Windows 10 'game mode' settings uncovered in insider update

[tag75]

I think this is great as my pc is much more powerful than an xbox one and ps4 and if it turns yr pc into a console like thing than your games will run a hell of a lot better for both mid range PCs and high end . Great work MS

[Saracen]

I would hope that the mode would be configurable via a control panel or similar.

So would I, especially as not everybody games on their PCs.

But MS of late don't have a great record of ceding control to users. Time will tell, I s'pose.

[TheAnimus]

I think the only real control they aren't ceding is that of updates... Which I'm kind of in favour of, I know too many people who think they know computers and don't bother with things like updates in a timely manner. One such person wonders how he was hacked on his MBP.

I dislike the 'suggested apps' nonsense, but that can be turned off in the menu.

[DanceswithUnix]

I think the only real control they aren't ceding is that of updates... Which I'm kind of in favour of...

I know what you mean, but they need to find a better way.

In Android I get asked politely to update packages on a regular basis, and accept unless I need the phone for something and will defer until a less critical time.
In Linux I "yum update" on a regular basis, have a quick glance on the package list and let it get on with it.
I recently lost hours of my time when a Windows 10 laptop wouldn't talk to the network, and given that I was trying to set up a new router assumed it must be the router at fault because a DHCP client is so basic it must work and I wasn't aware of the laptop recently updating.

If I don't feel I can rely on MS getting the updates right to the same standard as their competition, then they have a problem.

As for a control panel option, no that is another pointless check box to go wrong. It should just work, though frankly Windows does so little in real terms that it should really just stay the hell out of the way. Otherwise you might end up with "database mode" and who knows what else as well.

[Saracen]

I think the only real control they aren't ceding is that of updates... Which I'm kind of in favour of, I know too many people who think they know computers and don't bother with things like updates in a timely manner. One such person wonders how he was hacked on his MBP.

I dislike the 'suggested apps' nonsense, but that can be turned off in the menu.

But that one control, of updates that is, gives them ultimate power to change the functionality of my PC, whether I like it or not.

I see the advantages .... for them. Yes, they can nanny people not competent to do it themselves. And from a developers point of view, having something pretty close to a single, known code base to work to is nirvana compared to the hell of almost as many variations of code base as their are users.

So I can even understand a 'default' setting, with an option switch buried deep enough that you really have to look for it, which should prevent the general non-'expert' user finding it. It could even have a disclaimer of liability if you turn it off.

But ultimately, ceding control of my PC to MS, allowing them to force changes I am adamant I don't want, is unacdeptable to me.

Case in point - software I rely on runs on 16-bit systems but not 32 or 64 bit, despite emulation modes, etc. So, I have a system I keep running WinXP specifically for that reason. Yet, if MS could force an "update" on that, it would mess me up right royally.

Similarly, I want there to be NO chance my data can end up on MS cloud servers. And by none, I mean absolutely none whatever. Yet, when MS have access to how my system functions, not only without my permission but against my express wishes, they COULD change my system to enable cloud access and that is an utter non-starter.

The point is not whether they do do this, or indeed a variety of other things. It's that they can, and moreover, without my permission or even without the pesky nuisance for them if bothering to tell me.

Whether it's enabling cloud access, or changing graphics drivers, or anything else, it's MY flippin' PC not Microsoft's, though they don't seem to see it that way.

If they simply notified us of changes and gave knowledgeable people an opt-out, it would be a whole different story but the fact is that by ceding control of updates, you cede control over absolutely everything. MS could, for instance, decide we're all going to run the same video resolution because it makes UI design easier. Don't gave a suitable monitor? No prob, go buy one. Game mode? Whatever they decide is what we get, want it or not. Given they they can just do things, via update, and we are powerless to say no, the ONLY control we have is that that MS chooses to let us have.

For now.

Well, to hell with that. And with MS.

[Corky34]

To be fair we do have control as the services responsible for Windows updates can be stopped, obviously that exposes the OS to security vulnerabilities but given Microsoft's recent behavior, personally, I'd take my chances with security vulnerabilities over Microsoft.

Also i don't think they had a choice other than to go down the forced all in one update route, the way Windows is designed means small changes/differences can have big consequences.

[DDY]

But that one control, of updates that is, gives them ultimate power to change the functionality of my PC, whether I like it or not.

I see the advantages .... for them. Yes, they can nanny people not competent to do it themselves. And from a developers point of view, having something pretty close to a single, known code base to wirk to is nirvana compared to the hell of almost as many variations of code base as their are users.

So I can even understand a 'default' setting, with an option switch buried deep enough that you really have to look for it, which should prevent the general non-'expert' user finding it. It could even have a disclaimer of liability if you turn it off.

But ultimately, ceding control of my PC to MS, allowing them to force changes I am adamant I don't want, is unacceptable to me.

Case in point - software I rely on runs on 16-bit systems but not 32 or 64 bit, despite emulation modes, etc. So, I have a system I keep running WinXP specifically for that reason. Yet, if MS could force an "update" on that, it would mess me up right royally.

Similarly, I want there to be NO chance my data can end up on MS cloud servers. And by none, I mean absolutely none whatever. Yet, when MS have access to how my system functions, not only without my permission but against my express wishes, they COULD change my system to enable cloud access and that is an utter non-starter.

The point is not whether they do do this, or indeed a variety of other things. It's that they can, and moreover, without my permission or even without the pesky nuisance for them if bothering to tell me.

Whether it's enabling cloud access, or changing graphics drivers, or anything else, it's MY flippin' PC not Microsoft's, though they don't seem to see it that way.

