Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft's Problem Isn't How Often it Updates Windows -- It's How It Develops It (arstechnica.com)

Posted by msmash on from the closer-look dept.

Ever since Microsoft settled on a cadence of two feature updates a year -- one in April, one in October -- the quality of its operating system (taking into consideration the volume of bugs that emerge every few days) has deteriorated, writes Peter Bright of ArsTechnica. From the story: The problem with Windows as a Service is quality. Previous issues with the feature and security updates have already shaken confidence in Microsoft's updating policy for Windows 10. While data is notably lacking, there is at the very least a popular perception that the quality of the monthly security updates has taken a dive with Windows 10 and that installation of the twice-annual feature updates as soon as they're available is madness. These complaints are long-standing, too. The unreliable updates have been a cause for concern since shortly after Windows 10's release.

The latest problem has brought this to a head, with commentators saying that two feature updates a year is too many and Redmond should cut back to one, and that Microsoft needs to stop developing new features and just fix bugs. Some worry that the company is dangerously close to a serious loss of trust over updates, and for some Windows users, that trust may already have been broken. These are not the first calls for Microsoft to slow down with its feature updates -- there have been concerns that there's too much churn for both IT and consumer audiences alike to handle -- but with the obvious problems of the latest update, the calls take on a new urgency.

129 of 227 comments (clear)

  1. Imagine owning a car... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Imagine owning a car. One fine morning, you wake up and the steering wheel has been moved from left to right, and the brake pedal is on the ceiling. You call up the manufacturer, ask "why'd you do that."

    Answer: "it's better, you'll get used to be new driver experience."

    1. Re:Imagine owning a car... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're being very generous. To use the car analogy, imagine you come to your car one morning, your stuff has been stolen and the car is on fire. You phone up the manufacturer and all they can say is "oopsie doodles! I guess we didn't catch that in testing!"

    2. Re:Imagine owning a car... by Luthair · · Score: 2

      Funny you should bring up the car..... but there have been significant problems, including deaths caused by car manufacturers mucking with how the gear lever works.

    3. Re:Imagine owning a car... by thegarbz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sensationalist FUD much? Microsoft has never updated Windows 10 with such a jarring UI change. The Windows 10 steering wheel is where it has always been, as is every other fundamental control you need to use the OS.

      A more accurate description would be owning a car and waking up to find the air-conditioning controls now have a few different control options, oh and as part of that it set itself back from Celsius to Fahrenheit, also additional prompts now come up with different alarms while driving. Maybe the dashboard speed indicators have changed colours.

      Sounds horrible doesn't it?

      Personally it's a feature of exactly the car I want to buy: https://electrek.co/2018/09/03...

    4. Re:Imagine owning a car... by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, he's right, because what you're describing is what Microsoft is doing by accident, whereas what he's describing is the experience Microsoft intends you to have. We've gone from Windows 7, which, while not rock solid, could have uptimes measured in years and had a consistent, obvious, user interface, to Windows 10 which intentionally crashes (sorry, "updates") once a week, and which has UI changes that are mandatory every six months that result in users having to relearn basics like "Where in the settings do I change this?"

      That's ignoring the bugs. Your files being deleted? That's an accident. Everything above, that's on purpose. That's already terrible and Microsoft needs to stop it.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    5. Re:Imagine owning a car... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sensationalist FUD much? Microsoft has never updated Windows 10 with such a jarring UI change.

      That's not to say Microsoft has never done such a jarring UI change. I'm looking at you, Windows 8 Start window.

    6. Re:Imagine owning a car... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      I want regular 'ol analog gauges for the important things and buttons that can be used with gloves on for the HVAC. No touch-screen crap everywhere polluting my interior.

    7. Re: Imagine owning a car... by jd · · Score: 1

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      This explains everything. The agency obviously rents out bug testers and n managers to companies like Microsoft.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    8. Re:Imagine owning a car... by thomn8r · · Score: 1

      If they had "courage" they would remove the steering wheel.

    9. Re: Imagine owning a car... by illiac_1962 · · Score: 1

      If they had courage they would remove the coward pedal.

    10. Re:Imagine owning a car... by jasonharrop · · Score: 1

      The analogy breaks down, but in a good way: You can't virtualise a car, but you can virtualise Windows.

      And then, in VirtualBox, you can choose to disconnect the network adaptor. No network = no Windows updates. Or leave it connected, and let it update, while you keep working without interruption in your host OS.

    11. Re:Imagine owning a car... by omfglearntoplay · · Score: 2

      Is it normal practice still in Microsoft (and other big shops) to have devs who write code as fast as possible with zero time spent on fixing broken code? They shuffle all the broken first pass code to their B team and have them try to figure it out, which much take forever since you have to figure out where the other person's mind was.

      This just seems like it begs for bugs and issues. But it surely gets code out the door fast!!!

    12. Re:Imagine owning a car... by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised it took me this long to find the MS apologist, but ladies and gentlemen, here he is.

      Actually, the reality is that MS has goobered up the UI to the point that people don't even want to use it.
      For how bad you could say the start button was, the current W10 interface is a total POS in comparison.
      And guess what, everyone knows it.
      Only some will admit it.

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    13. Re:Imagine owning a car... by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1

      While some seem to prefer the ribbon, to me it exchanged one arbitrary grouping of features for another arbitrary grouping. One gets around in Office by memorizing where shit is, NOT because of their lovely menus/ribbons. It was a stupid UI move in my opinion.

      On the money! MS can't help themselves.
      It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall in some of the Office or Windows UI meetings, to hear the absolute bullshit that gets spread around thick by people that have no clue how real users use their software.

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    14. Re:Imagine owning a car... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I want regular 'ol analog gauges

      Cool story bro.

    15. Re:Imagine owning a car... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised it took me this long to find the MS apologist, but ladies and gentlemen, here he is.

      I'm keen to hear why I am wrong. In what fundamental way has Microsoft changed the Windows 10 UI between versions? By the way I don't apologise for MS. I simply call out bullshit when I see it. You're welcome to scroll down the threads and see some of my other posts where I'm critical of MS and the Windows 10 updates.

      Actually, the reality is that MS has goobered up the UI to the point that people don't even want to use it.

      Back in real reality: People don't give a shit. Even more in reality, nothing has fundamentally changed for people. The only major changes for users has been the Control Panel (something rarely used day to day), and the Action Panel (something completely ignoreable and your computer will work just fine). We get it, you don't like the new UI. Many power users don't.

      For how bad you could say the start button was, the current W10 interface is a total POS in comparison.

      I'm not sure what's more absurd, the notion that the start button was bad (it was seen as one of the most accessible and user friendly changes to UI design in the past 30 years and was adopted by GUIs everywhere as a result), or that you think the Windows 10 interface doesn't have exactly the same mechanics as Windows 7.

      And guess what, everyone knows it. Only some will admit it.

      Everyone knows it. You just seem to be the odd one out.

    16. Re:Imagine owning a car... by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Well first, some of how you judge Microsoft's changes depends on when you're measuring from. The UI was *relatively* stable from Windows 95 until Windows 7, but even then, ignoring the re-skinning, they regularly shuffled settings around. I don't remember great examples, but the start menu organization changed now and then, and where a setting was in the control panel changed. You could argue that the changes were good, but still, it's a change.

      The switch to Windows 8 was pretty much, "The steering wheel is on the other side and the gas pedal is on the ceiling now. Don't worry, you'll get used to it." Then Windows 10 was, "Ok, we'll put the gas pedal on the floor again, but we're moving it to the passenger side."

      If you're just counting since Windows 10, it's been a lot more stable, but it's not true that things aren't being moved around. A lot of the Control Panel objects are being moved into "Settings" with each new version. Configuring network interfaces and VPN connections keeps changing within settings, for example. There's actually a lot of stuff that's been moved and reorganized since 2015. Again, you can argue that it's better, but regardless it's change.

