you Anon, I will try it.

    11. Re: Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by elgholm · · Score: 1

      One time I actually managed to repair with the repair utility, and one time it actually booted by itself and repaired. But the others, not so lucky... Iâ(TM)ll reinstall.

    12. Re: Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by elgholm · · Score: 1

      Yes, but a clean install takes time. You accumulate programs and their settings during a couple of years, and files thatâ(TM)s you perhaps havenâ(TM)t backed up.

    13. Re:Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by mcswell · · Score: 1

      Same experience here, but I grow clovers. The four leaf kind.

    14. Re:Guess I'll have my work cut out for me then... by nogginthenog · · Score: 1

      Got the problem on an AMD PC here. Even a fresh install of the latest Windows 10 from MSDN blue screens it. Used to work on older versions of Windows 10.

  5. Not worth it by WaffleMonster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Speaking for myself all of this downtime for no tangible benefit isn't worth it nor is constantly dealing with the aftermath of what broke or changed behind your back this time. Computers are supposed to be tools.. vehicles to get shit done yet vendors seem hell bent on wasting everyone's time with nonsense.

    I must say being impressed with 30 minutes of downtime in the age when production systems can be migrated across physical systems with seconds or less of downtime is like being awarded a medal for crossing the finish line hours after everyone went home and roads re-opened to vehicle traffic.

    1. Re:Not worth it by burtosis · · Score: 1

      Microsoft leads all other major companies in the sheer number of participation awards.

  6. Re:other OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a non-Windows user, I read this headline and assumed 30 minutes was a regression, not an improvement. Previous updates took 1-2 hours? What the hell are you doing with all that time? I can go from a blank hard drive to a fully up-to-date Linux installation with all my personal applications and configurations in place in 30 minutes. An update should be considerably faster than that, and certainly shouldn't take my machine out of commission for more than a minute or two.

  7. Define 'minutes' by DickBreath · · Score: 2

    Do you mean real minutes? Or do you mean Microsoft 'minutes'? New, improved, bigger, better Microsoft minutes!

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    1. Re:Define 'minutes' by iampiti · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's minutes as estimated by the Windows file copying dialog :P

    2. Re:Define 'minutes' by Negafox · · Score: 1

      Frieza time.

  8. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  9. Same two hours. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
    But the first 90 minutes of downloading and setting up the installation and staging the files will happen before you reboot. Then, Presto! it takes only 30 minutes to install!

    Amazing technology!

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  10. LOLZ by DarkRookie · · Score: 1

    HAHAHAHAHAHA
    No it fucking won't.

    --
    The millennial that doesn't like most of the stuff designed for millennials.
  11. Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by mystik · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I had a machine I serviced that would not install the fall creator's update, with a non-specific error message.

    I was both impressed and horrified to learn that that fall creators update would searched the *ENTIRE* hard drive for incompatible software. It was failing because it located an old copy of the Netware client Installer, in "C:\Old_Computer\Documents and Settings\User\Downloads\Novell". This software wasn't even installed on the computer; just present in that directory. The built-in updater failed w/ a general error, and the downloaded copy of the update claimed "You must uninstall this incompatible software", which, again, was not actually installed, just present on the hard drive.

    Now I know *why* Windows takes forever to install updates :(

    --
    Why aren't you encrypting your e-mail?
    1. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by DRJlaw · · Score: 2

      I was both impressed and horrified to learn that that fall creators update would searched the *ENTIRE* hard drive for incompatible software.

      Well, you can't trust the "Programs and Features" listing to include all of the software operable on the machine, much less that some software hasn't been installed with a slight error in its registry entries for installation/uninstallation that gets blown out by a "cleaner" program, so if you want to avoid the corner case of some user crying to the world that you've broken their software setup you have to treat every executable/application as if it is used.

      The general error nonsense is maddening and stupid, but the refusal to upgrade makes reasonable sense.

    2. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2

      Well, you can't trust the "Programs and Features" listing to include all of the software operable on the machine . . .

      Well maybe Microsoft should fix that since they created the OS.

      The general error nonsense is maddening and stupid, but the refusal to upgrade makes reasonable sense.

      It makes it less reasonable in my opinion. It means I can't update a current Windows computer to 10 that is being used as a network drive for other software because MS finds incompatible even though none of the software is actually installed.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      As if Linux or Max OS X are any better in that regard.

