Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Windows 10 October 2018 Update is Deleting User Data For Many (windowscentral.com)

Posted by msmash on from the something-to-watch dept.

New submitter CaptainPhoton writes: I updated my test PC using the Windows 10 October Update (1809). That seemed safe enough, so I proceeded to upgrade my production PC. I just encountered an issue where everything in the Documents folder was deleted, even though I had clicked the option to keep my files. Everything else in my user profile remains intact. I am curious, how widespread is this issue? Has anyone else here encountered this issue? Some articles are starting to crop up acknowledging this failure. Citing complaints from several users, Windows Central reports: Sometimes, when you perform an upgrade to a new version of Windows 10, the setup may move the user files to the previous installation backup located inside the "Windows.old" folder. However, according to those users experiencing sudden data loss, they looked everywhere, and their personal files are nowhere to be found.

111 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. Well it's your own fault. by hey! · · Score: 4, Funny

    You're supposed to be keeping your files on Microsoft Cloud. If you insist on using a product in a way other than the manufacturer intended, that manufacturer can't be responsible for the results.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:Well it's your own fault. by Lothsahn · · Score: 1

      I seriously hope there were missing tags from the above comment. :)

      --
      -=Lothsahn=-
    2. Re:Well it's your own fault. by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In a way, I'm half serious. I run Linux and only boot Windows occasionally, just to keep abreast of what's happening in that world. But I prefer Linux because Windows, like so many other digital platforms out there today, has an agenda: to shape my behavior as a consumer.

      While Linux may not be perfect, and it comes with occasional hardware compatibility headaches, I value the ability to create the user experience *I* want, to orchestrate the kind of work flow *I* prefer, not take what Microsoft wants me to take. It's a tradeoff, but every operating system is a tool; the question is whose hand is it in?

      Microsoft has always tried to leverage its desktop position to sell its other products and services. And they understand the day of the market dominance of the desktop has passed so they really do want you to use the cloud services. I don't actually think Microsoft would screw up its desktop OS deliberately, but for most people if MS does screw up, they don't really have any choice but to continue using Windows. In the long term entrusting their data to Microsoft's cloud services will almost certainly be the path of least resistance for those people.

      I just prefer to stay well out of that.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:Well it's your own fault. by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It could be argued that the initial fault was using Windows 10 at all ;)
      But the part about the cloud backup was obviously sarcastic...

      And to get serious for a moment, things like these are why I back up my files from time to time. I also have them outside the usual, Microsoft-designed scheme for storing user data. The original reasons were
            - I want them close to the top level of the file system, not down below three more layers as in C:\Users\Lonewolf666\Documents.
            - I want them on a separate partition I can copy as a whole, and that is not impacted if I nuke my C:\ drive for some reason.

      But now I see they are much less likely to be hit by stuff like this as well. One more reason.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    4. Re:Well it's your own fault. by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like somebody forgot to slip Uncle Billy their monthly dues. Tsk tsk

    5. Re:Well it's your own fault. by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      I don't actually think Microsoft would screw up its desktop OS deliberately

      IMHO the big screw up was the GUI change between Windows 7 and Windows 8. And such a massive change does not happen by accident.

      Conspiracy theory time:
      My guess is that Microsoft believed (correctly) that the relevance of the desktop would decline in the future, and (incorrectly) that they could train their desktop user base into being familiar with the Windows Phone UI and liking it, by shoving the same UI down the throat of the Windows 8 users.

      That did not work out so well. Windows 8 was widely hated and Windows Phone tanked anyway. And, perhaps out of an inability to admit a mistake, Microsoft never fully reinstated the old UI.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    6. Re:Well it's your own fault. by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      Not so. Windows has improved enormously in the last two decades. It's just that it hasn't done so in a complete vacuum, you must also consider how any competitors have improved.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    7. Re:Well it's your own fault. by hey! · · Score: 1

      It's improved, absolutely, particularly on a purely technical level. But it's always had the same flaw deep in its DNA. Windows is not designed around the needs of users. It's designed primarily for people who make other people use it.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    8. Re:Well it's your own fault. by Gabest · · Score: 1

      Documents are others can be redirected. You can have data on D or network share, but still in the standard Windows location.

    9. Re:Well it's your own fault. by rajkiran_g · · Score: 1

      But I prefer Linux because Windows, like so many other digital platforms out there today, has an agenda: to shape my behavior as a consumer.

      systemd: Hold my beer...

    10. Re:Well it's your own fault. by Slashdot+Junky · · Score: 1

      A downside in this context to mapping your special folders to non standard paths is that these paths become the special folders. I have long done this and do so with a separate partition. I suspect the apparent bug would have killed the data just the same regardless of where "Documents/My Documents/Personal" points, because it isn't the path tbhat is targeted; it is the alias that represents what is in use for the logged-in user.

      --
      .
      Landfill Mining Co.
      Managing the (Un)natural Resources of Tomorrow
    11. Re:Well it's your own fault. by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      On my system, "Documents/My Documents/Personal" is mostly empty and unused as far as documents I (intentionally) save go.
      Some automatic, temporary saves still go to the special folders but I never rely on those. When I'm done with my work I always save to my data folders on D:\. Which are not redirected to.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    12. Re:Well it's your own fault. by McFortner · · Score: 1

      I seriously hope there were missing tags from the above comment. :)

      There were, but the update deleted them....

