Forced Win10 download

On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 19:18:57 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Mayayana wrote:

I'm guessing that anyone who's still allowing Windows Update to run
has accepted that Microsoft is taking over their computer, but in
case anyone's interested: *All* Win7-8 machines on dripfeed are now
receiving all of Win10, with the plan that the owners will be [at
minimum] nagged to install Win10 once the downloads are finished.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...e-just-in-case

Didn't happen to me; however, I do not install Microsoft's bogus
"updates" that are only applicable for migration to Windows 10 or for
Microsoft to spy on you (e.g., Windows Client updates for
"compatibility", telemetry updates). I don't have the KB3035583 update
(the "Get Windows 10" app) that is nothing but lureware to prod users to
move to Windows 10, along with several other updates that have NOTHING
to do with Windows 7 and everything to do with Windows 10 migration.
Perhaps by not accepting all those bogus Windows Update Client updates
that I avoided the one that turns it into an adware channel.

Occasionally Microsoft's updates phuck up the toolbars that I added the
Windows taskbar: all the toolbars disappear and I have to re-add them.
While the folder for each toolbar still exists, I have to add the
toolbars and rearrange and resize them. Happens about 3-4 times a year.
Happened in this week's Patch Tuesday round of updates. That would've
been tolerable (**** happens) except then my permissions got screwed up.
Programs, like games, that would launch from shortcuts before now popped
up a message that I needed admin privs. Uh huh. Using "run as admin"
didn't help. Changing my security group membership from several
security groups to just one (Administrator - that was one of my
account's security group memberships) didn't help. Rebooting didn't
help. Wasn't interested in working of fixing their **** up so I
restored from an image backup saved on Mondary morn and everything
working just fine now. I won't be applying any of Microsoft's updates
again for another month while I wait for them to fix (release new
versions or issue amending patches) whichever ones caused the **** up.

I also noticed Microsoft is now combining targets for their patches.
Several security updates for apps included "single signon for ADAL"
which is for Windows (ex., KB308552 = Signon ADAL + Excel); see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_sign-on.

Considering Microsoft dropped mainstream support for Windows 7 back in
Feb 2015, and because of their combined patches (if you want the good
part then you have to take the bad part), and because they push patches
for programs that are NOT installed (Skype, Lync, OneDrive for Business
which is NOT the same as OneDrive, MS Access), and because of their
pushing to change Windows 7/8 to advertising platforms (aka adware) for
Windows 10, I've decided not to even check for updates until I decided
to trial them but only after making a full image backup of the OS
partition. I currently have WU set to "notify only" but I'm going to
turn that off completely.

Microsoft has tried or succeeded to burn me many times with their
inappropriate, faulty, wrongly targeted, or Win10 bait patches. Time to
cease the invasion. I'll have to plan an evening for when to save an
image backup and spend time researching all the updates to decide which
ones are applied and which are hidden (which only lasts until Microsoft
pushes a new version of the same update).

Microsoft is trying to turn Win7/8 into Win10 adware platforms but they
are also pushing other crap in their updates that I don't want, don't
need, and can't use in my home PC setup. Not only will I have to
research every update they offer in the future, I figure it's time to
review every update I retrieved before.


Well said, and thanks.

I've always set update to let me choose what and when to install. I
research every one and only install those that: I'm convinced I must
have for security or performance and have not been a problem for
others. The Updates that don't pass that test get hidden. I don't
even consider any that are less than fully explained or have a hint of
secrecy in their wording.

DC

Jonas Q wrote on 09/11/2015 10:02 AM:
On 10-Sep-2015 23:31, . . .winston wrote:
Mayayana wrote on 09/10/2015 5:13 PM:
I'm guessing that anyone who's still allowing
Windows Update to run has accepted that Microsoft
is taking over their computer, but in case anyone's
interested: *All* Win7-8 machines on dripfeed are
now receiving all of Win10, with the plan that the
owners will be [at minimum] nagged to install Win10
once the downloads are finished.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...e-just-in-case





Probably of value to read and understand the supposed quoted statement.

Microsoft told us: "For individuals who have chosen to receive automatic
updates through Windows Update, we help upgradable devices get ready for
Windows 10 by downloading the files they’ll need if they decide to
upgrade."