      Have you used OS X? Applications that are installed are in folder called Applications. As for Linux there is the distinct separation between system and user applications with applications being put into certain folders.

      The software doesn't have to be "actually installed" in order to be run, and if you're using a Windows 10 client as a network drive server for incompatible versions of windows, you deserve any difficulties that you get.

      That's not what the poster said. He said specifically that the Win 10 install refused to work because another software's installer application was located in a folder. It had not been run. Win 10 objected to the mere presence of a file that didn't affect the operation of the machine.

      Knock off the stalking behavior - it's creepy.

      Jeez you're full of yourself. You posted something and object to being responded is what you're saying. If I had responded to every thing you said you might have a point.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    4. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by Khyber · · Score: 1

      It also runs around DELETING files on your system. Upgrade from windows 7? That first update will wipe out the Windows.old directory where your old Win7 Stuff went. It will also delete music players it detects and replaces them with Groove Player (this is the 3rd time I've dealt with Microsoft uninstalling and replacing AIMP.)

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    5. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "Knock off the stalking behavior - it's creepy."

      You must really not know how slashdot works. All I have to do is go to my comments posted page, and I can see if you replied, thus giving me an option to reply back to you that way instead of hunting down through a conversation.

      OTOH, if you want some real creepy stalking behavior, I've already figured out who you are and could just dox you right here on the site. Would that make you feel better and justified in making your stalking statement?

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    6. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Have you used OS X? Applications that are installed are in folder called Applications. As for Linux there is the distinct separation between system and user applications with applications being put into certain folders.

      Yes I have, and nothing prevents you from downloading an application file into an unusual folder and executing it. There is not enforcement of applications being put into certain folders, it is a convention, just as it is a convention upon installation to list programs within the "Programs and Features" registry entries in Windows so that they can be uninstalled.

      That's not what the poster said. He said specifically that the Win 10 install refused to work because another software's installer application was located in a folder. It had not been run. Win 10 objected to the mere presence of a file that didn't affect the operation of the machine.

      That does not change my point, which that the installer could be run from that location and the user might complain about the fact that it could not. The installer is an application as much as any other.

      You posted something and object to being responded is what you're saying.

      What a coinky-dink, with no connected to your posts from yesterday at all...

    7. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      OTOH, if you want some real creepy stalking behavior, I've already figured out who you are and could just dox you right here on the site. Would that make you feel better and justified in making your stalking statement?

      *Eye-roll*

    8. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Yes I have, and nothing prevents you from downloading an application file into an unusual folder and executing it

      Er? You do know what installing an application entails in OS X right?

      There is not enforcement of applications being put into certain folders, it is a convention, just as it is a convention upon installation to list programs within the "Programs and Features" registry entries in Windows so that they can be uninstalled.

      So let me understand you correctly: To address your own point that Windows doesn't know for sure what Programs are installed in their own OS and that is something they could fix, you then try to bring up OS X and Linux as a red herring. The last time I checked all my complaints about my Honda should not be directed towards Toyota. Also you failed to acknowledge when pointed out that OS X and Linux do in fact does this better.

      That does not change my point, which that the installer could be run from that location and the user might complain about the fact that it could not. The installer is an application as much as any other.

      Then that makes your entire point irrelevant. The poster was complaining about something specific which was about Win 10 updater finding a software that it deemed "incompatible" even though it wasn't actually installed.

      What a coinky-dink, with no connected to your posts from yesterday at all..

      Translation: You are triggered when someone responds to your posts pointing out how foolish they are.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    9. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Yes I have, and nothing prevents you from downloading an application file into an unusual folder and executing it

      Er? You do know what installing an application entails in OS X right?

      Non-denial #1. Nothing stops you from downloading a BSD-compliant application into /Users/UnknowingFool and executing it.

      here is not enforcement of applications being put into certain folders, it is a convention, just as it is a convention upon installation to list programs within the "Programs and Features" registry entries in Windows so that they can be uninstalled.

      So let me understand you correctly: To address your own point that Windows doesn't know for sure what Programs are installed in their own OS and that is something they could fix, you then try to bring up OS X and Linux as a red herring.

      Yes, Linux and Mac OSX also do not know for sure what programs are installed in the OS. No, it's not a red herring -- it's an explanation for why scanning the filesystem would be necessary under all three OSes if you want to ensure that no incompatible program is stranded upon an OS upgrade. Otherwise you're taking the OS's installed application list at its word and that list is not guaranteed to be complete.

