5 ms·

I want auto updates for security patches, please.

by ChrisLTD 5y ago

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
Good for you, there should be a checkbox so I don't have to suffer for your preferences.
- thesuitonym 5y ago
  There is, just turn off Windows Updates.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
    It isn't so straight forward if you aren't in the know on special tooling like O&O ShutUp 10 to accomplish it for you. Even then it'll get reset after updating and you'll have to fix it again. There is no "don't ever update unless I tell you to" checkbox, there is only the option to pause them for a limited time. Windows is actively user hostile when it comes to updates.
    - tobias3 5y ago
      Use Windows Pro and Group Policy Editor. There isn't a checkbox there but a radio box that allows you to configure update behaviour in detail. Never had an issue with it during all upgrades. And if Windows Home users should be able to disable automatic updates is debatable.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
        I don't think it is debatable. Users should have control over their own computers.
- passivate 5y ago
  I agree with parent, most non-technical people don't want to be system admin for their OS, so MS taking over is not really a bad deal. All my computers are IT managed and I have never had any update issues, so maybe there is some special sauce there via group policy. I have instructed them to section off my work PCs so they never update unless I tell them to, and it works. I get months and months of uptime till I take the reboot hit and do the updates.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
    The special sauce is probably WSUS, which allows them to control the update process for everyone and determine which updates they get and which they don't. Additionally, the WSUS channel for updates is behind Microsoft's normal updates, which allows for them to prevent problematic updates from reaching WSUS servers in the first place. Of course, home users get none of this. I personally believe it is arrogance to say that non-technical users shouldn't be allowed to control their own PCs. And besides, a lot of users of PCs at home are technical. So I strenuously disagree with you.
    - passivate 5y ago
      Your arguing against something I didn't say. You can disagree with me, but you can't put words in my mouth. I didn't say or imply "shouldn't be allowed" or anything similar.
      - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
        Since my comment was along the lines of "people should get a choice", if you did not intend to argue against that then one wonders what the point of your post was. I mean, look at your language: "MS taking over is really not a big deal". How am I supposed to have interpreted that?
tartoran 5y ago
Security patches != system upgrade = broken of existing installations and reset any custom configurations
marcodiego 5y ago
Ubuntu update notification allows the user to optionally see details of updates: https://www.addictivetips.com/app/uploads/2021/01/ubuntu-update-manager.png https://www.addictivetips.com/app/uploads/2021/01/ubuntu-upd... From there you can see what is being update and what the update does. You can even choose not to install one update or another or even not update a system component or another. So, if you're afraid a new LO version may break compatibility with documents you work on but GNOME updates will improve usability, you can disable one specific update. Very simple and user friendly. For users who don't know, understand or don't care, they will simply click update. Canonical is also planning to use snaps for some desktop or core components so they can have security updates automatically installed in the background. This is a somewhat polemic topic, but I understand their rationale: some people simply choose never to update because they have been burned by bad past experiences. Of course, the more advanced user can still disable it.

I want auto updates for security patches, please.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago

Good for you, there should be a checkbox so I don't have to suffer for your preferences.

thesuitonym 5y ago
There is, just turn off Windows Updates.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
  It isn't so straight forward if you aren't in the know on special tooling like O&O ShutUp 10 to accomplish it for you. Even then it'll get reset after updating and you'll have to fix it again. There is no "don't ever update unless I tell you to" checkbox, there is only the option to pause them for a limited time. Windows is actively user hostile when it comes to updates.
  - tobias3 5y ago
    Use Windows Pro and Group Policy Editor. There isn't a checkbox there but a radio box that allows you to configure update behaviour in detail. Never had an issue with it during all upgrades. And if Windows Home users should be able to disable automatic updates is debatable.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
      I don't think it is debatable. Users should have control over their own computers.
passivate 5y ago
I agree with parent, most non-technical people don't want to be system admin for their OS, so MS taking over is not really a bad deal. All my computers are IT managed and I have never had any update issues, so maybe there is some special sauce there via group policy. I have instructed them to section off my work PCs so they never update unless I tell them to, and it works. I get months and months of uptime till I take the reboot hit and do the updates.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
  The special sauce is probably WSUS, which allows them to control the update process for everyone and determine which updates they get and which they don't. Additionally, the WSUS channel for updates is behind Microsoft's normal updates, which allows for them to prevent problematic updates from reaching WSUS servers in the first place. Of course, home users get none of this. I personally believe it is arrogance to say that non-technical users shouldn't be allowed to control their own PCs. And besides, a lot of users of PCs at home are technical. So I strenuously disagree with you.
  - passivate 5y ago
    Your arguing against something I didn't say. You can disagree with me, but you can't put words in my mouth. I didn't say or imply "shouldn't be allowed" or anything similar.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
      Since my comment was along the lines of "people should get a choice", if you did not intend to argue against that then one wonders what the point of your post was. I mean, look at your language: "MS taking over is really not a big deal". How am I supposed to have interpreted that?

tartoran 5y ago

Security patches != system upgrade = broken of existing installations and reset any custom configurations

marcodiego 5y ago

Ubuntu update notification allows the user to optionally see details of updates: https://www.addictivetips.com/app/uploads/2021/01/ubuntu-update-manager.png https://www.addictivetips.com/app/uploads/2021/01/ubuntu-upd... From there you can see what is being update and what the update does. You can even choose not to install one update or another or even not update a system component or another. So, if you're afraid a new LO version may break compatibility with documents you work on but GNOME updates will improve usability, you can disable one specific update. Very simple and user friendly. For users who don't know, understand or don't care, they will simply click update. Canonical is also planning to use snaps for some desktop or core components so they can have security updates automatically installed in the background. This is a somewhat polemic topic, but I understand their rationale: some people simply choose never to update because they have been burned by bad past experiences. Of course, the more advanced user can still disable it.