Afiak, MSFT never stated it wouldn't offer the update to 10 to
qualifying o/s.
One of the GWX app features was for reserving Win10 and placing the
device in a queue, not a yes/no choice that the update.

I've yet to see anyone who removed 3035583 properly and continues to
hide it receive the bits when WU is set (and prove it) to full notify
(notify before download *and* install).



Well it happened to me. I have never reserved it and the crap was on my
computer which i deleted 2 says ago when i noticed it.
...and I'm not the only one.

And quit being a Msft shill.

http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft...rved-it-or-not


http://tinyurl.com/ngdagcn

Didn't say one had to reserve it. Having comprehension issues ?

It's obvious you don't have a clue or understand the GWX or reserve/not
reserve significance it has nothing to do with Win10 being offered by
other means (e.g. Windows Update)

What I did say "Afiak, MSFT never stated it wouldn't offer the update to
10 to qualifying o/s."

- read it closely again.

You probably even install 3035883 at one time too.



--
...winston
msft mvp windows experience

On 11-Sep-2015 16:57, . . .winston wrote:
Jonas Q wrote on 09/11/2015 10:02 AM:
On 10-Sep-2015 23:31, . . .winston wrote:
Mayayana wrote on 09/10/2015 5:13 PM:
I'm guessing that anyone who's still allowing
Windows Update to run has accepted that Microsoft
is taking over their computer, but in case anyone's
interested: *All* Win7-8 machines on dripfeed are
now receiving all of Win10, with the plan that the
owners will be [at minimum] nagged to install Win10
once the downloads are finished.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...e-just-in-case






Probably of value to read and understand the supposed quoted statement.

Microsoft told us: "For individuals who have chosen to receive automatic
updates through Windows Update, we help upgradable devices get ready for
Windows 10 by downloading the files they’ll need if they decide to
upgrade."

Afiak, MSFT never stated it wouldn't offer the update to 10 to
qualifying o/s.
One of the GWX app features was for reserving Win10 and placing the
device in a queue, not a yes/no choice that the update.

I've yet to see anyone who removed 3035583 properly and continues to
hide it receive the bits when WU is set (and prove it) to full notify
(notify before download *and* install).



Well it happened to me. I have never reserved it and the crap was on my
computer which i deleted 2 says ago when i noticed it.
...and I'm not the only one.

And quit being a Msft shill.

http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft...rved-it-or-not



http://tinyurl.com/ngdagcn

Didn't say one had to reserve it. Having comprehension issues ?

It's obvious you don't have a clue or understand the GWX or reserve/not
reserve significance it has nothing to do with Win10 being offered by
other means (e.g. Windows Update)

What I did say "Afiak, MSFT never stated it wouldn't offer the update to
10 to qualifying o/s."

- read it closely again.

You probably even install 3035883 at one time too.




Hello!! Wake up and smell the roses.

1. I never has any of the spying updates installed there all in the
hidden bucket.
2. I have update set to never check.
3. You are nothing but a shill.

End of discussion, I'm out of here.

On 11/09/2015 23:43, Jonas Q wrote:
snip
3. You are nothing but a shill.

Ah! You didn't listen, eh?

Goodbye, Jonas.

Jonas Q wrote on 09/11/2015 6:43 PM:
On 11-Sep-2015 16:57, . . .winston wrote:
Jonas Q wrote on 09/11/2015 10:02 AM:
On 10-Sep-2015 23:31, . . .winston wrote:
Mayayana wrote on 09/10/2015 5:13 PM:
I'm guessing that anyone who's still allowing
Windows Update to run has accepted that Microsoft
is taking over their computer, but in case anyone's
interested: *All* Win7-8 machines on dripfeed are
now receiving all of Win10, with the plan that the
owners will be [at minimum] nagged to install Win10
once the downloads are finished.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...e-just-in-case







Probably of value to read and understand the supposed quoted statement.

DennyCrane wrote:

I've always set update to let me choose what and when to install. I
research every one and only install those that: I'm convinced I must
have for security or performance and have not been a problem for
others. The Updates that don't pass that test get hidden. I don't
even consider any that are less than fully explained or have a hint of
secrecy in their wording.