      And I might actually argue that the changes since Windows 10 are more confusing to end users than previous changes. For each incremental version of Windows that came before (e.g. 2000 to XP, XP to Vista, Vista to 7) there were a lot of little things shifted around, and it was accompanied by a change in name, branding, and overall look and feel.

      If you were used to Windows XP and you then sat down at a Windows 7 machine, a lot of things would have moved around, which would be confusing. On the other hand, things were different enough that you'd immediately know you were on a different version of Windows, so the changes would have that context. Even if you understood very little about computers, you could understand, "I'm using a new thing now. Things look different and the controls have been changed."

      However, if you're using Windows 10 1507 and you sat down in front of a computer running Windows 10 1809, it's all Windows 10 and it all looks kind of almost mostly the same. The visual style is tweaked a little, but it's not that different, and it still says Windows 10. However, all kinds of things are moved around, and a bunch of stuff doesn't work the same way. If you're not aware of Microsoft's current development model, it could be pretty baffling.

    17. Re:Imagine owning a car... by Torodung · · Score: 2

      While some seem to prefer the ribbon, to me it exchanged one arbitrary grouping of features for another arbitrary grouping. One gets around in Office by memorizing where shit is, NOT because of their lovely menus/ribbons. It was a stupid UI move in my opinion.

      The purpose of the ribbon is advertising. It exposes features that you may not be thinking of, especially ones that will lock you into the "Office Open XML" file formats.

      Less marketable features are small, or buried. If this happens to be a feature you often use, you're SOL and you have to Google where the hell it is.

      So the ribbon is doing exactly what it's supposed to. Expose styles, and conditional formatting, and all the stuff MS wishes you would use at the expense of your ability to actually use the product with your own work habits. There's a reason those features are placed near the middle, and in some cases get an enormous amount of ribbon space. It's an ad. "Please use the product in a way that helps Microsoft" is the message.

      You want easy access to that one feature that MS doesn't care about? You get a spot waaaay over on the right of the ribbon where you can put it. That's about what MS thinks of your own priorities.

    18. Re:Imagine owning a car... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I suspect moving away from regular tool-bars was to (hopefully) make competitors look outdated and to "encourage" devs to buy MS tools to get the same look and feel. GUI engines were becoming too standardized and commoditized for MS's comfort. They weighed the pros and cons of such disruption and in the end didn't care about the complaining users that much because the users had few other practical choices. Disrupting commoditization was probably considered more important than not angering existing users.

      I suspect they fudged up the "file" menu because they wanted to force you to a promotional portal, such as "email this document using free Outlook", and now it's "save it on the Azure cloud! 1 year free."

      As a somewhat side issue, one "lost" advantage of the old-style tool-bars was you couldn't have a "favorites" sub-bar. For example, suppose you used "save as CSV" often in a spreadsheet app. If there was an icon associated with (or attachable), then you could right-click to put a shortcut (copy) of the CSV icon in your "favorites" tool sub-bar. Some even allowed you to rearrange the tool-bar to your own liking, although this has customer-service drawbacks.

      The non-standard sizes of ribbon elements makes dynamic management of "tool" shortcuts difficult to program. It's like Scrabble with non-standard letter blocks. (Mini dialog boxes can pop-up for specifics.) I admit there were some poorly-designed tool-bar implementations, but it was mostly from bad app design, not an inherent flaw of tool-bars.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    19. Re:Imagine owning a car... by omnichad · · Score: 1

      If you're getting to the point where you're going to start memorizing things, you do it right and learn the keyboard shortcuts. Have any of those even changed in the last 20+ years?

    20. Re:Imagine owning a car... by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      So M$ Windows anal probe 10 as a car. Well it monitors everywhere you go and reports back to the manufacturer. It install new passengers and removes them at will. It gathers and sells information about you, where you are going and what passenger you have. It will stop on the road at random intervals, not giving one fuck about where you are and how safe it is, and install new features or remove old ones, they might not work, bringing the car to a stop until you take it to the mechanics to reinstall everything. It also runs your engine, using your fuel to tow what ever it wants in the background because it will save them money not having to pay to tow their rubbish. Once you put something in the trunk it will keep it forever or delete it without notice, all your content belongs to it. It wants to control which passengers you let in the vehicle and charge them for a ride. It wants to charge rent whilst in your garage and block you from replacing it with another vehicle. You know, you absolutely know it will get worse.

      If it was a car, held to the rules and regulation of car standards, the government would have fined it out of existence years ago and the public would have stopped buying it before that.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    21. Re:Imagine owning a car... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      You could argue that the changes were good, but still, it's a change.

      I didn't say there was no changes. I said the fundamental interaction remains unchanged. And yes I was specifically talking about changes to Windows 10 given that the GP was talking about waking up to find changes which systems prior to Windows 10 didn't do.

      If you were used to Windows XP and you then sat down at a Windows 7 machine, a lot of things would have moved around, which would be confusing.

      The details of using something vs its fundamentals are different things. The GP referenced steering wheel, breaks, and accelerator. He didn't mention locating the fuse box, or identifying warning lights or anything like that which I would agree then would definitely have moved around between Windows 10 updates, but let's expand the fundamentals to Windows XP:

      Let's get in and fundamentally drive both:
      1. Both present you with a login screen where you need to type a password then drop you on desktop.
      2. Both you start by clicking the thing in the bottom right which includes the windows logo.
      3. Minor Difference: One asks you to hover over Programs, the other gives you programs straight away in a scroll list.
      4. You still start apps by clicking on them.
      5. When you next interact with the OS, the way of maximising, minimising, and closing apps is still there in the same place and in the same order. Alt tab still switches between tabs (though Windows 10 gives you more options), copy and paste still works as it always did (though Windows 10 gives you more options).
      6. When saving files I click on "Documents" on the left instead of "My Documents" as I did in Windows XP.

      Sure settings have moved around a lot, but for most users their interaction with the control panel is incredibly limited and usually doesn't extend beyond adjusting projector settings (a place you can get to by right clicking and clicking Display Settings in both OSes). Oh and maybe wifi settings, an icon that is in the bottom right of both systems.

      To be honest I think power users would be more baffled by the changes than normal users.

    22. Re:Imagine owning a car... by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I didn't say there was no changes. I said the fundamental interaction remains unchanged. And yes I was specifically talking about changes to Windows 10 given that the GP was talking about waking up to find changes which systems prior to Windows 10 didn't do.

      That post doesn't mention Windows 10. In fact, it's paraphrasing an old post that I've seen a bunch of times on Slashdot and other sites, definitely dating back to before Windows 10.

      The details of using something vs its fundamentals are different things.

      You say it's just details, but then you go on to show how the behavior of the start menu-- the single biggest UI element of the Windows desktop environment-- has changed. If it's not moving the gas pedal to the ceiling, it's changing the layout of the gear shift. And though I'd agree that most people don't deal with most of the items in the control panel on a regular basis, it's not at all unusual for someone to have to deal with some item in the control panel. It's not a big part of a user's interaction since they're mostly just working inside applications, but it's a big part of the operating system's UI. The big parts of the operating system's UI are the Start Menu, File Manager, window borders and menu, and Control Panel (and now settings). All of those things have changed quite a lot, both in layout and function.

      So maybe the "gas pedal moved to the ceiling" isn't the best comparison. The fundamental things you're dealing with all the time are where they always were, but they work a little differently. The gas pedal now requires that you push it side-to-side with your foot rather than just pushing it down. The steering wheel is more sensitive, and smaller adjustments make the car turn more. The gear shift layout has changed, and there's no 2rd gear anymore-- it goes straight from 1st to 3rd, and 3rd gear is where reverse used to be.

