I don’t like Windows, but at the point where the laptop updates automatically hasn’t it been bugging you about the update for hours or even days? I generally file complaints about bad update timings in the “fucked around and found out” folder
I mean, shouldn’t you be able to refuse updates anyway ? Like if there is you don’t like or that will break your workflow in the update, shouldn’t you be able to accept the risks and keep the old version indefinitely ?
Companies lock out the computer because it is lacking updates rather than have it working. Apple broke ssh on all their macs with an update for three months or so. Managed to postpone it for a while until the called and said I have to update or be locked out. Luckily I had postponed it for so long that the next update arrived just like a week later.
No, not on a business owned device. The updates should give warnings, of course. Some companies don’t seem to know how to supply those warnings before mandating the install, for some reason.
My company uses a third-party deployment platform that gives you dialog with a 60 minute countdown and a button to start immediately. And I think the deployment dialog can’t pop up if you’re not on the computer. Because nobody likes nonsense like five minute countdowns that can start while the screen is locked.
Honestly I don’t even remember, this was a long time ago, but if I recall the shitass Dell computer I was given had an SSD that repeatedly disconnected and required a forced reboot. Updates were managed automatically by the org so I don’t think I was ever prompted to update during my short time there. When I powered the shitter on Windows decided it was apparently a good time to update.
It really is a situation where you can’t make everyone happy. If you don’t force users to update eventually you get situations like WannaCry, where millions of PCs get hit by ransomware exploiting a vulnerability that was patched two months ago
It really is a situation where you can’t make everyone happy.
Well, you could make a lot more people happy by making the update process less invasive.
It’s particularly egregious that Windows not only needs to restart to apply updates (sometimes multiple times), but that these update restarts take much longer than normal restarts. Even if a Linux distro did force you to update, it still wouldn’t be as problematic, because Linux can update in the background, without interrupting you – and if it needs a restart in order to apply those updates, the restart doesn’t take any longer than restarting the computer normally. You never come across the uniquely Windows issue of “I can’t use my computer at all for the next 45 minutes because it’s updating.”
If the Windows update process wasn’t so invasive and debilitating, people might not put it off so much. (Also, if people could trust that Windows updates would actually make their computer better, rather than worse… When you use forced updates to arbitrarily change user settings, to push spyware and bloatware, to shall we say strongly encourage the use of features that nobody asked for … well, of course that makes people reluctant to update.)
I don’t like Windows, but at the point where the laptop updates automatically hasn’t it been bugging you about the update for hours or even days? I generally file complaints about bad update timings in the “fucked around and found out” folder
nope. it can just come out of nowhere sometimes.
Not in the EU region lol
I mean, shouldn’t you be able to refuse updates anyway ? Like if there is you don’t like or that will break your workflow in the update, shouldn’t you be able to accept the risks and keep the old version indefinitely ?
Companies lock out the computer because it is lacking updates rather than have it working. Apple broke ssh on all their macs with an update for three months or so. Managed to postpone it for a while until the called and said I have to update or be locked out. Luckily I had postponed it for so long that the next update arrived just like a week later.
No, not on a business owned device. The updates should give warnings, of course. Some companies don’t seem to know how to supply those warnings before mandating the install, for some reason.
The admins are not InTune with the latest technology
My company uses a third-party deployment platform that gives you dialog with a 60 minute countdown and a button to start immediately. And I think the deployment dialog can’t pop up if you’re not on the computer. Because nobody likes nonsense like five minute countdowns that can start while the screen is locked.
Honestly I don’t even remember, this was a long time ago, but if I recall the shitass Dell computer I was given had an SSD that repeatedly disconnected and required a forced reboot. Updates were managed automatically by the org so I don’t think I was ever prompted to update during my short time there. When I powered the shitter on Windows decided it was apparently a good time to update.
Still, though, I prefer an OS where I can fuck around in that regard and not find out.
It really is a situation where you can’t make everyone happy. If you don’t force users to update eventually you get situations like WannaCry, where millions of PCs get hit by ransomware exploiting a vulnerability that was patched two months ago
Well, you could make a lot more people happy by making the update process less invasive.
It’s particularly egregious that Windows not only needs to restart to apply updates (sometimes multiple times), but that these update restarts take much longer than normal restarts. Even if a Linux distro did force you to update, it still wouldn’t be as problematic, because Linux can update in the background, without interrupting you – and if it needs a restart in order to apply those updates, the restart doesn’t take any longer than restarting the computer normally. You never come across the uniquely Windows issue of “I can’t use my computer at all for the next 45 minutes because it’s updating.”
If the Windows update process wasn’t so invasive and debilitating, people might not put it off so much. (Also, if people could trust that Windows updates would actually make their computer better, rather than worse… When you use forced updates to arbitrarily change user settings, to push spyware and bloatware, to shall we say strongly encourage the use of features that nobody asked for … well, of course that makes people reluctant to update.)