      That does not change my point, which that the installer could be run from that location and the user might complain about the fact that it could not. The installer is an application as much as any other.

      Then that makes your entire point irrelevant. The poster was complaining about something specific which was about Win 10 updater finding a software that it deemed "incompatible" even though it wasn't actually installed.

      Any application held in local storage and executable as such is "installed." You're merely fooling yourself if you believe otherwise.

    10. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Dude, finding you isn't hard when your comment history reveals all that's needed to know. With that failure of an IP law firm you run.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    11. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      Consider yourself lucky. When I evaluated Window10 on a test system and installed the free update, the installer outright DELETED any application that it deemed incompatible. It didn't tell me this would happen until the damage was done.

      No warning... no asking for permission... no opportunity to update the application to a newer version. 11 applications just entirely wiped out. Ironically, while it was working the installer gave me regular assurances that "all my files would be exactly where I left them". I guess Microsoft doesn't consider any file on the drive to be mine.

      Needless to say, I'm still running Win7.

    12. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Dude, finding you isn't hard when your comment history reveals all that's needed to know. With that failure of an IP law firm you run.

      *eye-roll*

    13. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by eionmac · · Score: 1

      After 49 tries, Windows 10 Fall Creators Update has not installed on one Windows 10 computer. Twice it has exited to " we are restoring your old (Version 1703) Windows system". No reason ever given. Just the 'try again' screen. Windows 10 machines kept as teaching computers with no programs other than Windows 10 do update regularly even if slowly.

      --
      Regards Eion MacDonald
    14. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Non-denial #1. Nothing stops you from downloading a BSD-compliant application into /Users/UnknowingFool and executing it.

      Bahahaha. So this is your deflection again. You brought up how Microsoft cannot know which applications are installed yet when pointed out that they are in full control of this you try to deflect that criticism by talking about OS X and Linux. In Linux and OS X (derived from BSD), there are distinct separations of user applications and system applications. While a superuser can always do things against the convention in any system, regular users cannot. Whereas MS has never really enforced any convention for decades.

      Yes, Linux and Mac OSX also do not know for sure what programs are installed in the OS. No, it's not a red herring -- it's an explanation for why scanning the filesystem would be necessary under all three OSes if you want to ensure that no incompatible program is stranded upon an OS upgrade. Otherwise you're taking the OS's installed application list at its word and that list is not guaranteed to be complete.

      Again a red herring. The complaint that you made was on Microsoft. Again you made this complaint. And now you try to deflect it by mentioning other OS.You can also complain that Commodores never knew where programs were located too.

      Any application held in local storage and executable as such is "installed." You're merely fooling yourself if you believe otherwise.,

      Bahahahaha,. See here you are trying to change the meaning of the word "installed" because you have been shown up not to know what you are talking about. First, back to what the OP said. He had an Netware installation program in a folder. It was a very old copy of that program, and I don't even know if it could run because Win 10 complained about the compatibility. Second by your definition, almost everything downloaded is "installed" to where "installed" does not mean anything different than "downloaded". Windows force downloaded Windows 10 installation program on my Win 8.1 computer; Win 10 is "installed" even though it has never been run. Funny, it still says Win 8.1 when I look but according to you Win 10 has been "installed". Maybe you should tell MS that as it keeps bothering me to "install" Win 10.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    15. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Bahahaha. So this is your deflection again. You brought up how Microsoft cannot know which applications are installed yet when pointed out that they are in full control of this you try to deflect that criticism by talking about OS X and Linux. In Linux and OS X (derived from BSD), there are distinct separations of user applications and system applications.

      No deflection. In Linus and BSD there are supposed to be distinct separations, when you follow customary practices, just as in Windows there are supposed to be distinct separations between system applications, user applications, and user data, when you follow customary practices, but in all three you can put an application in an extraodrinary place, i.e., not /usr/bin or its analog, and installed application list will not reflect it. Prove it false, or move on.

      Again a red herring. The complaint that you made was on Microsoft.

      I didn't make a complaint - you've lost track of the thread. I explained why Microsoft scanned local storage for incompatible executable applications and you lost your damn mind about how that was Microsoft's problem that it didn't know what was "installed" on the computer. As if the "Programs and Features" list was the end-all-be-all and the scanner finding anything else was somehow wrong. Microsoft fixed exactly the problem that you're complaining of -- they scanned the entire local storage for incompatible executable applications.