      --
      Beware of Sales Reps bearing gifts.
    13. Re:Well it's your own fault. by Insanity+Defense · · Score: 1

      C: is for CODE
      D: is for DATA

      When I was still using Windows as my home OS it was:

      C: Windows

      D: Swap

      E: Applications

      F: Data

      I found that programs on the same partition as the swap file were interfering with it and causing a significant part of my crashes. Crashes diminished greatly after that. Windows itself fragments the C: drive so by isolating it as the only thing on the C: drive I greatly decreased the amount of defraging I had to do as the other partitions rarely reached the point where it was needed. Of course separating apps from data meant that backing up your data partition alone was easier and more frequent.

  2. It used to be a joke, but... by msauve · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's now a fact that Windows is malware.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:It used to be a joke, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's shiteware, has been for years. The only thing Nadella did was change it from general-purpose shiteware to locked down tablet appliance shiteware.

    2. Re:It used to be a joke, but... by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Seems like Win 7 is pretty stable these days though.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    3. Re:It used to be a joke, but... by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

      I'm running a Windows XP machine (security camera duty only) with a registry hack that makes it think it's a goddam ATM and I receive security updates pretty regularly.

      I'm betting that, by now, hackers at large don't consider it low hanging fruit.

      Windows XP registry hack keeps security updates rolling for the dead operating system

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    4. Re:It used to be a joke, but... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Seriously?

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    5. Re:It used to be a joke, but... by vtcodger · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting that for just 0.001 Bitcoin (roughly $6.40US) Microsoft will restore your Documents folder?

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    6. Re:It used to be a joke, but... by lgw · · Score: 2

      That only works for computers with internet access. Why would someone put an ATM on the internet?

      Many, perhaps most, ATMs (all the shitty little ones no run by banks) still use dial up. They are vastly less secure! The security is a joke, because no one took the threat of an attacker discovering the ATM's phone number seriously. Remote "jackpotting" has been a real attack for almost a decade now as a result. The fact those ATMs mostly ran WinCE actually didn't matter, the security was so sloppy (built-in admin accounts with standard passwords, etc.) it didn't even rise to the level of old Windows security.

      Banks tend to worry about the threat from technicians with the keys to the ATM more than random internet attackers, and rightly so given the statistics. Better to have it internet connected for firmware updates than send a technician to every ATM in the world. Sure, an ATM needs security just like the bank's web page needs security, but they're both going to be internet connected.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    7. Re:It used to be a joke, but... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      People with basic Windows 10, not Pro or Enterprise, are essentially the QA department for Microsoft. The longer you can postpone updates the better.

    8. Re:It used to be a joke, but... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Because banks are stupid. As long as the losses are less than the cost of beefing up security then that's what they'll do.

  3. Is this sarcasm? by mykepredko · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure if you're serious as I would expect that files in the "Documents" folder to be system specific and should not be touched/torched.

    --
    Mimetics Inc. Twitter
    1. Re:Is this sarcasm? by hey! · · Score: 1

      I like to keep people guessing, which tells you everything you need to know :-)

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:Is this sarcasm? by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Certainly not specific to Windows Updates, but those folders are not immune to encryption and cannot be labeled as, "Do Not Encrypt," for those of us who would like some protection against ransomware.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    3. Re:Is this sarcasm? by hey! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I run a small form-factor server running FreeBSD with ZFS, set to do daily snapshots. I never worry about Windows ransomware.

      I'm surprised more people don't use some kind of snapshot-capable server. It's not exactly rocket science.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:Is this sarcasm? by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Why in simple hell is this modded down?

      We all know what snapshots are and how they work.

      Ransomware often propagates to connected storage.

      That shit can even ride the wire to cloud storage.

      AC and I have seen that happen.

      I use EHDs rotated out daily, completely disconnected from the network.

      When I walked in and saw the ransomware lock, I had 5 individual drives with the prior 5 day's data.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    5. Re:Is this sarcasm? by hey! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Definitely not rocket science but how many snapshots can you hold especially once all the data has been encryption with ransomware?

      Millions, probably. After the data has been encrypted, you can't change it, so additional snapshots (which only record changes in copy-on-write filesystem like ZFS or BTRFS) will take up only metadata storage space. Meanwhile you'll still have at least dozens of good snapshots from before the attack to fall back on. Honestly Windows is at least fifteen years behind in filesystem technology, most people just don't *know* that.

      I agree snapshots are not a backup solution, because if something happens to the server you lose them too. But running a tightly locked-down BSD fileserver on a private network is certainly a low risk for ransomware attacks.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    6. Re:Is this sarcasm? by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised more people don't use some kind of snapshot-capable server. It's not exactly rocket science.

      For many people it might as well be rocket science - they would not have a clue of how to start.

    7. Re:Is this sarcasm? by hey! · · Score: 1

      If your connected storage has copy-on-write or log-structured filesystem technology, and you still have control of the server itself, you don't have to worry if the ransomware encrypts the data on the server. The previous, unencrypted data is still there and easily accessible.

      This technology is exotic in the Windows world but it's been mainstream on Unix for years.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    8. Re:Is this sarcasm? by hey! · · Score: 1

      Anybody who has the brains to qualify as a Windows server administrator should be able to install FreeNAS on a beige box. That, plus block-level RSYNC copying and you've got a cheap safety net that doesn't affect how you operate on a day-to-day basis.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    9. Re:Is this sarcasm? by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

      This, I hear, is also starting to go out to home users. It is these who I fear will lose the most.

