Good Enough? Stop Now?

[NoelC]

Looking at my Task Manager, I see my Win 8.1 x64 MCE system has been running stably for 24 days, 14 hours, 13 minutes.

 

Makes me wonder...

 

Should I just stop applying updates?

 

Maybe this is as good as it's ever going to get.

 

• Win 10 is not better.  Different maybe, not better.  Doesn't really look like it's going to GET better either.
   
• Win 7 and earlier are dead and gone, having achieved "as good as they're ever going to get".  And I do have them all in virtual machines if I want a walk down memory lane (or find something I can only do with them).

 

Nothing's wrong with my Win 8.1 setup (well, nothing that's not designed to be wrong).  I'm productive, it's functional.  It's not being improved, nor will it be. 

 

Further Windows Updates will serve only to..

 

a ) (optimistically) solve bugs I don't know I have and haven't encountered in my daily work, and

 

b ) (realistically) SLOW and DESTABILIZE my system.

 

Microsoft at this point only has an incentive to make existing installations worse, in the name of "security" or whatever.

 

With tomorrow being February "update Tuesday", I'm wondering: 

 

Has the day come to just ignore all further Windows Updates?

 

-Noel

Edited February 9, 2015 by NoelC

[MagicAndre1981]

You should always install updates. I also only reboot once a month to restart after Patchday, this is fine

[NoelC]

Of course, that's the strategy I have been following, which has led me to having a good system but... 

 

The Microsoft today is not the Microsoft of yesteryear.

 

If you put your computing life completely in the hands of people with nefarious motives, not to mention butterfingers, is that being smart?

 

I haven't seen much from Microsoft to make me increase my respect for them lately.  What have you seen?

 

-Noel

[MrMaguire]

Just stop installing updates? Sure, why not. I used XP Pro x64 for over 5 months after its EOL in April. I really didn't encounter any problems whatsoever, even compared to my XP Pro x86 installs which were receiving the POSReady 2009 updates every month. Not to mention using Windows 2000 4 years after its EOL. Generally speaking, if you know what you're doing, you don't need any safety nets, and if you're not experiencing any bugs, you're just exercising futility by installing someone else's updates.

Edited February 9, 2015 by MrMaguire

[HarryTri]

Since they are offered I install them. They increase security and are - usually - harmless.

[jaclaz]

Just stop installing updates? Sure, why not. I used XP Pro x64 for over 5 months after its EOL in April. I really didn't encounter any problems whatsoever, even compared to my XP Pro x86 installs which were receiving the POSReady 2009 updates every month. Not to mention using Windows 2000 4 years after its EOL. Generally speaking, if you know what you're doing, you don't need any safety nets, and if you're not experiencing any bugs, you're just exercising futility by installing someone else's updates.

Yes and no.

 

Coming from someone that still runs a couple NT4.00 and 2K machines (connected to the internet) 24/7 365 days a year and whose "main" PC, also connected to the internet runs XP Service Pack 2 (with a bunch of selected updates - but not that many), yes traditionally a large number of updates are not really-really *needed*, but no , there is the actual  need of a properly configured setup (like a good firewall (hardware) and similar) and that would IMHO count as "safety nets".

 

As I see it is more about responsibility, if (when or if and when or when and if ) I will get some nasty malware (or *whatever*) I will blame myself (and noone else) for having being not capable of preventing/filtering it, whilst most people would prefer in the same situation to blame someone else, like, you know :

Notwithstanding I have applied all MS updates, I have got xyz malware/virus/worm, the fact I have configured unsafely my internet access and that my users are total morons which I completely failed to educate on the very basics and like to go wherever they like to download every kind of crap including warez and *whatnot* doesn't touch me, the fault is either MS's or my users', definitely I did whatever I could (actually the only things I know how to do, which is blindly applying MS updates, slowing each and every hardware I can put my hands on with costly antivirus and antimalware crappy tools).

 

 

jaclaz

[NoelC]

Thing is, I've always followed the philosophy:  There's some (if somewhat intangible) value in keeping current.

 

Choosing to accept Windows Updates is tantamount to continuing a partnership with Microsoft.  It can be a Very Good thing - assuming Microsoft's motives are aligned with our own.

 

But you see, the thing is, we have entered a new era, where Microsoft is becoming openly predatory.  For example, they're actively hobbling the desktop in order to make people crave Metro/Modern more and more.  I'm a bit surprised the Justice Department hasn't taken notice.  Perhaps all their old apps still run okay.

 

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that Microsoft could use Windows Update to subtly change older, existing installations into something that works worse and worse, and without question.  Inasmuch as we all work very hard to keep malware from auto-installing itself, Windows Update ensures Microsoft has all their body parts already in the door.