But now you have to forfeit an update that has some changes you want for
some targets but other changes you don't for other targets. In a combo
update (multiple targets), I couldn't give a gnat's fart about SSO
(single sign-on) but I might want the Excel fixes; however, to avoid the
SSO changes, I have to forego the Excel fixes. Oh how wonderful. ~:-/

On 11/09/2015 15:02, Jonas Q wrote:
Well it happened to me. I have never reserved it and the crap was on
my computer which i deleted 2 says ago when i noticed it.
...and I'm not the only one.


Frankly, idiots like you shouldn't be allowed to go near any windows
system because you missed something because of your low intelligence and
now blaming Microsoft for everything when you should be ashamed of your
"below par" intelligence and for relying on other idiots like Manyama,
Wolf and other Canadian "Small boys" abusers to educate you.

Jonas Q wrote:

winston wrote:

I've yet to see anyone who removed 3035583 properly and continues to
hide it receive the bits when WU is set (and prove it) to full
notify (notify before download *and* install).

Well it happened to me. I have never reserved it and the crap was on my
computer which i deleted 2 says ago when i noticed it.
...and I'm not the only one.

And quit being a Msft shill.

http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft...rved-it-or-not

http://tinyurl.com/ngdagcn

Because their knowledge or experience differs from you then they must be
a Microsoft shill (roll eyes). You jump in without any declaration that
you avoided the Win10 bait updates which, by omission, means you did
install them. Looks more like when you disagree about your experiences
that you pull out the "shill card" as though that lends more credence to
your experiences but the effect is just the opposite. How many users or
customers do you personally support? Oh, just one: yourself. That it
happened to you and not for others means something differs in YOUR
configuration. Instead of delving into what that difference might be,
you throw out your shill card.

Reminds me when a customer called tech support who transfered them to a
programmer whose response was "Works for me." I (not the customer but
working at the same place) told him, "Okay, pack up your computer and
send it to the customer." Turns out he had an SDK installed that was
never a requirement for the customer. Our software was supposed to
include a lib file but the programmer forgot to include it.

Neither of those articles - the OP's reference nor your attempt to
volumize incident count by posting another article on the same topic -
lists the updates to show if those users did or did not install the
Win10 bait updates. Nor will we ever know if those authors ever knew
that information or the expertise, or lack thereof, of the users
reporting the auto-download behavior.

Those are not technically detailed articles. Notice they never say HOW
the Win10 image is getting downloaded. They don't know. They're not
that technically "deep". From the non-technical descriptions in those
articles which recount a story they got from some user, those users very
likely *did* install the Win10 bait updates.

How many users out of all those you know (and assuming you know more
than 10 so there is some sample size) review EVERY update before
installing it? How many click on the "More information" link to read
that KB article? How many click the admin/IT link in that KB article to
read another with more technical details? How many research an update
outside of what Microsoft says (and now too often says little)?

The small percentage of users here that review updates before applying
them is not representative of percentage of all users of Windows. Few
ever review an update. That's not what users expect to do, they don't
want to do that work, and they don't have the expertise to understand
most of the updates even for those with some description. So it is very
likely those non-detailed reports are from typical users that simply
accept all updates that Microsoft pushes at them.

Where you do stand regarding accepting everything or reviewing EVERY
update? After seeing winston's reply, did you actually check your
update history to ensure you don't have any of the Win10 bait updates
(that turn Win7/8 hosts into adware platforms) and also the telemetry
(spying) updates?

Jonas Q wrote:

Hello!! Wake up and smell the roses.

What is used to make roses grow? Manure, and you're sure shovelling it
out.

1. I never has any of the spying updates installed there all in the
hidden bucket.

That doesn't prevent a newer version of the same update showing up. You
still have to review EVERY update to check what it does. Do you? No
mention of you reviewing every update. Not even a mention that you
verified KB3035883. Happened to you so you wanted to post a "me, too"
or +1 vote without details, then you get angry when someone mentions
some details but doing so must surely make them a shill.