      And then a ton of smaller things have changed. The entire console is shuffled around. The lever to pop the hood is now inside the trunk. The lever to pop the trunk and the lever to open the gas cap are now the same lever, and which one it opens depends on which direction you push it. The windshield wiper control lever has disappeared, and it's now a dial in the console. Just lots of little things, and you could say "it's better!" but it's still going to be confusing and disruptive to someone just trying to drive their car.

      But the original metaphor was written a long time ago to generally point out the annoyance of having software UI changes, so we can't expect it to be tailored specifically to Windows 10. Also, my altered, possibly more accurate metaphor is a lot less clear and snappy.

      To be honest I think power users would be more baffled by the changes than normal users.

      I don't think that makes it better. But certainly normal users get confused by the Windows UI changes. There are plenty of people who still operate their computer on the basis of, "I don't understand how anything works, I just know that I press this button when I want that thing to happen," and if you move or rename the button, they can't function.

    23. Re:Imagine owning a car... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      This isn't just Microsoft. This is how everyone does it. Since the cost of providing updates has dropped to near zero, companies have no problems with "ship early and ship often" and let the customers be the beta testers.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    24. Re: Imagine owning a car... by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      +5 because you don't have basic reading comprehension, fuck head.

      He said "intentionally crashes (sorry, "updates") once a week". i.e. he's not saying it actually crashes, just that it might as well, because you are forced to reboot once a week to complete the forced updates.

      Have a task/computation that is going to take two weeks? Too fucking bad, since updates are not always optional and once the update downloads you are forced to install it (with the accompanying reboot).

    25. Re:Imagine owning a car... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I'm more of a visual memorizor than a finger-movement memorizer. Some people are the reverse.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    26. Re:Imagine owning a car... by omnichad · · Score: 1

      The equivalent feature now is to hover the ribbon button and see the shortcut. But you can also access the ribbon by keyboard by hitting the alt key.

  2. SDLC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Microsoft's Software Development Life Cycle:

    1. Does it compile? If Yes, Ship it!
    2. Get input from unpaid Beta Testers - ignore most of it
    3. If they complain, they are "doing it wrong"
    4. Introduce More Bugs, and optionally Bug-Fixes and Features
    5. Re-Compile
    6. GOTO 1

    1. Re:SDLC by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Insightful

      0. Introduce random UX changes that no one needs or wants because oooooh! shinyyy!

    2. Re:SDLC by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

      forgot 1A lay off QA team and pass it to unpaid Beta Testers

    3. Re:SDLC by greenwow · · Score: 2

      And don't finish the UI changes you start. See the control panel.

      Just sucks that Microsoft has gotten rid of so many good employees that they can't finish that task they started over five years ago.

    4. Re:SDLC by Penguinisto · · Score: 3, Informative

      This sounds like the Apple way

      Depends... if we're talking iOS, you'd be spot-on.

      MacOS (OSX) on the other hand? They got that stability/performance shit down fairly cold. My last MacBook Pro (5 years old, my wife inherited it last month, uses it daily) only got one OS re-install, and that was because I swapped out the old platter drive for an SSD not long after I bought it.

      Zero stability issues, something like 5-6 OS upgrades on the same disk, a zillion patches/app-updates/etc... no sweat. Even today, it still runs as tight and fast as it did when I bought it in 2013. Only reason that I'm still not using it is because the 512MB GeForce in it doesn't run the Iray render engine worth a damn (slow old GPU, no RAM to speak of on it, etc.)

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    5. Re:SDLC by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      Disagree on one point...

      Win2k had the first iteration of Active Directory, and to be honest, it sucked balls, and each SP they slathered on just made it worse.

      Because of that, as far as the Enterprise is concerned, IMHO 2003 stands as the last best version, though 2008 is still somewhat usable.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    6. Re:SDLC by PingSpike · · Score: 1

      According to yahoo laying off QA improves quality because without QA there are far fewer bugs in the code. Or was that bugs found in the code? Wait, the difference is immaterial because as everyone knows things that you can't see don't exist.

    7. Re: SDLC by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      You forgot 1B: Ignore bug reports from Beta testers.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    8. Re:SDLC by greenwow · · Score: 1

      I think that spoke more to the terrible quality of QA that Microsoft had. When you pay less than you can make at a local McDonald's, then of course you're going to either get unqualified or unmotivated people.

    9. Re:SDLC by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Kind of like that old MS joke:

      Microsoft Windows 8 and 10, noun: A 64-bit compilation of 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor written by a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition with 0 bit of understanding good UI.

    10. Re:SDLC by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 2

      Win2k had the first iteration of Active Directory, and to be honest, it sucked balls

      Microsoft blatantly ripped off Novell Netware for AD.

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    11. Re:SDLC by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Honestly, I don't think iOS is that bad either. I've had a couple versions in recent years that were a little quirky, but mostly it's been trouble free, and some of the recent updates even seem to have made my device snappier.

      I have other problems/annoyances with Apple, but I haven't had big problems with stability or just untested releases.

      Disclaimer: I don't use that many apps on my phone and I usually wait at least a few days before installing software updates on my phone. If I hear that people are having problems with the updates, I wait until it sounds like things have sorted themselves out.

    12. Re:SDLC by snapsnap · · Score: 1

      McDonald's on 85th just up the hill on Redmond Way (which becomes 85th) from Redmond is paying up to $18 an hour starting and offers referral bonuses. Two friends that used to work for vendors at Microsoft now work there. Microsoft is literally losing people to McDonald's now.

    13. Re:SDLC by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      And don't forget, they also randomly remove options that used to be accessible from the control panel. The intent seems to be to discourage customization for anyone but a power user willing to spend time googling (binging) for a the relevant registry setting.

    14. Re:SDLC by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      1B) Dump the unpaid Beta Testers and pass it on to unsuspecting customers.

    15. Re:SDLC by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      I thought the term "unpaid Beta Testers" meant the customers.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    16. Re:SDLC by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      There are often unpaid beta testers in a lot of areas. Maybe call it limited release or preview release or whatever, but it happens. Remember the preview releases for Windows 8, I don't think you could characterize those testers as merely customers trying to use a finished product early.

    17. Re:SDLC by McFortner · · Score: 1

      You just successfully described the Millennial Mindset in one sentence, minus "plus RGB LEDs".

      --
      Beware of Sales Reps bearing gifts.
  3. This, indeed this... by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My biggest bugaboo is that Windows updates obliterates the CUDA-enabled nVidia video driver I have installed on the laptop, and replaces it with the craptastic non-CUDA Microsoft WHQL driver... which is why I have the whole thing disabled as deep in the registry as humanly possible.

    Would it kill Microsoft to look for 3rd-party drivers before stomping all over shit with their own versions? I mean, if it weren't for a few CG apps (and the lack of a decent nVidia GPU in the latest MacBook Pros), I wouldn't care, but damn...

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re: This, indeed this... by StevenDeBondt · · Score: 1

      Huh, so it takes nvidia marketing to diminish windows marketing? Interesting. *notes down behaviour patterns*

    2. Re: This, indeed this... by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not a question of marketing, I promise. The Iray render engine (built into a lot of CG rendering suites and apps nowadays) requires CUDA-enabled drivers, or else the render kicks to CPU for calculations, causing render times to go up by factors. This means a 30-minute render suddenly takes, say, an hour and a half... if you're lucky.

      Microsoft's WHQL GPU/video driver has CUDA disabled, so you're stuck with CPU (not GPU) rendering - and you usually don't find out until after it begins. Also, when you have a 6-12GB GPU card, all that RAM goes to waste under Microsoft's driver. :/

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    3. Re:This, indeed this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Would it kill Microsoft to look for 3rd-party drivers before stomping all over shit with their own versions?

