Microsoft intentionally sabotaging Windows 7, by making Windows Update unbearable??

[VirtualLarry]

Anyways, that's what I believe. It just seems like a strange coincedence, that around the time that Windows 10 was released, Windows 7's Update procedure simply started taking HOURS and HOURS to run. Before it even gives you the list of available updates.

I'm not even talking about a PC that is installed fresh, from a SP1-U disc. That takes like 7 hours.

I'm talking about a PC that was current as of March 2015. Started at 4PM today, still hasn't show much progress, although, one core of the E3300 (2.5Ghz C2D, should be an OK spec to run Win7 on), has been pinned mostly all throughout that time.

Disgusting.

All MS would have to do, is release a "Fix Rollup", even if they don't want to release a full SP release.

This is pretty-much class-action stuff, "Not fit for purpose", if MS is intentionally crippling their existing OSes, to force people to move to 10.

 

[mikeymikec]

Jumping to conclusions much?

XP had a crap spot wrt WU shortly before its support expiry date and MS fixed it. I noticed yesterday that Win7 was chewing over WU for quite a while, saturating a single core of my haswell i5 (it was Windows patch day yesterday, my PC installed about 18 updates). I ran WU through another cycle this morning after reading your post and it took a few seconds.

If you're talking about an old PC that was last updated in March, I'm not surprised it took ages to process updates, it probably had 60-90 to do. It's probably chewing over the Win10 download as well. I can't remember when exactly MS fixed Win7's WU memory consumption issue, I wonder if that had a part to play.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Jumping to conclusions much?

Maybe...

If you're talking about an old PC that was last updated in March, I'm not surprised it took ages to process updates, it probably had 60-90 to do. It's probably chewing over the Win10 download as well. I can't remember when exactly MS fixed Win7's WU memory consumption issue, I wonder if that had a part to play.

It has been sitting there, just chewing CPU. I have Resource Monitor open, and disk and network activity is virtually nil. But a little over one CPU core is pegged.

Interestingly, I chose to "show kernel times", and the red line is like 80% of the graph. So something is spending a lot of time in kernel mode. Not sure if there are driver problems somewhere. It's an Intel ITX mobo, with a Kingston SSD that was a re-branded Intel. Pretty standard stuff.

This is still just the phase where it gets the list of updates to show, I haven't even gotten that far yet, nevermind actually getting to the download and installation phase.

 

[Carson Dyle]

I'm talking about a PC that was current as of March 2015.

March???

You really keep on top of things, don't you?

 

[LPCTech]

Its probably The microsoft corporation targeting you specifically since my updates seem to work without issue. This is the most likely thing, not that there are problems with your specific install or hardware. Its the Microsoft Corporation involved in a conspiracy to get YOU to upgrade to win 10. Through sorcery they have determined that its very important for then to have you on windows 10 so they can spy on your important works. Good luck, MS could be a powerful enemy. I hear tin foil prevents their "signals" from getting you. Maybe make a little hat for the pc...

 

[mikeymikec]

Maybe...

It has been sitting there, just chewing CPU. I have Resource Monitor open, and disk and network activity is virtually nil. But a little over one CPU core is pegged.

Interestingly, I chose to "show kernel times", and the red line is like 80% of the graph. So something is spending a lot of time in kernel mode. Not sure if there are driver problems somewhere. It's an Intel ITX mobo, with a Kingston SSD that was a re-branded Intel. Pretty standard stuff.

This is still just the phase where it gets the list of updates to show, I haven't even gotten that far yet, nevermind actually getting to the download and installation phase.

Re: kernel time - It could suggest hardware problems, driver problems or simply a lot of disk I/O is going on. Otherwise a single core being consumed by WU is really nothing new, as I said, it does it on mine as well.

If you want to pursue other possibilities relating to Windows, you could run the Windows Update Readiness Tool, sfc /scannow, and the Win8 DISM cleanup restore command.

 

[Mushkins]

One PC (that hasn't been updated since March) has issues with Windows Update and it's a grand Microsoft conspiracy that's worthy of a class action lawsuit?

Sounds more like a malware infection to me.

 

[Micrornd]

The only conspiracy here with Windows 10 is the obvious one.
Microsoft has been waiting patiently, for quite a while, to eventually move to a subscription service based OS and that is coming down the line once Windows 10 is "fully" adopted.

Doubt it?
The server OS side of Microsoft has also waited patiently for Intel and AMD to fully adopt multi-core CPUs. Now that they have and multi-core CPUs have been accepted, while knowing that it's not economically feasible vs. performance to go back to single or dual core, it's more than a coincidence that Server 2016 is going to be licensed "by core", rather than "by socket".

How long until "subscription by core" hits the consumer level. I'd say that depends on how quickly Windows 10 reaches dominance. :\

 

[Chiropteran]

All MS would have to do, is release a "Fix Rollup", even if they don't want to release a full SP release.

They did release a full SP release. It's called "windows 10", and it's available for free.

 

[Charlie98]

They did release a full SP release. It's called "windows 10", and it's available for free.

