3 ms·

I’ve never had Windows do this, but my machine also isn’t managed by corporate IT. I think Windows downfall is really providing too many knobs for these people

by vips7L 5y ago

I’ve never had Windows do this, but my machine also isn’t managed by corporate IT. I think Windows downfall is really providing too many knobs for these people to control. Corporate IT is inherently anti-user in my experience. They only care about their policies and not enabling you to get your job done.

chucksta 5y ago
>Corporate IT is inherently anti-user in my experience. This is a 2 way street, there is a reason they still always ask if it's been rebooted. They can tell it can't and they are being lied to. >They only care about their policies and not enabling you to get your job done. Simply not true, it's almost always the first concern. Judging by your tone you are not considering they have a job to do as well, and it's relies on your assistance, or you get a forced activity like that.
sangnoir 5y ago
> Corporate IT is inherently anti-user in my experience As someone who did help-desk in the past, corporate IT is not anti-user, but pro-efficiency, though the outcomes may be indistinguishable. IT is typically under-resourced[1], and has to deal with too many users with too many requests, and prima donna users - more of them than you'd imagine - demand personalized white-glove service (but don't want support to offer that to others because it ought to expedite service to them)
- prepend 5y ago
  We’re all understaffed. But I’ve never designed such a stupid process and then blown off complaints. Scripting patches to only run at off hours or prompting to patch at the end of the day is not rocket science. Perhaps they are overworked. Perhaps they are stupid. Perhaps they are just jerks. Having non-idiotic patch policies isn’t asking for “white-glove service” and responding to user complaints when my process breaks a user process is something we get paid to do. Comically stupid IT processes lead to more user requests. So “doing it right” is actually easier than doing it stupid and having people complain.
prepend 5y ago
My home gaming pc has done this and I frequently dust off old vms where windows requires patches just to start. I didn’t set any policy and wish I could turn off this option. My cohabitants not being able to play games when they like isn’t a huge discomfort, but does make me wish more games would run on Linux or Mac (where this never happens).
wutbrodo 5y ago
This happens on personal, non-managed Windows as well. In college, my friend dropped out in the middle of a LAN Starcraft game because of it. Windows simply isn't a good choice for anything but a toy system or a specialized one to be used rarely (eg for gaming)

by vips7L 5y ago

chucksta 5y ago

>Corporate IT is inherently anti-user in my experience. This is a 2 way street, there is a reason they still always ask if it's been rebooted. They can tell it can't and they are being lied to. >They only care about their policies and not enabling you to get your job done. Simply not true, it's almost always the first concern. Judging by your tone you are not considering they have a job to do as well, and it's relies on your assistance, or you get a forced activity like that.

sangnoir 5y ago

> Corporate IT is inherently anti-user in my experience As someone who did help-desk in the past, corporate IT is not anti-user, but pro-efficiency, though the outcomes may be indistinguishable. IT is typically under-resourced[1], and has to deal with too many users with too many requests, and prima donna users - more of them than you'd imagine - demand personalized white-glove service (but don't want support to offer that to others because it ought to expedite service to them)

prepend 5y ago
We’re all understaffed. But I’ve never designed such a stupid process and then blown off complaints. Scripting patches to only run at off hours or prompting to patch at the end of the day is not rocket science. Perhaps they are overworked. Perhaps they are stupid. Perhaps they are just jerks. Having non-idiotic patch policies isn’t asking for “white-glove service” and responding to user complaints when my process breaks a user process is something we get paid to do. Comically stupid IT processes lead to more user requests. So “doing it right” is actually easier than doing it stupid and having people complain.

prepend 5y ago

My home gaming pc has done this and I frequently dust off old vms where windows requires patches just to start. I didn’t set any policy and wish I could turn off this option. My cohabitants not being able to play games when they like isn’t a huge discomfort, but does make me wish more games would run on Linux or Mac (where this never happens).

wutbrodo 5y ago

This happens on personal, non-managed Windows as well. In college, my friend dropped out in the middle of a LAN Starcraft game because of it. Windows simply isn't a good choice for anything but a toy system or a specialized one to be used rarely (eg for gaming)