 

Astounding things could be done in the name of "security", for example...

 

Imagine, for a moment, that terrible exploits might happen to be reported against "legacy" Windows systems right around the time Microsoft wants people to move on to a new system.  Doom and gloom will be predicted for those not moving on.  And, what's worse, Microsoft can be heroes by releasing a fix that's already fixed by the new version by a change to the design, yet requires an extensive patch of the "legacy" system that of course degrades its performance but makes it (un)comfortably safe to use... 

 

I wonder whether the only thing holding them back from pulling stuff like this off (assuming they haven't already) is their own lack of competence.

 

I know full well who's the system admin and responsible for keeping my system functional.  That would be me.  I'm thinking ahead on that score, as I do every month - hence this thread.

 

Thing is, we've already seen a significant degradation of the Windows Direct2D display subsystem, delivered in a recent Windows Update.  I know this because I do benchmarks after every update. Thankfully I really don't use Direct2D for anything.  But what will degrade next? 

 

Remember when Windows 8 was supposed to be faster than 7?  Did you notice that, with the release of 8.1, it's now a fair bit slower by comparison?  Do some comparative file system testing if you don't believe me.  I have.

 

I will certainly test the forthcoming updates on a virtual machine, and perhaps if I don't find trouble or see overt performance degradation maybe I'll stay on the bandwagon for another cycle.  Of course, the software degradation routines could have a timer...  We may already be screwed.  But it's okay, Windows 10 will be a free upgrade, right? 

 

-Noel

[jaclaz]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that Microsoft could use Windows Update to subtly change older, existing installations into something that works worse and worse, and without question.  Inasmuch as we all work very hard to keep malware from auto-installing itself, Windows Update ensures Microsoft has all their body parts already in the door.

 

Astounding things could be done in the name of "security", for example...

...and it wouldn' t even be that much a completely "new" idea, that is more or less what the good Apple guys have done in recent years for IOS (but not for OSx, which they keep as two completely different and separated OSes/platforms/whatever)

 

A decision that seems to me like slightly more intelligent than the "Thou shalt have a same OS on ALL devices" the good MS guys are trying to inscribe on the tables (tablets ? ) of the Law as 11th Commandment.

 

jaclaz

[NoelC]

For what it's worth:  I researched all of this month's updates then installed them all on my test virtual machine.  No major failures occurred.

 

Notably no "rollup" of bugfixes (outside of specific security patches) is part of the February package.  It seems rather light, actually.  I did see that besides security fixes it looks like Microsoft has included something to make activation management more aggressive.

 

With what testing I've done I haven't noticed any specific problems or slowdowns, but it's impossible to subject a Windows system to thorough testing in just a short time, and it's a bit difficult to sense specific performance issues in a VM.

 

If you have experiences with this month's updates, please share them.

 

-Noel

[vinifera]

unless patch is something critical, why bother ?

I have unpatched XP since 2011

and unpatched win7 since 2010

 

no problems there

[NoelC]

That IS the question.

 

There is some, often intangible, value to keeping current.  It really boils down to making a value judgment about whether continued partnering with Microsoft is a net gain or a net loss.

 

And the judgment DOES need to be re-evaluated from time to time, as the value seems to be going down.

 

For what it's worth, I've had several Internet Explorer crashes over the past couple of days (since the last set of updates went in).  Not to the level of "I need to uninstall KBxxxxxx" yet, but it is an option I'm not unwilling to consider.

 

-Noel

[AnX]

Running Windows XP Pro just fine on my 8 core rig. I don't update too much. Plus I don't notice a difference between a stock SP3 XP and a fully patched XP SP3. Same goes for 8.1.

I prefer Windows XP as its a much quicker and lighter OS overall. After installing the RAM patch, I can access all 8GB RAM, it plays all the games i usually play, and does the stuff I need to. Windows 8.1 just sits there for the occasional new DX 11 title.

[vinifera]

 

For what it's worth, I've had several Internet Explorer crashes over the past couple of days 

 

well there lies your problem

you use piece of sh* software

[NoelC]

In all seriousness there are reasons I choose to use IE.  Its security model is actually good, even though out of the box it's poorly set up.

 

And prior to this week I haven't had crashes with it, so your characterization of it as excrement is not really founded.  But everyone has their browser preference for whatever reasons.  It's all good.

 

-Noel

[vinifera]

not really

IE or more specific MSHTML is integrated into system (shell needs it)

and as of winblows 8, its mandatory for metro-crap

 

to me anything that is so tight integrated into system = ticking bomb

I don't even enjoy having .net 2 integrated, yet it has to be coz of DWM

but what happens when security hole is found within .net 2 ?

they won't support it coz its out of real use, its ancient