Someone drank the Kool-Aid.... D:

No, W10 is a separate (different) OS from W7, et al, it is not an update.

 

[SparkyJJO]

You have ONE PC with a problem and say it is a conspiracy.
I manage a few dozen PCs, that have no problems at all, and I say there is no conspiracy.

I think my dozens far outweigh your lone PC.

 

[MustISO]

Just did two fresh installs of Windows 7 on two different systems. Both with SSDs and from start to finish the full update didn't take more than 60-80 minutes from having no updates at all. It cab be slower due to some bugs they've had with the update process consuming 100% CPU. They released a fix for that recently.

 

[Chiropteran]

Someone drank the Kool-Aid.... D:

No, W10 is a separate (different) OS from W7, et al, it is not an update.

You are making two statements which do not support each other.

I agree that Windows 10 is different from Windows 7, but I disagree that it's not an update.

Windows XP SP2 was an update, and Windows XP SP2 was noticeably different from Windows XP (no service packs installed).

All of the features of Windows 10 could have been offered as service packs, if Microsoft wanted to put it out that way. I think if anyone drank the kool-aid, it's you- since you have accepted Microsoft's claim that Win 10 is a completely different OS.

(Win 7 was essentially just Vista Service Pack 2, for the record.)

 

[Ketchup]

Did a fresh install of 7 not too long ago on a VM with a SSD. Started around 9 and was fully updated by noon, going back and forth for reboots.

I have noticed that Windows' check for updates take longer at some times than they do at others, but I don't think there is any type of conspiracy here. 7 has a LOT of updates to go through, depending on how current the machine is. The newer OS will take less, and therefore be quicker at it. It just makes sense, doesn't it?

 

[Ketchup]

You are making two statements which do not support each other.

I agree that Windows 10 is different from Windows 7, but I disagree that it's not an update.

Windows XP SP2 was an update, and Windows XP SP2 was noticeably different from Windows XP (no service packs installed).

All of the features of Windows 10 could have been offered as service packs, if Microsoft wanted to put it out that way. I think if anyone drank the kool-aid, it's you- since you have accepted Microsoft's claim that Win 10 is a completely different OS.

(Win 7 was essentially just Vista Service Pack 2, for the record.)

I think the argument here is part of the point: Microsoft wants to blurr the lines between an update and a SP (or whatever new name they have for these releases). We already have one new update since release of Windows 10 that will minimize the time to get a fresh install up to date. That IS the point.

 

[Captante]

Actually I just did a clean install of Win 7 the other day & it was the fastest I've ever experienced getting all the updates installed. Seemed to me the overall number of updates was much smaller then the last one before?

 

[VirtualLarry]

One PC (that hasn't been updated since March) has issues with Windows Update and it's a grand Microsoft conspiracy that's worthy of a class action lawsuit?

Sounds more like a malware infection to me.

Considering the OS was fresh-installed, updated (in March), and then mothballed, I seriously doubt that.

Edit: Anyways, this isn't the only machine that I've had issues with, but it was the most severe. That machine only has 2GB of RAM (running 64-bit), but the Windows Update only went up to a little over 2GB Commit Charge.

Every box I've done a fresh install of Win7 SP1 on, though, has taken at least 4-7 hours to update. (And I have a relatively fast connection to Microsoft, 75Mbit/sec FIOS. Edit: All of these boxes have SSDs too. WU seems to chew more CPU than I/O bandwidth, in my observations.)

Edit: This box will just have to stay without updates. If I let it run at 100% CPU for as long as it needs, to show the updates, then select the updates to install, it shuts off due to overheating. (Mini-ITX with C2D Celeron, 2GB RAM, no chassis fan, Al chassis.)

 

[BarkingGhostar]

I'd believe Larry over any religion, but that's just me. I would not doubt M$ is unhappy about the lackluster conversion rates so far and the fact that quite a few are still using 7 (including me) instead of free-upgrading.

 

[nemesismk2]

They did release a full SP release. It's called "windows 10", and it's available for free.

just read this:-

Still running IE10? Not for long, says Microsoft

Browser support will be running out for most users on January 12

After January 12, the unsupported versions of IE will no longer receive updates, and users who wish to plug the myriad of security holes that inevitably pop up for Internet Explorer will need to move on to a newer build.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/12/11/ie10_eol_12_january/

 

[Charlie98]

Actually I just did a clean install of Win 7 the other day & it was the fastest I've ever experienced getting all the updates installed. Seemed to me the overall number of updates was much smaller then the last one before?

I don't think that's true at all... considering all the W10 and telemetry updates.

I clean installed W7 on my GAME rig about 2 months ago (after rolling up to W10, BTW.) It took about 8 hours to completely build it, part of that time picking through the plethora of updates to leave the main W10 and telemetry updates behind. This also included a number of WU fails... after waiting X amount of time and having it fail.

After the first of the year I'll probably be clean installing my DESK machine (again...) with W7 (driver problems, not W10) so I'll take note again.