      If the 3rd party has a tested driver registered with Microsoft for that sub-version of Windows, it will use that. The patch falls back to default drivers as a safety precaution to prevent unstable OS conditions.

      They really should test big 3rd party drivers on the new builds before sending out the patches to see if there is a conflict first, but I'm sure a lot of people at both Microsoft and nVidia are pointing fingers at each-other because of how the responsibility for testing was written into whatever agreements they have.

    4. Re:This, indeed this... by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Would it kill Microsoft to look for 3rd-party drivers before stomping all over shit with their own versions?

      That's not the issue. The third party drivers published to Windows Update should be the same as the vendor actually ships. Windows won't automatically overwrite a driver unless there's a new version or a WHQL version of the existing driver... and you can disable the touching of drivers in windows (it's under System, not under the Update Settings).

      Normally I would say the manufacturer fouled something up, but in this specific update there were a LOT of problems relating to drivers even before the file deletion bug came up. They really fouled up this update bigtime.

    5. Re:This, indeed this... by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 2

      You're not getting it. Microsoft believes that it owns your computer, not you, and that that's right and good and the natural order of things. You're just a silly child, irresponsible and irrational, and what you want is not relevant; they see themselves as the parent in this scenario. It may sound like I'm spinning conspiracy theories but functionally speaking what I'm saying is accurate. Microsoft doesn't want you being the administrator of your own personal computer, they feel they're the only ones qualified to do that, and being True Believers in this concept, they have no reason to doubt themselves or listen to any opposing viewpoint. The exception is Enterprise systems, in which case they must cede some control to the corporations that are buying thousands of licenses from them. What you, the private single end-user wants, is irrelevant. They'll replace your questionable 'third party' driver with the one they wrote and qualified because they believe that's what's best. You should feel lucky they don't lock you out of drivers entirely, because they could if they wanted to. All of this is why Microsoft is to be avoided now.

    6. Re:This, indeed this... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      It's my understanding that MS will only load their WHQL version if the version direct from nvidia.com is older.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    7. Re:This, indeed this... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      It depend on the card, but with newer GPUs, the latest driver from nVidia that's WHQL was released Oct 11, 2018. However, the latest WHQL for the oldest supporting CUDA GPU (8800 series) is Dec 14, 2016. It's possible a newer version for the 8800 series was released only through Microsoft; in which case it could ostensibly over-write the latest public version direct from nVidia's website.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    8. Re:This, indeed this... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      In short, Windows is not the product. The user is the product.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    9. Re:This, indeed this... by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      I think that's pretty much the anthem of Corporate America (and beyond?) these days. The ostenible 'product' they're selling seems to be just the bait on the hook for the real product, which is the purchasers' personal information. Seems like everything everywhere is now geared towards collecting data on people.

    10. Re: This, indeed this... by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      That's usually how you find out... after you discover that the render is taking way longer than it otherwise should.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  4. Computer SCIENCE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just wonder what happened to software ENGINEERING.

    Why is it that user data ends up scattered everywhere ?

    Why not have all the Windows software run from a read only directory,
    and all Apps & Programs added on run from their own read only directory,
    and keep all user info in its own User directory.

    Things get scattered about and stuffed in hidden directories, etc.

    I would like to see microsoft sort out the OS and default apps / office, so all of it runs from its own read only drive.

    Then all data and cookies and registry, etc gets stored on its own drive or separate folder.

    Also it would be best if they made Windows & Office completely portable so it can just run off a flash drive keychain & not be so tied up into lengthy installs into a PC.

    Licenses can be sold to people and businesses and not linked to hardware platforms.

    1. Re:Computer SCIENCE by Jamu · · Score: 1

      Why not have all the Windows software run from a read only directory,

      Where would hello.cpp compile to?

      --
      Who ordered that?
    2. Re: Computer SCIENCE by Londovir · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I get what you're trying to say, but it would be nice if you didn't phrase it in a way that makes you a douche. My Computer Science degree, with the countless hours spent implementing every well known sorting algorithm, search algorithm, data manipulation algorithm, data structures, and other things that were done well decades ago, says your concept of requesting a lack of an engineering degree to being a code monkey is crap. A degree doesn't have to have the word engineering in it to be a valuable degree program. Hell, it doesn't have to be taught in a college of engineering either. It's the content and curriculum that matter. I'd argue it's more likely that the company has pushed their developers to release faster and faster, without the time needed to properly test and QA their work. You can be a vaunted engineer, and if you are being rushed, you'll make mistakes. Look at Apple... You could make the same arguments about the last 3 versions of iOS being substandard for quality as the Windows 10 updates have been lately. I doubt Apple has code monkeys, as you'd call it; I think they are just rushing their workers to market.

      --
      Londovir
    3. Re: Computer SCIENCE by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You don't have to have a degree to be an engineer, and you can have a degree and still not be one. It is about competence not certification paperwork. I would wager that most incompetent people in the industry have a degree but instead of approaching the problem as an engineering one, the start writing code on day one because they don't know any better, and that is how management thinks it is done.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    4. Re: Computer SCIENCE by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Because MS has decades of backwards compatible APIs and they attract inexperienced devs who don't know better. If INI files work for you, you use them. If the registry works for you, use it. If XML files in the user profile dir works, use it.

      You can't remove these capabilities without a fundamental, backwards-incompatible redesign of how apps interact with the OS, turning it into a walled garden, iOS-esque environment.

    5. Re: Computer SCIENCE by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Oh, I totally agree. Idiots who think that you should design a system rather than start off writing code are the Antichrist ... you fucking moron.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    6. Re: Computer SCIENCE by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      My Computer Science degree, with the countless hours spent implementing every well known sorting algorithm, search algorithm, data manipulation algorithm, data structures, and other things that were done well decades ago, says your concept of requesting a lack of an engineering degree to being a code monkey is crap

      That's not what the parent said.

      He said if you don't have an engineering degree you're not an engineer - In the same way someone who didn't go to medical school isn't a "medical doctor" or someone who didn't go to architecture school isn't an architect.

      You may very well write excellent software, but you're not a "software engineer" unless you have an engineering degree.

    7. Re:Computer SCIENCE by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Doing things your way requires an adherence to proper design and discipline to maintain this. This is not the Microsoft Way. The Microsoft Way is to get it out fast, and then if a better way is discovered later then the old way and new way can live together side by side.

    8. Re: Computer SCIENCE by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      As a software developer, I'm fully aware of my limitations and take that into account when I do my work. I would imagine most developers do this. In my experience, if there's a buggy release, it's not the fault of developers or testers, but of management. Developers are constantly being asked to squeeze in one more feature, without being given the time to properly design it, and without the time for the testers to do their work. I've known quite a few testers in my day and they are generally very thorough people, and the best ones are downright amazing in their ability to find (and even diagnose) bugs. The limiting factor is almost always time (and similarly resources). The best developers and testers can't do amazing things if they aren't given the time and resources to do them properly, and we see this everywhere. Software releases, and as a result quality, are driven by people who are more concerned with getting the feature out, getting the item on the marketing list ticked off, and getting money from customers rather than that the feature is complete, useful and bug-free.

      Can you imagine how today's software companies would function under the constraints of 20-30 years where you can't put out patches every month? Software came out less often, but it generally worked better. It had to, because there was no quick fix, as an update would require a massive distribution of CDs or even (gasp!) floppy disks. Sure, we had crappy software back then as well, but things have definitely not gotten better. Customers being beta testers went from being the exception to being the norm.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    9. Re: Computer SCIENCE by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      In a century or two, there won't be software engineers. The software itself will do all that for us. Either that or software engineers will be back to using relays and vacuum tubes.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  5. Go backup the older days of SP's also windows serv by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    Go backup the older days of SP's also windows server is a bit slower but 2016 really needs an SP or update roll-up to fix the long updates.

