5 ms·

Also the security patch channel has been incredibly abused to deliver non-patches.

cbhl 9y ago
Windows 10 has tons of security patches in it. Yes, it also has some UI changes that are less than great, but, seriously, stop using Windows XP already.
- throwaway2048 9y ago
  So you are just going to ignore the fact that Microsoft abused the security patch channel to automatically "upgrade" people to windows 10?
  - cbhl 9y ago
    OS updates should come through the normal security patch channel! That's how OS X does it, and that's how Chrome OS does it.
    - acqq 9y ago
      Still, Microsoft misused the channel. They made it intrusive, misleading and impossible to control more than once.
    - reitanqild 9y ago
      OS updates should come through the normal security patch channel! Except when you are "updated" from a full, paid version to a spyware/adware-ridden version. Seriously: I think Windows 10 is great, technically and usability wise. But MS need to learn that they can't have it both ways: Paid xor ads. (I can think of two exception: inside the store app and inside settings for onedrive.)
    - kakarot 9y ago
      Well, it's not how most Linux distros do it. If your update has breaking changes, it's not a security update. There is no good reason to excuse Microsoft for maliciously disguising updates as security patches in order to manipulate the non tech-savvy into switching to their new unprecedentedly invasive OS. Especially when, as you said, the UI is worse. The entire UX of Windows 10 is worse, every time I have to use it for something I get physical anxiety from claustrophobia. I really don't like that I have to install untrusted 3rd party software on my computer in order to prevent my operating system from automatically ruining my user experience and spying on me.
- sesqu 9y ago
  Windows XP is a red herring. No one uses it anymore, and WannaCry didn't even successfully spread from that version of Windows. Windows 7 is the new holdout, and people aren't eager to swallow 10.
  - PakG1 9y ago
    Except in countries that used XP extensively like China. Non-Microsoft parties had to create and release patches that protected against wannacry.
    - sesqu 9y ago
      Why? The only reason XP came up was because Microsoft went out of their way to patch it themselves.
      - PakG1 9y ago
        Because XP patches only worked on valid licenses. A ton of XP in China is pirated. So Qihoo 360 created custom patches for all those pirated versions of Windows. Weird Alice in Wonderland situation. https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/15/pirated-windows-china-russia-wannacry/ https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/15/pirated-windows-china-ru...
  - saiya-jin 9y ago
    I am one of those people, as software dev. Win 7 just works, all hardware is OK, all software too. OS is just runtime environment for software used, so it should just let me do what I need in that software, nothing more. M$ messed up big time with all that forceful pushes to Win 10, and trust is always easy to lose and hard to gain (even harder to gain back). Don't get me started on all that spying stuff, that's purely pathetic. I see honestly no added value in Win10, only removed one. Won't there be like, uhm, some better version of Windows in near future? Like Windows 11, not designed by assholes?
- bsder 9y ago
  Microsoft deserves ALL the blame for people still running XP. They broke so many hardware drivers with the XP->Vista change that people basically got stuck forever. Then, not having learned their lesson, they pulled similar crap with the Windows 7->Windows 8 transition which pissed people off so badly that they refused to go to Windows 10 and are currently suing Microsoft for attempting to shove it down people's throats. Insecure old version of Windows are Microsoft's own damn fault.
  - rocqua 9y ago
    I recall the driver change was because under XP, drivers ran under kernel privileges. Moving them out of the kernel is a great engineering decision, infinite backwards compatibility isn't feasible. Sometimes breaking changes are needed.
    - dfox 9y ago
      Drivers still run inside kernel. What was changed in Vista is that the kernel tries to detect when kernel data structures that should be immutable are changed, which some drivers do. The idea of non-privileged drivers is neat, but in general is not worthwhile because the driver has to somehow access the hardware, which for significant amount of device/platform combinations leads to access to arbitrary memory locations. Edit: perfect example are GPU drivers, which are for a long time typically composed of small priviledged kernel driver and all the complex logic in userspace. In many cases the interface between these two components could be abused to get code execution in kernel context (in 2k/xp times there was even RCE in kernel context triggered by displaying properly crafted image in IE)
      - rocqua 9y ago
        As I recall, the issue they meant to address wasn't security but stability. Apparently a majority of BSODs were caused by faults in the driver taking down the kernel with it. This means you aren't preventing drivers from having full access. You just need to prevent more unintended side-effects.
acqq 9y ago
Yes, the final analysis showred that Windows 7 systems were the most affected by WannaCry. And they were targeted for more than a year by Microsoft with the multiple "upgrade now to 10" ads delivered through the security update channel. And I personally had the computers which didn't work under Windows 10, and worked correctly under Windows 7, so I really understand those who disabled auto-updates. Not to mention that also afterwards there were Windows 7 patches that kept one CPU core 100% busy for days!