Do I think MS is intentionally jacking with updates and such? I think what it amounts to is intentional disregard... meaning they aren't putting as much effort into maintaining W7/8 as they could, instead neglecting it for The One True Faith and Salvation of W10. They aren't the only ones that do it (Intuit is another...) but it just means more work for those of us who are continuing with W7/8. MS went through this with XP, and they really want to kill off the hangers-on.

 

[Mushkins]

Considering the OS was fresh-installed, updated (in March), and then mothballed, I seriously doubt that.

Edit: Anyways, this isn't the only machine that I've had issues with, but it was the most severe. That machine only has 2GB of RAM (running 64-bit), but the Windows Update only went up to a little over 2GB Commit Charge.

Every box I've done a fresh install of Win7 SP1 on, though, has taken at least 4-7 hours to update. (And I have a relatively fast connection to Microsoft, 75Mbit/sec FIOS. Edit: All of these boxes have SSDs too. WU seems to chew more CPU than I/O bandwidth, in my observations.)

Malware on a system nine months behind on critical security updates, of which those nine months have been some of the worst we've ever seen for new malware and critical vulnerabilities, is a whole lot more likely than Microsoft conspiring to force you to install Windows 10 by intentionally crippling your Windows Update.

Edit: This box will just have to stay without updates. If I let it run at 100% CPU for as long as it needs, to show the updates, then select the updates to install, it shuts off due to overheating. (Mini-ITX with C2D Celeron, 2GB RAM, no chassis fan, Al chassis.)

I...

Maybe you should fix the overheating issue instead of going "whelp, it just doesn't need updates?" If your PC is thermally throttling from running Windows Update no wonder it doesn't work.

 

[Runequest2]

I did find it pretty crazy that my mother called me to tell me her Widows 7 computer was not working.

I live close enough that I headed over and it had not booted into Windows and was stuck on a screen trying to repair windows and failing to do it.

So I force shut the computer down and it boots into Windows and up comes a popup for Windows 10 upgrade.

I decline and it turns out the update process had "failed". So it updates 6 of them. 2 fail and the remaining 10 will not update.

I reboot and after two more reboots all the updates finally work.

Maybe it was just a strange coincidence that the updates failed and the popup from MS for Windows 10 upgrade all happened at the same time.

 

[xgsound]

You will probably hear from people that think only the absolute latest OS and updates are acceptable. This is your machine so do what works for you. My solution to this update situation is to always turn off all auto updates and update when and if convenient. YMMV

I maintain many relatives machines and now routinely turn off auto updates because of the many difficulties it has caused over the years. Since I did that the problems are close to nonexistent. I didn't realize that updates had caused so many of their problems.

It was the worst when MS was pushing for the end of XP and the updates for MSE stopped MSE from working at all with a huge red X stating that the OS was obsolete. True enough but Bitdefender worked fine.

This happened to 5 machines at once in different locations and a few later when the operator ran updates. That was what prompted me to always disable auto updates and it has given me great results.

Jim

 

[Fardringle]

Going 9 months without updates is going to make it take a while to process all of the pending updates. That's your fault, not Microsoft's...

If you don't want to run regular updates, that's your choice, but you have to expect that it's going to take a long time to get caught up when you do eventually let it check for updates.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Malware on a system nine months behind on critical security updates, of which those nine months have been some of the worst we've ever seen for new malware and critical vulnerabilities, is a whole lot more likely than Microsoft conspiring to force you to install Windows 10 by intentionally crippling your Windows Update.

OK, smart guy. Considering it wasn't even online, I'm not sure how it would get malware, but I guess I can run a malwarebytes scan for the heck of it.

Edit: I'm a very careful user, and I haven't had any malware on any of my systems, for years now. (Yes, I run Malwarebytes scans monthly.) So if this system got malware, without even being online, then that's quite an anomaly.


And I don't think it's directly a "conspiracy", just a case of serious neglect. MS is in a position of power to fix this issue, by issues a "Fix Rollup"... but they won't. Because, Win10.

I...

Maybe you should fix the overheating issue instead of going "whelp, it just doesn't need updates?" If your PC is thermally throttling from running Windows Update no wonder it doesn't work.

Well, pardon me. I didn't consider that MS would do the equivalent of running Prime95 for four hours, before being allowed the "privilege" of installing their updates.

Plenty of smaller (SFF, mini-PC) chassis are "thermally disadvantaged", and are not meant for full 100% CPU loads 24/7. Microsoft is effectively throwing all of those customers under the bus.

Edit: I discovered that Intel had some drivers and utilities available for this board. Even though MS OOB drivers installed for everything but PCI Simple Comms Controller (Intel AMT crap), I also installed the updated GMA and ProSet drivers, along with a desktop monitoring util. Which showed 0C thermal margin for the CPU. Uh-oh. Throttling, at idle? Anyways, the CPU fan wasn't running, which is weird, the mobo has a built-in piezo, I figured I would get a fan-fail alarm beep tone. Some cables had apparently gotten in the way.

So now that that's settled, I'm trying WU again.