'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day

In article k
Anonymous wrote:

As you may recall, Microsoft has delivered KB3035583 as a
'recommended update' to users of Windows 7 and 8.1. What this update
does is install GWX ("Get Windows 10"), a program which diagnoses the
system to see if it is eligible for a free upgrade to Windows 10, and
if so, asks the user if they would like to upgrade (though recently,
the option to decline has been removed). Some users have gotten
around this by editing Windows Registry values for "AllowOSUpgrade",
"DisableOSUpgrade", "DisableGWX", and "ReservationsAllowed" in order
to disable the prompt altogether. This advice was endorsed by
Microsoft on their support forums.

According to a report by Woody Leonhard at InfoWorld, the newest
version of the KB3035583 update includes a background process which
scans the system's Windows Registry twice a day to see if the values
for the four aforementioned registry inputs were manually edited to
disable the upgrade prompt. If they were, the process will alter the
values, silently re-download the Windows 10 installation files (about
6 GB in total), and prompt the user to upgrade.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/302...hing-get-windo
ws-10-nagware-isnt-as-easy-as-you-think.html

Note: infoworld.com takes forever to load, if it loads at all.

Old news. If you have any brains at all you can turn it off.

"Anonymous" wrote in message
...

In article k
Anonymous wrote:

As you may recall, Microsoft has delivered KB3035583 as a
'recommended update' to users of Windows 7 and 8.1. What this update
does is install GWX ("Get Windows 10"), a program which diagnoses the
system to see if it is eligible for a free upgrade to Windows 10, and
if so, asks the user if they would like to upgrade (though recently,
the option to decline has been removed). Some users have gotten
around this by editing Windows Registry values for "AllowOSUpgrade",
"DisableOSUpgrade", "DisableGWX", and "ReservationsAllowed" in order
to disable the prompt altogether. This advice was endorsed by
Microsoft on their support forums.

According to a report by Woody Leonhard at InfoWorld, the newest
version of the KB3035583 update includes a background process which
scans the system's Windows Registry twice a day to see if the values
for the four aforementioned registry inputs were manually edited to
disable the upgrade prompt. If they were, the process will alter the
values, silently re-download the Windows 10 installation files (about
6 GB in total), and prompt the user to upgrade.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/302...hing-get-windo
ws-10-nagware-isnt-as-easy-as-you-think.html

Note: infoworld.com takes forever to load, if it loads at all.

Old news. If you have any brains at all you can turn it off.

I think only temporarily. I sut it off in my win 7 and both 8.1's by
deleting some crap somewhere, but it came back in less than a week.

A real PITA.

Jake wrote:


"Anonymous" wrote in message
...

In article k
Anonymous wrote:

As you may recall, Microsoft has delivered KB3035583 as a
'recommended update' to users of Windows 7 and 8.1. What this update
does is install GWX ("Get Windows 10"), a program which diagnoses the
system to see if it is eligible for a free upgrade to Windows 10, and
if so, asks the user if they would like to upgrade (though recently,
the option to decline has been removed). Some users have gotten
around this by editing Windows Registry values for "AllowOSUpgrade",
"DisableOSUpgrade", "DisableGWX", and "ReservationsAllowed" in order
to disable the prompt altogether. This advice was endorsed by
Microsoft on their support forums.

According to a report by Woody Leonhard at InfoWorld, the newest
version of the KB3035583 update includes a background process which
scans the system's Windows Registry twice a day to see if the values
for the four aforementioned registry inputs were manually edited to
disable the upgrade prompt. If they were, the process will alter the
values, silently re-download the Windows 10 installation files (about
6 GB in total), and prompt the user to upgrade.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/302...hing-get-windo
ws-10-nagware-isnt-as-easy-as-you-think.html

Note: infoworld.com takes forever to load, if it loads at all.

Old news. If you have any brains at all you can turn it off.

I think only temporarily. I sut it off in my win 7 and both 8.1's by
deleting some crap somewhere, but it came back in less than a week.

A real PITA.

And if you use this, what happens ?

http://blog.ultimateoutsider.com/201...ly-remove.html

You use that, if you've left Windows Update on Auto, and
you've been receiving a steady stream of "surprises"
from Microsoft.

You have to keep that program up to date, if you
expect to deal with new twists as time passes.

"GWX - The gift that keeps on giving"

Paul

In article
Paul wrote:

Jake wrote:


"Anonymous" wrote in message
...