2. I have update set to never check.

And did you also disable the Windows Update service, too? Probably not
since you likely still retrieve updates at a time of your choice. For
example, if the WU service is enabled, Windows Defender will still get
its updates despite you configured WU to never check for updates.
Defender uses the existing updater mechanism to update itself. For
those that refuse to get any updates from Microsoft (until a time of
their choice), they not only configure WU to never check for updates
(which those users will do manually) but also disable the WU service
(which they then have to enable when to do choose to update).

3. You are nothing but a shill.

Apparently you really don't want anyone to give credence to your posts.

End of discussion, I'm out of here.

Ah, yes, and all of that info now disclosed was somehow secretely hidden
in your first reply or readers of your first reply post were somehow
supposed to magically divine that configuration. You don't say why you
should not have received the prepatory download but we're supposed to
know somehow.

Glad you're "out of here". Lessens the FUD. Reminds me when I told the
manager that the waitress was impossible to get back to our table
although I was loudly calling her and even throwing spoons on the tile
floor to get her attention. I left without getting my meal and while
outside she storms out and blasts "You got me fired!" My rebuttal was
"One complaint did not get you fired." One incidence or even a thousand
out of millions of Win7/8 platforms does not a covert prep make.
Without the technical details regarding the configuration to know HOW
the download was taking place, it's just FUD for now. More info is
needed to find something common amongst all those covert downloads.
Winston stated the obvious candidates. And what did you have to offer?
Your shill card.

Mayayana wrote:
omitted attribution lines re-added

Brian Gregory wrote:

Yes. I think this can happen but it's a bug -- some mistake in one of
Microsoft's many updates to the GWX stuff.

Did you read the article? It may not be curently happening on all
machines with AU enabled, but MS says they're doing it:

Microsoft told us: "For individuals who have chosen to receive
automatic updates through Windows Update, we help upgradable devices
get ready for Windows 10 by downloading the files they'll need if
they decide to upgrade. "When the upgrade is ready, the customer will
be prompted to install Windows 10 on the device.

My reading of that statement is for users that accept ALL updates.
Minor exceptions often go unmentioned when stating generalities. "have
chosen to receive automatic updates" without clarification means
accepting all updates. Remember that Microsoft's default config for WU
is to "automatically download and install", not "notify only" nor "never
update". Well, you, Paul, I, and many others here know about the Win10
bait updates. Microsoft's general statement does not account for users
that review the updates and select which updates to allow and which to
hide. It generalizes on the typical scenario for the vast majority of
users where WU configured to its install-time default: auto-install.

So we're back to winston (and perhaps Paul) suspecting the "Get Win10
app" (GWX) is the culprit. I've yet to see a specific update listed in
the candidates that Microsoft wants to push onto my computer that
describes itself as the Win10 installer. I do review all updates. Yes,
some updates are obscure but none come close to saying they are a Win10
installer and I've seen no external comment (non-Microsoft) reporting on
the updates where someone has claimed was the Win10 installer.

So just what is pulling down the Win10 installer file(s)? Has anyone
actually used a monitor to see what process is doing the network access
to Microsoft's WSUS servers that has an open handle on the download file
so it can write to that file to store it locally? If none of the
offered updates is the Win10 installer then something else is retrieving
that file. Remember that the WU service is not only used for updating
Windows. Even if WU is configured to "notify only" or "never check",
Defender (or is it MSE) will use the WU service to obtain its updates.
Rather than rebuild an auto-update and up code size for that product, it
instead uses WU to do the grunt work. There are anti-virus programs
that I wished would use the Task Scheduler already available in Windows
rather than lugging along their own scheduler and consuming more memory
to have it running so scheduled backup jobs will start. Reusing Windows
services is like reusing code: not having to rebuild the wheel for every
program. So the WU service may indeed by the channel through which the
Win10 installer gets retrieved but I don't see any update that looks
like the actual Win10 installer file so something is using WU to get
that file. Sure looks like GWX update could be the client that uses WU
service to retrieve the Win10 installer.

So, for those who thought configuring WU to "notify only" or "never
check", and to be sure that nothing ELSE can use WU as its auto-updater,
disable the WU service, or review all those updates to escape the Win10
bait updates that could use WU as their auto-updater. The config in WU
about Windows updates does not stop using WU by other programs. That
Microsoft doesn't document how WU works (other than how WSUS works) is
likely why no one but Microsoft uses WU for non-Windows updates.

