Microsoft to allow partial control over updates, even for home users.

On 2015-07-27 7:47 PM, SC Tom wrote:


"Char Jackson" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:19:29 -0400, "SC Tom" wrote:



"Ed Cryer" wrote in message
...
Ken1943 wrote:
I bet their programmers are so into code they never even "use" a
computer. Or they use Apples !!


I watch a lot of modern films. And every time someone uses a
computer it's
always an Apple Mac laptop with the back facing the camera and
displaying
that Apple logo.


Apple pays well for people to do that in films and TV shows. If you
watch
any NBC programs such as the NCIS series, you'll notice they always use
Microsoft Surface Pro's ( NBC=MSNBC :-) ). Since Bill owns NBC, he
probably
doesn't want to see no stinkin' Apples on HIS network :-)

BTS addressed the NBC/CBS issue, so my question is, who is Bill? When
I look
at the key executives of NBC and CBS, I don't see anyone by that name.


Since Bill Gates is somewhat involved with Microsoft, and Microsoft owns
NBC, I would think Bill's last name is Gates :-) May be a round-about
ownership, but I bet he's in there in some way.

Where the Hell did you get the impression that Microsoft owns NBC? A
joint venture of NBC and Universal owns the company, Microsoft was
simply a partner at some point in the 1990s in creating MSNBC. It's not
even involved anymore.

--
A.M

On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 20:09:45 -0400, "A.M" wrote:

On 2015-07-27 7:47 PM, SC Tom wrote:


"Char Jackson" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:19:29 -0400, "SC Tom" wrote:



"Ed Cryer" wrote in message
...
Ken1943 wrote:
I bet their programmers are so into code they never even "use" a
computer. Or they use Apples !!


I watch a lot of modern films. And every time someone uses a
computer it's
always an Apple Mac laptop with the back facing the camera and
displaying
that Apple logo.


Apple pays well for people to do that in films and TV shows. If you
watch
any NBC programs such as the NCIS series, you'll notice they always use
Microsoft Surface Pro's ( NBC=MSNBC :-) ). Since Bill owns NBC, he
probably
doesn't want to see no stinkin' Apples on HIS network :-)

BTS addressed the NBC/CBS issue, so my question is, who is Bill? When
I look
at the key executives of NBC and CBS, I don't see anyone by that name.


Since Bill Gates is somewhat involved with Microsoft, and Microsoft owns
NBC, I would think Bill's last name is Gates :-) May be a round-about
ownership, but I bet he's in there in some way.

Where the Hell did you get the impression that Microsoft owns NBC? A
joint venture of NBC and Universal owns the company,

Comcast owns NBC.

"The National Broadcasting Company (NBC) is an American commercial
broadcast television and radio network that is the flagship property
of NBCUniversal, a subsidiary of Comcast"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBC


Microsoft was
simply a partner at some point in the 1990s in creating MSNBC. It's not
even involved anymore.

On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 19:47:58 -0400, "SC Tom" wrote:



"Char Jackson" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:19:29 -0400, "SC Tom" wrote:



"Ed Cryer" wrote in message
...
Ken1943 wrote:
I bet their programmers are so into code they never even "use" a
computer. Or they use Apples !!


I watch a lot of modern films. And every time someone uses a computer
it's
always an Apple Mac laptop with the back facing the camera and
displaying
that Apple logo.


Apple pays well for people to do that in films and TV shows. If you watch
any NBC programs such as the NCIS series, you'll notice they always use
Microsoft Surface Pro's ( NBC=MSNBC :-) ). Since Bill owns NBC, he
probably
doesn't want to see no stinkin' Apples on HIS network :-)

BTS addressed the NBC/CBS issue, so my question is, who is Bill? When I
look
at the key executives of NBC and CBS, I don't see anyone by that name.


Since Bill Gates is somewhat involved with Microsoft, and Microsoft owns
NBC, I would think Bill's last name is Gates :-) May be a round-about
ownership, but I bet he's in there in some way.