      Bahahahaha,. See here you are trying to change the meaning of the word "installed" because you have been shown up not to know what you are talking about.

      Coming from PETs, Commodore 64s, and IBM XTs running DOS, I'm afraid that you do not know what you are talking about. Applications were not "installed" under MS-DOS because there was no operating system-based directory of applications stored in the hard drive? As if...

      Begone ignorant youngster...

    16. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by ElizabethGreene · · Score: 1

      If you'd like to know why this happened, the reason for the upgrade failure should be in
      C:\$Windows.~BT\Sources\Rollback\setupact.err
      or
      C:\$Windows.~BT\Sources\panther\setupact.log

      The former is created if it fails and rolls back, the latter if it doesn't get that far.

    17. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      No deflection. In Linus and BSD there are supposed to be distinct separations, when you follow customary practices, just as in Windows there are supposed to be distinct separations between system applications, user applications, and user data, when you follow customary practices, but in all three you can put an application in an extraodrinary place, i.e., not /usr/bin or its analog, and installed application list will not reflect it. Prove it false, or move on.

      First of all, how long have you used Windows? The distinctions that you list are very recent and not always enforced as of today. Second, why again are you talking about Linux and BSD when Windows is what we are supposed to be talking about.

      I didn't make a complaint - you've lost track of the thread.

      To refresh your memory: You said: "Well, you can't trust the "Programs and Features" listing to include all of the software operable on the machine, . . " to which I responded Microsoft should probably fix that. That sounds like a complaint to me. Then you started to try to deflect any criticism of MS by mentioning OS X and Linux. Is your memory any clearer? Also you can always scroll up to see what you wrote.

      I explained why Microsoft scanned local storage for incompatible executable applications and you lost your damn mind about how that was Microsoft's problem that it didn't know what was "installed" on the computer.

      And you missed my entire point: The OP complained he had a copy of an old program on his computer and that the Win 10 installer refused to update to Win 10 because he had the file. The OP clearly stated that he had not installed the program. Why should MS care about what files someone has on their drives if they are not actually installed? That would make it so no one could use Windows machine as a repository for older programs which I initially stated.

      I don't know where you work but we have a mix of new and legacy machines, and we do not allow people to install whatever software they want. That is why have network drives full of software that they can install that has been tested and configured. But according to this we cannot update the computers that are housing the software files to Win 10 because MS somehow feels that their judgement of what files we can have supersedes operational practices.

      As if the "Programs and Features" list was the end-all-be-all and the scanner finding anything else was somehow wrong. Microsoft fixed exactly the problem that you're complaining of -- they scanned the entire local storage for incompatible executable applications.

      Again that is MS problem that should probably fix. And again you missed the point: MS should not be stopping an update process for the mere presence incompatible software installation files that have not been executed and override their users wishes. If MS wants to warn the user about the presence of files, that's another matter.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    18. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      First of all, how long have you used Windows? The distinctions that you list are very recent and not always enforced as of today.

      I tried 1.01 on my XT-compatible. I ran 3.0 on my 386SX. How long have you, youngster?

      Second, why again are you talking about Linux and BSD when Windows is what we are supposed to be talking about.

      Says you. You don't dictate what we are "supposed" to be talking about, and I certainly didn't agree to anything of the sort.

      To refresh your memory: You said: "Well, you can't trust the "Programs and Features" listing to include all of the software operable on the machine, . . " to which I responded Microsoft should probably fix that. That sounds like a complaint to me.

      As the one who wrote the words, I can safely inform you that you're wrong. You can tell because you dropped "so if you want to avoid the corner case of some user crying to the world that you've broken their software setup you have to treat every executable/application as if it is used" and "the refusal to upgrade makes reasonable sense." Which is not a corner case specific to Windows.

      And you missed my entire point: The OP complained he had a copy of an old program on his computer and that the Win 10 installer refused to update to Win 10 because he had the file. The OP clearly stated that he had not installed the program. Why should MS care about what files someone has on their drives if they are not actually installed?

      Because your point is stupid, and relies upon some special definition of "installed" that you still can't explain, much less reconcile with how programs were "installed" before Windows tried to put a pretty face on automated uninstallation routines, and because "so if you want to avoid the corner case of some user crying to the world that you've broken their software setup you have to treat every executable/application as if it is used".

