Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don't tell people to turn off Windows Update

troyhunt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 567 posts

Re: Don't tell people to turn off Windows Update

#81

Post by madiathomas »

setq wrote: post #11

I don't know why people complain about updates and restarting, particularly in this thread. You fill your car up with fuel regularly because it has been warning you it's nearly empty for a while much like updates remind you regularly. People seem to complain and say "it updated right when I was in the middle of X" but they've been putting it off for ages. Do you break down in the middle of the motorway when you run o…

In my case, it is simply too expensive to download updates. I live in a country which is notorious for expensive data prices. I don't mind interruptions. That's a good problem to have. The choice for me is between spending a week's worth of groceries to download updates periodically or spending that money to buy food and risk getting my PC infected.

Re: Don't tell people to turn off Windows Update

#82

Post by yorwba »

noja wrote: post #49
CydeWeys wrote: post #4

I love the way he's compared the people who tell you to turn off auto-updates with anti-vaxxers; it's quite an apt analogy. Microsoft shares part of the blame here for pushing features that the user clearly doesn't want through updates (especially to the major OS version). Look at the recent ads in Windows file explorer for one example. A lot of the advice to turn Windows Update off is a misguided response to Microso…

> I love the way he's compared the people who tell you to turn off auto-updates with anti-vaxxers; it's quite an apt analogy. This is a good analogy, but does it work in different circumstances? (Apologies for the derail) Over on Android , the apps have got so big (and the storage was until recently so small) that automatic updates _cannot_ be installed - the new apps are too big, the phone is full. What do we do the…

In my case, buy a large SD card to put the apps on, then find out that only the primary storage can hold apps. I think this limitation has been lifted in more recent Android versions, but - of course - I can't upgrade.

Moving all my photos and ebook .pdfs off did alleviate the burden somewhat, but hasn't completely solved it.

My current workaround for very large apps is to uninstall, redownload, install. Apparently, holding both the update and the installed app uses much more space than doing a fresh install.

Re: Don't tell people to turn off Windows Update

#84

Post by bigbugbag »

Does this guy work for microsoft ? It reads like a partisant piece for microsoft.

Totally overlooked the suspicious timeline of Microsoft releasing patched for vulnerabilities that were exploited for a long time by the NSA right after it was made apparent those had been stolen and were about to be released in the wild. No question asked about NSA having known and exploited those vulnerabilities for a while, no question about Microsoft possibly willingly playing along or being legally forced to do so.

No mention that disabling Microsoft update trend is a logical answer to Microsoft using the system to silently installing spying software, breaking the system altogether, disabling pirated versions among others.

No mention that the solution to things like the wannycry outbreak is not turning on windows update but less windows and more other OS and backups. With a sane backup policy ransomware is merely a joke.

Re: Don't tell people to turn off Windows Update

#85

Post by dozzie »

Xylakant wrote: post #78
dozzie wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> services: they are specifically designed to be updated and restarted I write plenty of daemons (you call them "services"). What exactly do I write specifically for them to be able to continue to run when a library is upgraded?

Nothing. They just keep using the old version of the lib and thus potentially vulnerable.

Yes, but they continue to run while the library is being updated. That's the point. They can get restarted once the update process finishes, which takes a lot less time than be shut down, wait for update, and be started again.

From what I know, Windows doesn't allow a library to be replaced until it's not used by anything, which is more intrusive and is IMO the root cause (though indirect) why people hate updating Windows.

Re: Don't tell people to turn off Windows Update

#86

Post by pawadu »

dozzie wrote: post #56
pawadu wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

software: can upgrade binaries and libraries without affecting already running programs services: they are specifically designed to be updated and restarted kernel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ksplice

> services: they are specifically designed to be updated and restarted I write plenty of daemons (you call them "services"). What exactly do I write specifically for them to be able to continue to run when a library is upgraded?

Sorry, I meant things like dependency management among services.

I don't think systemd supports what you are asking but it shouldn't be too hard to write a service that restarts other services if their shared libraries change?

Re: Don't tell people to turn off Windows Update

#87

Post by roesel »

The reason for turning off updates is (I believe) rarely that one doesn't want important security updates. Just as Ubuntu servers have an option to automatically install critical security updates and for the rest you run `apt-get` when you want, the same should be available on windows.

Blaming the users is nice and easy, but Microsoft definitely deserves half of the blame (if not more).

Re: Don't tell people to turn off Windows Update

#89

Post by madiathomas »

Grue3 wrote: post #83

I'm currently on Windows 7 and don't want to accidentally install Windows 10. Turning off updates seems to be the only reliable way to do this.

...and once you are on Windows 10, you will need a degree in Computer Science to disable updates :). I was forced into Windows 10. To turn off updates, I had to disable the Windows Update service. There is no user friendly option to turn them off.

Re: Don't tell people to turn off Windows Update

#90

Post by setq »

madiathomas wrote: post #81
setq wrote: post #11

I don't know why people complain about updates and restarting, particularly in this thread. You fill your car up with fuel regularly because it has been warning you it's nearly empty for a while much like updates remind you regularly. People seem to complain and say "it updated right when I was in the middle of X" but they've been putting it off for ages. Do you break down in the middle of the motorway when you run o…

In my case, it is simply too expensive to download updates. I live in a country which is notorious for expensive data prices. I don't mind interruptions. That's a good problem to have. The choice for me is between spending a week's worth of groceries to download updates periodically or spending that money to buy food and risk getting my PC infected.

This is an interesting and genuine case where I can see that it doesn't make sense.

In your case it should be possible to have a windows "branch" with just critical vulnerabilities patched with binary diffs or something rather than 680-odd Mb patch sets.

Post reply on HN