19 ms·

I'm a tolerant person, but I switched from Windows to Mac because the forced Windows updates kept messing me up. One time I left a long simulation running overn

by kens 6y ago

I'm a tolerant person, but I switched from Windows to Mac because the forced Windows updates kept messing me up. One time I left a long simulation running overnight. In the morning, I was greeted by a computer that had automatically rebooted to install updates, killing my simulation. Another instance was my daughter's birthday party, where she wanted to show a movie. The computer decided to spend an hour doing updates instead. It seems like Windows has become an update engine that will sometimes also do computation for you. My assumption is there's someone at Microsoft who gets a bonus as long as they keep presenting update graphs going up and to the right, and they don't care how much they mess up the user experience in the process. Microsoft should reassign that person.

Spooky23 6y ago
Its part of the windows as a service transition. In a commercial setting it’s even worse — I have had to keep machines vulnerable because update bundles contain code that breaks stuff and you cannot break them out. The other fun thing is that if you run into a complex problem, there’s no scenario where it will get fixed for you. For some products, there is literally a two week window before they freeze changes. There is no escape — this is the new way. Apple is even worse and more unpredictable.
- userbinator 6y ago
  I have had to keep machines vulnerable because update bundles contain code that breaks stuff and you cannot break them out. Vulnerable to what, exactly? That is also the other part of the problem with these "security updates" --- if you look at the details (when they are provided, which seems to be diminishing too) the vast majority of them are local privilege escalations that assume the attacker can run arbitrary code on the machine; IMHO if an attacker can do that, you already have a much bigger problem to worry about!
geoelectric 6y ago
Mac isn't all that much better with the Remind Me Later nag you can't fully dismiss. They've been marching steadily towards forced updates, just they're being obnoxious enough first that people will thank them for cutting the UI noise.
- bromonkey 6y ago
  Mac won't literally forcibly reboot your machine though if you aren't sitting there to click "no." You can also use `softwareupdate --ignore` on Mac to shut off the notification. I'm not aware of anything equivalent on Windows.
  - serf 6y ago
    >You can also use `softwareupdate --ignore` on Mac to shut off the notification. I'm not aware of anything equivalent on Windows. the ability to cancel or ignore updates on a windows machine is relegated to a downloaded tool on the Microsoft site[0]. [0]: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4026726/windows-10-hide-updates-or-driver-updates https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4026726/windows-10-...
    - bromonkey 6y ago
      The Microsoft ignore updates is only temporary though isn't it?
    - Mindwipe 6y ago
      softwareupdate --ignore is now deprecated, and will via security patches even be patched out of older versions of MacOS, in what is an enormous "fuck you" to users.
  - LordFast 6y ago
    Looks like it's removed as of 10.15.5
  - geoelectric 6y ago
    Yeah, ignore is removed going forward. The forced reboots from Windows are absolutely obnoxious, though, no argument.
  - jimnotgym 6y ago
    They have this other way to force updates, by removing support for the OS you are running every few years.
arp242 6y ago
> The computer decided to spend an hour doing updates instead All Linux/BSD systems I've used can update in minutes at the most (excluding the download time); I've long since wondered why Windows update is so much slower? Even binary diffs generally don't take that long to apply in my experience. So where is all the time spent? Also why does it need to reboot? It is the "hard" file locking that's on Windows?
- m0xte 6y ago
  Reboot is definitely the file locking. One of the worst architectural choices that they made. As for the time, I have no idea. A lot of it’s sitting there doing SFA looking at task manager.
  - jimnotgym 6y ago
    My impression, as an enterprise user is that Windows updates require reboots less frequently than they used to. I also note that Macs often require update reboots too, which suggests there is more to this. Some Linux updates also require a reboot on some distributions. Less frequently than Windows, but still there.
    - pdonis 6y ago
      > Some Linux updates also require a reboot on some distributions. AFAIK the only time this is the case is an update of something that can only be reloaded to get the updated version by rebooting--the most common case being the kernel.
    - beagle3 6y ago
