
Windows 10 upgrade installing automatically on some Windows 7, 8 systems - v4n4d1s
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/10/windows-10-upgrade-installing-automatically-on-some-windows-7-8-systems/
======
bargl
Relevant followup article. [http://venturebeat.com/2015/10/15/microsoft-stops-
automatic-...](http://venturebeat.com/2015/10/15/microsoft-stops-automatic-
windows-10-upgrades-says-default-checked-update-was-a-mistake/)

TLDR: It was a mistake and Microsoft stopped it.

~~~
Animats
They say it was a mistake. Do you believe them? Was anyone at Microsoft fired?
Did Microsoft offer a way to undo an unwanted install of Windows 10?

~~~
smt88
> Was anyone at Microsoft fired?

As a tech worker, I don't want to live in a world where tech workers are fired
because they make a small, fixable mistake.

> Did Microsoft offer a way to undo an unwanted install of Windows 10?

Yes. You can downgrade Windows 10 to whatever you installed it on top of. I
think this has been possible since the Vista -> 7 upgrade.

~~~
CamperBob2
_As a tech worker, I don 't want to live in a world where tech workers are
fired because they make a small, fixable mistake._

The quality of work coming out of the Windows Update group has been seriously
problematic lately. It's _well_ past time to fire some people.

~~~
krylon
For the past 2.5 years, I've been working as sysadmin / helpdesk monkey at a
mostly-Windows shop.

On Debian or CentOS, updates are simple - if any updates are available, you
install them. End of story.

On Windows, as I have learnt the hard way, simply installing all available
updates is pretty much begging for trouble. During my training at Deutsche
Telekom, when I heard that they had a whole team whose only task was testing
Windows updates, I thought they were being wussies. Now, I envy them. The
reality for me is more like checking online discussion boards to see if anyone
was dumb enough to just install all the updates, yet smart enough to figure
out which ones caused them trouble, then only approving those updates nobody
has complained about. It is kind of like playing Russian roulette.

As as Unix-person looking at the Windows world from an outsider's perspective
(kind of), I am kind of shocked that this is the OS powering approximately 90%
of corporate desktops. Imagine if, following the end of the Cold War, Western
car companies had been driven out of business by the Trabbi. That is pretty
much what has happened in the PC world.

And, yes, I get that Windows is tortured by more combinations of hardware and
software than anyone wants to imagine, and QA for their updates must be a
living hell. But IIRC, Microsoft also made something like 20 _billion dollars_
in profit last year, so they could easily spend one billion on making Windows
update not suck - or at least suck slightly less - and still be disgustingly
profitable.

The worst thing is that people who have known no other OS but Windows all
their lives fail to see how utterly wrong this is. Either they just don't know
any better, or it's a massive case of Stockholm syndrome...

(Sorry, but I've had that on my mind for a while, and since it was patchday
this week, I hope you can understand my need to vent a little...)

~~~
smt88
> _simply installing all available updates is pretty much begging for trouble_

I've done this since Windows 95. It hasn't caused me a problem since Windows
XP SP2. I actually love Windows update and missed it when I was on Linux.
Ubuntu's kernel upgrades would randomly break sleep, audio, special keys on my
keyboard, or other weird stuff.

~~~
krylon
Mmmh, point taken. I only had problem with updates on Linux when I was using
Gentoo and lived on the unstable branch (and unstable, of course, implies that
such problems are to be expected).

There is a difference between administrating a single machine at home, or
maybe a handful, or taking care of a company network of (in my case) about 80
machines (and that is still a tiny network, I suppose). Problems that a
typical user only sees once in a couple of years become disturbingly common as
the number of machines grows, and I guess that is true regardless of the
operating system being used.

Having said that, I have encountered some rather strange and frustrating
problems with Windows updates. One time, a Windows update would somehow not
successfully register itself as being installed, but it did require a reboot.
So after installing the update, the user rebooted her system, finding yet
another update (the very same, in fact) available, install it, reboot, find
another update... For some reason, only two machines in our network were
affected by this problem, and I have no clue why it was these specific
machines. One time, an update to Office 2013 overwrote some VB script that
Autodesk Inventor happened to depend on, causing it to crash while displaying
the splash screen; reinstalling Inventor hepled with that, but now Outlook
would crash when trying to write an email. Another time, an update caused a
few machines to hang while booting. There was an update to Windows 8.1 that
was not called a Service Pack, but for all intents and purposes, it was, and
Microsoft said that without this update installed, 8.1 machines would no
longer receive updates; however, this update caused 8.1 in combination with a
specific version of WSUS to no longer talk to the WSUS server - I think this
is what people call a Catch 22.

