I was wrong about windows 10

[Anteaus]

They also claimed that no-one was using the Start menu any more in Win7. Uh-huh....

Of course, the fact that in my daily work I see a multitude of customers' systems is not a definitive measure, but I'd say I encounter one customer per year who had Windows Update not set to automatic. On the other hand, barely a week goes by that I'm not removing some sort of malware from customers' computers.

Admittedly my customer base is far more likely to be comprised of people who aren't that comfortable or au fait using computers, so again another reason not to think of it as definitive, but I don't think I've ever heard of it as a topic in mainstream or IT pro/semi-pro press. Furthermore, how many times does someone on this forum say they don't install Windows updates? In the time I've been here I may have read such a thing maybe five times?



IMO this is an argument that MS is necessarily wrong about enforcing mandatory updates: If their decision-making process is so broken that they came to the conclusion that the way they went about it was a good idea, then the stage for screw-ups was already set. Furthermore I think they've been *extremely* fortunate that this hasn't blown up in their faces in an extreme fashion. Given the PR nightmares that were Vista and Win8x, I'm surprised they didn't step more carefully, but IMO it simply boils down to arrogance.

Everyone knows that a new OS is likely to have "teething issues", there's enough historical evidence for that to be a given. MS still thought such a plan was a good idea.

If I was responsible for considering such a decision, I would want to get a few years of Windows 10 updates running properly (and by properly I mean that if some people have problems with updates, the root cause is found to be something that wasn't really avoidable, e.g. malware, or a very illogical OS configuration like the ones OEMs came up with that caused XP SP3 to blow up), behind it before saying "this may be a good idea".

I can get on board with what you are saying. In regards to the updates, I just meant that MS has somewhat of a point about the necessity of mandatory updates but that they are incapable of actually administering them properly; therefore, I agree with you that it is an argument against it.

 

[Sheep221]

The only reason they removed turn off option is because they want to sell windows as service - meaning software that is incomplete and will be developed over a time and in order to have all installations at desired version, they had to remove this because some users would opt out and wouldn't be up to date with things like microsoft store, skype, outlook, office etc. Security updates are important but they are not the reason for this. This could cause business problems because if those things won't work due to version incompatibility, the ads, less sold call minutes and software via store etc could cause undesired losses.

 

[Rhonda the Sly]

Syncing of the Start layout might have been pretty cool if you had devices with matching resolution and software configurations but most people, I suspect, do not. I know I don't. I have a different focus on each device and my Start layouts reflect that.

If I remember correctly, Start was rewritten to use a XAML layout engine in Windows 10 ( among other things). I suspect it, given how awkward it could be for many, people at Microsoft simply deemed it unworthy of the effort to re-implement.

 

[JimmiG]

FWIW I've not had a problem with a Windows Update breaking anything in more than 10 years.

Win10 has already bitten me twice with it's automatic updates

-With my old WiFi adapter, it would keep "updating" to a generic driver that made 5 GHz unavailable. I had to manually downgrade to an older manufacturer supplied driver to enable it again. This kept happening repeatedly.

-The 1511 update bricked my Win10 tablet, probably because I had re-directed a few paths like Temp to an SD card (only 32GB internal storage). With no no installation media provided, and a customized install of Win10, I had to send it in for "repair".

 

[nerp]

The only reason they removed turn off option is because they want to sell windows as service - meaning software that is incomplete and will be developed over a time and in order to have all installations at desired version, they had to remove this because some users would opt out and wouldn't be up to date with things like microsoft store, skype, outlook, office etc. Security updates are important but they are not the reason for this. This could cause business problems because if those things won't work due to version incompatibility, the ads, less sold call minutes and software via store etc could cause undesired losses.

There is a lot of truth to this. That's why MS is phasing out support for Windows 8 -- because 8.1 is the current version of that OS. Eventually, MS will soon be dropping support for RTM Windows 10.

 

[Sheep221]

There is a lot of truth to this. That's why MS is phasing out support for Windows 8 -- because 8.1 is the current version of that OS. Eventually, MS will soon be dropping support for RTM Windows 10.

Yep, in this sense it is also correct that windows 7 is only supported till 2020 when you have SP1 installed. Unlike the 7 or 8 respectively, they don't really feature many microsoft services.