    10. Re:Is this sarcasm? by lgw · · Score: 2

      There's no storage technology that's any more exotic in the "Windows world" than anywhere else. This isn't he 20th century.

      But how long does your snapshot last is the question? They're usually not set up to be kept for more than a few days, as that's all you need when a user calls and says "oops, I accidentally deleted/corrupted/messed up that file" - which is something like 85% of restores.

      Also, ransomware will totally screw up your COW snaphot system unless you've seriously over-provisioned it, as it will change 100% of files, where usual daily file change may be 1%. Sometimes that's how you lean of ransomware spreading - suddenly your backup server is pinging you that it's getting full. At least then you're probably notified in time to make a difference.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    11. Re:Is this sarcasm? by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I'm retired and this is something I haven't thought of in the 3 years since.

      Restoring from tape backup (in the day) was a pain because it's a matter of finding the right data set for the date of last known good.

      I rarely had to use that method for an unintentionally deleted, or corrupted, file.

      ETA was usually measured in hours.

      Restoring a file from just moments ago was also measured in hours.

      With shadow copies, I was a hero. For the few people who were interested, I taught them the simple, quick steps.

      --

      Ransomware can wreak total hell.

      After I left, the firm (law) got hit with ransomware (phishing email) and I talked to my replacement IT guy and it was several days of stress just to come back on line from fragments of shit laying here and there.

      They did not get a full recovery and they don't know precisely what's missing.

      I asked what steps the firm was taking regarding ransomware, and he said they bought ransomware insurance.

      I don't know, and don't care, if he was shitting me or not.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    12. Re:Is this sarcasm? by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I recall, as I'm sure you do, when provisioning costs to mitigate this kind of disaster was prohibitive.

      These days, solutions are cheap and it's a best practice to have copies of stuff crammed everywhere.

      Hell, I used to pack user desktop unused HD space with crucial data.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    13. Re:Is this sarcasm? by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Any properly designed storage backup system has a physical/logical break in the control flow. You are arguing a stupid point.

      --
      Good-bye
    14. Re:Is this sarcasm? by hey! · · Score: 1

      Oh, I should mention that with COW file system based NAS distros, the normal practice is to take snapshots every 15 minutes and keep them for a month or two. It doesn't require massive overprovisioning because each snapshot in a COW file system only contains changed blocks. In a situation where 100% of your files are changed, you'd need to have as much space free to accommodate all the encrypted files. If you didn't have it, then the update would fail.

      I'm quite a few years out of date on Windows administration, but the last time I looked into Windows snapshots they were a lot more costly than they are under ZFS.

      Oracle's been using COW for its RDBMS product for years, which accounts for its unusually robust and flexible transaction isolation, backup and recovery capabilities. Oracle programmers by in large have never heard of a "dirty read". You can use a past version of the database as the starting point for a new, updatable copy of the database that runs in parallel, something Oracle calls "virtual private databases". And you don't need to wildly overprovision anything, where storage blocks are identical between copies, they're shared.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    15. Re:Is this sarcasm? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      But how long does your snapshot last is the question?

      I have snapshots going back to 2015, so I'd guess the answer is "as long as you want".

    16. Re:Is this sarcasm? by lgw · · Score: 1

      There are two kinds of backup: backing up user files for user mistakes, and backing up the servers for server-level failure. Snapshots solve the former, well enough, but ransomware is really the latter, which I guess some people don't understand.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    17. Re:Is this sarcasm? by lgw · · Score: 1

      As a former storage guy, let me encourage everyone to solve all problems by over-provisioning. It's only money.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    18. Re:Is this sarcasm? by lgw · · Score: 1

      I'm quite a few years out of date on Windows administration, but the last time I looked into Windows snapshots they were a lot more costly than they are under ZFS.

      Windows software snapshots are fine for an on-server technology. Obviously, dedicated storage boxes do better than filesystem options.

      Where Windows led the way was providing a solid framework for making useful snapshots of databases (or mail servers that act like databases). If you just take a snapshot, it's useless - you need to tell the DB you're doing it, let it tell you it's ready, then tell it you're done. And you want that to work seamlessly with any DB provider, and either the builtin snapshot or your fancy big-box storage system snapshot.

      As you point out, you can do that an Oracle-specific way if you want, but it sure was nice to have an OS standard way that all the major vendors complied with. That let me develop my own cross-site DR product that would work with any common DB or storage system, with only a small team to dig into the details of how each big storage product had to be told to do its own cross-site replication (as there's no standard at all there, even within a company). Even without fancy hardware, Windows snapshots plus rsync did great for copying a consistent point in time from one site to another.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    19. Re:Is this sarcasm? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Overprovisioning on backups is always the best choice.

      Nothing is worse than going to restore your backup and discovering it's no good.

      Your best bet is daily/hourly incremental backups with weekly/daily full backups. And once a month/year take a copy of your incremental backup and rotate it to long term storage purely for restores.

      Media is *cheap*.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    20. Re:Is this sarcasm? by swilver · · Score: 1

      And this is completely wrong.

      Encryption will rewrite all the data, and a 1 TB drive can only hold 1 copy of 1 TB of data. It is not a metadata change only when ransomware encrypts your data.

      While the encryption is happening, Windows will delete more and more snapshots to recover space, until only 1 is left.