      Some linux updates require a reboot for a kernel update to take effect; Many modern ones, if properly configured, can update the kernels without rebooting (e.g. Ubuntu, RedHat and Oracle all have that as a paid option for businesses, Ubuntu also free for personal or oss use). But I've never had an issue where something wouldn't work between the end of an update and a reboot, where that does happen on Windows. Furthermore, it has happened to me that after a kernel upgrade (on a system that did require a reboot to make it take effect), I took a couple of weeks before reboot (running long simulations), in which case I was able to apply yet another kernel upgrade or two; but you only ever need one reboot to make the latest-and-greatest take effect. On Windows, you accumulate reboots if you wait (which requires constantly rejecting the "shall I reboot now" prompts) so you may need many; and I've sometimes needed several reboots even though I didn't delay anything.
silveroriole 6y ago
Hmm, I have both but I honestly find the Mac more annoying. For people who shut down their computer at night, the Windows updates work quite well - they download quietly in the background and apply quickly when you shut down and start up. I haven’t had a Windows machine restart at an irritating time for years. Every Mac update I’ve done, on the other hand, has taken 30-60 minutes of staring at a screen with a progress bar while the fans spin up to maximum. And weeks of nagging EVERY DAY before I finally give in and update.
- guitarbill 6y ago
  sounds like apples to oranges. you shut down your windows computer at night, but not your mac - i don't get it? mac updates do take a while, but unless i'm misremembering, they're less frequent. and some windows updates take absolutely ages, too. the difference for me is that windows update keeps breaking stuff, like bluetooth drivers -.-
  - silveroriole 6y ago
    Macs seem to discourage shutting down, compared to windows. I’ve always been a windows user and I literally couldn’t figure out HOW to shut down the Mac without asking someone. No power button, nothing came up in the search tool thingie for ‘shut down’, I didn’t realise the Apple logo was clickable... maybe I’m just a bit thick :) Anyway, my point is, the UI discourages you from regularly giving the computer a good time to install updates.
    - prepend 6y ago
      You not knowing that the Mac equivalent of the start button has a shutdown option is the “UI discouraging?” How does the Windows UI encourage shutdowns? I only shut down my windows and mac machines. Windows is at least weekly, mac is about 2-3 times per month.
      - silveroriole 6y ago
        Because the windows shutdown option is in the start menu, which you see constantly. The Mac shut down option is in a menu which I almost never click. To me, that indicates the designers have different ideas about how often users want to shutdown/restart. Apparently lots of people disagree though since I got downvoted a lot (which I don’t think is what downvote is for, but whatever...)
98codes 6y ago
Any time I've had that happen, I've ignored prompts to install updates on my schedule, or even to schedule to update to happen some time in the next week. Every time I tell it to schedule the update, it does it when I tell it to.
donmcronald 6y ago
Look at the release channels. The SAC for Windows and monthly channel for MS365 are used to test for the real customers which are enterprise (LTS) users. Looking at the way MS365 does it for different SKUs makes it obvious. Less money means more frequent updates.
ponker 6y ago
Windows kicked off an update in the middle of a friend's funeral where there was a slideshow running.
- FriendlyNormie 6y ago
  The irony is that most of you will die soon as a result of the actions of the man who thought this feature was a good idea, and you’ll all die in such a massive simultaneous wave that no one will have time to throw a funeral for you.
dontblink 6y ago
Mac is similar too. I get tired of having to upgrade my OS (losing features such as 32 bit support or having to upgrade to use new hardware) simply to stay secure.
- Tagbert 6y ago
  The Mac won’t auto reboot your system to install that update. It just nags you now and then like it should.
entropie 6y ago
Interesting. I never experienced something like this on my desktop. Actually I always wondered why people are bothered by windows 10 updates at all, because for me it was maximail a bit disturbing. My xps notebook with windows 10 OTOH, well, it's actually close to a nightmare. I bought it late 2019 and had multiple on occasions the machine decided to WAKE UP from sleep a hour after midnight and running the update Procedere without shutting down. If it was in the sleeve I was greeted by a very very hot notebook at the morning with almost no battery left. It took a while to turn this of.
- Narishma 6y ago
  I've had a similar nightmare on a laptop. Every once in a while it would wake up randomly to do a Windows Update. But since the lid is closed, the laptop would overheat and shutdown in the middle of the update. When I came to use it it would waste an hour or two removing the broken update. After a couple such incidents I just installed Debian instead.
  - entropie 6y ago
    This is even worse. For the record; I tried lots of stuff but I think this german post was the solution: https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/universal-orchestrator-idle-start-weckt-den-pc-immer-wieder-auf.1875735/page-2#post-22752382 https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/universal-orchestr...
stephenhuey 6y ago