cbhl 9y ago

Windows 10 has tons of security patches in it. Yes, it also has some UI changes that are less than great, but, seriously, stop using Windows XP already.

throwaway2048 9y ago
So you are just going to ignore the fact that Microsoft abused the security patch channel to automatically "upgrade" people to windows 10?
- cbhl 9y ago
  OS updates should come through the normal security patch channel! That's how OS X does it, and that's how Chrome OS does it.
  - acqq 9y ago
    Still, Microsoft misused the channel. They made it intrusive, misleading and impossible to control more than once.
  - reitanqild 9y ago
    OS updates should come through the normal security patch channel! Except when you are "updated" from a full, paid version to a spyware/adware-ridden version. Seriously: I think Windows 10 is great, technically and usability wise. But MS need to learn that they can't have it both ways: Paid xor ads. (I can think of two exception: inside the store app and inside settings for onedrive.)
  - kakarot 9y ago
    Well, it's not how most Linux distros do it. If your update has breaking changes, it's not a security update. There is no good reason to excuse Microsoft for maliciously disguising updates as security patches in order to manipulate the non tech-savvy into switching to their new unprecedentedly invasive OS. Especially when, as you said, the UI is worse. The entire UX of Windows 10 is worse, every time I have to use it for something I get physical anxiety from claustrophobia. I really don't like that I have to install untrusted 3rd party software on my computer in order to prevent my operating system from automatically ruining my user experience and spying on me.
sesqu 9y ago
Windows XP is a red herring. No one uses it anymore, and WannaCry didn't even successfully spread from that version of Windows. Windows 7 is the new holdout, and people aren't eager to swallow 10.
- PakG1 9y ago
  Except in countries that used XP extensively like China. Non-Microsoft parties had to create and release patches that protected against wannacry.
  - sesqu 9y ago
    Why? The only reason XP came up was because Microsoft went out of their way to patch it themselves.
    - PakG1 9y ago
      Because XP patches only worked on valid licenses. A ton of XP in China is pirated. So Qihoo 360 created custom patches for all those pirated versions of Windows. Weird Alice in Wonderland situation. https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/15/pirated-windows-china-russia-wannacry/ https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/15/pirated-windows-china-ru...
- saiya-jin 9y ago
  I am one of those people, as software dev. Win 7 just works, all hardware is OK, all software too. OS is just runtime environment for software used, so it should just let me do what I need in that software, nothing more. M$ messed up big time with all that forceful pushes to Win 10, and trust is always easy to lose and hard to gain (even harder to gain back). Don't get me started on all that spying stuff, that's purely pathetic. I see honestly no added value in Win10, only removed one. Won't there be like, uhm, some better version of Windows in near future? Like Windows 11, not designed by assholes?
bsder 9y ago
Microsoft deserves ALL the blame for people still running XP. They broke so many hardware drivers with the XP->Vista change that people basically got stuck forever. Then, not having learned their lesson, they pulled similar crap with the Windows 7->Windows 8 transition which pissed people off so badly that they refused to go to Windows 10 and are currently suing Microsoft for attempting to shove it down people's throats. Insecure old version of Windows are Microsoft's own damn fault.
- rocqua 9y ago
  I recall the driver change was because under XP, drivers ran under kernel privileges. Moving them out of the kernel is a great engineering decision, infinite backwards compatibility isn't feasible. Sometimes breaking changes are needed.
  - dfox 9y ago
    Drivers still run inside kernel. What was changed in Vista is that the kernel tries to detect when kernel data structures that should be immutable are changed, which some drivers do. The idea of non-privileged drivers is neat, but in general is not worthwhile because the driver has to somehow access the hardware, which for significant amount of device/platform combinations leads to access to arbitrary memory locations. Edit: perfect example are GPU drivers, which are for a long time typically composed of small priviledged kernel driver and all the complex logic in userspace. In many cases the interface between these two components could be abused to get code execution in kernel context (in 2k/xp times there was even RCE in kernel context triggered by displaying properly crafted image in IE)
    - rocqua 9y ago
      As I recall, the issue they meant to address wasn't security but stability. Apparently a majority of BSODs were caused by faults in the driver taking down the kernel with it. This means you aren't preventing drivers from having full access. You just need to prevent more unintended side-effects.

acqq 9y ago

Yes, the final analysis showred that Windows 7 systems were the most affected by WannaCry. And they were targeted for more than a year by Microsoft with the multiple "upgrade now to 10" ads delivered through the security update channel. And I personally had the computers which didn't work under Windows 10, and worked correctly under Windows 7, so I really understand those who disabled auto-updates. Not to mention that also afterwards there were Windows 7 patches that kept one CPU core 100% busy for days!