    21. Re:Is this sarcasm? by hey! · · Score: 1

      Yes, and what will happen is the write will fail when space runs out, leaving your real data intact.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    22. Re:Is this sarcasm? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Speaking of WIndows 7 is ahead of 10 as you can make snapshots. WTF happened when it was removed with Windows 8 and later?

      It still is way behind but winFS was supposed to provide this and we all know that failed. I wonder if ReFS has anything like this for those stuck requiring win32 software?

      --
      http://saveie6.com/
  4. Maybe it deleted your data. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But think of all the improvements that came with this update.

    1. Re:Maybe it deleted your data. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It certainly has freed up a lot of hard disk space, that's for sure.

  5. Why do you try new install instead of update? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    [...] "even though I had clicked the option to keep my files. [...]

    As far as I remember, this option is available only when you start system installation from scratch...

    Why would you overwrite running production system with "fresh" install?

    We did 25 Pros update so far and no sign of trouble. Using Windows Update of course. Systems are being updated like that since 1607 and it never failed.

    Enterprise version will likely get update over the weekend as it is, as usual, delayed a few days.

    1. Re:Why do you try new install instead of update? by Marc_Hawke · · Score: 1

      That was my reaction as well. When did an 'update' even ask that question. I figured there was the possibility that it was a 'really big' update and so there was extra interaction involved. I wonder if anyone can validate that.

      --
      --Welcome to the Realm of the Hawke--
    2. Re:Why do you try new install instead of update? by psm321 · · Score: 1

      since 1607

      I feel like if the Renaissance era had been infected with Windows, we'd probably know about it

    3. Re:Why do you try new install instead of update? by GerryHattrick · · Score: 1

      So far, the many elderly cousins I've 'downgraded' to Win10 have had a faultless experience (except for agonisingly-long 'updates'). The integrated nonsense does seem to 'look after' them. Nobody ever uses the neat Linux dual-boot that I always put there for disasters. Of course, it takes me 30 minutes each to get rid of telemetry (each update) and re-tweak their desktops to look just like the XP they know (thank you, Classic Shell). Only downside is, with 30 minutes devoted to each cousin each upgrade, wonderful TeamViewer now thinks I'm 'commercial'.

    4. Re:Why do you try new install instead of update? by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      Someone clearly hasn't heard of the Defenestration of Prague.

      --
      The Quirkz Handbook of Self-Improvement for People Who Are Already Pretty Okay
  6. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    People keep documents in the Windows Documents folder?

  7. It happened to me! by rhanoudi · · Score: 5, Informative

    All of the content in the documents folder were deleted. In addition, the recycle bin was empty! Luckily I had a backup from the previous week.

  8. 23 years of files by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    > "I have just updated my windows using the October update (10, version 1809) it deleted all my files of 23 years in amount of 220gb. This is unbelievable, I have been using Microsoft products since 1995 and nothing like that ever happened to me."

    Fortunately for you, this was no big deal because you take regular backups of the last quarter-century of your digital life, right?

    1. Re:23 years of files by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The same guy wrote a review for a light bulb.

      "1 star. The lightbulb in my study room eventually broke during the night, making the 500 books that I collected over the past 23 years completely unreadable."

  9. Re: ridiculous by CaptainPhoton · · Score: 1

    Hi AC. I used the ISO from Media Creation Tool, which has worked for all the semi-annual updates so far without data loss. For 1809, 5 of 6 machines have not lost the Documents folder. One of the theories floating out there is that it has something to do with being domain joined. Another theory is that it has something to do with OneDrive. The only resolution I've seen on forums is to run undelete software, otherwise the recourse is restore from last backup.

  10. Are you Cirrus? by smagruder · · Score: 1

    Really, cirrusly!

    --
    Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
  11. Malcious deletion by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

    Note with Daddy Nadella's handprint on it...

    Dear User...

    Nice data you got there....
    Shame if something happened to it...
    Pay up for OneDrive and you'll be pruhtected ... you don't need no local storage.

  12. WIndows 10 is unusable junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously why would anyone run Windows 10 ? It's full of spyware, it comes with crapware that you can't uninstall (Cortana, Edge, Telemetry etc.) takes away your control over updates, it phones home providing who knows what information about your supposedly personal data, and now it deletes your files.

    Coupled with its grotesque sub Fisher-Price interface ("is it a tablet ?, it is a phone ?, is it still Windows 98 ?") it's an absolute, complete and utter, complete train wreck. Utter garbage like something thrown together by an idiot who's had 1/2 hours computer training.

    Sadly I've got some Windows specific programs I need to run so I'll have to stick with Windows 7 until there are suitable alternatives on Linux (i.e. probably never) but I'll not allow a sigle Windows 10 device in my house.

    What a shame. It used to be a good home operating system.

  13. Scary thought by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

    My main backup is on Onedrive! I'm not clear on whether that gets blown away too. Looks like I'd better get my thumbdrive backup up to date before this autoupdates onto my box.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    1. Re:Scary thought by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      This could be malicious deletion to "nudge" users into using OneDrive vs local-only storage. OneDrive is on the "clown", so it should be restorable even if the local copy is deleted. Not so for files that are local-only and not backed up.

  14. Confusing, by CaptainDork · · Score: 3, Insightful

    this is.

    We're not sure if these are just a few isolated cases and how many users are affected, but this should be taken as a reminder of the importance of creating a backup of your computer before going through any upgrade .