Mac OS X has been my daily driver for almost 1.5 decades and I almost got my parents a Mac since they had an ancient laptop and were sorely in need of an upgrade. Instead, I got them a shiny laptop from the Microsoft Store thinking that would minimize the kinds of problems I’ve encountered with terribly cheap Windows machines over the years (icky stuff installed, bad drivers, bad build quality, etc). In recent months my parents have experienced unsettling behavior which I assume is related to Windows updates: seeing it update and then turn to a black screen forever, without even being able to turn it off and back on (and then returning the next morning and it magically comes back on). Of course I had to buy them a new machine right before the pandemic, so the Microsoft Store is closed and I can’t get someone to see if there’s any other problem with it. I know iOS is defaulting to updating people without them knowing too - I’m not a fan, but maybe I’m not the target demographic. Still, they should make sure it’s more robust if they’re going to force it on people without warning.
- reaperducer 6y ago
  iOS at least defaults to updating in the middle of the night when the device is plugged in and locked. It also gives you a warning hours before it happens. If you're able to walk them through it, automatic updates can be disabled.
- slim 6y ago
  if I may suggest a refactoring : "15 years" is 30% less characters than "1.5 decades" and it's less surprising too
- coded 6y ago
  That doesn’t sound good. We had similar black screen behavior. It turns out that disabling hibernation solved the problem.
  - stephenhuey 6y ago
    Yeah, I'll give that a whirl. And after posting my comment, I discovered that Microsoft is closing all their stores, so no real-life meetings with Microsoft's version of an Apple Genius will be possible anymore... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23651672 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23651672
GordonS 6y ago
I've never had an issue with forced updates with Windows 10. Might be because I use the Enterprise edition? If you want to get it, I recommend the Microsoft Action Pack - you get a lot stuff for the money, including multiple Windows 10 licenses, 5 O365 licenses, Visual Studio subscriptions, Azure credits... It's amazing value really, but seems to be relatively unknown.
- Krasnol 6y ago
  Nah, never had issues on Pro too (upgraded from win7)
- JoelTheSuperior 6y ago
  Indeed. I'm honestly surprised to read of such poor experiences here because I've honestly found that Windows 10 has given me a lot less grief than macOS has recently.
- coded 6y ago
  Oh thanks. Do you have to signup as a Microsoft partner in order to get the action pack?
  - GordonS 6y ago
    I've had it for something like 5 years now, but I think the only qualifier was joining the Microsoft Partner Network (MPN), which is free, but I think you need to have a business, which I'd assume many on HN do (even a sole trader is OK, I think).
- Silhouette 6y ago
  I've never had an issue with forced updates with Windows 10. Might be because I use the Enterprise edition? For many practical purposes, the higher Windows 10 tiers such as Enterprise and Education are a different product to the lower ones such as Home and Pro. Microsoft isn't stupid and knows that professional sysadmins at large organisations would never surrender control of their corporate networks and the devices on them to an external party, so Microsoft doesn't try to push much-criticised aspects of Windows 10 such as mandatory telemetry and upgrades in that market. If you want to get it, I recommend the Microsoft Action Pack Unfortunately, there doesn't appear to be any legal method to acquire Windows 10 Enterprise without signing up for all the other enterprise junk that no small business wants to deal with. The Pro edition of Windows used to cater to the small business and power user market, yet bizarrely in Windows 10 that edition seems to have been heavily downgraded and is now little better than Home in the negative aspects we're talking about here.
cryptonector 6y ago
Agreed. Windows needs to have APIs, and apps that can save state must use them, to give apps a chance to save state. E.g., hibernate running VMs, finish syncing docs to drives, save simulation state (as in your case), etc.
- michaelmrose 6y ago
  Making every app that retains any state automatically save it sounds good but seems harder to implement than just don't reboot without asking.
  - cryptonector 6y ago
    Many apps already have this. Your browser can restore windows and tabs on restart. Your $EDITORs save work in progress and let you restore on restart (well, VIM does). VMs can get paused and saved. These are by far the most important apps to have restored. Sure, I'd like my tmux instances and shells and stuff restored too, but I script all that setup anyways, so I'm good there. So, really, it's just a matter of integration.
    - michaelmrose 6y ago
      This still compares unfavorably to suspend and hibernate and worrying about state once every several months.
II2II 6y ago