In article k
Anonymous wrote:

As you may recall, Microsoft has delivered KB3035583 as a
'recommended update' to users of Windows 7 and 8.1. What this update
does is install GWX ("Get Windows 10"), a program which diagnoses the
system to see if it is eligible for a free upgrade to Windows 10, and
if so, asks the user if they would like to upgrade (though recently,
the option to decline has been removed). Some users have gotten
around this by editing Windows Registry values for "AllowOSUpgrade",
"DisableOSUpgrade", "DisableGWX", and "ReservationsAllowed" in order
to disable the prompt altogether. This advice was endorsed by
Microsoft on their support forums.

According to a report by Woody Leonhard at InfoWorld, the newest
version of the KB3035583 update includes a background process which
scans the system's Windows Registry twice a day to see if the values
for the four aforementioned registry inputs were manually edited to
disable the upgrade prompt. If they were, the process will alter the
values, silently re-download the Windows 10 installation files (about
6 GB in total), and prompt the user to upgrade.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/302...hing-get-windo
ws-10-nagware-isnt-as-easy-as-you-think.html

Note: infoworld.com takes forever to load, if it loads at all.

Old news. If you have any brains at all you can turn it off.

I think only temporarily. I sut it off in my win 7 and both 8.1's by
deleting some crap somewhere, but it came back in less than a week.

A real PITA.

And if you use this, what happens ?

http://blog.ultimateoutsider.com/201...ly-remove.html

You use that, if you've left Windows Update on Auto, and
you've been receiving a steady stream of "surprises"
from Microsoft.

You have to keep that program up to date, if you
expect to deal with new twists as time passes.

"GWX - The gift that keeps on giving"

Paul

So, free Windows is just like Linux now. A lot of code and
promising crap that never gets fixed or developed further.

Fritz Wuehler wrote:

So, free Windows is just like Linux now. A lot of code and
promising crap that never gets fixed or developed further.

Most of the time, we end up not understanding
why they're changing things. If the objective was
to in an obvious way, "make Win10 better and better",
I might have a more positive attitude to the rolling
release idea and what they're actually doing to it.

For example, the desktop version uses Windows
Update. The latest builds added Update Orchestrator,
which sits above Windows Update, a piece of software
used on the Enterprise edition. Do consumers
need Update Orchestrator ? No.
Did the policies in the OS change, because
of the presence of Update Orchestrator ? Yes.
Is the overall change an improvement for
consumers ? No.

The desktop version is being used as a testbed,
and for ideas that may have no positive impact
on the consumer version itself. And that's not
really the intention of the rolling release idea.
It's an abuse of rolling release.

Paul

On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:06:39 -0000, Paul wrote:

Fritz Wuehler wrote:

So, free Windows is just like Linux now. A lot of code and
promising crap that never gets fixed or developed further.

Most of the time, we end up not understanding
why they're changing things. If the objective was
to in an obvious way, "make Win10 better and better",
I might have a more positive attitude to the rolling
release idea and what they're actually doing to it.

For example, the desktop version uses Windows
Update. The latest builds added Update Orchestrator,
which sits above Windows Update, a piece of software
used on the Enterprise edition. Do consumers
need Update Orchestrator ? No.
Did the policies in the OS change, because
of the presence of Update Orchestrator ? Yes.
Is the overall change an improvement for
consumers ? No.

The desktop version is being used as a testbed,
and for ideas that may have no positive impact
on the consumer version itself. And that's not
really the intention of the rolling release idea.
It's an abuse of rolling release.

Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's not gone wrong once.

--
Debugger: a tool to remove evidence of rear entry.

Mr Macaw wrote:


Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's
not gone wrong once.

Yes, I can see your carefully reasoned argument.

Paul

On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:38:35 -0000, Paul wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:


Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's
not gone wrong once.

Yes, I can see your carefully reasoned argument.

It's my experience. Windows doesn't annoy me at all. The only thing M$ ever did that irritated me was Metro in Windows 8, which made me use classic shell. Apart from that, M$ have done nothing but improve Windows.

--
During the weekly Lamaze class, the instructor emphasized the importance of exercise, hinting strongly that husbands need to get out and start walking with their wives.
From the back of the room one expectant father inquired, "Would it be okay if she carries a bag of golf clubs while she walks?"

"Mr Macaw" wrote in message news
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:38:35 -0000, Paul wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:


Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's
not gone wrong once.

