Windows Update - How will it change your system?

Anonymous
2016-10-14T16:11:13+00:00

You need to make a decision about where you want to be with your system.

My advice is to change the Windows Update (WU) setting to never.

It really depends on where you want to be with your Windows 7 system.

Woody Leonhard has described the situation something like this.  Note, I am using my own words here and describing it from my own perspective:

http://www.infoworld.com/article/3128983/microsoft-windows/how-to-prepare-for-the-windows-781-patchocalypse.html

Group A:  Roll over and just let MS install what ever they wish on your computer and just don't worry about privacy and the spyware they will install.  With this option you leave WU as Delayed start, and set the WU setting at Recommended.  This is the easy way and requires no effort or concentration.  You just let happen what will.  This is essentially what you have with a Windows 10 system.

Group B:  Refuse to accept any updates except Security ones.  In that case you follow my initial recommendation and leave WU set at Never.  You get the Security only updates from the "catalog".   There is risk here in B.  You are trusting that MS will not put anything in that group that does things you do not want done. A sort of level of trust in MS that I am not sure they deserve.   Keep in mind that they have done the same thing with this set of updates they did in the main one.  It is all one agglomeration of whatever number of security updates they decide to put in it. 

Group C (AKA W): Shut down WU permanently and never again accept a Windows Update.  This group feels that the risk of MS changing their machine in unacceptable ways or even bricking it is greater than the risk of a hacker breaking in because some security patch was not installed.   I suspect that most people who even think about this topic will opt for this.  However since most people think of their computer like a potato peeler, they will not even think about this and things will just happen without them even knowing.  They will be Group A and won't even know it.

I am in Group W and would like to be in Group B.   It depends on whether I can find a satisfactory way for my 150 or so client machines to be updated.  They are average Joes and Janes.

Note that this may not apply to NON-Windows updates such as Office.  I am not sure how you can be in group B or W and do this, but I am working on it.

UPDATE November 19, 2016:

It now appears that B is an impractical strategy for 99% of users.  And, here is the reason why:  When an error is made in a security-only update, if the error turns out not to have a security affect, it may be corrected in a non-security update.  In that case if you were following B strategy, you would be left with an un-corrected defective update installed on your computer.  If you were extremely diligent and knew about it, you may be able to get the correction in specific cases.  This would entail an extreme amount of diligence that few would be willing or able to provide.

The new rollup style of updates that Microsoft is now providing to what we would call Group A, which include all kinds of updates (security and non-security), are cumulative.  That means if you miss a month or even more, it will not matter because by installing the latest month's rollup, you would be up to date.

NOTE well, that Security-only updates are NOT cumulative.  Which means if you miss a month, you may never get the missed updates.

So one strategy that you may wish to consider is following Group C, but still updating .net and Microsoft Office through Windows Update, but installing no Windows updates at all.  It would be advisable in this case that you stop using Internet Explorer because you would not be getting those updates, but instead use an alternative browser.

Then, after following this strategy for some time, if things take a turn for the worse, and you decide you made the wrong choice (Group C with .net an Office updates), you can easily shift to A by simply using the latest offered Rollup offered in Windows Update.

So, as things have evolved, it looks like the vast majority have really only two choices:  A as described above or C (modified as described above).  The good news is that if you follow the modified C strategy, you have a way back to the Microsoft way, that is easy to implement.

Windows for home | Previous Windows versions | Windows update

Locked Question. This question was migrated from the Microsoft Support Community. You can vote on whether it's helpful, but you can't add comments or replies or follow the question.

0 comments

247 answers

Sort by: Oldest
Most helpful Newest Oldest
  1. Anonymous
    2016-10-18T02:40:50+00:00

    I'm going to apologize, because I will sort of move this thread away from specific troubleshooting to what I thought it was supposed to be -- a discussion that was supposed to encompass the setting of a trend or two because of this company's direction toward removing control from us individual types.

    And by "individual types" I mean that Microsoft must be allowing the corporate buyers of the software to have more control over issues about what information goes from a corporation's computers into the Microsoft collection of information from a given corporation.