My assumption is that Windows users are notoriously bad at applying updates, either because they are not aware of them or believe that they know better than Microsoft. While I do prefer the update mechanism under my choice of Linux distributions, which allows me to initiate an update then cancel it if it looks like it will affect software currently in use, it is not suitable for most people.
- Multicomp 6y ago
  > My assumption is that Windows users are notoriously bad at applying updates, either because they are not aware of them or believe that they know better than Microsoft. That's a rather broad brush you got there. Windows users probably gained the reputation for being update-adverse when Windows decided it owned the computer, not the user (me) who paid for the electricity that the computer definitely needs. That in and of itself wouldn't be a thing except windows updates on multiple occasions have broken stuff and restarted computers on people in the middle of their work. How dare MS add their own timer to MY computer. It's their software, but after Windows 8.1 (the last OS that actually passably pretends to obey me), I'm done and going to Linux. Mint or Fedora. Xfce. I may not drink much of the FOSS first cool aid, but its time. Windows 10 (non LTSC) hates me, and the feeling is mutual.
  - II2II 6y ago
    > Windows users probably gained the reputation for being update-adverse when Windows decided it owned the computer It is also possible to argue that Microsoft became more aggressive with updates because people were not updating their systems. I do not agree with many of the decisions that Microsoft made with Windows updates. For example: I am of the opinion that they should have made security updates mandatory and let people decide whether they will accept feature updates. Yes, there would still be issues with that model but at least they can legitimize it. They can legitimize it since we live in a networked world that has to be treated as hostile. As for your transition to Linux, I would highly suggest finding reasons to embrace Linux rather than treating it as a means for ditching Windows. One of those reasons includes the FLOSS "kool-aid" since the less restrictive licensing model has many benefits that trickle down to the end user. Having positive reasons for using Linux will also make it easier to stick with it when you do come across aspects that you do not like, because you will come across things that you do not like. And please stop bad mouthing Windows. Quite frankly, a lot of Linux user look like idiots since they spout outdated information. Just as Linux has improved over time, Windows has done the same. Within a few months, there is a solid possibility that critiques of the platform will become irrelevant. Within a few years, it is virtually certain that the critiques will be irrelevant.
pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
Did the simulation require internet access? What are the tactics Microsoft uses to deal with computers that are offline? Can those tactics be circumvented?
umvi 6y ago
Reminds me of my PS4. I only played it a couples times a month, but every time I turned it on it had 30 minutes' worth of upgrades waiting. I sold my PS4 because I was tired of the updates.
- Reelin 6y ago
  In the same vein, forced updates is why I refuse to allow Snap on any of my systems and opt for Flatpak instead.
- GuiA 6y ago
  But you can pay Sony $60 a year for the privilege of getting your PS4 to update everything in the background on its own! Clearly the free market provides the best player experience.
- realusername 6y ago
  That's the reason I don't buy consoles anymore, the consoles had a simple pitch going for them, sit down and play, no waiting, no fiddling. That used to be true, except nowadays, you have to wait for endless updates every time you switch on the console.
- Shared404 6y ago
  Xbox One is even worse. If you go to long without playing you have to both update, and sign back in to a microsoft account.
zaphirplane 6y ago
Isn’t there a maintenance window that can be configured, I don’t know what the default one is sounds like something to tweak. I’m not saying all is well, i would set it and move on with my life YMMV
shawnz 6y ago
Try this: When you see that updates are available, just install them instead of putting it off. It takes 10 minutes at most. Following that philosophy, I have never had an update interrupt me at a critical moment. Meanwhile my update-averse colleagues are constantly dodging the prompts and complaining about update interruptions.
- stubish 6y ago
  On my games machine, yup. Generally works a treat. On the Win 7 era laptop used as a web browser by parents though? The same updates take several hours (slow spinning rust). So that machine is likely being replaced by a Chromebook in the near future, as a Windows replacement is looking at least double the cost for enough hardware to avoid the update problems.
  - shawnz 6y ago
    Why not put in an SSD? That would be cheaper than a Chromebook
user5994461 6y ago
Your assumption is not correct. The secret answer is that you (and all home customers) are simply beta testers for enterprise customers. Worked in enterprise, windows computers there only update on the week end or when the administrator decides to force an update overnight (they send a notification firmwide that all computers will be rebooted).