      I don't know where you work but we have a mix of new and legacy machines, and we do not allow people to install whatever software they want.

      Bully for you. Remember your complaints about "real world scenarios" and MS failing to accout for them? How about home-operated Windows 10 machines run by non-professional users who simply expect their software to run after an update?

      But according to this we cannot update the computers that are housing the software files to Win 10 because MS somehow feels that their judgement of what files we can have supersedes operational practices.

      You're complaining that Microsoft's operational practices are blocking your operational practices while touting how you block your users operational practices with pride?

      Plus you're serving software applications to legacy machines from Windows 10 client desktops and you think that your operational practices don't completely suck?

      Stop wasting my time.

      Again that is MS problem that should probably fix.

      They did. You bitched. Oh, you mean centralize it all in a pretty little interface that is guaranteed to be accurate. Which no major operating system does. Yeah, they should get right on that.

      And again you missed the point: MS should not be stopping an update process for the mere presence incompatible software installation files that have not been executed and override their users wishes.

      Yes, they should. Their users' wishes are frequently idiotic. Like demanding that all the programs be listed in a pretty little interface that is guaranteed to be accurate yet has no effect upon the upgrade process because that would be overriding "their users wishes." Here's a hint: put the software on a server share like a competent IT professional.

      If MS wants to warn the us

    19. Re:Windows 10 Fall Creators Update by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      I tried 1.01 on my XT-compatible. I ran 3.0 on my 386SX. How long have you, youngster?

      I was laughing at people who used Windows back then. Multitasking, multi-user environments, what's that you say? If only VMS and Unix machines didn't exist so that people know what real computing entailed.

      Says you. You don't dictate what we are "supposed" to be talking about, and I certainly didn't agree to anything of the sort.

      Of course, you want to deflect again. You're losing the argument badly and changing the subject is the only way you might have some points. The problem is that you'd still lose the argument after you switch subjects as I've previously noted.

      As the one who wrote the words, I can safely inform you that you're wrong. You can tell because you dropped "so if you want to avoid the corner case of some user crying to the world that you've broken their software setup you have to treat every executable/application as if it is used" and "the refusal to upgrade makes reasonable sense." Which is not a corner case specific to Windows.

      You sound like someone who has never worked in a corporate IT environment before. [sarcasm]"Install whatever software you want". Nothing every goes wrong in corporate IT when that happens.[/sarcasm] Also you don't seem to know there are reasons why we have legacy software. It's not because we want to make our lives harder. Sure you can tell those companies that did not/will not update their Win 7 drivers that they should give us new drivers because you can't fathom why we still have Win 7 machines that don't use Win 10. Or hire a team programmers to write new drivers. Also to complement that team, make sure you hire lawyers to so that our programmers don't breach any copyright/patent issues while writing our own drivers. Or please approve the millions of dollars for new equipment so that we can replace older machines that work with newer ones because Win 10 is so much nicer.

      Also you tell the admins that to stop crying because some idiot updated the servers/computers that affected business operations. You know like that accountant who just had to install Win 10 that borked his machine. Hey it sucks to be him but considering he's the one that approves payroll, people not being paid on time until we get his computer back is just "whining". People installing whatever software they want is the only way anything works in a corporate environment.

      Because your point is stupid, and relies upon some special definition of "installed" that you still can't explain, much less reconcile with how programs were "installed" before Windows tried to put a pretty face on automated uninstallation routines, and because "so if you want to avoid the corner case of some user crying to the world that you've broken their software setup you have to treat every executable/application as if it is used".

      Dear lord. Please look up what installed means. It does not mean "downloaded". You keep using the word "installed" when you mean "downloaded". Again you don't seem to work in a corporate environment where admins have to control what software is installed. They have to keep repositories. They have to test the software before updating user machines. Where do they keep the software? On machines.

      You're complaining that Microsoft's operational practices are blocking your operational practices while touting how you block your users operational practices with pride?

      Again go work in a corporate IT environment before you comment further as you don't seem to have a clue. The time admins spend on curated updates is time consuming enough. Allowing anyone to install anything? You do know that's how viruses and worms and ransomware get into networks right? You do know that increases the tickets and issues, right? "You installed a bitcoining mining application that runs all day and caused your computer to slow down because you wanted to

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  12. You're an idiot by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

    No your computers were not "bricked". Unless you had to remove the flash chip or hook up the JTAG programmer your hardware isn't even remotely bricked. Sounds like you are better suited to iDevices.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re:You're an idiot by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Technically they were not "bricked" but they were definitely broken. Other than phrasing how is his complaint any less relevant?

