6 ms·

And thereby leaving millions of unpatched machines vulnerable. We just went through that with Android. No thanks. I think a more reasonable answer lies in Micro

And thereby leaving millions of unpatched machines vulnerable. We just went through that with Android. No thanks. I think a more reasonable answer lies in Microsoft taking a better/different approach to Q/A.

throwaway2048 8y ago
Windows feature updates are pushed down the same pipeline, and installed automatically.
CamperBob2 8y ago
That excuse almost made sense until they turned Windows Update into a marketing channel.
josteink 8y ago
And it’s easier to do better Q/A when you don’t have to support 200 earlier versions and patch-revisions.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
barking 8y ago
They need to give you the choice on whether to update or not. If you choose not to they should just maybe give you a warning on every launch and leave it at that.
- derefr 8y ago
  We're talking about herd immunity from viruses here. Imagine that there were a new deadly pandemic every few days. Should a human being, at that point, be allowed (by the social norms of their society, by law, whatever) to refuse to receive once-daily "vaccination updates"?
  - cortic 8y ago
    Yes. And its a bit creepy you think the answer should be no.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - derefr 8y ago
      Here’s maybe a less-fraught analogy: say you have an autonomous car. Assume that the car’s autonomous-driving algorithms prevent it from hitting a person or another car no matter who’s driving, but don’t prevent it from, say, knocking down a telephone pole, or colliding with one of the support posts holding up a bridge. Now, do you have the right to own and drive this autonomous car around on public roads, if you’ve modified the car to be an “open server” where anyone can anonymously connect to it from anywhere on the Internet and drive it around? And, if not, then what’s the difference between that modification, and knowingly driving the car when it has an unpatched vulnerability allowing people to do the same? And if you find that there is no difference, then what’s the difference between a vulnerable car that can DDoS physical infrastructure, and a vulnerable PC that can DDoS virtual infrastructure?
      - tolien 8y ago
        The missing part of your analogy is that in a safety-critical scenario like that, there's no way that the update to the car would be delivered alongside a change to make the UI go dark at night or a completely-rewritten version of the entertainment system. The second something went wrong with such a bundled update, the manufacturer would be annihilated by regulators around the world and/or by a collapse in consumer confidence. MS could deliver security updates separately to feature changes but chooses not to. The Tragedy of the Commons is that well-publicised incidents like this (and the trend of updates to consumer software, supposedly under the guise of enhancing security, to bring about significant changes in appearance and behaviour) make people less, not more, inclined to defer updates to all software with the result that developers feel the urge to strong-arm users into updating.
      - 8y ago
- hacst 8y ago
  Afaik you can still configure it this way in Pro and higher skews using the group policy editor. And it's not like they didn't try the "asking the user" thing before. It's just that many users will happily keep dismissing any kind of warning that doesn't immediatly make their computer stop working forever. That's just no longer something that's acceptable for a machine connected to the internet.
  - mehrdadn 8y ago
    > That's just no longer something that's acceptable for a machine connected to the internet. I'm not sure users have been finding the alternative that has been playing out any more acceptable. Does it look that way to you?
r00fus 8y ago
I think iOS is better. I only get asked to bypass the OS update every month or so and it takes less than three seconds to bypass. They mover force an update but make you aware you're on an older version.
- kbenson 8y ago
  I was alive and working in the dark ages where the majority of the world did not patch their OS, and we should not be clamoring to go back just because occassionally the the light hurts our eyes. I'm much happier in a world where only those that put in the effort to research how to block updates and then go through the steps can do so. They are much more likely to encounter info on how they should really think about what they are doing, and whether there are alternatives or partial solutions that achieve most their needs without being as extreme. Please don't ruin the little bit of herd immunity we've built up.
- shawnz 8y ago
  How does that solve the issue described in the comment you're replying to? Are you comfortable leaving potentially critical remote vulnerabilities exposed for a whole month?
- vbezhenar 8y ago
  And if you need to restore device, you'll be updated no matter what.
  - giobox 8y ago
    While you can argue it might be nice to have the option to keep the older backup, it’s also kind of a handy feature that I can restore to latest OS and not have to spend time installing updates myself, my data conveniently seeded into the latest software. At any rate, iCloud is not “backup” in the traditional sense, it’s really “cloud sync” for user data. In that context it’s not really surprising that connecting a new device to iCloud and restoring pulls the newer OS version, given you never really backed up the OS data at any point.
mehrdadn 8y ago
It used to work fine pre-Win-10 where they gave you the updates and let you install them when the time was right for you. This stubborn obsession with the idea that no sane user could possibly have anything more critical in their life than installing whatever code comes out of your hands instantly is just nuts.
- ip26 8y ago
  pre-Win-10, Windows was also considered the most bug-infested zombie-farm around. idea that no sane user could possibly have anything more critical in their life than installing whatever code comes out The problem is when you examine user behavior, they inexplicably seem to have something more critical than installing updates, 24/7/365. Which is how bot farms begin.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
xeeeeeeeeeeenu 8y ago
There's a difference between security updates and feature updates.

throwaway2048 8y ago

Windows feature updates are pushed down the same pipeline, and installed automatically.