by kens 6y ago

Spooky23 6y ago

Its part of the windows as a service transition. In a commercial setting it’s even worse — I have had to keep machines vulnerable because update bundles contain code that breaks stuff and you cannot break them out. The other fun thing is that if you run into a complex problem, there’s no scenario where it will get fixed for you. For some products, there is literally a two week window before they freeze changes. There is no escape — this is the new way. Apple is even worse and more unpredictable.

userbinator 6y ago
I have had to keep machines vulnerable because update bundles contain code that breaks stuff and you cannot break them out. Vulnerable to what, exactly? That is also the other part of the problem with these "security updates" --- if you look at the details (when they are provided, which seems to be diminishing too) the vast majority of them are local privilege escalations that assume the attacker can run arbitrary code on the machine; IMHO if an attacker can do that, you already have a much bigger problem to worry about!

geoelectric 6y ago

Mac isn't all that much better with the Remind Me Later nag you can't fully dismiss. They've been marching steadily towards forced updates, just they're being obnoxious enough first that people will thank them for cutting the UI noise.

bromonkey 6y ago
Mac won't literally forcibly reboot your machine though if you aren't sitting there to click "no." You can also use `softwareupdate --ignore` on Mac to shut off the notification. I'm not aware of anything equivalent on Windows.
- serf 6y ago
  >You can also use `softwareupdate --ignore` on Mac to shut off the notification. I'm not aware of anything equivalent on Windows. the ability to cancel or ignore updates on a windows machine is relegated to a downloaded tool on the Microsoft site[0]. [0]: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4026726/windows-10-hide-updates-or-driver-updates https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4026726/windows-10-...
  - bromonkey 6y ago
    The Microsoft ignore updates is only temporary though isn't it?
  - Mindwipe 6y ago
    softwareupdate --ignore is now deprecated, and will via security patches even be patched out of older versions of MacOS, in what is an enormous "fuck you" to users.
- LordFast 6y ago
  Looks like it's removed as of 10.15.5
- geoelectric 6y ago
  Yeah, ignore is removed going forward. The forced reboots from Windows are absolutely obnoxious, though, no argument.
- jimnotgym 6y ago
  They have this other way to force updates, by removing support for the OS you are running every few years.

arp242 6y ago

> The computer decided to spend an hour doing updates instead All Linux/BSD systems I've used can update in minutes at the most (excluding the download time); I've long since wondered why Windows update is so much slower? Even binary diffs generally don't take that long to apply in my experience. So where is all the time spent? Also why does it need to reboot? It is the "hard" file locking that's on Windows?

m0xte 6y ago
Reboot is definitely the file locking. One of the worst architectural choices that they made. As for the time, I have no idea. A lot of it’s sitting there doing SFA looking at task manager.
- jimnotgym 6y ago
  My impression, as an enterprise user is that Windows updates require reboots less frequently than they used to. I also note that Macs often require update reboots too, which suggests there is more to this. Some Linux updates also require a reboot on some distributions. Less frequently than Windows, but still there.
  - pdonis 6y ago
    > Some Linux updates also require a reboot on some distributions. AFAIK the only time this is the case is an update of something that can only be reloaded to get the updated version by rebooting--the most common case being the kernel.
  - beagle3 6y ago
    Some linux updates require a reboot for a kernel update to take effect; Many modern ones, if properly configured, can update the kernels without rebooting (e.g. Ubuntu, RedHat and Oracle all have that as a paid option for businesses, Ubuntu also free for personal or oss use). But I've never had an issue where something wouldn't work between the end of an update and a reboot, where that does happen on Windows. Furthermore, it has happened to me that after a kernel upgrade (on a system that did require a reboot to make it take effect), I took a couple of weeks before reboot (running long simulations), in which case I was able to apply yet another kernel upgrade or two; but you only ever need one reboot to make the latest-and-greatest take effect. On Windows, you accumulate reboots if you wait (which requires constantly rejecting the "shall I reboot now" prompts) so you may need many; and I've sometimes needed several reboots even though I didn't delay anything.