MS doesn't own NBC and never has, but other posters have clarified by now,
so I won't pile on. ;-)

Char Jackson wrote on 07/27/2015 2:52 PM:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:19:29 -0400, "SC Tom" wrote:



"Ed Cryer" wrote in message
...
Ken1943 wrote:
I bet their programmers are so into code they never even "use" a
computer. Or they use Apples !!


I watch a lot of modern films. And every time someone uses a computer it's
always an Apple Mac laptop with the back facing the camera and displaying
that Apple logo.


Apple pays well for people to do that in films and TV shows. If you watch
any NBC programs such as the NCIS series, you'll notice they always use
Microsoft Surface Pro's ( NBC=MSNBC :-) ). Since Bill owns NBC, he probably
doesn't want to see no stinkin' Apples on HIS network :-)

BTS addressed the NBC/CBS issue, so my question is, who is Bill? When I look
at the key executives of NBC and CBS, I don't see anyone by that name.


NBC is owned by NBC Universal a division of Comcast
87% of Comcast is held by institutions and mutual funds.

- there's probably a Bill in there somewhere.

MSFT divested itself of the MSNBC channel ten years ago and msnbc.com 3
years ago. All that remains of msnbc.com after divesting and rebranding
is the portal for the online home of the cable news channel.


--
...winston
msft mvp windows experience

Ed Cryer wrote:

GlowingBlueMist wrote:
Yep, they have caved in to the pressure, at least partially, on the
forced update issue.

Read the article by Ed Bott at ZDNet for the method to accomplish it as
it's not automatic.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/microso...tag=YHFb1d24ec


Note, the turning back on of System Restore (which the W10 Upgrade will
turn off) near the end of the article so you will have the chance of
rolling back a defective update long enough to work the procedure to
keep the bad update from reinstalling.

I like the explanation of why MS wanted to force updates. Nothing
sinister; quite the opposite. And, quite frankly, I admire their guts in
trying to force it through (and also their good sense in reacting to the
storm of user outrage against it).

So then, this compromise solution will offer what?
1. Install all updates (keeping SR going), uninstall bad ones with a
system roll-back, and then hide the update.
2. Hide all updates, vet them one by one, install chosen ones.
This latter option is a major concession from MS; a major concession.

Ed

Users don't like someone that is NOT the owner of the computer from
changing its state without permission. You had a stable computer and
then "suddenly" (as most posters put it) your computer is sick. Malware
is not always intended as such: goodware with bad code or conflicts with
other software is itself malware. It did something bad to your stable
setup. That means it is malware, even if it comes from Microsoft.

Since the "solution" is not included in the distro of Windows but must
be obtained separately and will be done so only by those in-the-know,
there is no compromise nor a concession. It is a user-derived
workaround for something that Microsoft will not do to give control back
to the real owners of the computers. This solution has a pile of dog
**** delivered at your door, you step out and into the pile of ****, you
hop back inside to wash your shoes, and then carefully head back outside
to hose off the welcome mat.

Wonder if WSUSoffline works with the servers pushing out the Windows 10
updates (if they're different). Seems the only safe way to update your
computer is to not get the updates from Microsoft. Instead run your own
WSUS server or maybe use WSUSoffline to retrieve the updates and then
you pick which ones to install from the WSUS server or from the
WSUSoffline archive.

If Microsoft doesn't stop hijacking its customers within the 1 year of
the claimed "free" distribution of Windows 10, I won't be trying Windows
10 until then or never if this issue isn't resolved - and in the
customers' favor.

On 7/27/2015 11:22 AM, GlowingBlueMist wrote:
On 7/27/2015 12:21 PM, Nil wrote:
On 27 Jul 2015, GlowingBlueMist wrote
in alt.comp.os.windows-10:

Yep, they have caved in to the pressure, at least partially, on
the forced update issue.

Read the article by Ed Bott at ZDNet for the method to accomplish
it as it's not automatic.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/microso...to-hide-or-blo
ck-unwanted-windows-10-updates/#ftag=YHFb1d24ec

I don't quite get how this works. When you check for updates, they
download and install automatically, so when do you get the chance to
hide them?

I suppose it will become clearer when I try it for myself, which I will
do ASAP. This has been my major objection to Win10.