CamperBob2 8y ago

That excuse almost made sense until they turned Windows Update into a marketing channel.

josteink 8y ago

And it’s easier to do better Q/A when you don’t have to support 200 earlier versions and patch-revisions.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

barking 8y ago

They need to give you the choice on whether to update or not. If you choose not to they should just maybe give you a warning on every launch and leave it at that.

derefr 8y ago
We're talking about herd immunity from viruses here. Imagine that there were a new deadly pandemic every few days. Should a human being, at that point, be allowed (by the social norms of their society, by law, whatever) to refuse to receive once-daily "vaccination updates"?
- cortic 8y ago
  Yes. And its a bit creepy you think the answer should be no.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - derefr 8y ago
    Here’s maybe a less-fraught analogy: say you have an autonomous car. Assume that the car’s autonomous-driving algorithms prevent it from hitting a person or another car no matter who’s driving, but don’t prevent it from, say, knocking down a telephone pole, or colliding with one of the support posts holding up a bridge. Now, do you have the right to own and drive this autonomous car around on public roads, if you’ve modified the car to be an “open server” where anyone can anonymously connect to it from anywhere on the Internet and drive it around? And, if not, then what’s the difference between that modification, and knowingly driving the car when it has an unpatched vulnerability allowing people to do the same? And if you find that there is no difference, then what’s the difference between a vulnerable car that can DDoS physical infrastructure, and a vulnerable PC that can DDoS virtual infrastructure?
    - tolien 8y ago
      The missing part of your analogy is that in a safety-critical scenario like that, there's no way that the update to the car would be delivered alongside a change to make the UI go dark at night or a completely-rewritten version of the entertainment system. The second something went wrong with such a bundled update, the manufacturer would be annihilated by regulators around the world and/or by a collapse in consumer confidence. MS could deliver security updates separately to feature changes but chooses not to. The Tragedy of the Commons is that well-publicised incidents like this (and the trend of updates to consumer software, supposedly under the guise of enhancing security, to bring about significant changes in appearance and behaviour) make people less, not more, inclined to defer updates to all software with the result that developers feel the urge to strong-arm users into updating.
    - 8y ago
hacst 8y ago
Afaik you can still configure it this way in Pro and higher skews using the group policy editor. And it's not like they didn't try the "asking the user" thing before. It's just that many users will happily keep dismissing any kind of warning that doesn't immediatly make their computer stop working forever. That's just no longer something that's acceptable for a machine connected to the internet.
- mehrdadn 8y ago
  > That's just no longer something that's acceptable for a machine connected to the internet. I'm not sure users have been finding the alternative that has been playing out any more acceptable. Does it look that way to you?

r00fus 8y ago

I think iOS is better. I only get asked to bypass the OS update every month or so and it takes less than three seconds to bypass. They mover force an update but make you aware you're on an older version.

kbenson 8y ago
I was alive and working in the dark ages where the majority of the world did not patch their OS, and we should not be clamoring to go back just because occassionally the the light hurts our eyes. I'm much happier in a world where only those that put in the effort to research how to block updates and then go through the steps can do so. They are much more likely to encounter info on how they should really think about what they are doing, and whether there are alternatives or partial solutions that achieve most their needs without being as extreme. Please don't ruin the little bit of herd immunity we've built up.
shawnz 8y ago
How does that solve the issue described in the comment you're replying to? Are you comfortable leaving potentially critical remote vulnerabilities exposed for a whole month?
vbezhenar 8y ago
And if you need to restore device, you'll be updated no matter what.
- giobox 8y ago
  While you can argue it might be nice to have the option to keep the older backup, it’s also kind of a handy feature that I can restore to latest OS and not have to spend time installing updates myself, my data conveniently seeded into the latest software. At any rate, iCloud is not “backup” in the traditional sense, it’s really “cloud sync” for user data. In that context it’s not really surprising that connecting a new device to iCloud and restoring pulls the newer OS version, given you never really backed up the OS data at any point.

mehrdadn 8y ago

It used to work fine pre-Win-10 where they gave you the updates and let you install them when the time was right for you. This stubborn obsession with the idea that no sane user could possibly have anything more critical in their life than installing whatever code comes out of your hands instantly is just nuts.

ip26 8y ago
pre-Win-10, Windows was also considered the most bug-infested zombie-farm around. idea that no sane user could possibly have anything more critical in their life than installing whatever code comes out The problem is when you examine user behavior, they inexplicably seem to have something more critical than installing updates, 24/7/365. Which is how bot farms begin.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

xeeeeeeeeeeenu 8y ago

There's a difference between security updates and feature updates.