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:You're an idiot by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Heck, 2017 was a great year for Linux, only 400 security bugs.. lol

      You do know that if you are basing security on the number of bugs in CVE: Windows 8.1 and Windows 10 combined to have more 400 bugs combined in 2017. That doesn't include all other versions of Windows like Server 2012 (235), Server 2016(252), Win 7(229) ,etc. But please feel free to laugh at Microsoft.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re: You're an idiot by elgholm · · Score: 1

      Oh, sorry that I used that word, since it upset you. I didnâ(TM)t mean the hardware was bricked. But for me, a computerâ(TM)s hardware is worth around 6-8 hours work time. And completely reinstalling the computer, installing all programs, finding their licenses, setting everything up, tweaking, logging in to all relevant services, etc. Well, yeah, no thank you. It takes me around 2-3 days before Iâ(TM)m up and running again. 3 of the computers belonged to my sons, and they didnâ(TM)t even have backups made.
      Hardware, of course not bricked - which I thought everyone understood.
      Software, hence âoemy systemâ, very much so.

    4. Re: You're an idiot by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      And how many distros does the Linux number include? And what is the the severity of those bugs? You see it's not as clear as you make it out to be. And yes, true security personnel have been laughing at Windows for years. Only neophytes think that Windows has been anything but secure.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  13. Whether you want it to or not. by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > Microsoft Says Windows 10 Spring Creators Update Will Install in 30 Minutes

    Whether you want it to or not.

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    1. Re:Whether you want it to or not. by heson · · Score: 1

      Furthermore the bootup after the install will take 2 hours (but that is not part of the install, it is just a maintenance operation)

    2. Re:Whether you want it to or not. by Z80a · · Score: 1

      This sound more like a freeza threat than anything else.
      "You dirty damn monkey! in 30 minutes the update will be installed and you will die!"

  14. So... by TheOuterLinux · · Score: 2

    About as long as it takes to install an entire Linux distribution such as "Linux Mint" without updating as it goes? Ummm..k. "A" for effort good buddy.

  15. Yes I read the article... by Mark+Hood · · Score: 1

    But the headline: "Microsoft Says Windows 10 Spring Creators Update Will Install in 30 Minutes" did lead me to think it would start installing in half an hour from now. And I'd be unable to stop it.

    --
    Liked this comment? Why not buy me something nice
  16. Re:other OS (apt-get dist-upgrade) by Monster_user · · Score: 1

    This is the equivalent of an apt-get dist-upgrade on Ubuntu, not a simple update. The 30 minutes sounds like it is the portion that occurs after the reboot, not the download and update itself. I'm trying to recall if there is anything I have to do after a dist-upgrade on Ubuntu once it reboots,..

  17. Credit where it's due by Voyager529 · · Score: 2

    Look, I'll be the first one to say that Windows Update in Win10 is basically indistinguishable from malware at this point. The forced updates are written with the assumption that the user wants them, that the software is an improvement over the old, and that the user's time is better spent waiting for the update to complete than whatever it is they would otherwise be doing with their computer.

    All of these problems need to be solved. However, I will acknowledge the intermediate step being taken here. The amount of time an update takes to install is a major part of the problem here. If the monthly updates took five minutes and the semi-annual updates took 30, instead of the hours they currently take, I think it would go a long way to solving the other issues.

    The massive question mark here is the hardware being used to make these claims. "a current-gen i7 with 32GB of RAM and a high end Intel SSD" taking half an hour? That's crap. "a six year old Celeron with a 5400RPM, 250GB laptop drive and 4GB of RAM" taking half an hour, on the other hand, is pretty impressive.

    1. Re:Credit where it's due by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      Look, I'll be the first one to say that Windows Update in Win10 is basically indistinguishable from malware at this point.

      At this point? People were joking that Windows is like malware back in the mid-1990s.

    2. Re:Credit where it's due by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      If the monthly updates took five minutes and the semi-annual updates took 30, instead of the hours they currently take, I think it would go a long way to solving the other issues.

      Would it solve the issue of a forced reboot three days into a four day model run? Really?

      Will faster updates fix the issue of broken software? Really?

    3. Re:Credit where it's due by thegeekzweb · · Score: 1

      Have to agree that I am not a fan of forced updates in Windows 10. Regardless of how long it takes to install, many of us will remember a box full of disks and then a handful more disks to install IE. Those were the days.

      --
      Geekzweb.com - A technology blog and community
  18. Re:other OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It is Microsoft and Windows. This is the ONLY operating system from the ONLY vendor where a program can be "running" yet doing zero I/O, consuming zero CPU, and having no detectable peripheral or internal usage whatsoever (ie doing nothing with memory either) yet take forever to get anywhere (as in, installing ANYTHING on Windows, where it will sit "doing nothing" while it is "getting ready to install", sometimes for hours).

    I wish they would do away with all this crap and just make the update work properly. I can download 100 GB a heck of a lot faster (elapsed time wise) than the cruddy Microsoft crappola can figure out which 2K it needs to download.

    Also, when I install something or perform an update I want it to GO GO GO GO GO to the point that some required resource (I/O, CPU, RAM Bandwidth, whatever) is 100% consumed. If no resource is 100% consumed then what the heck is the crap doing? Is it the "sleep for (10000 - version) seconds delay so that you are fooled into believing that each version is faster than the previous when all it really is, is that each version wastes less time doing nothing?

  19. False headline by mcl630 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Microsoft Says Windows 10 Spring Creators Update Will Install in 30 Minutes

    No, they did not say that. They said the "offline" part of installation will take 30 minutes (down from 82 minutes for the Creators Update and 51 minutes for the Fall Creators Update). They are just moving more of the install to the "online" phase. Total time should be about the same. The only advantage is that you can still use your computer during the "online" phase.

    1. Re:False headline by Malizar · · Score: 2

      That's debatable, it generally takes me 1-2 hours to get my computer back on the internet after a major update from them. I am sure this update will be no different.

  20. 30 minutes? not a lot of time to back up my Linux by iTrawl · · Score: 1

    How about a longer lead time for a heads up Slashdot? If I hadn't read the article when I did I would have been surprised by the update when it rebooted my computer. And I don't even use Windows! Whose decision is this?

    --
    "Everybody's naked underneath" -- The Doctor
  21. BOOST in installation time? by RHenningsgard · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't that be "boost in installation SPEED?"

  22. restart services only by DrYak · · Score: 1

    I'm trying to recall if there is anything I have to do after a dist-upgrade on Ubuntu once it reboots,..

    And sometime you don't have even to reboot.

    Have a look at 'needrestart' package. It's a plugin to dpkg that can automatically identify which services use files (such as libraries) that got overwritten during the upgrade, and give you the possibility to restart them.

    So if it's not a big upgrade (like between two refreshes of the same LTS on Ubuntu, or a point release of Debian stable), you might postpone the reboot.

    openSUSE has the ' zypper ps' command doing a similar detection (but you have to type the 'systemctl restart {blah}.service' yourself), which is pretty much useful on a rolling release distro like Tumbleweed which has extremely frequent but tiny updates (do these updates affect any executables that are currently running ?)

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re: restart services only by Monster_user · · Score: 1

      A refresh of the same LTS doesn't typically require a reboot on Windows either.

      Going from 17.10 to 18.04 does, which would be the equivalent of Fall Creators to Spring Creators.

  23. Babysitting the updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So when is Microsoft going to fix the problem of having to sit through the hours-long update process and answer wizard questions HALF-WAY-FUCKING-THROUGH it? Put the stupid questions at the beginning of the process so I can answer them and go home and have the update finish on its own overnight.

    Or better yet, stop making Windows version updates a separate process from Windows Update.

  24. Well whoop-de-doo by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It'll be a story when they let me decide which 30 minutes.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  25. And after that, plug and pray by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

    With big updates from MS, you never know whether your PC will work afterwards.

  26. Re:Yeah bullshit. by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

    It's not the worst product they've ever put out. Not by a long shot. See: Windows ME.

    At least Windows 10 is useable and functional at what it's designed to do. And yes, it's designed to spy.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  27. OEM triage by tepples · · Score: 1

    As I understand it, it's Dell's responsibility to triage problems reported by Dell customers and aggregate them for escalation to Microsoft.

  28. Re:other OS by eionmac · · Score: 1

    Maximum time to do an update on my i7, 16GB RAM machine, has been 37 hours! version to version 1703.

    --
    Regards Eion MacDonald