5 ms·

I have always thought about the shutdown crapfest as not being able to shutdown for like ... 25 reasons? I believe there is a KB entry somewhere listing a bunch

I have always thought about the shutdown crapfest as not being able to shutdown for like ... 25 reasons? I believe there is a KB entry somewhere listing a bunch of them. Almost impossible to troubleshoot ( network connections! )

wolfgang42 9y ago
I once had a Windows 7 machine refuse to shut down because it was "Playing Logoff Sound"!
- moogly 9y ago
  Haha, I wouldn't even be mad. That's adorable.
- neilalexander 9y ago
  Windows 2000 wouldn't even start the logoff or shutdown process until the logoff sound had completed playing. ;-)
  - damnfine 9y ago
    Oh god, I remember setting a whole sone as my logoff somewhere in the win9x days, and it totally would. I had to hear the whole damn song just to reboot, by which time I had forgotten to change it. Annoyed my family for weeks.
olyjohn 9y ago
Is it just me, or shouldn't an OS be able to kill it's own processes? When I kill -9 in Linux, the application is dead, gone... doesn't hang, doesn't sit there frozen. Task Manager... don't even get me started. It feels like half the time when I try to end a process, it won't end. It'll hang up Task Manager or something else will freak out before you actually end a non-responsive process. This is why I feel Windows can't shut down half the time. It doesn't actually seem to be able to kill and shutdown it's own processes. So when shutdown time comes, one little app hang and you'll just sit there forever.
- mrguyorama 9y ago
  AFAIUI, Windows took the philosophy that the user should be the god of their system. By running software, the user has indicated to the OS that "This code is blessed and I want it to run". Where this becomes relevant is that when you shut down, Windows doesn't just kill -9 everything (which it is totally capable of doing), but instead, politely informs all running processes of the imminent shutdown so that they can clean themselves up and finish anything important. If things take too long, Windows shows the screen to the user with the "Shut Down Now" button which, when pressed, indicates to the OS that the god of the realm has given Windows the authority to purge everything and shut down. The problem seems to be that Windows seems to consider "takes too long" as just a few seconds in some cases, and is reluctant to just begin culling everything of its own accord, and therefore asks for permission and authorization. Windows assumes that any program the user run must be doing "Important" work, otherwise, why would you run it? This "User is God" mindset seems to be gone with the 8/10 versions though, which makes me rather sad
  - WorldMaker 9y ago
    I feel like that mindset is still there, but the goal posts have just moved. As you point out, in Vista and 7 the "takes too long" was often just a few seconds (the reported goal in Vista was listed in milliseconds). 8/10 continue to tune that based on telemetrics and user decisions in aggregate on one side and developer/application opt-in to more aggressive app shutdowns on the other side. That app is taking too long to shutdown screen still occurs in 8/10; it's just slower to appear and more likely to only appear in cases where an application has truly stalled out.
    - mrguyorama 9y ago
      I meant the mindset seems to have changed on a grander scale. IE with respect to forcing updates on users and aggressive telemetry collection. I understand how Microsoft is between a rock and a hard place when it comes to OS updates, as a majority of systems being up to date helps with herd immunity to prevent worm-scale attacks lack the past few ransomeware attacks, but at the same time, I hate desktop systems coming closer to mobile phones with respect to being locked down. With some updates even changing system settings, it's obvious that Microsoft no longer trusts the user, and that unnerves me. When it comes to telemetry, I was always for it before, purposely selecting the "yes send telemetry" for any Microsoft product I installed, as I was very much a fanboy for most of my life and I enjoyed helping to make the product better. But the way they've handled the privacy aspect of it, along with not allowing you to opt out in any real way, other than disconnecting the network makes my hair stand on end.

wolfgang42 9y ago

I once had a Windows 7 machine refuse to shut down because it was "Playing Logoff Sound"!

moogly 9y ago
Haha, I wouldn't even be mad. That's adorable.
neilalexander 9y ago
Windows 2000 wouldn't even start the logoff or shutdown process until the logoff sound had completed playing. ;-)
- damnfine 9y ago
  Oh god, I remember setting a whole sone as my logoff somewhere in the win9x days, and it totally would. I had to hear the whole damn song just to reboot, by which time I had forgotten to change it. Annoyed my family for weeks.

olyjohn 9y ago

Is it just me, or shouldn't an OS be able to kill it's own processes? When I kill -9 in Linux, the application is dead, gone... doesn't hang, doesn't sit there frozen. Task Manager... don't even get me started. It feels like half the time when I try to end a process, it won't end. It'll hang up Task Manager or something else will freak out before you actually end a non-responsive process. This is why I feel Windows can't shut down half the time. It doesn't actually seem to be able to kill and shutdown it's own processes. So when shutdown time comes, one little app hang and you'll just sit there forever.

mrguyorama 9y ago
AFAIUI, Windows took the philosophy that the user should be the god of their system. By running software, the user has indicated to the OS that "This code is blessed and I want it to run". Where this becomes relevant is that when you shut down, Windows doesn't just kill -9 everything (which it is totally capable of doing), but instead, politely informs all running processes of the imminent shutdown so that they can clean themselves up and finish anything important. If things take too long, Windows shows the screen to the user with the "Shut Down Now" button which, when pressed, indicates to the OS that the god of the realm has given Windows the authority to purge everything and shut down. The problem seems to be that Windows seems to consider "takes too long" as just a few seconds in some cases, and is reluctant to just begin culling everything of its own accord, and therefore asks for permission and authorization. Windows assumes that any program the user run must be doing "Important" work, otherwise, why would you run it? This "User is God" mindset seems to be gone with the 8/10 versions though, which makes me rather sad
- WorldMaker 9y ago
  I feel like that mindset is still there, but the goal posts have just moved. As you point out, in Vista and 7 the "takes too long" was often just a few seconds (the reported goal in Vista was listed in milliseconds). 8/10 continue to tune that based on telemetrics and user decisions in aggregate on one side and developer/application opt-in to more aggressive app shutdowns on the other side. That app is taking too long to shutdown screen still occurs in 8/10; it's just slower to appear and more likely to only appear in cases where an application has truly stalled out.
  - mrguyorama 9y ago
    I meant the mindset seems to have changed on a grander scale. IE with respect to forcing updates on users and aggressive telemetry collection. I understand how Microsoft is between a rock and a hard place when it comes to OS updates, as a majority of systems being up to date helps with herd immunity to prevent worm-scale attacks lack the past few ransomeware attacks, but at the same time, I hate desktop systems coming closer to mobile phones with respect to being locked down. With some updates even changing system settings, it's obvious that Microsoft no longer trusts the user, and that unnerves me. When it comes to telemetry, I was always for it before, purposely selecting the "yes send telemetry" for any Microsoft product I installed, as I was very much a fanboy for most of my life and I enjoyed helping to make the product better. But the way they've handled the privacy aspect of it, along with not allowing you to opt out in any real way, other than disconnecting the network makes my hair stand on end.