  6. "dangerously close to loss of trust"? Well past! by DutchUncle · · Score: 3, Funny

    Anyone I know who uses Windows does all they can to prevent updates, including - perhaps especially - IT departments. For some strange reason, it only takes one time of the CEO having his computer go into a forced update in the middle of a presentation to lenders, and policy changes REAL fast.

  7. So what? by nagora · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If Microsoft Windows was only bought based on its quality and reliability there wouldn't have been a Windows 3, and if there had then ME would have killed it off, and of not then Vista would have, and if not then Windows 10... and so it goes one. Windows has never really been ready for the desktop - it's still unbearably bad/slow at even simple file handling.

    Microsoft have zero incentive to do things better because the market never punishes them for their mistakes. They just shrug their shoulders and carry on regardless.

    --
    "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    1. Re:So what? by EryximachusBK · · Score: 1

      I long since gave up on Slashdot, but I just created this account specifically to address this. You are claiming that for nearly 30 years, Windows, the most popular operating system in the world by orders of magnitude can't handle simple file handling? This kind of stuff was funny 10-15 years ago when it was obvious trolling, but my god - you're just a nutjob. I make a solid $350,000 a year using unbearably slow Windows 10 and Office 2016. What the fuck are you doing with your life? Maybe the problem is YOU, not the operating system.

    2. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft have zero incentive to do things better because the market never punishes them for their mistakes

      Sounds like a failure of the market. If Windows is so terribly unusable, then how come it hasn't been supplanted by macOS/Linux? Businesses aren't going to use tools that specifically work worse than others, so there must be some reason they haven't doubled down on any alternatives that could serve them better.

      It's called a monopoly.... Microsoft has one, and there are no other viable choices. When you're the only game in town, you can do pretty much whatever you want.

    3. Re:So what? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      and if not then Windows 10... and so it goes one.

      To be fair to the complaints, Windows 10 is the second flop in a row. That IS a first for Microsoft.

      it's still unbearably bad/slow at even simple file handling.

      File handling itself is fine. The way information about files is aggregated and displayed to users is what is frustrating. e.g. File save dialogues which have custom sorting for a folder and have thumbnails enabled load the thumbnail cache before sorting. That is truly frigging dumb. It's not that file handling is slow, it's that Windows does stuff not relevant for the user at odd times.

    4. Re: So what? by jd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's easy to answer.

      1. Businesses like the fantasy of someone to blame, Linux robs them of that

      2. Linux for the desktop was killed by OSDL and hardware vendors

      3. MacOS, OS/X and Linux don't have the range of applications needed

      4. Microsoft's Truth campaign

      5. Microsoft taxing vendors if they supply rival OS'

      6. Microsoft bribing ISO

      7. Legacy install base

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    5. Re: So what? by jd · · Score: 3

      Who cares what you make? Past cost of living, money is a number.

      It's how well you work and how positive that is in the broader picture.

      Windows of all kinds is of very low quality. It has a defect density somewhere between ten to a hundred times that of Linux. It is fantastically insecure and unstable. The office suite is so poor, Microsoft had to bribe ISO to recognise the format. The UI for Office is cumbersome and gets in the way of doing anything productive.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    6. Re: So what? by jd · · Score: 1

      Also, popularity is irrelevant. Plague charms were popular, once. Didn't mean they worked. Something works or it doesn't, the rest is window dressing and salespitch.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    7. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're partially wrong, at least with the implications of what you're saying.

      1) Linux is too distributed; it requires businesses to develop their own things rather than buy a more complete solution. Developing processes and customized things for every task adds a tremendous process burden to the business that they do not want.

      2) Linux for desktop never had a chance, because it's too distributed and there's no one vendor or source of truth. THe message is confusing; I don't even know what Linux is or stands for.

      3) This. Specifically MS Office. MS Office comes free with a Windows install, but the fact remains that most businesses are run on Outlook, Word, Excel, and Powerpoint. Every competitor out there, like Google Sheets, Docs, Slides, and Gmail, are poor imitations.

      4) I don't know what the MS truth campaign is. MS sucks at engineering the market; there is no brand loyalty to them the way Apple has done with their marketing.

      5) I don't know what you mean by taxing; they take away support of customers who support their competitors. That's normal?

      6) I don't know anything about ISO bribing. This sounds like a gossiper programmer's tale.

      7) The Legacy install base is the real issue, but probably not the way you think. Retraining staff on how to use a new system costs a tremendous amount of money, often more than the install. I've been through two ERP installations with SAP in different companies, and every time the cost to train the staff was 150% of the actual cost of the software installation. Why switch to Linux or Mac when the retraining of the staff could cost 10's of millions of dollars? What is the ROI to spend that kind of money? I've never seen anyone make a case for switching when the cost of staff retraining is so high.

    8. Re:So what? by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      Businesses aren't going to use tools that specifically work worse than others

      You haven't spent much time working in a larger business, have you?

    9. Re: So what? by jd · · Score: 1

      No, a distribution such as RHEL is a one-stop shop.

      No, there is only one official kernel, one API, one goal, one vision. (There needs to be a Freddie edition.)

      Since when is LibreOffice a poor imitation? You need to try harder.

      You don't know about their international tour, dissing open source and claiming a lower TCO? Boy, did you miss out on some garbage. It's just just the CEOs didn't.

      Microsoft charge several hundred dollars an install more from every vendor that offers alternatives. They used to offer a refund for unused installs, but rescinded that after Refund Day when people tried to claim. Microsoft claimed they weren't bound by their offer.

      No, it's widely acknowledged, including by ISO, that Microsoft bought themselves a fast track for their Office format and then bought votes from the committee. Telling me I'm wrong is not a substitute for looking this up. Before dismissing things, look.

      Sorry, retraining? I can use a Windows clone window manager for X. LibteOffice requires no retraining. There are Exchange clones, so you get the nifty calendar, but Exchange is on the cloud anyway. Jira is web-based. Firefox doesn't change. SQL tools have very similar interfaces. The difference in syntax between SQL Server and Postgres or Oracle will require a cheat sheet. Most WMs for X provide similar control panels to those under Windows, close enough that it's not retraining but basic familiarization.

      But that still leaves a lot of applications, mostly legacy, that relied on undocumented calls or strange behaviors, making it impossible to run them under a compatibility layer, and where the vendor won't port or no longer exists to.

      I've been in the industry a very long time. Computers and OS' stand or fall by the legacy software available. When Microsoft broke compatibility with OS/2, they eliminated the market for their rival. They got caught and heavily fined for doing the same thing to DRDOS. This is a standard behavior of theirs, which ultimately ended up in two antitrust l lawsuits.

      Microsoft lost both cases. Look it up.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    10. Re: So what? by nine-times · · Score: 1

      At this point, I really think it's mostly about the catch-22 of, developers don't develop apps for Linux because there aren't users, and users don't use it because there aren't apps. Similarly with hardware-- hardware vendors don't support it because there aren't enough customers using it, and users don't use it because their hardware doesn't support it.

      And then, like you said, there are the legacy apps. Some company has some old application created 15 years ago. Their whole business runs on this crappy application that nobody knows how it works anymore, and it only runs on Windows. So that business needs Windows.

      There are some really great, attractive, easy to install, easy to use Linux desktop distributions.

    11. Re:So what? by nagora · · Score: 1

      File handling itself is fine. The way information about files is aggregated and displayed to users is what is frustrating. e.g. File save dialogues which have custom sorting for a folder and have thumbnails enabled load the thumbnail cache before sorting. That is truly frigging dumb. It's not that file handling is slow, it's that Windows does stuff not relevant for the user at odd times.