 

[Magic Carpet]

I still don't "like" Win10, but I am getting used to it. But every time I contemplate upgrading from Win7, I decide not to.

Really, for me, one of the determining points is that *I'm* in control of *my* PC. With forced updates in Win10, that's no longer true.

I see your point, Larry. If update control is vital, why not use Win 8.1 instead? Still superior to Windows 7 in about every way, except for GUI maybe. Hell, it does even have Media Center. Efficiency wise it's slightly worse than W10 though. And there is no WDDM 2.0 driver support. Essentially, if you are not gaming, Windows 8.1 is absolutely fine*. Yesterday I worked on my other Windows 8.1 laptop and I didn't feel it lagged behind much compared to my other W10 laptop. If anything, touch gestures worked better on 8.1

*Essentially, W10 is really W8 with SP2.

Point being, you don't have to run W10 if you don't want to. Plenty of alternative solutions.

P.S. Try to run one of your systems with only 2 gigs of ram, W7 versus W10. See for yourself. You'll never go back. W7 < W8.1 < W10. In that order. Why do you want to stay 2 "gens" behind? Pick the golden middle, at least. I mean if you like things retro and style, Why not go back all the way to Vista SP2, minus a few things, it's pretty much the same Windows 7, lmao. ALL WITHOUT W10 NAGGING / TELEMETRY UPDATES AND STILL SUPPORTED FOR ANOTHER YEAR. What's not to like?

EDIT: 0kay, no APU drivers support from AMD, not an option for you.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I'm still holding out in the small hope that MS will royally screw up with a Windows Update that breaks a multitude of computers, makes international news and a policy change results, but as time goes on that is increasingly unlikely IMO.

I just updated mu Asus Linux (Ubuntu) laptop last night, and it installed a new kernel, and it won't boot. GRUB recovery doesn't work. I lost all of my user data, and now even a factory recovery, when I do an upgrade to 14.04, won't boot in the same way.

Linux bricks another one...

 

[Ketchup]

I think MS is trying. You can't turn off Windows updates means that you can't stop receiving security updates for the OS.

MSE (Windows Defecter, if you prefer) can't be turned off beyond a reboot unless you have another AV installed. Way to many people (that shouldn't) try to turn off their AV.

Are there things they need to work on? Yep. They should use more discretion with their driver updater, but at least you can turn it off without a hack. And the build updates reset too many preferences, but I think that will improve over time.

I do like the invisibility of Windows updates though. Pretty slick.

 

[Magic Carpet]

I think MS is trying. You can't turn off Windows updates means that you can't stop receiving security updates for the OS.

I am sure that is a reason as well. Yet even my iPhone doesn't force updates on me, giving me a choice of staying either potentially vulnerable / lacking some feature/functionality or up-to-date. Choice is good, imo.

Not sure if I like Microsoft taking that choice away, to be frank with you, just turned up my computer saying updates have been installed, no idea what updates, I have to dig for it. Might of as well hidden all that "information" all-together. But again, this is a fun computer used for... testing purposes. Hehe.

People are getting lazy and Microsoft have just gotten ahead of them, lmao. They figured, this is a safe approach to do things. Still, you can disable them via GPO/registry and install them manually (I have yet to try doing that, though).

Random search (nov 2015):

Just got a few Win 10 Pro installations out there. I know that the update can be fetched manually from Windows update.
But it set me thinking whether WSUS will support these type of updates (or upgrades) especially if they're likely to be bi-annually.

I'm still waiting for WSUS to get patched so that my W10 clients show up in the console as W10 & not 'Windows Vista' as they currently do.

 

[RLGL]

The biggest issue I have with 10 has to do with the downloads. My DSL is quick but loaded withe errors. This has caused IMO problems that were cleared IP during a fesh install

 

[Jembo]

They fixed most of my issues recently except for Sleep. It doesn't work. I've tried all the tricks yet still a no go. Have to hard reset the laptop if it sleeps for more than 2 hours.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Have to hard reset the laptop if it sleeps for more than 2 hours.

What does Event Viewer say?

 

[Jembo]

What does Event Viewer say?

Let me get back to you tomorrow on that. I haven't used Sleep in a while. Will try tonight. Thanks for the idea.