    They are going back and forth using the terms "updates" and "upgrades."

    Also, there's a reference to an "Update Assistant tool."

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:Confusing, by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      It's both.

      It's a feature upgrade, and it's a security update.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    2. Re:Confusing, by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I missed the feature upgrade part.

      As I said, I'm retired, so my observations are dated.

      For production devices, I was never an early adopter.

      I waited a week or so (except for zero day patch) just in case something like this screw-up happened.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    3. Re:Confusing, by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Busted!

      That's why I suffer from imposter syndrome.

      I faked a 36-year career and stuff.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  15. Re:ridiculous by Tx · · Score: 1

    If you donâ(TM)t know what youâ(TM)re doing [...]

    Oh, the irony...

    --
    Oh no... it's the future.
  16. Re:Unsurprising by Nkwe · · Score: 1

    My own fault for using Windows for anything other than running Windows compatible software I suppose.

    How would expect any software that isn't compatible with its operating system to run, Windows or otherwise?

  17. windows makes it hard by jmccue · · Score: 1

    I have not used windows in a very long time, but from what I remember and from what I have seen helping people at work to fix their windows machines Microsoft does not make backups easy.

    In UN*X (BSD/Linux/...) all user files and configs are under one directory, where under Windows the files are spread all over creation. So backups and restores of user data is trivial on UN*X but under windows you probably need to purchase 1 or more proprietary backup application and that more than likley will not work 10 or 20 years hence

    So in someways I feel for this person even if they selected the wrong option

    1. Re:windows makes it hard by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      In UN*X (BSD/Linux/...) all user files and configs are under one directory, where under Windows the files are spread all over creation.

      Windows has been keeping all the user files in a single directory since Windows 2000, named "Documents and Settings". Microsoft renamed it to "Users" in Windows 7, IIRC, or possibly Vista. Under this directory are directories for each user who has logged into the system.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:windows makes it hard by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      In UN*X (BSD/Linux/...) all user files and configs are under one directory, where under Windows the files are spread all over creation

      My experience is the opposite. On Windows, files are always (these days) kept in a well-defined set of special-purpose folders, such as Documents, Photos, AppData, and so on. On some Ubuntu machines that I have to maintain, configuration and application files are WHO KNOWS where, sometimes under the user's home folder.

    3. Re:windows makes it hard by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      .,.. until that MBA guy flips out about his PST archive folders in Outlook. God forbid his disk dies or you push an update to Office 365 and his PST files which are not in c:\users are not moved or worst uninstalled.

      That can be a resume altering event as the IT guy always gets the blame and fired. Not the exec who can't be bothered with backups.

      PST files/Archive folders in Outlook are the bane of my experience always with Windows support as everyone is so anal about every email from 1997 onwarding must be always available at all time even if it is over 200+ gbs in size and require an i7 to respond.

      Regardless yes documents are stored but unlike a Mac or Linux things like my example above and applications can't be moved and copied making Windows a mess.

      --
      http://saveie6.com/
  18. Ransomware without the ransom by WaffleMonster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Might be useful to start keeping a list of Windows 10 features.

    1. Installs and enables RAT (Remote Access Trojan) by default with full access to your data and enabling privacy agreement authorizing extraction of user content without notification or asking first.

    2. Installs unwanted applications not part of the operating system without permission.

    3. Deletes your shit (NEW!)

    4. Cyber stalking that can't be disabled and what little of it can be disabled is only temporary thanks to conveniently forgetful privacy settings.

    5. Injection of advertisements into operating system's UI shell

    6. Perpetual beta quality software updates

    7. Installs updates and reboots whether you want to or not without explicit consent

    8. Issues scary warnings during third party software installation for self-serving anti-competitive reasons.

    9. Tricks users into creating accounts they don't need and steals credentials via typography and WiFi.

    10. Transformation of minesweeper and solitaire classics into adware unless you are willing to pay a monthly fee.

    1. Re:Ransomware without the ransom by nuckfuts · · Score: 1

      1. Installs and enables RAT (Remote Access Trojan) by default...

      What are you talking about?

    2. Re:Ransomware without the ransom by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      Deleting stuff isn't new. My first experience with Win10 (as an upgrade from Win7 on a test system) was that 11 applications were removed after the upgrade as they were deemed "incompatible". No warning... no asking permission... all the files were just toasted. I knew immediately that I wasn't going to install that shit on my production machine. The best part is that running the Compatibility Appraiser before the upgrade told me my system was compatible with Windows10. In fact, not only did many of my apps get deleted, but my sound and network interfaces were not supported and didn't work. Thanks for the heads up, Microsoft!

      Working on other peoples' systems, I've found that deleting the whole user profile is a frequent problem when performing any update to Win10. All your files can disappear at any time.

    3. Re:Ransomware without the ransom by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about?

      https://docs.microsoft.com/en-...

      "Microsoftâ(TM)s internal testing, additional data becomes necessary. This data can include any user content that might have triggered the problem and is gathered from a small sample of devices that have both opted into the Full diagnostic data level and have exhibited the problem."

      " Microsoft engineers can use the following capabilities to get the information:

      âAbility to run a limited, pre-approved list of Microsoft certified diagnostic tools, such as msinfo32.exe, powercfg.exe, and dxdiag.exe.

      âAbility to get registry keys.
      âAll crash dump types, including heap dumps and full dumps."