Yes, I can see your carefully reasoned argument.

It's my experience. Windows doesn't annoy me at all. The only thing M$
ever did that irritated me was Metro in Windows 8, which made me use
classic shell. Apart from that, M$ have done nothing but improve Windows.

--
During the weekly Lamaze class, the instructor emphasized the importance
of exercise, hinting strongly that husbands need to get out and start
walking with their wives.
From the back of the room one expectant father inquired, "Would it be okay
if she carries a bag of golf clubs while she walks?"

What irritates me is that MS is trying to ram 10 down my throat. That's my
decision, not theirs.

On 16/01/2016 18:14, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:06:39 -0000, Paul wrote:

Fritz Wuehler wrote:

So, free Windows is just like Linux now. A lot of code and
promising crap that never gets fixed or developed further.

Most of the time, we end up not understanding
why they're changing things. If the objective was
to in an obvious way, "make Win10 better and better",
I might have a more positive attitude to the rolling
release idea and what they're actually doing to it.

For example, the desktop version uses Windows
Update. The latest builds added Update Orchestrator,
which sits above Windows Update, a piece of software
used on the Enterprise edition. Do consumers
need Update Orchestrator ? No.
Did the policies in the OS change, because
of the presence of Update Orchestrator ? Yes.
Is the overall change an improvement for
consumers ? No.

The desktop version is being used as a testbed,
and for ideas that may have no positive impact
on the consumer version itself. And that's not
really the intention of the rolling release idea.
It's an abuse of rolling release.

Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's
not gone wrong once.

It works for me too, but the fact that it is being used as a testbed,
like Paul put it, combined with the nearly "unstoppable" automatic
updates, makes me a bit unconfortable. I mean, a new feature update
could break it any time, could it not?

On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 19:23:03 -0000, Thip wrote:

"Mr Macaw" wrote in message news
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:38:35 -0000, Paul wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:


Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's
not gone wrong once.

Yes, I can see your carefully reasoned argument.

It's my experience. Windows doesn't annoy me at all. The only thing M$
ever did that irritated me was Metro in Windows 8, which made me use
classic shell. Apart from that, M$ have done nothing but improve Windows.

What irritates me is that MS is trying to ram 10 down my throat. That's my
decision, not theirs.

You don't need to have the decision to use the second best Windows. And for ****'s sake it's FREE! It's unbelievable that Microsoft are for once GIVING STUFF AWAY then people STILL bloody complain about it. For crying out loud, get a life!

--
FREE ONE DOLLAR BILLS!
(Please send $4.95 to cover posting and handling)

On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 19:31:43 -0000, edevils wrote:

On 16/01/2016 18:14, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:06:39 -0000, Paul wrote:

Fritz Wuehler wrote:

So, free Windows is just like Linux now. A lot of code and
promising crap that never gets fixed or developed further.

Most of the time, we end up not understanding
why they're changing things. If the objective was
to in an obvious way, "make Win10 better and better",
I might have a more positive attitude to the rolling
release idea and what they're actually doing to it.

For example, the desktop version uses Windows
Update. The latest builds added Update Orchestrator,
which sits above Windows Update, a piece of software
used on the Enterprise edition. Do consumers
need Update Orchestrator ? No.
Did the policies in the OS change, because
of the presence of Update Orchestrator ? Yes.
Is the overall change an improvement for
consumers ? No.

The desktop version is being used as a testbed,
and for ideas that may have no positive impact
on the consumer version itself. And that's not
really the intention of the rolling release idea.
It's an abuse of rolling release.

Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's
not gone wrong once.

It works for me too, but the fact that it is being used as a testbed,
like Paul put it, combined with the nearly "unstoppable" automatic
updates, makes me a bit unconfortable. I mean, a new feature update
could break it any time, could it not?

I don't feel like I'm using a Beta version. It's more reliable than previous models.

--
How come abbreviated is such a long word?

On 16/01/2016 20:39, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 19:31:43 -0000, edevils
wrote:

On 16/01/2016 18:14, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:06:39 -0000, Paul wrote:

Fritz Wuehler wrote:

So, free Windows is just like Linux now. A lot of code and
promising crap that never gets fixed or developed further.

Most of the time, we end up not understanding
why they're changing things. If the objective was
to in an obvious way, "make Win10 better and better",
I might have a more positive attitude to the rolling
release idea and what they're actually doing to it.