My impression is that the updates will be all installed for you. Only
if you have a problem will you roll back the upgrade and then use the
optional troubleshooter (if you activate it) to look at the list of what
you removed and tell the PC which items NOT to try installing again.

So it's basically, Oops we goofed, hopefully you can still boot up so
that you can remove the offending update and block it.

I'd like to hear how you do that when the video driver update gives
you a blank screen. And you can't boot into safe mode. And you can't
even get into the bios. This whole loss of control thing is a BIG
issue for those who know anything about computers.

I gave up trying to make my system work. Would install fine, but after
a reboot, it had a black screen. Had to change the video card to make
a stable system. Seems to work fine now, but if they force more drivers
on me...???

mike wrote:
On 7/27/2015 11:22 AM, GlowingBlueMist wrote:
On 7/27/2015 12:21 PM, Nil wrote:
On 27 Jul 2015, GlowingBlueMist wrote
in alt.comp.os.windows-10:

Yep, they have caved in to the pressure, at least partially, on
the forced update issue.

Read the article by Ed Bott at ZDNet for the method to accomplish
it as it's not automatic.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/microso...to-hide-or-blo
ck-unwanted-windows-10-updates/#ftag=YHFb1d24ec

I don't quite get how this works. When you check for updates, they
download and install automatically, so when do you get the chance to
hide them?

I suppose it will become clearer when I try it for myself, which I will
do ASAP. This has been my major objection to Win10.

My impression is that the updates will be all installed for you. Only
if you have a problem will you roll back the upgrade and then use the
optional troubleshooter (if you activate it) to look at the list of what
you removed and tell the PC which items NOT to try installing again.

So it's basically, Oops we goofed, hopefully you can still boot up so
that you can remove the offending update and block it.

I'd like to hear how you do that when the video driver update gives
you a blank screen. And you can't boot into safe mode. And you can't
even get into the bios. This whole loss of control thing is a BIG
issue for those who know anything about computers.

I gave up trying to make my system work. Would install fine, but after
a reboot, it had a black screen. Had to change the video card to make
a stable system. Seems to work fine now, but if they force more drivers
on me...???

Does Safe Mode even use the NVidia or ATI driver ?

My recollection is, the resolution drops when you're
in Safe Mode, which tells me the Microsoft VESA fallback
driver is being used. In a very modern OS, this gives a
fixed screen resolution of 1024x768. Even on a 1440x900
monitor :-)

You could certainly mess up some disk drivers to
good effect. Go into the BIOS right now, turn on RAID
mode (with no RAID driver present), then boot to Safe
Mode and see if you get an "Inaccessible Boot Volume"
or not. That would be fun.

Paul

On 2015-07-27 11:45 PM, J0HNS0N wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 20:09:45 -0400, "A.M" wrote:

On 2015-07-27 7:47 PM, SC Tom wrote:


"Char Jackson" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:19:29 -0400, "SC Tom" wrote:



"Ed Cryer" wrote in message
...
Ken1943 wrote:
I bet their programmers are so into code they never even "use" a
computer. Or they use Apples !!


I watch a lot of modern films. And every time someone uses a
computer it's
always an Apple Mac laptop with the back facing the camera and
displaying
that Apple logo.


Apple pays well for people to do that in films and TV shows. If you
watch
any NBC programs such as the NCIS series, you'll notice they always use
Microsoft Surface Pro's ( NBC=MSNBC :-) ). Since Bill owns NBC, he
probably
doesn't want to see no stinkin' Apples on HIS network :-)

BTS addressed the NBC/CBS issue, so my question is, who is Bill? When
I look
at the key executives of NBC and CBS, I don't see anyone by that name.


Since Bill Gates is somewhat involved with Microsoft, and Microsoft owns
NBC, I would think Bill's last name is Gates :-) May be a round-about
ownership, but I bet he's in there in some way.

Where the Hell did you get the impression that Microsoft owns NBC? A
joint venture of NBC and Universal owns the company,

Comcast owns NBC.

"The National Broadcasting Company (NBC) is an American commercial
broadcast television and radio network that is the flagship property
of NBCUniversal, a subsidiary of Comcast"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBC

Thank you. Still, there's no Microsoft in that equation.


--
A.M

Char Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 22:18:56 +0100, Ed Cryer wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 14:52:56 +0100, Ed Cryer wrote:

GlowingBlueMist wrote:
Yep, they have caved in to the pressure, at least partially, on the
forced update issue.

Read the article by Ed Bott at ZDNet for the method to accomplish it as
it's not automatic.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/microso...tag=YHFb1d24ec


Note, the turning back on of System Restore (which the W10 Upgrade will
turn off) near the end of the article so you will have the chance of
rolling back a defective update long enough to work the procedure to
keep the bad update from reinstalling.

I like the explanation of why MS wanted to force updates. Nothing
sinister; quite the opposite.

What was their explanation? I skimmed the article, read your post, then
skimmed the article again, but I didn't see it.


Try with your glasses on next time, Char. And if that doesn't work then
move from "skimming" to either "thumbing through" or "perusing".

"Clearly, one of Microsoft's goals in changing the behavior of Windows
Update in Windows 10 was to drag customers, kicking and screaming if
necessary, into the always-up-to-date world, in the process removing
many of the most common vectors for malware, unpatched systems."

My apologies. I did see that section, (both times), but I dismissed it since
it was very clearly an assumption made by the author and not something that
Microsoft had said, plus, it wasn't really an explanation at all. Thanks for
clarifying!


Yes, I guess it is an assumption. But it's not one I've heard much of
here. OTOH I've heard lots of nagging against MS.
If the assumption is correct, then I'll go further and paint an assumed
scenario.
At a senior management meeting in the MS penthouse suite someone stood
up and said "We must do all we can to make Win10 as secure as possible.
Suggestions please".
And the first one that came was "Let's ensure all updates and patches
are installed ASAP".

Ed

On 7/28/2015 12:49 AM, Paul wrote:
mike wrote:
On 7/27/2015 11:22 AM, GlowingBlueMist wrote:
On 7/27/2015 12:21 PM, Nil wrote:
On 27 Jul 2015, GlowingBlueMist wrote
in alt.comp.os.windows-10:

Yep, they have caved in to the pressure, at least partially, on
the forced update issue.

Read the article by Ed Bott at ZDNet for the method to accomplish
it as it's not automatic.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/microso...to-hide-or-blo
ck-unwanted-windows-10-updates/#ftag=YHFb1d24ec

I don't quite get how this works. When you check for updates, they
download and install automatically, so when do you get the chance to
hide them?

I suppose it will become clearer when I try it for myself, which I will
do ASAP. This has been my major objection to Win10.

My impression is that the updates will be all installed for you. Only
if you have a problem will you roll back the upgrade and then use the
optional troubleshooter (if you activate it) to look at the list of what
you removed and tell the PC which items NOT to try installing again.

So it's basically, Oops we goofed, hopefully you can still boot up so
that you can remove the offending update and block it.

I'd like to hear how you do that when the video driver update gives
you a blank screen. And you can't boot into safe mode. And you can't
even get into the bios. This whole loss of control thing is a BIG
issue for those who know anything about computers.

I gave up trying to make my system work. Would install fine, but after
a reboot, it had a black screen. Had to change the video card to make
a stable system. Seems to work fine now, but if they force more drivers
on me...???

Does Safe Mode even use the NVidia or ATI driver ?

My recollection is, the resolution drops when you're
in Safe Mode, which tells me the Microsoft VESA fallback
driver is being used. In a very modern OS, this gives a
fixed screen resolution of 1024x768. Even on a 1440x900
monitor :-)

Yep, that's why you need safe mode...to get a fallback driver
so the screen works so you can uninstall the driver that's
giving you a blank screen.

If there's no way to get a screen working, you can't fix anything.
Layer UEFI on top of that and it's game over.

Of course, if there's no driver that works, you change the video card,
which I did.

You could certainly mess up some disk drivers to
good effect. Go into the BIOS right now, turn on RAID
mode (with no RAID driver present), then boot to Safe
Mode and see if you get an "Inaccessible Boot Volume"
or not. That would be fun.

Paul