silveroriole 6y ago

Hmm, I have both but I honestly find the Mac more annoying. For people who shut down their computer at night, the Windows updates work quite well - they download quietly in the background and apply quickly when you shut down and start up. I haven’t had a Windows machine restart at an irritating time for years. Every Mac update I’ve done, on the other hand, has taken 30-60 minutes of staring at a screen with a progress bar while the fans spin up to maximum. And weeks of nagging EVERY DAY before I finally give in and update.

guitarbill 6y ago
sounds like apples to oranges. you shut down your windows computer at night, but not your mac - i don't get it? mac updates do take a while, but unless i'm misremembering, they're less frequent. and some windows updates take absolutely ages, too. the difference for me is that windows update keeps breaking stuff, like bluetooth drivers -.-
- silveroriole 6y ago
  Macs seem to discourage shutting down, compared to windows. I’ve always been a windows user and I literally couldn’t figure out HOW to shut down the Mac without asking someone. No power button, nothing came up in the search tool thingie for ‘shut down’, I didn’t realise the Apple logo was clickable... maybe I’m just a bit thick :) Anyway, my point is, the UI discourages you from regularly giving the computer a good time to install updates.
  - prepend 6y ago
    You not knowing that the Mac equivalent of the start button has a shutdown option is the “UI discouraging?” How does the Windows UI encourage shutdowns? I only shut down my windows and mac machines. Windows is at least weekly, mac is about 2-3 times per month.
    - silveroriole 6y ago
      Because the windows shutdown option is in the start menu, which you see constantly. The Mac shut down option is in a menu which I almost never click. To me, that indicates the designers have different ideas about how often users want to shutdown/restart. Apparently lots of people disagree though since I got downvoted a lot (which I don’t think is what downvote is for, but whatever...)

98codes 6y ago

Any time I've had that happen, I've ignored prompts to install updates on my schedule, or even to schedule to update to happen some time in the next week. Every time I tell it to schedule the update, it does it when I tell it to.

donmcronald 6y ago

Look at the release channels. The SAC for Windows and monthly channel for MS365 are used to test for the real customers which are enterprise (LTS) users. Looking at the way MS365 does it for different SKUs makes it obvious. Less money means more frequent updates.

ponker 6y ago

Windows kicked off an update in the middle of a friend's funeral where there was a slideshow running.

FriendlyNormie 6y ago
The irony is that most of you will die soon as a result of the actions of the man who thought this feature was a good idea, and you’ll all die in such a massive simultaneous wave that no one will have time to throw a funeral for you.

dontblink 6y ago

Mac is similar too. I get tired of having to upgrade my OS (losing features such as 32 bit support or having to upgrade to use new hardware) simply to stay secure.

Tagbert 6y ago
The Mac won’t auto reboot your system to install that update. It just nags you now and then like it should.

entropie 6y ago

Interesting. I never experienced something like this on my desktop. Actually I always wondered why people are bothered by windows 10 updates at all, because for me it was maximail a bit disturbing. My xps notebook with windows 10 OTOH, well, it's actually close to a nightmare. I bought it late 2019 and had multiple on occasions the machine decided to WAKE UP from sleep a hour after midnight and running the update Procedere without shutting down. If it was in the sleeve I was greeted by a very very hot notebook at the morning with almost no battery left. It took a while to turn this of.

Narishma 6y ago
I've had a similar nightmare on a laptop. Every once in a while it would wake up randomly to do a Windows Update. But since the lid is closed, the laptop would overheat and shutdown in the middle of the update. When I came to use it it would waste an hour or two removing the broken update. After a couple such incidents I just installed Debian instead.
- entropie 6y ago
  This is even worse. For the record; I tried lots of stuff but I think this german post was the solution: https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/universal-orchestrator-idle-start-weckt-den-pc-immer-wieder-auf.1875735/page-2#post-22752382 https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/universal-orchestr...