  19. Re:ridiculous by Alain+Williams · · Score: 2

    Many, many years ago, when I was new to computers and didn't know very much, it occurred to me that I should make regular backups of all my data. Nobody told me to do that, it just seemed like common sense.

    Congratulations for having the insight, the intelligence to do backups. Most of us who hang out here will also have the insight. There are however, unfortunately, many who do not understand the need of backups - some of these will be distraught by a loss that is avoidable.

  20. Re:ridiculous by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

    In particular, Backups When You Are About To Do Something Dangerous.
    Such as upgrading Windows.

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
  21. Windows 7 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is why I still use Windows 7.

    And when the time comes, I'll just..... have to look and find a way to keep Windows 7.

    1. Re:Windows 7 by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      I suppose you'll want bug and security fixes, plus enhancements, for Windows 7. There's a name for the version of Windows with all those things, it's called Windows 10.

      There's nothing inherently more stable or safe about Windows 7 than Windows 10. In my experience, issues like BSODs are getting less frequent on Windows 10 than they ever were on Windows 7.

  22. I told you..... by MerlTurkin · · Score: 1

    ...morons not to upgrade to 10. You wouldn't listen........

    1. Re:I told you..... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Most of the spyware was backported to 7 and 8.1. Conveniently MS now only provides monthly update rollups in which you cannot choose which parts to install instead of many separate patches like in the past.

      That's true, but at least on 7 and 8 you can still remove it after installation, e.g. with remove_crw.cmd. With Windows 10, it is baked in.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  23. Re:ridiculous by greenwow · · Score: 1

    Or why you should always run Windows in a vm and do snapshots. It's so much easier to rollback after bad updates or when testing changes to try to get failed updates, like 2018-09 KB4458469 that is failing on all of our Windows machines, to rollback if you screw-up something or to reproduce the changes you made to fix it.

  24. I guess I'm lucky the last updated failed on all.. by greenwow · · Score: 1

    of our Windows machines so we can't even get to this update.

    It's the KB4458469 2018-09 update that keeps downloading over and over again killing our Internet connection. We run our own internal update servers WSUS, but because of problems with updates on our Dell Precision laptops we haven't approved any updates since last March so users keep checking for updates directly from Microsoft.

  25. Re: Why do people use Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Indeed. Visual Studio is still so much better than any of the crap I use Apple or Linux, except for Visual Studio Code of course.

    XCode is shite, and Eclipse is just a big nasty pile.

  26. Microsoft employees with modpoints by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Aww, did I hurt your feelings with the truth?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  27. Why not? by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

    When you run Windows in your computer you do not own your computer - MS does. Is it a surprise that every so often they will delete files at will?

  28. General rules I have for my computers by Fantasio · · Score: 1

    All this conforts the general rules I have for my computers... I have always considered the content of the Windows default folders as potentialy lost, and I keep the following Windows folders empty as much as I can: Document, Music, Videos, Desktop, Download. The content, when it exists, is transient, not important, junk...no need for any backup. All my (real/valuable) documents, links, music, are ...somewhere else (different folders / partitions / HDs depending on my computers), where I have full control and good backups. Also, I do not install any soft in the "Program Files" folder as much as I can. Microsoft cloud, or any cloud solution...No confidence. I keep nothing, except files that I have to transfer to somebody else.

  29. Re: ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I always have the intention of making backups anyways.

  30. Re: ridiculous by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

    Just as I will stop prevaricating -- tomorrow.

  31. Re:ridiculous by Miamicanes · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Except that, unless you

    1. Bend over backwards to configure Windows to ask your "permission" before installing updates,

    2. Aren't unlucky enough to have Windows throw up a sudden, "Windows wants to install updates... [REBOOT NOW!] learn more" (with "(learn more)" neither appearing to be an obviously-clickable button nor underlined link, printed in a tiny font, and probably inserted into the middle of a longer sentence that itself is neither clickable nor calls obvious attention to itself... and REBOOT NOW! being the default choice that gets selected if you aren't looking at the screen,didn't notice that Windows has rudely grabbed input focus, and press the 'enter' key).

    3. Have been making continuous backups (killing much of the performance benefit to having a fast SSD, unless you ALSO have a fast SSD to use for backups as well)

    4. Windows doesn't decide to fuck with your backup drive, too (which has to be continuously connected if you want to satisfy requirement #3).

    5. You're ALSO doing backups to an external drive that gets physically removed from the computer and locked away, so it won't be affected by ransomware, or get stolen/destroyed as well if you get robbed or your house burns down).

    My biggest beef with pretty much every current Windows backup "solution" is the fact that NONE of the ones that are remotely affordable can gracefully deal with what I call, the size/importance gradient & properly juggle multiple strategies... say, doing frequent incremental backups to a connected drive when the computer is genuinely inactive (say, screensaver active), replicating those local backups to a networked drive on the local LAN when the internal-to-internal backups are finished & the computer is still inactive, and periodically backing up a subset of files from the networked lan backup to "the cloud" (the ones that are important enough to pay ongoing fees to safeguard... I might have ~10-12 terabytes of files, but only a few hundred gigabytes of them are really what I'd be devastated to lose, and only a few gigabytes of them are truly what I'd call irreplaceable... and at least a quarter of THOSE are sitting on remote git repositories somewhere, anyway). Put another way, indiscriminately and continuously keeping 10+ terabytes of files backed up in "the cloud" just isn't sane (in terms of cost OR ongoing performance), but keeping a subset of them appropriately backed up is a major pain.

