
Hasn’t the problem of Windows updates being partially installed been solved? - nikbackm
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20151211-00/?p=92501
======
frou_dh
Recently I was surprised by how long Windows Update took to simply decide
which updates were available. When rejuvenating a relative's Vista machine
that hadn't been online for about 6 years, it took WU more than 2 days of
fully pegging the CPU to finally deliver the news that ~200 updates were
available.

What was it doing all that time? Some kind of solver?

~~~
adrtessier
About a month ago I decided to reinstall Windows on one of my old PCs, an
Intel Ivy Bridge desktop i5. It is frustrating and nearly impossible to end up
with a patched system. The process was pretty much as follows:

1\. Manually check for updates. This took forever and thrashed the hard disk,
every time.

2\. Select, download, and install the updates.

3\. Goto 1 until Windows couldn't find any more updates.

In some cases, step 2 would fail with various unknown errors and hex codes.
The only way to fix this is to run a Windows diagnostic that "resets Windows
Update components", which makes Step 1 take even longer than it would have
otherwise.

All in all, I think the update cycle took me about 4 hours before I gave up on
the third reboot and decided to just let Windows figure itself out. Compare
this to an 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade' or the OS X Software Update,
and it's a wonder people update Windows at all.

~~~
tedunangst
Windows 10 should (eventually) move to a model where the initial install is
much closer to the current update, requiring less patching.

~~~
makeithappen
Interesting, do you have any links about this?

~~~
tedunangst
The latest is actually they did it, then pulled it, but presumably they'll try
again. [http://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2015/11/window...](http://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2015/11/windows-10-november-update-mysteriously-pulled-as-concerns-
about-bugs-grow/)

------
frik
The Windows update used to be okay in Windows XP, Vista, Windows 7 and 8. But
Windows 10 with its forced update that has negative wait effects after every
reboot is unbearable. Also Linux don't need a reboot for 99.9% of its updates
and updates only the files that have changed. Something like Threshold 2
update for Win10 and all its problems like downloading 2+GB, doing a complete
OS re-installation (WTF), loosing drivers and applications and settings is
laughable in 2015. Also the new OldNewThing blog software isn't that great.

~~~
creshal
> The Windows update used to be okay in Windows XP

Nostalgia much? How many times did e.g. .NET updates force XP computers into
endless loops, or just killed the OS?

Windows Update has _always_ been a barely functional, embarrassing mess. It's
just that seems to be stuck in 2001, while others finally managed to sort
their crap out.

~~~
dingdingdang
> It's just that seems to be stuck in 2001, while others finally managed to
> sort their crap out.

Those others do not include Apple as anyone who's been indefinitely waiting
for "installing" OSX updates can confirm - and the OSX fixes needed have the
same weird incantation like qualities as the fixes for Windows updates (i.e.
remove update, then restart, then run again, then panic, redo-sequence). No
particular hate meant for Apple or MS.. but seriously, learn how to write a
basic update mechanism that do not include random-fail-over.

~~~
headShrinker
I manage Windows and Mac networks. Mac updates may take up to 5 minutes to
discover necessary updates, resulting in 5 - 10 package downloads, even on
machines that haven't been regularly updated. Windows, depending on the
version can take upwards of 20 - 30 minutes, with up to 50-60 package
downloads, and on machines that haven't been updated recently, 1 - 2 hours,
and hundreds of package retrievals.

> OS X fixes needed have the same weird incantation like qualities as the
> fixes for Windows updates

I find your statement inaccurate. Even if the update operations are fairly
similar in Windows and OS X, the latter's update system seems fairly
efficient. OS X doesn't have the libraries and dependences hell that windows
does. The update model fits well in to the OS X environment, not well at all
in Windows.

Also, Mac updates that update system files are 'rare' and usually only require
one reboot. Windows often requires 2 or 3 reboots. Again, I believe this is
because of the dependancies and libraries Windows is forced to maintain and
keep up to date.

Mac's don't hang on update or install, frankly, Ever, unless there is
something very wrong.

~~~
maaaats
The update procedure works fine, the newly updated OS X seldom so. Far too
often updating OS X means having something break.

------
sixothree
Recently after Windows 10 performed an update it notified me that it had
uninstalled a VPN client because of incompatibility.

Personally I would have preferred it not perform the Windows Update and allow
me to connect to my client's network considering that's one of the
requirements of getting paid by the client.

This is exactly why I keep a Windows 7 VM ready.

~~~
yuhong
Was this after the 1511 upgrade? I think you can go back to a previous build
pretty easily in Win10.

------
cm3
Having talked to many Windows users, I'm convinced that they never experienced
the package and release management process of Linux distros before. If they
did, they would constantly complain about Windows. With many Linux distros you
can even update packages as part of the installation process, giving you a
fully up to date distro. There's no reason for Microsoft to do anything less
since they require serial keys, activation and network connections anyway.

Compare the time it takes to remove or install a component (application or
library) and you will be very disappointed in Windows. No matter how fast your
disk or cpu is, Windows finds a way to make you wait half a weekend. This is
unacceptable, but nobody complains loud enough for Microsoft to reconsider.

Windows software management is a total mess and it got worse with newer
Windows versions.

But other parts of Windows get better with each release and it's mostly the
kernel land. This seems to be a case of different teams having different
culture (Windows kernel, Windows shell, Windows installer, ...). Take Windows
2003's desktop, put it on Window's 10's kernel, and you have a nice system.

~~~
J_Darnley
Package management on Linux can be summed up as: use this old, custom patched
version we provide or build from source.

The alternative is just Windows style software distribution: find a random exe
on the internet and run it.

~~~
heinrich5991
Some distros provide unpatched software that is up-to-date. :)

~~~
J_Darnley
Perhaps I should have used those years ago instead of becoming jaded and
cynical.

~~~
washadjeffmad
The trade off to having stable, secure packages has always been not getting
new features.

For example, in LTS releases, major versions are frozen but perpetually
updated and patched for the lifetime of the distro. In more bleeding edge
rolling release distros, you receive (or compile) sometimes major version
updates of software within a short time after their public release. In those
distros you can still freeze your packages at certain versions, but it's not
quite the same as making sure every library and component in the system is
getting the same treatment.

Try manjaro ([https://manjaro.github.io/](https://manjaro.github.io/)). It
uses pacman (like Arch) and yaourt (for AUR, building from source). Their
driver and kernel management makes switching between free/non-free drivers or
different kernels easy. And they're pretty close to bleeding edge; I've been
running kernel 4.2 with Xorg 1.17 (released 2015/02) for months, and up to
kernel 4.4rc4 and Xorg 1.18 are available in the repos.

------
keithpeter
_" If the role of an internal developer conference is to encourage discussions
among teams, then that one certainly succeeded. Because discussions most
definitely ensued."_

Been there, got the video, in less exalted company.

Is the book simply a repackaging of the blog posts or would it provide a more
coherent view of the history of the Windows project?

~~~
ygra
The book just contains selected blog posts, as well as two downloadable
appendices with more stories that haven't been published on the blog.

------
ikeboy
My system somehow lost all the original installation files for my programs.
Now whenever I try to update a program, it fails on the "removing previous
version" step. Insane.

------
NickHaflinger
I don't have such a problem, I have been Microsoft free for years ..