And the list goes on and on. I have only a few years of experience taking care
of a relatively tiny number of systems. Like I said, I understand now why
large companies run labs where they test Windows updates - and updates by
other software vendors, too, I suppose - against each and every combination of
hardware and software being used on the corporate network.

Just because you did not run into problems does not mean there are none, just
as my experience with updates on Linux and FreeBSD is not representative of
what it is like to run dozens or hundreds of machines with these operating
systems. However, currently the operating being used on the majority of
company networks is Windows, and the company making billions of that is
Microsoft.

Although, to be fair, in many cases where an update to Windows breaks a third
party application, I suspect the third party is at least as much to blame. In
my case, I have grown very weary of Siemens automation software (Simatic,
WinCC, TIA), which is very sensitive with regards to updates, to say the
least. So, to a degree, Microsoft has merely become a victim of its own
success.

------
frio
The Windows 10 upgrade process is what finally pushed me to Linux on the
desktop. As with any upgrade, I figured I'd wait a while for the dust to
settle (Ars' articles on the privacy-invasive nature of Windows 10 made me a
little nervous, but I figured that'd get fixed with time).

Unfortunately, Microsoft have been extremely aggressive about getting users to
move. The 8.1 update that encourages you to upgrade also downloads a copy of
Windows 10 -- which, on a small SSD, was frustrating. So, I removed and
blocked the KB-x update that added the upgrader.

Microsoft then added another, differently named KB-x update which preloaded
Windows 10 -- even if you'd blocked the other one
([http://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2015/09/micros...](http://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2015/09/microsoft-is-downloading-windows-10-to-pcs-even-if-you-
dont-reserve-a-copy/)).

Which, for me, was all a bit too much. Originally I figured I'd come back
after some time, but the massively expanded Steam catalogue on Linux is making
me question that too.

~~~
x5n1
Well you want all that user data so you can mine if for advertisers don't you?
How do you do that? Push people to Windows 10.

~~~
frio
I'm not really willing to ascribe motive; I'm sure there are plenty of
technical reasons to push people to an upgrade too (like reducing support
burden).

But -- there's nothing like an unwanted OS upgrade (repeatedly) burning
through your data cap and spare disk space to suggest that maybe you're not in
control of your computer anymore.

------
appleflaxen
I'm glad they rolled it back, but getting an unintended system upgrade is such
a big deal that I find myself wanting a bigger act of contrition.

This is a really big mistake to make with your flagship product.

~~~
Silhouette
_This is a really big mistake to make with your flagship product._

True enough. In this case, it looks like it might be particularly bad if it
affects systems where someone has actively chosen not to move to Windows 10
for their own reasons. That seems to be the case for a lot of "power users".
Also, while enterprise-scale businesses with full-time professional admins may
well be using WSUS and Enterprise versions of Windows, smaller businesses will
often be running Pro versions and handling upgrades in other ways, and could
be affected too.

Even if the arguments about forced updates and privacy don't seem to concern a
lot of typical home users, whether through apathy or ignorance, Windows seems
to be losing the trust of the tech community who often do care about such
things. That tech community both runs business IT and advises non-technical
friends and family, and as a rule it does not take kindly to being bullied.
Microsoft have now screwed this same issue up several times over within just a
few weeks, and it's starting to look like they've lost control of both their
product and their PR.

------
newman314
PSA: For people with Windows 10 installed, I've found the following tool quite
useful in shutting down the large amount of information collected.

[http://www.oo-software.com/en/shutup10](http://www.oo-
software.com/en/shutup10)

~~~
shostack
Any idea how secure and effective it is?

Got to be honest, I'm pretty terrified at what Win10 lets them collect. They
are pushing really hard to get people to install Win10 and the fact that they
backported all the data collection stuff and crammed it into updates all the
way back to Win7 is very telling.

~~~
newman314
You should be able to verify with wireshark.

I thought I had followed most of the best practices soon after release but
this tool identified a whole bunch more.

------
ausjke
I had not switched to win10, but was told by others who did saying that win7 >
win10 > win8, i.e. win7 is the best, is it true? I have a dual-boot win7 for
tax-filing that I had not booted into since April, using linux daily. This
news made me feel relieved a bit that it's good I did not have win7 running
and got automatically "upgraded".

