See what is new in Windows 10

haven't seen that before

so people here who hate windows do so because they're retarded and can't configure settings?

Makes sense

Operative systems aimed at the common user shouldn't have shit defaults. Your argument is only valid for things aimed at advanced users, like Gentoo.

...

Windows did literally nothing wrong.

Yes. This setting makes it so your computer is unavailable at times when you may need it.

Normalfags don't look up stuff. An OS aimed at idiots should be idiot proof and not get in the way.

Windows is not aimed at idiots. Windows is aimed regular people. Regular people know that pressing "later" means it will happen sometime. They generally accept this because it means things work right and they don't have to worry.
He had enough time to bitch and record this, he should have been able to look up "how to disable windows update".

The fact that you don't see the irony is outstanding.

That's not even the optimal solution. Why would want your system to be without security updates? Optimal solution is installing the updates whenever you want and have time for it and not whenever Windows feels like it.

This might be a shock to some people here but the guy who made that video may not be capable of doing this on his own. As in unable to think of doing a search for his problem or following a step by step guide even if he stumbles upon one.

And he's probably not an idiot either, he just bought a computer to do web browsing(porn) and light video editing. I know dozens of people just like him, if you delete a shortcut from their desktop they're convinced the program is gone.

They're afraid of doing anything on their own on their own because as little as they know they know enough that it can be broken easily and repairs cost money.

For us here used to being able to wipe /root and be back up and running in less than an hour we have no conception of how they use a computer.

You're so cool user.
It's the exact same process, except instead of saying "disable updates" you say "download but let me choose when to install". An option exists for both. The only problem here is the guy was lazy.

Those types of people aren't making videos about how annoying windows update is. This guy clearly has the ability, he's just a faggot.

The problem is Windows is not made for home consumer use, this is why Macfags don't have this problem as Apple made their update system less intrusive and designed so the OS updates scare or inconvenience the noobs.

We don't have that problem because Unix, BSD and Linux all have update systems that are highly customizable with the ability to get long uptimes even while keeping a system up to date.

u wot mate?

Yes it is, its just poorly done. In fact in its desperate need to be made for *everybody* its low tier committee designed shit.

Macintosh is made for the home market, Windows has always copied Macintosh badly, this is why even normal fags find Windows 10 way more complex then Windows 7 as Microsoft has no idea what they are doing with Windows thus made Windows a poor choice for normal fags.

No, this doesn't happen in unix because it allows files to be used even when open(unless you are OSTree, then you do the reboot as well).
Which comes packed with a bigger chance of corrupting your libraries in the process.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Go to look at Windows ver 1 or OS/2 ver 1 and compare it to MacOS at the time and you'll see that Microsoft was always unoriginal when it came to providing a user interface for normies. .

Right, and Apple never copied anything..

But at least Apple copied Xerox well. Windows on the other hand always went to route of a jack of all trade master of none route done by software engineers that were completely unaware their design goals were contradictory. Windows wanted to be easy to use but compared to the Mac, Amiga and Atari ST it was complex and in the 1990's Windows NT never supplanted the Unix workstations for heavy work loads even as Unix was dying out to Linux and BSD. The result of Windows being directionless is a OS that frustrates power users and noobs alike.

Better than being delusional and talking about things you don't understand.

No it isn't.
One disables updates, the other enables them but lets them be installed when you have time.

It's amazing how out of touch you are with reality.

Can you read nigger?
Reaching the point do actually do that is the same since their in the same fucking control panel option.

Here's how windows update works
Or
Even grandmas can leave a computer on once a month to let windows update do its thing. The only problem here is that some stupid fuck thinks "later" means never, and despite being so angry he created a video of himself yelling at windows update, he didn't spend one minute searching for a solution online. The only people who are annoyed by windows update are people who think they're smarter than they really are. Literally ever other person understands the system and changes it or works with it. By the way, that's exactly what you are. A fucking amateur.

Reason why Windows has forced automatic update is because tards never updated but always complained when they got 'pwned' by some well know exploit that MS already patched with update.