      Even if that was the whole of it, it's pretty cold comfort. But my experience of copying large (60GB+) files from a backup drive to the internal drive with Windows 10 is that it simply can't do it and always crashes at some point in the process. Perhaps it's a USB subsystem issue but in any case it's ridiculous.

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    12. Re:So what? by McFortner · · Score: 1

      If Windows is so terribly unusable, then how come it hasn't been supplanted by macOS/Linux?

      Well, first of all macOS is even more of a control freak than Windows 10. It's their way or the highway.

      Second, Linux? Which distro? Too many of them are not 100% compatible with each other. Something that was written in one distro might not work in another. Businesses are pretty weary of huge problems like that.

      Third, Micro$oft has managed to get itself installed on practically every business machine for so long that it's not feasable to switch to something else and have to buy whole new versions of software for the new OS for EVERY FREAKING COMPUTER that the company uses.

      So, yeah....

      --
      Beware of Sales Reps bearing gifts.
  8. Shout all you want, the response will be the same: by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Fuck you, who else are you going to go to?"

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
  9. Just wait for an acrade game running windows by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Just wait for an acrade game running windows (yes do) That get's dropped kicked after rebooting in the middle some of some best game ever.

  10. There is a problem with how it updates it... by Dwedit · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There actually is a problem with how it updates it. You see, Windows was designed to emit a two-byte NOP at the beginning of every function, just so it could be hotpatched to redirect to a longer jump instruction. This mechanism would allow reboot-free updating of core system files.

    I don't see any reboot-free updating of core system files here.

    1. Re:There is a problem with how it updates it... by strikethree · · Score: 1

      Well, honestly, trying to trace out all the file locks and kernel locks is too hard for them without making the system unstable by accident, so yeah. They went with the tried and true rebooting.

      It is disgusting to me that they don't have enough technical knowledge to fully understand the shit they are selling to everyone... but here you have it. It is what it is: A steaming pile of crap.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    2. Re:There is a problem with how it updates it... by kzwork · · Score: 1

      It is not even that, all Windows files in use are locked and cannot be overwritten hence updated - stupid design. Same for configurations (Registry). In Linux you can upgrade the program even if it is running, next time you call it - it is brand new - same applies to the Kernel.
      During update you replace all the necessary files with the newer versions and at the end restart the affected services (minus kernel, GUI and user applications ).

  11. Microsoft adapting old windows to a new world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Microsoft has a lot of legacy baggage to deal with in windows. In many cases I can install an application written for windows 95 and it will work in the latest build of 64 bit windows 10.

    This is a blessing and a curse. Lately it's been more of a curse. The whole desktop software model that Windows was born in to is sort of on the way out.

    The reality of 2018 is that software is a service. The internet is an every-changing sea of new stuff and there is no place for a static, monolithic operating system that does not change. Security updates. New services. New technologies. New everything.

    Microsoft's solution is to force rapid fire updates and periodic refreshes. Problematic? Yeah. Classic windows applications don't like that. Is there a better way to do it? Probably not for windows.

    Remember windows 8? When Microsoft tried to sell everyone windows that's not windows? That went over like a lead balloon and even today uptake of windows 10 store apps is minimal at best.

    People want windows. So we have this.

  12. Underuse of the word it. by vossman77 · · Score: 1

    Microsoft's Problem Isn't How Often It Updates Windows -- It 's How It Develops It

    Works much better like this:

    Its Problem Isn't How Often It Updates It -- It's How It Develops It

    1. Re:Underuse of the word it. by raftpeople · · Score: 2

      I'm noticing some similarities to that other "IT" from the movies:
      1 - Both IT's have a crazy clown interface
      2 - Both IT's make the townspeople lives miserable (although in fairness, only one of them loses your data)

  13. Yet another failure of capitalism by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1, Insightful

    New *features* sells software. Bug fixes don't.

    Microsoft will keep churning out crud. Same shit. Different day. That same old 90s era C++ "we know better than you" attitude is still very much in evidence.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    1. Re:Yet another failure of capitalism by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 2

      That's often true, but not in this case. Nobody "buys" windows for features, they get it because it came installed on their computer and that's what they need to run their software. No one's going to switch from Mac or Linux because File Explorer offers dark mode.

      But yeah, features are exciting and bug fixes are boring, so the suits want new features to brag about in their Powerpoints. Honestly, there's no reason MS can't do both. They're a huge company, they should be able to fix bugs and develop features at the same time. Problem is Windows is and always has been a huge mess, it needs to be modularized and compartmentalized.

      If I were king I'd start with a clean sheet, make Win 11 as backward-compatible as possible without compromising design parameters. Recognize that many "features" are actually apps and keep them sandboxed from the OS. Keep doing bug fixes for Win10 for those that are depending on legacy software, but no new features.

      --
      Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
  14. Don't worry by PPH · · Score: 1

    It will all be fixed in Windows 12.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  15. "Fix bugs" by tambo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Microsoft needs to stop developing new features and just fix bugs."

    Generally true, but what does Microsoft do about core features that are so intensely buggy that they are literally unsalvageable?

    • The Windows registry is a dumpster fire.
    • The Windows role-based security model is an unmitigated headache.
    • App compatibility is so bad that Windows still has a "Program Files" folder and a "Program Files (x86)" folder.
    • Windows Help has been beyond useless for the entire lifespan of Windows. It's so bad that people resort to MSDN, which is also beyond useless.
    --
    Computer over. Virus = very yes.
    1. Re:"Fix bugs" by Luthair · · Score: 1

      App compatibility is so bad that Windows still has a "Program Files" folder and a "Program Files (x86)" folder.

      What are you even complaining about here? That Microsoft supports customers instead of shitting on them?

    2. Re:"Fix bugs" by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Once they get customers switched over to monthly subscriptions, then they might start fixing bugs... Until then, they need to introduce new features to encourage upgrades.

      However it's more likely that they would just stop adding new features, and still not bother fixing bugs.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  16. Windows = Spam & Snoop Engine by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    with commentators saying that two feature updates a year is too many and Redmond should cut back to one, and that Microsoft needs to stop developing new features and just fix bugs.

    My observation is that M$ is experimenting with either different ways to spam Windows users, and/or looking for ways to force them into their cloud/store to (hopefully) rent or buy services through it. This is probably the main reason for changes.

    I get "Windows notifications" of new or upgraded services offered by M$. The pretty login screens sometimes show vacation spots that M$ appears to be sponsoring*. (I must admit, I have clicked out of curiosity after seeing some nice photo. I fed the troll, and had to shower afterward.) And MS-Paint has a notice toolbar icon that the app will be moving to the cloud soon with a link to their store. The app may be free (now), but they can get you into their store to shop around if they move their usual Windows goodies up there.

    They look at Google App Store and Apple Store as their future revenue growth, not selling OS's. The OS is to become their ad and MS-cloud tie-in platform. Linux-based OS's are slowly nipping at their OS cash cow, and they are scrambling for alternative revenue. They lost the phone and tablet OS wars, and consumers and small biz are slowly but increasingly shifting to Android and arguably Apple for desktop replacements or alternatives. New users only use M$ for compatibility, not because they want to. M$ is being pushed to be the new IBM, and Google is the new M$, but M$ won't go quietly, since they see how IBM is struggling to remain relevant. (IBM's A.I. ads have desperate PHB written all over them.)

    Cloud is their only recent success story; thus, they're hellbent in turning Windows into an MS-cloud portal. I'd do the same if I were a greedy MS executive trying to leverage the co's only success.

    * To be fair, I haven't found a direct tie yet, but some appear very suspicious. I should turn off the login wallpaper, but have to admit they supply some cool pics if you use the tuning feature to see what you like.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
    1. Re:Windows = Spam & Snoop Engine by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      They look at Google App Store and Apple Store as their future revenue growth, not selling OS's.