Might have to look again at using WSUSoffline. Disable WU service (not
just configure to not get *Windows* updates) so no process can use it
and then use WSUSoffline to get updates from which I can select which
ones to apply. Wonder if that would work under Windows 10 to overcome
Microsoft's forced updating.

"Big Al" wrote in message
...
Mayayana wrote on 9/10/2015 5:13 PM:
I'm guessing that anyone who's still allowing
Windows Update to run has accepted that Microsoft
is taking over their computer, but in case anyone's
interested: *All* Win7-8 machines on dripfeed are
now receiving all of Win10, with the plan that the
owners will be [at minimum] nagged to install Win10
once the downloads are finished.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...e-just-in-case


I'm not.


+1

| My reading of that statement is for users that
| accept ALL updates.

Yes. At least at a minimum. (As Winston keeps
pointing out, in their view you've legally accepted
anything and everything the first time you click
the Start button.)

That's why I worded it as a warning for people
who enable dripfeed updates. It seems there's no
neutrality at this point. To do nothing is to choose
-- knowingly or not -- to accept Win10 and all
that implies.

| So, for those who thought configuring WU to "notify only" or "never
| check", and to be sure that nothing ELSE can use WU as its auto-updater,
| disable the WU service, or review all those updates to escape the Win10
| bait updates that could use WU as their auto-updater.

I would think so. Disable the service and, if
possible, block any outgoing svchost. That's
what I do with Win7. Though some people
want to use services that go online. Paul has
instructions for putting individual services under
their own svchost instance, but personally I
don't think I'd trust that. And I don't know of any
firewall that can discriminate. So svchost has to
be blocked.
For me there's no firewall unless nothing can go
out that I haven't sent.
.... Then again, there's been some discussion that
MS intrusions may actually be using unrecognized
protocols. But I expect someone will catch that
eventually if it's true.

I read all these discussions about blocking
K-this-or-that while maybe accepting K-that-or-this,
while MS has said they're no longer going to
document what's in updates...
I also remember a few years ago there was an
issue where IT people who blocked WU were
getting the WU files themselves updated, without
permission or notification!
I'm not convinced there's going to be a realistic
option of "security patches only" once the dust
settles.

They seem to be making it very clear,
unapologetically: They've disrespected customers
all along, and now they're upping the ante, redefining
Windows as their service. So you really don't even
have a right to know how it works under the hood.
I wouldn't be surprised if the DMCA shows up in their
terms one of these days.

In the long run I don't think this is about WU or Win10
marketing. It's about taking over the product. Like
auto makers who decide to gradually convert *all*
cars to a legal status of taxi.
Phones and tablets are already halfway there. Cable
boxes are even more locked down. (Comcast has been
collecting patents for things like using living room
surveillance -- audio and video -- for targetted ads.)
I don't see much light at the end of the tunnel, other
than the possibility that the more civilized Europeans
might crack down on MS to the extent that their
services assault has to be given up.

Mayayana wrote on 09/12/2015 9:17 AM:
| My reading of that statement is for users that
| accept ALL updates.

Yes. At least at a minimum. (As Winston keeps
pointing out, in their view you've legally accepted
anything and everything the first time you click
the Start button.)

The evolution of 'licensed to use'


They seem to be making it very clear,
unapologetically: They've disrespected customers
all along, and now they're upping the ante, redefining
Windows as their service. So you really don't even
have a right to know how it works under the hood.
I wouldn't be surprised if the DMCA shows up in their
terms one of these days.

Or testing the waters.

Enforcement of DMCA (if in the TOS) would probably be equivalent to
enforcing purchasers of OEM stand-alone version of Windows (except 8.0)
using it for personal use.



--
...winston
msft mvp windows experience

On 11/09/2015 14:06, Mayayana wrote:
| Yes. I think this can happen but it's a bug -- some mistake in one of
| Microsoft's many updates to the GWX stuff.
|

Did you read the article? It may not be curently
happening on all machines with AU enabled, but
MS says they're doing it:

------
Microsoft told us: "For individuals who have chosen to receive automatic
updates through Windows Update, we help upgradable devices get ready for
Windows 10 by downloading the files they'll need if they decide to upgrade.
"When the upgrade is ready, the customer will be prompted to install Windows
10 on the device.