stephenhuey 6y ago

Mac OS X has been my daily driver for almost 1.5 decades and I almost got my parents a Mac since they had an ancient laptop and were sorely in need of an upgrade. Instead, I got them a shiny laptop from the Microsoft Store thinking that would minimize the kinds of problems I’ve encountered with terribly cheap Windows machines over the years (icky stuff installed, bad drivers, bad build quality, etc). In recent months my parents have experienced unsettling behavior which I assume is related to Windows updates: seeing it update and then turn to a black screen forever, without even being able to turn it off and back on (and then returning the next morning and it magically comes back on). Of course I had to buy them a new machine right before the pandemic, so the Microsoft Store is closed and I can’t get someone to see if there’s any other problem with it. I know iOS is defaulting to updating people without them knowing too - I’m not a fan, but maybe I’m not the target demographic. Still, they should make sure it’s more robust if they’re going to force it on people without warning.

reaperducer 6y ago
iOS at least defaults to updating in the middle of the night when the device is plugged in and locked. It also gives you a warning hours before it happens. If you're able to walk them through it, automatic updates can be disabled.
slim 6y ago
if I may suggest a refactoring : "15 years" is 30% less characters than "1.5 decades" and it's less surprising too
coded 6y ago
That doesn’t sound good. We had similar black screen behavior. It turns out that disabling hibernation solved the problem.
- stephenhuey 6y ago
  Yeah, I'll give that a whirl. And after posting my comment, I discovered that Microsoft is closing all their stores, so no real-life meetings with Microsoft's version of an Apple Genius will be possible anymore... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23651672 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23651672

GordonS 6y ago

I've never had an issue with forced updates with Windows 10. Might be because I use the Enterprise edition? If you want to get it, I recommend the Microsoft Action Pack - you get a lot stuff for the money, including multiple Windows 10 licenses, 5 O365 licenses, Visual Studio subscriptions, Azure credits... It's amazing value really, but seems to be relatively unknown.

Krasnol 6y ago
Nah, never had issues on Pro too (upgraded from win7)
JoelTheSuperior 6y ago
Indeed. I'm honestly surprised to read of such poor experiences here because I've honestly found that Windows 10 has given me a lot less grief than macOS has recently.
coded 6y ago
Oh thanks. Do you have to signup as a Microsoft partner in order to get the action pack?
- GordonS 6y ago
  I've had it for something like 5 years now, but I think the only qualifier was joining the Microsoft Partner Network (MPN), which is free, but I think you need to have a business, which I'd assume many on HN do (even a sole trader is OK, I think).
Silhouette 6y ago
I've never had an issue with forced updates with Windows 10. Might be because I use the Enterprise edition? For many practical purposes, the higher Windows 10 tiers such as Enterprise and Education are a different product to the lower ones such as Home and Pro. Microsoft isn't stupid and knows that professional sysadmins at large organisations would never surrender control of their corporate networks and the devices on them to an external party, so Microsoft doesn't try to push much-criticised aspects of Windows 10 such as mandatory telemetry and upgrades in that market. If you want to get it, I recommend the Microsoft Action Pack Unfortunately, there doesn't appear to be any legal method to acquire Windows 10 Enterprise without signing up for all the other enterprise junk that no small business wants to deal with. The Pro edition of Windows used to cater to the small business and power user market, yet bizarrely in Windows 10 that edition seems to have been heavily downgraded and is now little better than Home in the negative aspects we're talking about here.

cryptonector 6y ago

Agreed. Windows needs to have APIs, and apps that can save state must use them, to give apps a chance to save state. E.g., hibernate running VMs, finish syncing docs to drives, save simulation state (as in your case), etc.

michaelmrose 6y ago
Making every app that retains any state automatically save it sounds good but seems harder to implement than just don't reboot without asking.
- cryptonector 6y ago
  Many apps already have this. Your browser can restore windows and tabs on restart. Your $EDITORs save work in progress and let you restore on restart (well, VIM does). VMs can get paused and saved. These are by far the most important apps to have restored. Sure, I'd like my tmux instances and shells and stuff restored too, but I script all that setup anyways, so I'm good there. So, really, it's just a matter of integration.
  - michaelmrose 6y ago
    This still compares unfavorably to suspend and hibernate and worrying about state once every several months.