    What I'd LOVE to see from Microsoft (and what would convince me to switch to Linux once and for all, if it appeared there first) -- a new kind of filesystem I'll call "DHFS" ("data-hoarders' file system"). In day to day use, it would work like ext4 or NTFS... files get written directly to the drive, for performance. However, in the background (as a lowest-priority system task), it goes through periodically, finds all the "real" files, moves the "real" file to some "master" volume (assuming there isn't already an authoritative, identical copy of that exact file already there), and replaces it with a DHFSymlink (which works like a "regular" symlink for reading purposes, but writes/updates result in the symlink getting blown away & replaced by the new data (or if it's an append, some special structure that says, "the start of this file is (some file pointed to by this link), but the subsequent data is (this)", since creating an entire new copy of the file just to add a byte to it would totally kill performance).

    With something like DHFS, only the authoritative master copies of the files, and their MUCH smaller symlink data, gets backed up.

    In effect, DHFS would systematically preserve directly-usable copies of every unique file on the system (assuming you could figure out the "real" name and location of any given file), while preserving the CONTEXT & Metadata of those files with something similar to symlinks. If the ability to roll back state wasn't required, it would also do something akin to mark & sweep garbage collection... it would periodically go through its ar

  32. Re:Fake news. by lgw · · Score: 1

    Bill Gates would sue these Linux faggots for libel, but they don't have any money. If they did, they'd have a real computer.

    Dude, you fail it. The Slashdot Troll Style Guide clearly states that you can't talk about "Linux faggots" without making an Alan Cox / Anal Cox joke. Sheesh, at least make a minimal effort. Trolls these days just aren't as good as they were in my day!

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  33. Re: ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One of the theories floating out there is that it has something to do with being domain joined. Another theory is that it has something to do with OneDrive. The only resolution I've seen on forums is to run undelete software, otherwise the recourse is restore from last backup.

    So the entire system is needlessly complex, otherwise these three things (local files, domains, a cloud service) wouldn't be tied together in such a way.

    On my Linux systems I'd have to REALLY go out of my way to entangle those three things to that degree. And I still wouldn't have files going *poof* for mysterious reasons that can't be tracked down. Certainly nothing as trivial as a system update would cause something like this. This isn't something where you can say "ah well I see how a mistake could have done this". It's mind-blowing. What is the Windows updater doing that even allows this to be possible?

    On Linux here's what a system update entails: unpack some archives, copy their files to the right places, update the package manager's DB. Maybe generate a new bootloader configuration, which happens automatically and is only necessary if there was a kernel update. The whole process can be put into the background and ignored while you continue using the machine like normal.

    Apparently this process is FAR more complicated on Windows systems. That's remarkable considering the scope of Windows updates is far smaller (core system only) compared to what Linux package managers are updating. Amazing. Is the design of Windows really this broken?

  34. We're All Beta Testers, Now by BrendaEM · · Score: 1

    It used to be that there were consequences to releasing buggy software, but now 1.x releases are about as good as .1 were.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
  35. Re: ridiculous by Angeret · · Score: 1

    Procrastinators of the world unite...

    Sometime.

  36. LOL by JThundley · · Score: 2

    "Sure he beats me sometimes, but I know he does it because he loves me!"

  37. Teaches you the importance of backups by stooo · · Score: 1

    Deleting user data ?
    That's bad speak.
    No, it rather "teaches you the importance of backups."

    --
    aaaaaaa
    1. Re:Teaches you the importance of backups by msauve · · Score: 1

      So, the effort and time lost for recovery simply doesn't matter?

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    2. Re:Teaches you the importance of backups by stooo · · Score: 1

      Of course it matters.
      It's the essential part of the lesson what makes you remember the lesson for life.
      Be efficient, don't do backup courses without lengthy recovery time.

      --
      aaaaaaa
  38. User error by rcharbon · · Score: 1

    If you are updating via Windows Update, you don't get an "option to keep my files". You only get that when reinstalling Windows. So it would appear that user error was involved somehow.

  39. Re:ridiculous by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

    Actually, I just remembered... dealing with symlinks in Windows is still kind of a mess. A few years ago, I tried writing a Java program that would write a file, then create (or replace) a symlink in another directory so it always pointed at the latest file.

    It turned out to be hopeless. Not because Java can't create or modify symlinks (it can), but because Windows has bizarre, fucked-up rules governing who is (and more importantly, isn't) allowed to create & modify symlinks. From what I remember, one of the rules is that normal users can create and modify symlinks (in directories they own), but NOT users who are ALSO members of an 'admin' group, in which case theyre only allowed to do it if the program is running with elevated permissions. For the life of me, I fail to understand why it's ok for a user who's one step above "guest user" to create & modify symlinks in any directory he owns, but taboo for a user who's ALSO an admin -- but not running AS an admin -- to do the exact same goddamn thing in his own "Documents" folder.

    I could see Windows enforcing a rule like that if you want to create or modify symlinks in a system directory (or even a directory like "C:\Program Files"), but extending the prohibition to ANY directory SYSTEMWIDE (including the user's OWN documents folder) is just plain fucking stupid.