------



The first sentence of that quote doesn't sound like they are answering a
question about downloading the whole of Windows 10 without the user
asking, rather just about a few files that are downloaded. The second
sentence kind of does though.

--

Brian Gregory (in the UK).
To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address.

On 11/09/2015 20:30, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 19:18:57 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Mayayana wrote:

I'm guessing that anyone who's still allowing Windows Update to run
has accepted that Microsoft is taking over their computer, but in
case anyone's interested: *All* Win7-8 machines on dripfeed are now
receiving all of Win10, with the plan that the owners will be [at
minimum] nagged to install Win10 once the downloads are finished.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...e-just-in-case

Didn't happen to me; however, I do not install Microsoft's bogus
"updates" that are only applicable for migration to Windows 10 or for
Microsoft to spy on you (e.g., Windows Client updates for
"compatibility", telemetry updates). I don't have the KB3035583 update
(the "Get Windows 10" app) that is nothing but lureware to prod users to
move to Windows 10, along with several other updates that have NOTHING
to do with Windows 7 and everything to do with Windows 10 migration.
Perhaps by not accepting all those bogus Windows Update Client updates
that I avoided the one that turns it into an adware channel.

Occasionally Microsoft's updates phuck up the toolbars that I added the
Windows taskbar: all the toolbars disappear and I have to re-add them.
While the folder for each toolbar still exists, I have to add the
toolbars and rearrange and resize them. Happens about 3-4 times a year.
Happened in this week's Patch Tuesday round of updates. That would've
been tolerable (**** happens) except then my permissions got screwed up.
Programs, like games, that would launch from shortcuts before now popped
up a message that I needed admin privs. Uh huh. Using "run as admin"
didn't help. Changing my security group membership from several
security groups to just one (Administrator - that was one of my
account's security group memberships) didn't help. Rebooting didn't
help. Wasn't interested in working of fixing their **** up so I
restored from an image backup saved on Mondary morn and everything
working just fine now. I won't be applying any of Microsoft's updates
again for another month while I wait for them to fix (release new
versions or issue amending patches) whichever ones caused the **** up.

I also noticed Microsoft is now combining targets for their patches.
Several security updates for apps included "single signon for ADAL"
which is for Windows (ex., KB308552 = Signon ADAL + Excel); see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_sign-on.

Considering Microsoft dropped mainstream support for Windows 7 back in
Feb 2015, and because of their combined patches (if you want the good
part then you have to take the bad part), and because they push patches
for programs that are NOT installed (Skype, Lync, OneDrive for Business
which is NOT the same as OneDrive, MS Access), and because of their
pushing to change Windows 7/8 to advertising platforms (aka adware) for
Windows 10, I've decided not to even check for updates until I decided
to trial them but only after making a full image backup of the OS
partition. I currently have WU set to "notify only" but I'm going to
turn that off completely.

Microsoft has tried or succeeded to burn me many times with their
inappropriate, faulty, wrongly targeted, or Win10 bait patches. Time to
cease the invasion. I'll have to plan an evening for when to save an
image backup and spend time researching all the updates to decide which
ones are applied and which are hidden (which only lasts until Microsoft
pushes a new version of the same update).

Microsoft is trying to turn Win7/8 into Win10 adware platforms but they
are also pushing other crap in their updates that I don't want, don't
need, and can't use in my home PC setup. Not only will I have to
research every update they offer in the future, I figure it's time to
review every update I retrieved before.


Well said, and thanks.

I've always set update to let me choose what and when to install. I
research every one and only install those that: I'm convinced I must
have for security or performance and have not been a problem for
others. The Updates that don't pass that test get hidden. I don't
even consider any that are less than fully explained or have a hint of
secrecy in their wording.

DC


But most security updates have more than a hint of secrecy in the
wording. They don't like to give away anything other than the vaguest
details of the consequences of any vulnerabilities.

--

Brian Gregory (in the UK).
To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address.