II2II 6y ago

My assumption is that Windows users are notoriously bad at applying updates, either because they are not aware of them or believe that they know better than Microsoft. While I do prefer the update mechanism under my choice of Linux distributions, which allows me to initiate an update then cancel it if it looks like it will affect software currently in use, it is not suitable for most people.

Multicomp 6y ago
> My assumption is that Windows users are notoriously bad at applying updates, either because they are not aware of them or believe that they know better than Microsoft. That's a rather broad brush you got there. Windows users probably gained the reputation for being update-adverse when Windows decided it owned the computer, not the user (me) who paid for the electricity that the computer definitely needs. That in and of itself wouldn't be a thing except windows updates on multiple occasions have broken stuff and restarted computers on people in the middle of their work. How dare MS add their own timer to MY computer. It's their software, but after Windows 8.1 (the last OS that actually passably pretends to obey me), I'm done and going to Linux. Mint or Fedora. Xfce. I may not drink much of the FOSS first cool aid, but its time. Windows 10 (non LTSC) hates me, and the feeling is mutual.
- II2II 6y ago
  > Windows users probably gained the reputation for being update-adverse when Windows decided it owned the computer It is also possible to argue that Microsoft became more aggressive with updates because people were not updating their systems. I do not agree with many of the decisions that Microsoft made with Windows updates. For example: I am of the opinion that they should have made security updates mandatory and let people decide whether they will accept feature updates. Yes, there would still be issues with that model but at least they can legitimize it. They can legitimize it since we live in a networked world that has to be treated as hostile. As for your transition to Linux, I would highly suggest finding reasons to embrace Linux rather than treating it as a means for ditching Windows. One of those reasons includes the FLOSS "kool-aid" since the less restrictive licensing model has many benefits that trickle down to the end user. Having positive reasons for using Linux will also make it easier to stick with it when you do come across aspects that you do not like, because you will come across things that you do not like. And please stop bad mouthing Windows. Quite frankly, a lot of Linux user look like idiots since they spout outdated information. Just as Linux has improved over time, Windows has done the same. Within a few months, there is a solid possibility that critiques of the platform will become irrelevant. Within a few years, it is virtually certain that the critiques will be irrelevant.

pwdisswordfish2 6y ago

Did the simulation require internet access? What are the tactics Microsoft uses to deal with computers that are offline? Can those tactics be circumvented?

umvi 6y ago

Reminds me of my PS4. I only played it a couples times a month, but every time I turned it on it had 30 minutes' worth of upgrades waiting. I sold my PS4 because I was tired of the updates.

Reelin 6y ago
In the same vein, forced updates is why I refuse to allow Snap on any of my systems and opt for Flatpak instead.
GuiA 6y ago
But you can pay Sony $60 a year for the privilege of getting your PS4 to update everything in the background on its own! Clearly the free market provides the best player experience.
realusername 6y ago
That's the reason I don't buy consoles anymore, the consoles had a simple pitch going for them, sit down and play, no waiting, no fiddling. That used to be true, except nowadays, you have to wait for endless updates every time you switch on the console.
Shared404 6y ago
Xbox One is even worse. If you go to long without playing you have to both update, and sign back in to a microsoft account.

zaphirplane 6y ago

Isn’t there a maintenance window that can be configured, I don’t know what the default one is sounds like something to tweak. I’m not saying all is well, i would set it and move on with my life YMMV

shawnz 6y ago

Try this: When you see that updates are available, just install them instead of putting it off. It takes 10 minutes at most. Following that philosophy, I have never had an update interrupt me at a critical moment. Meanwhile my update-averse colleagues are constantly dodging the prompts and complaining about update interruptions.

stubish 6y ago
On my games machine, yup. Generally works a treat. On the Win 7 era laptop used as a web browser by parents though? The same updates take several hours (slow spinning rust). So that machine is likely being replaced by a Chromebook in the near future, as a Windows replacement is looking at least double the cost for enough hardware to avoid the update problems.
- shawnz 6y ago
  Why not put in an SSD? That would be cheaper than a Chromebook

user5994461 6y ago

Your assumption is not correct. The secret answer is that you (and all home customers) are simply beta testers for enterprise customers. Worked in enterprise, windows computers there only update on the week end or when the administrator decides to force an update overnight (they send a notification firmwide that all computers will be rebooted).