    Windows is littered with stupid rules like that. I remember a few years ago when a (seemingly) minor Windows update instantly broke every C# Microsoft Office extension we had, because Explorer and NTFS both enforce different (and not necessarily consistent) rules, and Office enforces yet another set of rules that's consistent with neither Explorer nor NTFS, and partially depends upon the syntax you use to specify paths. From what I recall, we were trying to read and write to files in a subdirectory of a network share that was mapped to a drive letter... previously, it was OK, but under the new rule, we had to use extended-UNC notation. Only in Microsoft's wacky bizarro world is it a permissions error to try and read "z:\path\to\taboo.dat", but totally OK to do the same thing to "\\?\UNC\somehost\foo\path\to\taboo.dat" when both refer to the EXACT SAME GODDAMN FILE.

  40. Re:ridiculous by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

    I make images of my boot drives periodically, but I'll move the schedule around if I know a Windows update is coming. I haven't needed to roll back to one yet because of Windows itself, though I have used an image to get back up and running after a drive failure.

    I'm not protecting against just poor OS updates, but against a rather large array of possible issues. The extra effort I make to back up before an OS update is pretty minimal.

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  41. Back up or shut up by TheRealQuestor · · Score: 1

    why would anyone do anything as major as a version upgrade of ANYTHING not back up first. It never fails to amaze me that people can be so careless of anything they deep important. I kind of anymore just take the stance of "serves them right".

  42. So basically go with LTSB by NotSoHeavyD3 · · Score: 1

    Which is apparently easily the best version of Windows 10 because it doesn't have upgrades except for security patches.

    --
    Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
    1. Re:So basically go with LTSB by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately LTSB is years old and missing newer things and the Windows Store and has all the problems of RTM of 2015.

      For example, WIndows Update takes 2 - 3 hours! Also updates can corrupt easier too as MS fixed these in newer versions of Windows 10. LTSB lacks WSL for Linux. LTSB lacks the Windows Store for things like Hulu and Netflix which is nice if you are a road warrior and use a Surface or Tablet/Hybrid thin device. LTSB also is missing control of how the updates (not features are used) that have been added in more modern versions of Windows 10. WIndows 10 LTSB won't support OneNote once Office 2019 comes out as it is only available in the Windows Store. LTSB has a monthly charge too!

      If you spend the extra $$ to upgrade from home to Pro or to buy Pro you can control Windows updates for up to 365 for feature updates and 90 days for security but get to keep all the newer fixes I described above. Hyper-V virtualization is an added plus too! FreeBSD, PFsense, and Linux have the guest kernel additions integrated unlike VMWare or Virtualbox. Just boot them up and they work as VmWare Workstation is getting expensive with constant upgrades.

      My Win10 Pro box is set to not get 1803 until January and for good reason while security updates. If you are stuck on Windows I have the "Pro" version a good compromise and I would not run LTSB as I am reliant on Hyper-V and the Windows Store for some apps.

      --
      http://saveie6.com/
    2. Re:So basically go with LTSB by NotSoHeavyD3 · · Score: 1

      I'll have to try that. I've installed pro as part of a dual boot but after I installed it I've had loads of problems when I first started and hearing stuff like this with ever update has made me stick with my previous OS as my primary. Thanks

      --
      Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
  43. Lost access to settings and update by Rip!ey · · Score: 1

    It left my laptop with no access to the settings menu and all that comes with it, and therefore no access to windows update. That's on top of the long standing issue of the screen never blanking and the machine never sleeping. If I select sleep from the menu, it just shuts down. It's not the laptop itself. A Windows 7 installation works just fine.

    The same laptop is now installing Ubuntu. It's been about 12 years since I last ran a Linux install. If the Steam Linux client is as good as I'm hearing, then Windows has finally reached a point of no return.

  44. Run Win10 "Pro" if you have to by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    WTF Microsoft?!

    This just shows that if you are stuck in win32 land for work or games get the "Pro" version or upgrade to it if your PC came with home.

    I have the pro version so I never had these problems. All my Feature Updates under Update settings are set to 90+ days. I won't get 1809 until February when the bugs are fixed. I have security updates also set for +9 days so in case a bad update is pulled I don't get it on my PC.

    Also, I get Hyper-V too which is free with Pro and beats VMWare Workstation and VirtualBox by a longshot as a type 1 hypervisor. Contrary to belief here on slashdot Linux, FreeBSD, and even FreeBSD based appliances like PfSense have GREAT support for Hyper-V in the kernel. No guest tools needed which is surprising.

    I still would prefer a Linux OS, but for desktop stuff and World of Warcraft I find Windows 10 even with all this freaking hell with pushed agile updates (for an OS not designed for it as being monolithic) still has less issues with non-Unix software. I miss Gnome2 greatly which is another reason.

    If you're a geek or use the PC for things actually important get Windows 10 Pro if Linux can't suit your needs.

    --
    http://saveie6.com/
  45. Re: ridiculous by epyT-R · · Score: 1

    The rest of the planet has no trouble with apostrophes.. it's only apple that fucked it up.

  46. Re:ridiculous by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

    Except that, unless
    [...]
    4. Windows doesn't decide to fuck with your backup drive, too (which has to be continuously connected if you want to satisfy requirement #3).

    I am still trusting/optimistic that Microsoft does not maliciously fuck with backups on a different partition or drive.
    If they ever do that and it becomes publicly known, even die-hard Microsoft fans in industry and administration would find it difficult to justify further use of Windows.

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages