If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
notes on the update
Hi All,
The update to SOF (Son-of-Frankenstein, w10 preview) from 9926 to 10031 took about 7 hours to complete (about 3 hours to download over DSL and about 4 hours to install, but I wasn't keeping track). As far as I can tell, M$ is downloading the whole potato and doing a full in-place reinstall. This would account for the large amounts of time involved. I presume they will do this the same way with any service packs. They seem to have done it this way with w7, vista (which was a nightmare), and Frankenstein (w8) (sp1 was a nightmare for a lot of people). M$ would be well to take a page from Fedora/Red Hat, where all programs installed the normal way and their revisions are stored in a database (yum and rpm). When you upgrade an alpha, beta, or release candidate, it will only download and install what has changed. Not the whole nine yards. Process takes anywhere from a minute to 30 minutes over DSL. It is really quick and simple. I have no idea why M$ does it the way they do, but I can't imagine it will done any better in the future if M$ doesn't change its ways. On the bright side, I did purposefully interrupted 10031 and a prior update to see what would happen. And the update app handled it well. I was impressed. (Dot Net updates did not go so well in w7.) Bit defender "seemed" (watch the weasel word) to survive the 10031 update. Bit Defender still wants me to "register", but I am loath to receive their marketing spam. (I am not worried about viruses anyway for this test bed. I am only concerned on how the Anti Virus program react with SOF.) I was also impressed with the big, round percent installed graphic, as you were just SSSLLLLOOOOWWW and not crashed. My 2 cents, -T |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
notes on the update
On 03/19/2015 10:02 PM, T wrote:
Hi All, The update to SOF (Son-of-Frankenstein, w10 preview) from 9926 to 10031 took about 7 hours to complete (about 3 hours to download over DSL and about 4 hours to install, but I wasn't keeping track). As far as I can tell, M$ is downloading the whole potato and doing a full in-place reinstall. This would account for the large amounts of time involved. I presume they will do this the same way with any service packs. They seem to have done it this way with w7, vista (which was a nightmare), and Frankenstein (w8) (sp1 was a nightmare for a lot of people). M$ would be well to take a page from Fedora/Red Hat, where all programs installed the normal way and their revisions are stored in a database (yum and rpm). When you upgrade an alpha, beta, or release candidate, it will only download and install what has changed. Not the whole nine yards. Process takes anywhere from a minute to 30 minutes over DSL. It is really quick and simple. I have no idea why M$ does it the way they do, but I can't imagine it will done any better in the future if M$ doesn't change its ways. On the bright side, I did purposefully interrupted 10031 and a prior update to see what would happen. And the update app handled it well. I was impressed. (Dot Net updates did not go so well in w7.) Bit defender "seemed" (watch the weasel word) to survive the 10031 update. Bit Defender still wants me to "register", but I am loath to receive their marketing spam. (I am not worried about viruses anyway for this test bed. I am only concerned on how the Anti Virus program react with SOF.) I was also impressed with the big, round percent installed graphic, as you were just SSSLLLLOOOOWWW and not crashed. My 2 cents, -T Also get a memory could not be reference on shutdown three times after the update. Doesn't seem to hurt anything |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
notes on the update
On 20-Mar-2015 01:02, T wrote:
Hi All, The update to SOF (Son-of-Frankenstein, w10 preview) from 9926 to 10031 took about 7 hours to complete (about 3 hours to download over DSL and about 4 hours to install, but I wasn't keeping track). big snip Latest build is 10041 not 10031 (typo)? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
notes on the update
T wrote:
On 03/19/2015 10:02 PM, T wrote: Hi All, The update to SOF (Son-of-Frankenstein, w10 preview) from 9926 to 10031 took about 7 hours to complete (about 3 hours to download over DSL and about 4 hours to install, but I wasn't keeping track). As far as I can tell, M$ is downloading the whole potato and doing a full in-place reinstall. This would account for the large amounts of time involved. I presume they will do this the same way with any service packs. They seem to have done it this way with w7, vista (which was a nightmare), and Frankenstein (w8) (sp1 was a nightmare for a lot of people). M$ would be well to take a page from Fedora/Red Hat, where all programs installed the normal way and their revisions are stored in a database (yum and rpm). When you upgrade an alpha, beta, or release candidate, it will only download and install what has changed. Not the whole nine yards. Process takes anywhere from a minute to 30 minutes over DSL. It is really quick and simple. I have no idea why M$ does it the way