~~~
smt88
8 was really, really similar to 7, except for the start menu. The start menu
made little difference to me because I just create taskbar/desktop shortcuts
or press the Windows key and type what I want. People bitched about the new
start menu because they weren't willing to see that there were better ways to
find their programs.

10 is really, really similar to 8 as well. The only noticeable difference is,
again, the start menu. There are small things here and there (and a much nicer
graphical design), but otherwise it's pretty much the same.

If you have enough storage, I'd suggest just trying Windows out as a dual-boot
option. If you don't like it, you can always remove the Windows partition, no
harm done.

~~~
grimman
> People bitched about the new start menu because they weren't willing to see
> that there were better ways to find their programs.

What exactly was the better way though? I'm still on Win7 in my primary
computer, having Win10 (and previously Win8) installed on my secondary.

On Win7 I press the start button and type the name of what I want to run (or
find) - this lets me do what I want _very_ quickly with a minimum of
interruption.

Win8 was similar, but it threw a jarring fullscreen slab of apps in my face. I
say it was similar because it still let me start typing right away and get to
the stuff I wanted with minimal hassle.

Win10 is a whole different beast, I feel. The search was decoupled from the
start menu; but the start menu itself returned to most of its former glory
(unintrusive, no jarring screen transition). The key factor here is that I can
no longer just start typing to get to an app, and I have yet to invest the
necessary time into seeing if it is at all possible since it's still my
secondary machine.

Right now, amidst all of the anti-Microsoft scaremongering, I'm also finding
it less likely that I'll keep going down the Microsoft path. Linux is starting
to look more and more attractive, with OS X a strong second place contender.
And not just for the start menu.

~~~
kemayo
> The key factor here is that I can no longer just start typing to get to an
> app,

Not sure what you mean; Windows 10 is exactly like Windows 7 and Windows 8
here. You hit the start button / start key, you start typing, and the things
you want start popping up.

~~~
grimman
> Not sure what you mean; Windows 10 is exactly like Windows 7 and Windows 8
> here. You hit the start button / start key, you start typing, and the things
> you want start popping up.

I can assure you, that is not the way it currently functions on my Win10
machine. For me the search bar is a magnifying glass next to the start menu,
at a minimum, or a full-blown text field. Regardless of which state, I have to
click it before being able to type and search.

------
macns
On a side note the 'get windows 10' update even if hid from the available
'important' updates will come back again to install. Disabled updates
altogether, still not sure if that does the job!

------
atriix
The fact that the possibility to make that "mistake" exists makes it a non-
mistake. And rather something that was due to happen but maybe someone pressed
the button too early.

------
autobahn
Inaccurate headline.

------
dang
Url changed from
[http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2015/10/16/microsoft...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2015/10/16/microsoft-
accident-forces-windows-10-onto-windows-7-windows-8/), which points to this.

------
orionblastar
Right "Accident". I'm sure the ads on the W10 start menu were an accident as
well. [http://betanews.com/2015/10/15/microsoft-now-uses-
windows-10...](http://betanews.com/2015/10/15/microsoft-now-uses-
windows-10s-start-menu-to-display-ads/)

I think Microsoft is trying to earn more money by forcing upgrades to Windows
10 and then displaying ads on the start menu and other places.

It is the pot of frogs in water, they slowly turn up the heat so the frogs
won't notice until it is too late.

~~~
WorldMaker
The "ads" are an opt-in recommendation feature of the Store and/or Cortana.
They don't directly make money for Microsoft. (Microsoft still gets its Store
cut if you actually buy one of the suggested apps, but it wants Suggested Apps
to be a useful, personalized recommender, not a paid featured spot...)

If the forced Windows 10 upgrades were not an accident, it wasn't to make
money. If anything it would be an attempt to save money and have fewer people
on older operating systems that they need to support.

If there's a "grand conspiracy" afoot, it should be pretty transparent and
obvious by now: Microsoft doesn't want people stuck on the same version of
Windows for a decade again (XP).

~~~
sliverstorm
_Microsoft doesn 't want people stuck on the same version of Windows for a
decade again_

And a more evil conspiracy, I cannot imagine.

:)

~~~
WorldMaker
Debian LTS, as one example, is Five Years. It's hard not to sympathize with
Microsoft that historically maybe their support contracts have been _too_
friendly, compared with the competition. :)

I think most of us wish we can keep our tech debt/maintenance relationships
below a decade. (At least, those of us that are not yet dinosaurs like IBM.)