When you are not first (or close to first) on market then you have to copy UI of existing (popular) solution or users will complain that your UI is not intuitive enough.
Look how Libre Office Writer and MS Word look very similar to each other. It is really hard to get users to accept change, for instance I still sometimes hear people complain how "new MS Word" is not as intuitive as Word 2003 and how Win XP was greatest OS ever made.

Not all devices can do this, embedded devices like those running nuclear reactors or railway signals require a 100% up time every year. This is done through redundancy but the idea of any unscheduled downtime for industrial systems is scary for most industries and they want to have plan every update years in advance. A railway can't just let a signalling controller go off-line to update without a truck load worth of paper-work beforehand. This is why FreeDos has found a niche for industrial embedded systems as there are tasks were it just works and nobody won't to upgrade beyond Dos.

It is not a question of it being original, it is the fact Windows was just a slapped together shell to make IBM PCs have a Macintosh like interface. Compared to TOS and Amiga OS, Windows had far less polish for home users.

What the fuck does that have to do with a desktop operating system update manager?

Pretty much every OS other then Windows does a better job for updates for actual work. Regardless environment Windows breaks work flow, even if it is not mission critical companies down want their workers losing hours of work just because Microsoft decided by default allow reboots without a administrator login. In real work environments the servers locked in their racks and only root can give the OS permission to restart yet not Windows you can't even setup Windows 10 to behave like this.

Every company handles updates when the office is closed so work flow is not interrupted.

You don't know what you're talking about.

During off-peak is when many servers are running jobs that take a long time to finish and suck up lots of resources. For example I don't think a large companies wants their servers interrupted while their servers are archiving the data from that day and running tests. In most large companies that have been using computers since the 1960's you requires tons of paperwork to change anything on a system drive let alone restart a machine.

Even in most default installations of Linux, you need sudo permission to reboot the hardware and it doesn't take much configuring to have the system never restart except through the shutdown command.

Which is fine for servers, but what you're forgetting is we're talking about a fucking desktop. You stupid shit.

From the home perspective it is not much better. It is better then how Windows 9x handled updates but that is like saying your update mechanism is actually functional yet it is still far worse then how every other major modern OS does updates. Even Linux Mint's retarded update system that is far too conservative in the packages it will update by default is better then Windows 10 update system default settings.

Windows 10 has bricked a large number of hardware repeatedly, it is easier to maintain a Arch system then Windows 10 as even Arch doesn't break compatibility with hardware anywhere near as often as Windows 10 updates. Go look at Windows update blogs and forms, you'll notice the term "patchocalypse" to define Microsoft going mad with the patches, now the Windows update repository is basically a testing repository with their patches having wide spread reports of bugs or larger security problem then those they were suppose to solve.

So by default Windows 10 will update your system with untested patched that has bricked systems yet it has no easy option to wait for the bugs in these patches to be patched as the later option is to short for that. Also the update system is too stupid to simply wait for you to log-off before it reboots.

Can you? You wrote "he should have been able to look up "how to disable windows update" when that wasn't the optimal illusion. You can't change what you wrote. If you mean the bit where you said
Then that's something you said later. You fucked up, that's all I was saying.

It is in the same placebut people are going to pick whatever they're told to or whatever they're more familiar with. This is why I'm saying you're terribly out of touch. People who are not very technical don't do the things you expect them to do. This is why sane defaults is important.

Except it'll update whenever it wants and not when you want it to by default.

Not in its default settings. I don't think you talked to many grandmas. I don't think you talked to many non technical people to begin with. Like the other guy, these are things normal people don't even think to look up. They assume Windows just works like this. And if you tell them to look up how to change that, they'll probably pick the wrong thing (disable instead of manual updates).
If I have to keep explaining you basic shit we're not going to get anywhere.

Like the other guy said*

The largest complaint here is that MS is releasing untested and or bad patches. The update system exists in a trade off and honestly is not a large inconvenience however that is a subjective argument based on how much a user values uptimes approaching 100%. Since the majority of people do not need 100% uptime I do not take it a major problem.

He can do whatever he wants. If he hates windows update he should disable it. If you just want to get rid of possible inconveniences from the user being an idiot he should set it to download but choose to install. Either works and it doesn't matter to me.

Sane defaults like requiring security updates? Yes. I agree. Most people when they see the popup notification that says "Updates need to be installed" will just leave their computer on when they go to bed and wake up in the morning with no problems. It's only the very small number of people who
1) Realize Windows needs to update
2) Do not want to update
3) Repeatedly press "later"
4) Never give Windows time to update
5) Do not disable automatic installation
That get annoyed at this. This is a subset of a subset of a subset of a subset of a subset.
MS should not have abandoned patch Tuesday but even then, the notification that windows needs to install updates exists whenever it receives one. It's not like it's hidden information. Unless you repeatedly press "later" you'll never be forced into the update at a specific time. And once you press "later" once, you should already know to let windows do updates when you no longer are using the computer for the day.

You are mostly incorrect but slightly correct. MS did abandon patch Tuesday, however the general point still remains as said above. Whenever a patch is released, maybe more than once a month sure, it doesn't change anything since you let windows update run when you aren't using the computer.

It is not so much updates but that the MS windows defaults doesn't give the user any rational choice. While horribly out of date at least Mint's update defaults won't break your system and most people rather expose themselves to hackers then have a update break their shit.

The point is he won't think of doing that, he might think that's just how Windows works. Or maybe he thinks the only other option is disabling it completely and doesn't want the security risks. Either way, normal people are not usually knowledgeable about this things. You're thinking from the point of view of someone who's more used to computers.

You don't see the problem here? They probably think they can hit "later" forever. Windows doesn't tell them it'll just start installing the updates eventually. If you're expecting people to think "later" can't be clicked forever, this is bad UI design.

See above.

The point is people turn off the computer when they're not using it, they don't care to run the update because they think it can keep getting skipped. And then it piles up. People don't like scheduling time for the computer to do its thing.

no one sane wants their computer to perform tasks without their consent that may make their computer inaccessible for unspecified periods of time, or perhaps even permanently if there's a blackout or the update otherwise fucks their shit up.

They don't. However, they want to be able to use their computer when they need it instead of having to reboot and let the OS do whatever the fuck it wants because it decided it has to be now.

You don't want Windows to reboot while you're torrenting/downloading/compressing/rendering something because it thinks the computer is idle.

Perhaps a cyanide pill or two could help clear your mind and make you reason better.

No I don't, because any normal person would notice that windows needs to update and just leave their computer on that night for it to update. This is actually what happens. As proof, go ask any soccer mom what she does when windows says it needs to update. She lets it fucking update. You're greatly underestimating people here.

Very, very few people do this. I don't even see the problem. If windows is an "OS for stupid people" what's the problem forcing them to update?

It decided it has to be now after a week or probably longer of letting the user know it had updates to install.
This doesn't happen to > 99% of people because > 99% of people let windows update update that night or the next night.

The problem is not that windows forced him to update at an inconvenient time, the problem is he ignored a weeks worth of notifications and ignored every opportunity to prevent this from happening.

Windows 10 does not wait till shut-down or there no longer being active users like Windows 7 did. Also MacOS had for decades made updates seamless yet Windows still can't do updates right.

There are some normies that only need PCs for a few minutes a day, there are also normies that think Windows PC to work like their old C64 worked where they can store it in a closest for years then drag it out when they need it and it just works.

While even MacOS only has a handful of mandatory updates all for exploits that are too large to be ignored, while all Windows 10 updates are mandatory.

He wouldn't have had the problem if he was running MacOS X, so yes it is a problem with Windows.

Just leave him be. He's not going to accept any information that contradicts what he thinks and we really have no way to prove people don't listen to Window's notifications other than "talk to people and see", much like he can't prove otherwise either.

Either way, manual updates don't get in the way and forced updates do, that's all that's needed to say.

I've been using MicroSoft products since DOS 3.3 and Windows 10 finally pissed me off enough to switch to Linux. Last straw was them denying people the ability to turn off the Store and their Windows 7 update packages so they can slipstream in their spyware.
Fuck you, MicroSoft.

Damn, that's sexy. Are there any WMs that will make my desktop look like that?

GNUstep is the closest thing I've ever seen. It may have a high-contrast icon theme, but I know it doesn't use GTK and I've never used it so I'm not sure how theming works with it.

Thanks user, that looks pretty nice

Gee, are you sure you are not one of those Winders users?