they do, but I can't imagine it will done any better in the future if M$ doesn't change its ways. On the bright side, I did purposefully interrupted 10031 and a prior update to see what would happen. And the update app handled it well. I was impressed. (Dot Net updates did not go so well in w7.) Bit defender "seemed" (watch the weasel word) to survive the 10031 update. Bit Defender still wants me to "register", but I am loath to receive their marketing spam. (I am not worried about viruses anyway for this test bed. I am only concerned on how the Anti Virus program react with SOF.) I was also impressed with the big, round percent installed graphic, as you were just SSSLLLLOOOOWWW and not crashed. My 2 cents, -T Also get a memory could not be reference on shutdown three times after the update. Doesn't seem to hurt anything Have you tested for FLAC codec support yet ? :-) I was waiting and waiting for that, and it was supposed to show up at 9950 (a revision that didn't show up). Paul |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
notes on the update
On 03/20/2015 12:02 AM, T wrote:
Hi All, The update to SOF (Son-of-Frankenstein, w10 preview) from 9926 to 10031 took about 7 hours to complete (about 3 hours to download over DSL and about 4 hours to install, but I wasn't keeping track). snip From start to finish it took exactly half that time for completion and I'm running Win10 in a Virtual Machine. That said, what MS is doing is simply installing an entire new build and what you saw was not an update per se. Once Win10 is released, I'm sure updates will occur without replacement of the entire OS. Even though I'd be unlikely to use apps from the Microsoft Store, I decided to at least see what they are. I tried the free "Photoshop Express" Even though it's very limited, it's extremely user-friendly and it did a good job. Any serious photographer who uses the full version of Photoshop would of course laugh at this, but for a casual user I can see that it would be popular. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
notes on the update
On 03/20/2015 06:02 AM, philo wrote:
That said, what MS is doing is simply installing an entire new build and what you saw was not an update per se. Once Win10 is released, I'm sure updates will occur without replacement of the entire OS. Hi Philo, Their updates just update what is needed. Their service packs seem to replace the whole potato at times. These are the ones you have to let run overnight. And, customer's panic and start rebooting things and all hell breaks lose. If M$ does the round percent thing on their huge updates (services) packs, I think the customers will just leave them alone while they run. -T |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
notes on the update
On 03/20/2015 05:02 AM, Disguised wrote:
On 20-Mar-2015 01:02, T wrote: Hi All, The update to SOF (Son-of-Frankenstein, w10 preview) from 9926 to 10031 took about 7 hours to complete (about 3 hours to download over DSL and about 4 hours to install, but I wasn't keeping track). big snip Latest build is 10041 not 10031 (typo)? Yup. Fumble fingers. :'[ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
notes on the update
On 03/20/2015 05:19 AM, Paul wrote:
Have you tested for FLAC codec support yet ? :-) I was waiting and waiting for that, and it was supposed to show up at 9950 (a revision that didn't show up). Paul Hi Paul, By "FLAC" do you mean "Free Lossless Audio Codec"? Is so, I do not have sound configured in my KVM (Red Hat's Kernel Virtual Machine) or any other of my virtual machines as Red Hat is working on a problem I uncovered with sound support. Sounds like you are still waiting on it. What do you mainly use FLAC for? On my base system, I use ogg almost exclusively. -T |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
notes on the update
T wrote:
On 03/20/2015 05:19 AM, Paul wrote: Have you tested for FLAC codec support yet ? :-) I was waiting and waiting for that, and it was supposed to show up at 9950 (a revision that didn't show up). Paul Hi Paul, By "FLAC" do you mean "Free Lossless Audio Codec"? Is so, I do not have sound configured in my KVM (Red Hat's Kernel Virtual Machine) or any other of my virtual machines as Red Hat is working on a problem I uncovered with sound support. Sounds like you are still waiting on it. What do you mainly use FLAC for? On my base system, I use ogg almost exclusively. -T I'm waiting on it, because it was claimed to be a "feature". And since actual Easter Eggs in the OS are few and far between, that's why I've been making a big deal about the claim. I want to see Microsoft actually add a CODEC :-) You know how it hurts them to do that. Paul |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
notes on the update
Paul wrote in :
I'm waiting on it, because it was claimed to be a "feature". And since actual Easter Eggs in the OS are few and far between, that's why I've been making a big deal about the claim. I want to see Microsoft actually add a CODEC :-) You know how it hurts them to do that. Paul build 10041, media player now plays .FLAC.. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|