4 ms·

Recently I was surprised by how long Windows Update took to simply decide which updates were available. When rejuvenating a relative's Vista machine that hadn't

by frou_dh 11y ago

Recently I was surprised by how long Windows Update took to simply decide which updates were available. When rejuvenating a relative's Vista machine that hadn't been online for about 6 years, it took WU more than 2 days of fully pegging the CPU to finally deliver the news that ~200 updates were available. What was it doing all that time? Some kind of solver?

pavs 11y ago
Even though I dnot use windows anymore, I have done this many many times with Windows Vista and Windows 7. It never took more than few hours. Even though few hours pretty freaking long. Taking couple of days doesn't sound like normal.
Pxtl 11y ago
There was a brutal bug in Vista on some machines where it would peg the CPU for hours during update check on start-up. Users learned to never fully reset unless it was critical. I saw it personally in multiple machines, and I'm a dev not an admin - I only use a handful of computers.
DavideNL 11y ago
This is the thing that amazed me most when switching from Windows to Mac, no more endless updating and rebooting. Updates seem less frequent and also less time consuming. I noticed the same thing you describe on Windows 7 by the way.
ivank 11y ago
https://superuser.com/questions/890038/why-is-checking-windows-update-so-slow https://superuser.com/questions/890038/why-is-checking-windo...
- adrtessier 11y ago
  So others don't have to click through to this: "Windows 7 uses Component-Based Servicing [1], which means Windows Update has to work ridiculously hard to determine file and component dependencies/inter-dependencies, maintain side-by-side versions of older files/components, while still making it possible to uninstall individual updates/components but without breaking any other updates/components, all the while taking into account supercedence and god knows what else. The code that does all this must be hellishly complex." [1] https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc756291(v=ws.10).aspx https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc756291(v=ws.10...
  - yuhong 11y ago
    Yea, definitely much more complex than the update.exe that was used back in XP.
blub 11y ago
Maybe there's a problem somewhere, because I've seen reports of other people being affected on various forums in October and November. I am currently trying to update a W7 SP1 VM, but it just keeps looking for updates, even after installing two updates for the update client itself. It's extremely annoying and not related to Vista particularly, nor specific types of hardware as far as I can tell.
- devit 11y ago
  Try manually installing the patch at https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3102810 https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3102810
  - blub 11y ago
    Already did, thanks. Didn't seem to have an effect, back when I installed it yesterday. Today, after about 3h it found the updates.
adrtessier 11y ago
About a month ago I decided to reinstall Windows on one of my old PCs, an Intel Ivy Bridge desktop i5. It is frustrating and nearly impossible to end up with a patched system. The process was pretty much as follows: 1. Manually check for updates. This took forever and thrashed the hard disk, every time. 2. Select, download, and install the updates. 3. Goto 1 until Windows couldn't find any more updates. In some cases, step 2 would fail with various unknown errors and hex codes. The only way to fix this is to run a Windows diagnostic that "resets Windows Update components", which makes Step 1 take even longer than it would have otherwise. All in all, I think the update cycle took me about 4 hours before I gave up on the third reboot and decided to just let Windows figure itself out. Compare this to an 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade' or the OS X Software Update, and it's a wonder people update Windows at all.
- tedunangst 11y ago
  Windows 10 should (eventually) move to a model where the initial install is much closer to the current update, requiring less patching.
  - makeithappen 11y ago
    Interesting, do you have any links about this?
    - tedunangst 11y ago
      The latest is actually they did it, then pulled it, but presumably they'll try again. http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/11/windows-10-november-update-mysteriously-pulled-as-concerns-about-bugs-grow/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/11/window...
  - yuhong 11y ago
    And only a few updates are needed at most when you do need them, thanks to the new cumulative update model.
- bhrgunatha 11y ago

by frou_dh 11y ago

pavs 11y ago

Even though I dnot use windows anymore, I have done this many many times with Windows Vista and Windows 7. It never took more than few hours. Even though few hours pretty freaking long. Taking couple of days doesn't sound like normal.

Pxtl 11y ago

There was a brutal bug in Vista on some machines where it would peg the CPU for hours during update check on start-up. Users learned to never fully reset unless it was critical. I saw it personally in multiple machines, and I'm a dev not an admin - I only use a handful of computers.

DavideNL 11y ago

This is the thing that amazed me most when switching from Windows to Mac, no more endless updating and rebooting. Updates seem less frequent and also less time consuming. I noticed the same thing you describe on Windows 7 by the way.

ivank 11y ago

https://superuser.com/questions/890038/why-is-checking-windows-update-so-slow https://superuser.com/questions/890038/why-is-checking-windo...

adrtessier 11y ago
So others don't have to click through to this: "Windows 7 uses Component-Based Servicing [1], which means Windows Update has to work ridiculously hard to determine file and component dependencies/inter-dependencies, maintain side-by-side versions of older files/components, while still making it possible to uninstall individual updates/components but without breaking any other updates/components, all the while taking into account supercedence and god knows what else. The code that does all this must be hellishly complex." [1] https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc756291(v=ws.10).aspx https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc756291(v=ws.10...
- yuhong 11y ago
  Yea, definitely much more complex than the update.exe that was used back in XP.

blub 11y ago

Maybe there's a problem somewhere, because I've seen reports of other people being affected on various forums in October and November. I am currently trying to update a W7 SP1 VM, but it just keeps looking for updates, even after installing two updates for the update client itself. It's extremely annoying and not related to Vista particularly, nor specific types of hardware as far as I can tell.

devit 11y ago
Try manually installing the patch at https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3102810 https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3102810
- blub 11y ago
  Already did, thanks. Didn't seem to have an effect, back when I installed it yesterday. Today, after about 3h it found the updates.

adrtessier 11y ago

About a month ago I decided to reinstall Windows on one of my old PCs, an Intel Ivy Bridge desktop i5. It is frustrating and nearly impossible to end up with a patched system. The process was pretty much as follows: 1. Manually check for updates. This took forever and thrashed the hard disk, every time. 2. Select, download, and install the updates. 3. Goto 1 until Windows couldn't find any more updates. In some cases, step 2 would fail with various unknown errors and hex codes. The only way to fix this is to run a Windows diagnostic that "resets Windows Update components", which makes Step 1 take even longer than it would have otherwise. All in all, I think the update cycle took me about 4 hours before I gave up on the third reboot and decided to just let Windows figure itself out. Compare this to an 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade' or the OS X Software Update, and it's a wonder people update Windows at all.

tedunangst 11y ago
Windows 10 should (eventually) move to a model where the initial install is much closer to the current update, requiring less patching.
- makeithappen 11y ago
  Interesting, do you have any links about this?
  - tedunangst 11y ago
    The latest is actually they did it, then pulled it, but presumably they'll try again. http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/11/windows-10-november-update-mysteriously-pulled-as-concerns-about-bugs-grow/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/11/window...
- yuhong 11y ago
  And only a few updates are needed at most when you do need them, thanks to the new cumulative update model.
bhrgunatha 11y ago