6 ms·
The problem isn't automatic updates, it's the philosophy behind those updates. On Ubuntu (last time I used it some 5 years ago), an update fixed bugs in softwar
by franga2000 6y ago
The problem isn't automatic updates, it's the philosophy behind those updates. On Ubuntu (last time I used it some 5 years ago), an update fixed bugs in software and that's it. Occasionally you'd get a new feature here and there, but rarely in the shell and existing features always stayed in their places. On Windows 10, updates ship breaking changes basically every time and there is no regard for consistency. Whether the updates are manual or automatic is an implementation detail - eventually, you'll update either way. The big difference is between a rolling release with no promise of compatibility and a versioned release with LTS.
- SCHiM 6y agoStrange, my experience is also the exact opposite. I really wonder why that is? I'm running about 10 windows 10 machines, various builds, auto updates enabled. Some in a domain, some in a workgroup. The last time an update bricked a system, or even broke a feature, must be over a year ago. Now on Ubuntu, I have the same experience as some other posters. I'm reasonably confident that I can update if I do it semi regularly. But the number of times I've experienced breakage that lead to hours of bugfixing during $DAYJOB, is way too high. Now everything is in its own tightly controller docker, no more random breakage (unless docker breaks, or a key expires...). A debian 9 apt upgrade actually managed to render my install inoperable once. But that might be semi-unfair as it had to do with graphics drivers. Are you running windows systems on semi-recent hardware? Or is it all decades old thinkpad laptops with shitty thirdparty drivers?