      Not so, they see the App store as a revenue source, but the plan is to turn Windows into a monthly service cost in 2020 just like Office 365 you'll have to pay every month to use windows. This has been in the plans for 5+ years now and it's why Windows 10 was "free". Free in the sense that you gave away all commerical rights to a paid for copy and agreed to pay for the SAAS version of windows when it rolls out as an update to Windows 10.

      Honestly if you aren't aware this is the plan you've not been paying attention.

    2. Re:Windows = Spam & Snoop Engine by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      the plan is to turn Windows into a monthly [fee based service]

      That probably won't fly in the consumer market. People think of such devices as appliances (for good or bad). Android and Apple don't charge a monthly OS fee.

      Yes, it will probably work in the "enterprise" environment, and already is in some shops, but they cannot over-do it for similar reasons.

      Thank You Linus and Linux for making MS sweat. Similar thanks to the teams of MySql, PostgreSql, Apache, etc.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  17. Re:Go backup the older days of SP's also windows s by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    This IS a service pack. Simply changing the name back won't solve these problems. The problem is they change so much shit with each Service Pack and then force it down user's throats without testing with the hope of sticking to some arbitrary timeline for releasing them.

  18. Microsoft has it "pause" before by davidwr · · Score: 1

    I think sometime in the mid-late 2000s or every early 2010s Microsoft re-focused on security at the expense of new non-security features.

    For awhile.

    These days, any company that's in the market that Microsoft is in needs to have a "security in depth first" approach. This means as close to zero security-related bugs as possible and fixing or providing reasonable mitigations for security issues as quickly as possible.

    Bugs that lead to unwanted data deletion or, for that matter, "silent failures" on requests to delete data, are security bugs even if they do not lead to unauthorized access.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  19. Re: Go backup the older days of SP's also windows by jd · · Score: 2

    Older days, odd number service packs bricked the machine.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  20. Microsoft is damaging customers and itself. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Mod parent up!! However, that comment may, in some ways, be too kind.

    Microsoft is poorly managed? Plenty of evidence.

    Microsoft was badly managed 10 years ago.

    Microsoft managers lack social ability. They have done ENORMOUS DAMAGE to the Microsoft brand name. That is my best understanding and opinion.

    Some of the many, many reports of Microsoft managers thinking they can manipulate and control everyone, as though the managers are government dictators:

    Windows 10 is possibly the worst spyware ever made. "Buried in the service agreement is permission to poke through everything on your PC." (Aug. 4, 2015)

    Microsoft's Intolerable Windows 10 Aggression (May 27, 2016)

    Microsoft is infesting Windows 10 with annoying ads (March 17, 2017)

    Microsoft, stop sabotaging Windows 10. (March 21, 2017)

    A huge problem: A high percentage of people who work with Windows computers make more money if there are more problems with Microsoft and Windows. There is a conflict of interest.

    Apparently Microsoft managers decided they would try to be like Google's Android. They apparently decided to try to gather information about everything, and try to sell that information. Most people with cell phones don't have the technical knowledge necessary to know if they are being abused.

    Can a company be sued for supplying computers with Windows 10? If a company supplies Windows 10 computers to businesses and doesn't get a signed agreement from all business customers that the customers know Windows 10 allows Microsoft to gather data from their computers, the supplier could be the target of court cases, and possibly even go to prison. No business customers want Microsoft employees to have access to their company information. My opinion, shared by many others.

    People working with desktop computers don't want to be distracted by ads. They don't want to try to learn new, complicated user interfaces.

    1. Re:Microsoft is damaging customers and itself. by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      The problem is Windows in the past 5 years (or more!) is that the primary changes being made to Windows is to serve Microsoft, not the user. No one asked for the massive changes that came with Windows 8. No one liked them. Microsoft was uncontrollably lusting after the 30% cut that Apple gets from everything sold through their store and tried to force Windows to work on that model, even though it never did and there was no way it ever could. On top of that, they decided that desktop computers (or laptops for that matter) were passe and that everyone in the world would be using Windows on a phone or tablet and made that the primary interface for Windows. These were both disastrous choices that only served Microsoft's purposes and had nothing to do with users. Then Windows 10 comes along which is nothing but a massive spyware operation, again to serve Microsoft's desires and not the users.

      Microsoft was used to forcing anything they wanted on the user for a long time, and as they ran out of ways to monetize their software, they became more and more desperate to extract more value out of customers. Except now their competition is stiffer than ever.

      I used to like Windows. I still want to like Windows, but Windows isn't a product any more. The users are the product.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  21. Isn't that a general problem with agile dev? by MerlinTheWizard · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Despite regular bold statements that agile methods have improved everything, experience shows that it has mostly degraded software quality and consistency and only improved short-term revenue for software companies.

    Regarding Windows, this has gone downhill so much that it defies good sense. It actually used to be a pretty decent platform (at least starting with Windows NT 4 and Windows 2000), very consistent. Starting with Windows 8, it started degrading. You just have to remember their main strategy was to push forward Windows on mobile platforms. They failed spectacularly with the mobile market, yet they kept insisting with all the same methods. Windows 10 is essentially the result of a strategic failure, which is incidentally consistent with agile methods, as those basically promote no long-term vision or strategy and only focus on short-term makeshift jobs, AKA "new features".

    1. Re:Isn't that a general problem with agile dev? by blahplusplus · · Score: 2

      Windows 10 is essentially the result of a strategic failure,

      No, windows 10 is the result Microsoft seeing the mad profits of the last 20 years of software theft (aka taking control of the software) by the videogame industry (aka Ultima RPG's during the 90's become mmo's and profits explode, world of warcraft, overwatch with lootboxes and microtransactions, etc) and walled garden software model pioneered by smartphones, the videogame industry for the last 20 years has been at the forefront of wanting to get rid of software ownership and take control of the end users machine. It's been silicon valleys wet dream to basically remove control of machine from the user and turn it into a locked down walled garden like smart phones. They basically want what the videogame industry and smart phone industry want, endless stream of 'service' based software apps/micro apps, etc. To do that they are basically turning the PC into a smartphone and getting rid of user freedom.

    2. Re:Isn't that a general problem with agile dev? by Luthair · · Score: 1

      I think you're confused, agile doesn't say anything about when software should be released. Its about taking on bite-sized chunks instead of trying to tackle the entire universe at once. Continuous delivery is likely the source of your complaint as its about pushing shit out the door frequently which makes it a lot more difficult to do in-depth testing due to time constraints.

    3. Re:Isn't that a general problem with agile dev? by strikethree · · Score: 1

      Hm. Vista was slow because of the DRM in the kernel. Windows 7 was faster because they figured out how to not make the DRM such a resource hog, but Windows 7 was just as anti-consumer as Vista.

      Starting with Windows 8, it started degrading.

      I would say it became unpalatable around Windows 8. It was already degrading before that. Windows 10 is just a "what the fuck is this shit?! I will never submit to it." step in the wrong direction.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    4. Re:Isn't that a general problem with agile dev? by complete+loony · · Score: 1

      This still feels like Microsoft are using the same development model under the hood. Go through a burst of writing new features, trying to get them into trunk before "feature freeze", not caring that they are fundamentally broken. Then go through a bug fixing phase before release. The difference is the timing of each development cycle.

      They migrated to git internally, but their code base is so large that they had to write a virtual filesystem driver so developers could work on the code without cloning the history and checking it all out. Clearly, what they should be focusing on is splitting every component into a separate source code repository, each with their own release cycle. With automated testing to ensure that every release actually works.