For example, the desktop version uses Windows
Update. The latest builds added Update Orchestrator,
which sits above Windows Update, a piece of software
used on the Enterprise edition. Do consumers
need Update Orchestrator ? No.
Did the policies in the OS change, because
of the presence of Update Orchestrator ? Yes.
Is the overall change an improvement for
consumers ? No.

The desktop version is being used as a testbed,
and for ideas that may have no positive impact
on the consumer version itself. And that's not
really the intention of the rolling release idea.
It's an abuse of rolling release.

Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's
not gone wrong once.

It works for me too, but the fact that it is being used as a testbed,
like Paul put it, combined with the nearly "unstoppable" automatic
updates, makes me a bit unconfortable. I mean, a new feature update
could break it any time, could it not?

I don't feel like I'm using a Beta version. It's more reliable than
previous models.


I am not having problems either. But we don't know what issues a new
feature may or may not cause in the future. The difference between
Windows 10 and previous windows versions is that Windows 10
automatically updates itself with new features.

"edevils" wrote in message ...

On 16/01/2016 18:14, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:06:39 -0000, Paul wrote:

Fritz Wuehler wrote:

So, free Windows is just like Linux now. A lot of code and
promising crap that never gets fixed or developed further.

Most of the time, we end up not understanding
why they're changing things. If the objective was
to in an obvious way, "make Win10 better and better",
I might have a more positive attitude to the rolling
release idea and what they're actually doing to it.

For example, the desktop version uses Windows
Update. The latest builds added Update Orchestrator,
which sits above Windows Update, a piece of software
used on the Enterprise edition. Do consumers
need Update Orchestrator ? No.
Did the policies in the OS change, because
of the presence of Update Orchestrator ? Yes.
Is the overall change an improvement for
consumers ? No.

The desktop version is being used as a testbed,
and for ideas that may have no positive impact
on the consumer version itself. And that's not
really the intention of the rolling release idea.
It's an abuse of rolling release.

Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's
not gone wrong once.

It works for me too, but the fact that it is being used as a testbed, like
Paul put it, combined with the nearly "unstoppable" automatic updates,
makes me a bit unconfortable. I mean, a new feature update could break it
any time, could it not?

I've allowed MS to update my machines automatically for years without an
issue. However, a Win 10 update a few weeks ago did change some of my
settings. But no problems since then.
But since we have no choice, lets see how it plays out.

On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 21:43:05 -0000, edevils wrote:

On 16/01/2016 20:39, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 19:31:43 -0000, edevils
wrote:

On 16/01/2016 18:14, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:06:39 -0000, Paul wrote:

Fritz Wuehler wrote:

So, free Windows is just like Linux now. A lot of code and
promising crap that never gets fixed or developed further.

Most of the time, we end up not understanding
why they're changing things. If the objective was
to in an obvious way, "make Win10 better and better",
I might have a more positive attitude to the rolling
release idea and what they're actually doing to it.

For example, the desktop version uses Windows
Update. The latest builds added Update Orchestrator,
which sits above Windows Update, a piece of software
used on the Enterprise edition. Do consumers
need Update Orchestrator ? No.
Did the policies in the OS change, because
of the presence of Update Orchestrator ? Yes.
Is the overall change an improvement for
consumers ? No.

The desktop version is being used as a testbed,
and for ideas that may have no positive impact
on the consumer version itself. And that's not
really the intention of the rolling release idea.
It's an abuse of rolling release.

Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's
not gone wrong once.

It works for me too, but the fact that it is being used as a testbed,
like Paul put it, combined with the nearly "unstoppable" automatic
updates, makes me a bit unconfortable. I mean, a new feature update
could break it any time, could it not?

I don't feel like I'm using a Beta version. It's more reliable than
previous models.


I am not having problems either. But we don't know what issues a new
feature may or may not cause in the future. The difference between
Windows 10 and previous windows versions is that Windows 10
automatically updates itself with new features.

And with previous versions, most of us did this anyway. And we didn't know about problems until AFTER the update.

Oh, except there weren't any problems. So what is it you're worrying about again?


--
A teacher wanted to teach her students about self-esteem, so she asked anyone who thought they were stupid to stand up. One kid stood up and the teacher was surprised. She didn’t think anyone would stand up so she asked him, “Why did you stand up?� He answered, “I didn’t want to leave you standing up by yourself.