    BUT, I'm taking my own post off-topic.

    I want to ask for an opinion from some of you folks that have been doing more homework than I.

    Does anyone think it would be illegal to try and design some software that would break a Windows Update package into pieces so that only certain "pieces" could then be installed by one of us?

    Has that idea already been brought up by somebody else?  Maybe by you, Woody?

    Thank you for any ideas.

    An even bigger thank you will be issued if I have stepped over the line and should retract my thinking from this thread and you tell me to do so without banning me.

    You would need to read the EULA very carefully. There are certainly statements in it that say you cannot try and break the update process, so tread carefully.

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments
  2. Anonymous
    2016-10-18T02:43:33+00:00

    Found a gem that explains why you should not use that Convenience roll-up (AKA Win7 SP2)

    http://windows-update-checker.com/FAQ/ConvenienceRollupKB3125574-Issues.htm

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments
  3. Anonymous
    2016-10-18T03:00:14+00:00

    palm50, please forgive me for a moment as I address something our Canadian friend wrote.

    I think, Canadian Tech, that the "PC market" is never going to see the happy days of the past and that Microsoft executives, for example, see that dark lining in the clouds.

    You see, sir, it's those little Star Trek thingies that are making people so happy now.  Those little smartphone things are all many people want and are happy with and probably so happy they won't even bother to keep using their PC, if they had/have one.

    For those who do not have a PC but are very happy with using only the smartphone, they won't be buying one (a PC).

    And even making the PC smaller is not going to give the boost to the PC market that it needs to keep growing as it was before smartphones showed up.

    The money is just not going to be there and that is why the Microsoft executives decided no more new operating systems.  Just keep patching this new one called #10.

    As a result I foresee that eventually there will only be one commercial entity selling operating systems for the PC.

    Selling, as in commercial.  (Sorry that I seem to be going simple here and repeating myself.  Not all members are native English users.)

    The "We Build It Ourselves" group that seems to be the Linux group will be at the other end.

    We'll have just two groups -- one commercial and just barely staying alive and one non-profit.

    The corporate client will probably be the only reason one commercial entity will be able to stay in the game.

    Who will end up being the only seller is anybody's guess.  It may not be Microsoft.  I think they know it where these things are discussed at Microsoft way, way far from public ears.

    But the big problem is that there will still be a whole bunch of folks that will not have the proper style of thinking or time to be able to use a Linux system.  Just look at how many people have a hard time maintaining their car.  Sure, Linux is great for a lot of folks, but not the majority.

    So we'll have one commercial seller and one doing a Linux style.

    So that is why we need to explore ways to control certain things about what information from my private domain -- my house -- gets into a commercial domain.

    And now it looks like another bit of control -- individual updates -- has been removed from our grasp.

    So I think we should be able to ask the hotshots in this PC Community -- everywhere on the Net -- if they think we can counter this move by this particular commercial entity that is still in the business.

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments
  4. Anonymous
    2016-10-18T03:14:39+00:00

    MS could go back to the model of the '90s and support us enthusiasts like they did back then. There was probably be about the same size market for a full PC with a customizable OS as there was back then. Somehow they managed to create software that worked and could afford to write solid comprehensive documentation back then, so why not now?

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments
  5. Anonymous
    2016-10-18T03:15:39+00:00

    palm50, your reference to a registry fixer software deserves attention, even though it is a tad off-topic.  Except how that software might affect the installing of updates.

    I think you have a point in that idea.

    BUT I have to let you know that I don't use any sort of registry fixing anything.  I don't like the idea of some software messing about in my registry, unless it is this company's software doing it.

    I mean, it is their registry now.

    I write "now" because I think a long, long time ago when Mr. Gates was a very young man he may have borrowed some software from somebody without fully informing that individual of what was going on.

    BUT that was too long ago to be fretting too much about it now.  Sort of like a statute of limitations, if I may be forgiven.

    So, yes, a registry fixer not from Microsoft is a problem, in my view.

    But aren't we supposed to be covering this topic in a more general sense?  Painting on a bigger canvas, so to speak.

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments