5 ms·

You know, I would do quite a lot to get full granular control of Windows Update back. I'd sign and mail a liability waiver. I'd send Microsoft a box of chocol

You know, I would do quite a lot to get full granular control of Windows Update back. I'd sign and mail a liability waiver. I'd send Microsoft a box of chocolates. I'd take a training course and pass a standardized licensing exam. In the meantime I'm stuck dealing with Windows Update breaking things every week. I've completely given up on ever using my convertible laptop as a tablet again because every day I have to replace the updated broken drivers for the orientation sensor with the good ones from a fresh install of Windows and every night it dutifully installs the broken updated ones and there's not a damned thing I can do about it without disabling Windows Update entirely.

NegativeLatency 7y ago
Might not help your case but I found turning them off and manually updating to work ok. The group policy option has been working for me: https://www.howtogeek.com/224471/how-to-prevent-windows-10-from-automatically-downloading-updates/ https://www.howtogeek.com/224471/how-to-prevent-windows-10-f...
duxup 7y ago
>I'd take a training course and pass a standardized licensing exam I like this idea but it really doesn't protect anyone else if you quit updating and your machine become a less than desirable participant on the internet for the rest of us.
- Causality1 7y ago
  So instead I stay on Windows 7 and become a much greater risk.
  - duxup 7y ago
    It is ultimately your call.
- Silhouette 7y ago
  In that case, it seems the root cause of your concerns about other Internet users is that updates for their systems from the OS developer are no longer considered trustworthy. Given that the developer in question has something of a track record now of delivering potentially unwelcome updates, such caution is reasonable. So I think you're aiming at the wrong target here. In any case, the vaccination argument only works if it's defending against a real threat. If there's a genuine security issue here, perhaps it is. On the other hand, if this update really is causing otherwise absent telemetry software to be installed, not installing that telemetry software is hardly a threat to other Internet users.
  - duxup 7y ago
    I'm not 100% sure I understand all of what you're saying. Generally if you disable updates, you disable them all, so that means security updates too. If a given update isn't a security update and you disabled all updates ... you're still going to miss it if it was a security update too.
    - Silhouette 7y ago
      Generally if you disable updates, you disable them all That isn't necessarily true at all. Indeed, the basis of this very story is that Microsoft has been providing updates for older versions of Windows that included only the security patches (i.e., not new features, telemetry, and any other stuff that might change the behaviour of system in ways its user doesn't want). In terms of your "vaccination" strategy for the Internet, these patches are the ones that matter. However, in this case, Microsoft might have bundled one of the things that people have been trying to opt out of -- telemetry -- into one of the updates labelled as security only. If they really have, that would be a further significant breach of trust, and given their recent track record with pushing telemetry, GWX and so on, a lot of people are no longer even willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, to the point that some people are no longer applying updates from Microsoft at all, in some cases including security updates. That is bad for almost everyone, and it's been directly caused by Microsoft's repeated abuse of the update system to push user-hostile changes.
herpderperator 7y ago
I've been running Windows with Windows Update disabled for many years. I enable it and update when I feel I should, and assess risk on an as-needed basis. I'm aware that running outdated software is bad practice, but I like not getting interrupted on my PC... for 154 straight days so far: https://i.imgur.com/1RTpIBY.png https://i.imgur.com/1RTpIBY.png
- Causality1 7y ago
  What method do you use? Group Policy, a third party program, or just renaming needed DLLs?
- oauea 7y ago
  Can you visit my website? I need some new nodes for my botnet.

NegativeLatency 7y ago

Might not help your case but I found turning them off and manually updating to work ok. The group policy option has been working for me: https://www.howtogeek.com/224471/how-to-prevent-windows-10-from-automatically-downloading-updates/ https://www.howtogeek.com/224471/how-to-prevent-windows-10-f...

duxup 7y ago

>I'd take a training course and pass a standardized licensing exam I like this idea but it really doesn't protect anyone else if you quit updating and your machine become a less than desirable participant on the internet for the rest of us.

Causality1 7y ago
So instead I stay on Windows 7 and become a much greater risk.
- duxup 7y ago
  It is ultimately your call.
Silhouette 7y ago
In that case, it seems the root cause of your concerns about other Internet users is that updates for their systems from the OS developer are no longer considered trustworthy. Given that the developer in question has something of a track record now of delivering potentially unwelcome updates, such caution is reasonable. So I think you're aiming at the wrong target here. In any case, the vaccination argument only works if it's defending against a real threat. If there's a genuine security issue here, perhaps it is. On the other hand, if this update really is causing otherwise absent telemetry software to be installed, not installing that telemetry software is hardly a threat to other Internet users.
- duxup 7y ago
  I'm not 100% sure I understand all of what you're saying. Generally if you disable updates, you disable them all, so that means security updates too. If a given update isn't a security update and you disabled all updates ... you're still going to miss it if it was a security update too.
  - Silhouette 7y ago
    Generally if you disable updates, you disable them all That isn't necessarily true at all. Indeed, the basis of this very story is that Microsoft has been providing updates for older versions of Windows that included only the security patches (i.e., not new features, telemetry, and any other stuff that might change the behaviour of system in ways its user doesn't want). In terms of your "vaccination" strategy for the Internet, these patches are the ones that matter. However, in this case, Microsoft might have bundled one of the things that people have been trying to opt out of -- telemetry -- into one of the updates labelled as security only. If they really have, that would be a further significant breach of trust, and given their recent track record with pushing telemetry, GWX and so on, a lot of people are no longer even willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, to the point that some people are no longer applying updates from Microsoft at all, in some cases including security updates. That is bad for almost everyone, and it's been directly caused by Microsoft's repeated abuse of the update system to push user-hostile changes.

herpderperator 7y ago

I've been running Windows with Windows Update disabled for many years. I enable it and update when I feel I should, and assess risk on an as-needed basis. I'm aware that running outdated software is bad practice, but I like not getting interrupted on my PC... for 154 straight days so far: https://i.imgur.com/1RTpIBY.png https://i.imgur.com/1RTpIBY.png

Causality1 7y ago
What method do you use? Group Policy, a third party program, or just renaming needed DLLs?
oauea 7y ago
Can you visit my website? I need some new nodes for my botnet.