      This would be a painful & slow process, but with a solid foundation underfoot, they should be able to build new features faster.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    5. Re:Isn't that a general problem with agile dev? by MerlinTheWizard · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the info. Development methods are one thing, and I realize how big Windows source code must have grown and how difficult it has become to work on it, but I do think the fundamental problem is still one of strategic vision.

      I don't agree with the current state of Windows being linked to development difficulties. It's almost entirely caused by a defective vision.

      I cited the agile methods because they are very often tied to a strategy problem, and are often used to try and circumvent it or ignore it altogether.

      I don't quite agree with what has been said above, most agile methods in use today rely on frequent releases, such as "scrum". And ALL of them focus on splitting a project into tiny tasks. May sound like a good idea on the surface, and works reasonably well on a solid existing code base, but makes long-term architectural design and decisions impossible to make.

  22. Re:Shout all you want, the response will be the sa by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Be nice, or MS will merge with Comcast.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
  23. Quality of its operating system has deteriorated? by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    Exactly when was Microsoft Windows a high quality Operating System?

    After 32 years, it's still barely usable, completely unstable, full of security holes. I run approx 300 servers and zero of them run Windows, across all the desktops I manage, only three of them run it, because of a crappy software that some clients require. It's fair to say that Microsoft Windows is a usable, some what functional OS, that can solve simple problems, but past that, forget about it.

  24. The only new feature needed... by megalomaniacs4u · · Score: 1

    The only new feature they need to implement in Windows 10 is the one that unfucks the UI and reverts to Windows 7.

    Other useful features would involve removing the dire windows store, UWP apps, the new settings bullshit and reverting to control panel.

  25. The Joy of Agile by smithcl8 · · Score: 1

    Software engineers and business analysts may love it, but when you're updating stuff too often, it becomes a mighty headache to the end user. MS is simply too big to go this way with Windows....you can't update a billion devices 2x a year without something breaking.

  26. Clickbait by farble1670 · · Score: 2

    Wait, we have this clickbait title:

    Microsoft’s problem isn’t how often it updates Windows—it’s how it develops it

    but this buried in the article:

    Microsoft hasn't exactly revealed the development process being used with Windows 10

    Explanation: barely tech literate clickbait writer for Ars Technica imagines they have a clue about how software development works at Microsoft. Argue all you want about the quality of windows, but don't try to pretend you have some understanding about software development and how it's gone wrong in Redmond.

  27. Truer story than you may realize! by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Tesla owners are complaining about this very thing right now. The much lauded version 9.0 software update they're pushing out to Teslas right now rethinks the whole UI. Model S owners can no longer pick any two application to split on the top and bottom halves of their screens. Instead, Tesla decided the navigation window should always be present, with anything else you might want to see on a toolbar along the bottom that lets you pick one to slide up, overlaying the bottom portion of the nav screen.

    So effectively, people who have been driving their cars since 2012 with things laid out their preferred way (backup camera screen always visible while music/stereo controls occupy the other half of the display, perhaps?) are now forced to do things differently.

    It seems like the computer industry has this unique perspective that their designers know what's best for their users and dictate where and how you'll control what you use - changing it at will.

    1. Re:Truer story than you may realize! by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Distros like CentOS do limit you to just security updates, and unless the update is for the kernel it won't require you to reboot.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  28. QA by antdude · · Score: 1

    MS axed its QA years ago too. :(

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  29. That is quite obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That quality of the updates is an issue has been obvious for a long time. What gets me mad is the stress these updates bring to bear on my computer. It Microsoft had their way, Windows would churn up the hard drive almost all the time. I've already had several HDs fail in the last few years on both Dell and HP machines. So what I did was to disable Superfetch and set the update mode to "let me know about them but don't download and don't install any"; I'll let you figure out how I did that and yes, my machines run on Windows 10 Home. Even an apparently straightforward Desk Cleanup will bring the system almost to a grind for hours if you chose to also delete the system update temp files(because it needs to "optimize" stuff, see).

  30. Re:"dangerously close to loss of trust"? Well past by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

    does all they can to prevent updates,

    And then are shocked. SHOCKED! when the update they've put off for 6 months eventually installs itself.

    Or they could just schedule it for a time that isn't during a presentation.

  31. Regret. by KreAture · · Score: 1

    Not a single day goes by without me regretting installing Windows 10.
    Stop adding new shit, fix the bugs and let the system be stable and then leave me alone!

    Every time all my documents, that I use as reference material for something I am writing, is closed and windows forcibly rebooted I feel violated. Can I sue for psychological trauma?

    Every time the "pay per startup", (very expensive), application I use is shut down for a reboot it cost money. Can I sue for that money back?

  32. Re:"dangerously close to loss of trust"? Well past by DarkRookie2 · · Score: 1

    It doesn't always allow you to that.
    It will just update cause it wants to.

    --
    http://progressquest.com/spoltog.php?name=Son+Of+Son+Of+DarkRookie
  33. MS will never lose my trust by gweihir · · Score: 1

    They never had it and they will never get it.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  34. Winner, Winner, Chicken Dinner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Windows has so many layers of backward compatibility that create a large percentage of the security problems. But if Windows wasn't backwards compatible with those old apps Slashdotters would be complaining that the lack of backwards compatibility was a cash grab by Microsoft to force you to buy new versions.

  35. Re:Quality of its operating system has deteriorate by gweihir · · Score: 1

    Indeed. Windows is and has always been a toy. For a toy, the quality would be reasonable, bit for something you need to be able to depend on, it is a bad joke.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  36. Addendum by Torodung · · Score: 1

    In the latest versions, you can put your custom group anywhere on any tab, name it whatever you want, and stick your features on it, including ones that aren't on the ribbon at all.

    So, MS eventually listened to reason. Office 2007 was a mess though.

  37. Re:Addendum [cow ribbon] by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    So, MS eventually listened to reason. Office 2007 was a mess though.

    Are you saying it took MS 11 years to get the ribbon right? The fact they didn't get it right first before releasing it tells you something:

    We are all Beta Cows! Say Msoooo, you beta cows!

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
  38. Re:It's so much worse than "quality" by jezwel · · Score: 1
    I can't remember the last time my unmanaged home PCs spent time doing updates, because I've set it to do them in the wee hours of the morning.
    Every once in a while I'll sit down with breakfast and have to login, which is an indication that the PC ran an update.

    It's been doing that since the free upgrade to Win10 came out for earlier versions of windows.

    I have no idea about how long updates take to download, it does that in the background. Installing? I'm asleep, there's a several hour window of opportunity there.

    I get the feeling a lot of these updates are being forced on people that have their computers turned on only when they want to use them, so updates are forced to break into their useful time?

  39. Re:Go backup the older days of SP's also windows s by aaron44126 · · Score: 1

    They did post an updated Windows Server 2016 image that has all of the updates through this past February.

  40. Ditching Microsoft for Good by Joshs922 · · Score: 1

    I grew up in the Seattle area - home of Microsoft - using DOS and Windows and loved it, especially Windows 2000. We switched to Debian Linux at home years ago and haven't missed Windows. We run Windows 7 in a VM to run Quickbooks only until they require Windows 10 at which point we will ditch Quickbooks too. We are also switching away from Windows at work. I just received our new Synology NAS in the mail - The SBS 2011 server is being replaced by this Linux-based NAS that has more functionality (the kind that people actually want) at a fraction of the cost. Worker bees will run Linux - new System76 machines perhaps. LibreOffice, the GIMP, Inkscape, etc. - Linux software meets all of our needs here. We'll run Quickbooks on Windows in a VM if we have too until we switch away from it too. We are experimenting with LibreCAD for our 2D CAD needs. If it works, the CAD dept. will run Linux. If not, they may have to run Macs to have AutoCAD. We're ditching Microsoft for good though because of this nonsense.