If they simply notified us of changes and gave knowledgeable people an opt-out, it would be a whole different story but the fact is that by ceding control of updates, you cede control over absolutely everything. MS could, for instance, decide we're all going to run the same video resolution because it makes UI design easier. Don't gave a suitable monitor? No prob, go buy one. Game mode? Whatever they decide is what we get, want it or not. Given that they can just do things, via update, and we are powerless to say no, the ONLY control we have is that that MS chooses to let us have.

For now.

Well, to hell with that. And with MS.

I've mentioned it before, but such an update has pushed me off Win 10 after initially giving MS the benefit of doubt.

List of GP settings that don't work on Win10 pro anymore;

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/...ation-editions

I've actually got two Win 10 education licences at my disposal, but MS can stuff it.

[Nasing Speshal]

Interesting. I still prefer windows 7. Apart from Directx 12 is windows 10 better for gaming?

[DanceswithUnix]

the way Windows is designed means small changes/differences can have big consequences.

Amusing bug

Still, the PIF editor was always an awful kludge to get around the dreadful memory layout imposed by DOS and the later abuse of the A20 bug in the '286. If the PC had been a clean decent architecture, it wouldn't have happened. I don't remember there being an equivalent on the Amiga/ST/MAC of the era.

But a game mode, that sounds like another nasty hack like the PIF editor that will come back to bite people. That would no doubt be fixed with another layer of nasty hackery.

[Saracen]

I've mentioned it before, but such an update has pushed me off Win 10 after initially giving MS the benefit of doubt.

....

Likewise. Having stuck with MS since about 1984, they finally pushed me to Linux. I'm not a professional techie, but I do have enough computer background, dating back to the days of teletype and punch card decks, that transferring was not the culture shock it might be to a computer novice.

Nonetheless, I wasn't looking forward to it.

However, what came as a bit of a shock was how hard it wasn't. The trickiest but was deciding which flavour to use. After that, installing and getting used to it was certainly no harder than Windows, at least up to the level of modest user. If you really want to delve in the nuts and bolts then, sure, you can, but so far I've not needed to.

So now, I have some legacy systems including WinXP and Win7, and everything else, going forward, is Linux. I must admit, I wonder why I waited so long.

[peterb]

Install VirtualBox and you run Win7 and XP in a virtual environment - simultaneously if you want to - you will need a reasonable amount of RAM to do that though!

But you right, Open Office or Libre Office offers most of the facilities needed for quite complex Word Processing and reads and writes MS office files, and the mail, calendar and contacts applications are again as good as the standard Windows offerings. It is possible to connect to an exchange server if you really need to, but for most people in a non-corporate environment, it's not an issue - and you can always set up your own imap server on the machine if that meets your needs.

[watercooled]

I think the only real control they aren't ceding is that of updates... Which I'm kind of in favour of, I know too many people who think they know computers and don't bother with things like updates in a timely manner. One such person wonders how he was hacked on his MBP.

I dislike the 'suggested apps' nonsense, but that can be turned off in the menu.

I agree (with the 'kind of' part anyway); I'm also frustrated by the forced updates and having no control over when they're installed, but at the same time I completely understand why they've done it, and mostly agree with that logic. It's a tough one to get right - ensuring systems receive critical updates without 'experts' being able to avoid them and harming the Internet as a whole (e.g. botnets from compromised systems), but still allowing people to have a bit of control over when updates are installed to avoid forced reboots in the middle of lengthy tasks. There needs to be a better way than what they're currently doing. And if you're really determined, there are still fairly straightforward guides online of how to completely disable updates - you have to ask the question of whether this forced update policy is likely to drive more people to simply disable updates out of frustration if it keeps ruining their rendering tasks or whatever.

I really don't like ceding that sort of control to Windows, but how would you distinguish people who really don't want updates to happen *right now* but do understand their importance, from those who simply think they're just a useless annoyance and wouldn't bother at all?

I really think there needs to be something like a 'safety off' mode in Windows for people like us on Hexus (maybe that's what 'game mode' will be?) - we really don't need an OS to default to forcing regressive driver updates*, cloud sync nonsense, invasive system telemetry; we're quite capable of managing our own systems. I hate having to re-install Windows 10 on one of my own systems because of the amount of options I have to trawl through and disable to make the OS less irritating.

*I find this one particularly annoying - by default, Windows forcibly installs minor, non-security updates for drivers and on more than one occasion this has caused major stability problems for my system e.g. from needless sound, network and GPU drivers. Seriously, with most hardware drivers, if they're not broken, just leave them alone!! If they're going to do things like this they need to do a *much* better job of validating them. It's quite simply unacceptable for default automatic updates to turn a working computer into a broken computer on such a regular basis, likely requiring many people to pay for tech support.

[Strawb77]

[Gunbuster]

If that was the difference between Home and Pro I could understand. in reference to Watercooled's safety off mode.

[scaryjim]

... by default, Windows forcibly installs minor, non-security updates for drivers and on more than one occasion this has caused major stability problems ...

This isn't new to Windows 10 though - over a decade ago I got called out by a client and ended up having to charge them for rolling back an automatic driver update. That was on XP.

I haven't had to do it yet on Win 10, but next time I have to roll back a driver I'll check whether you can still disable driver updates for individual devices.

I'm not going to deny that it's frustrating to deal with forced updates, but tbh I'm more inclined to blame the hardware vendors than Microsoft. After all, they're the ones pushing borked drivers to Windows Update. But I guess so many people are so willing to blame Microsoft every time something goes wrong that the hardware vendors probably reckon they can push any old rubbish out and get away with it...

[DDY]

This isn't new to Windows 10 though - over a decade ago I got called out by a client and ended up having to charge them for rolling back an automatic driver update. That was on XP.

I haven't had to do it yet on Win 10, but next time I have to roll back a driver I'll check whether you can still disable driver updates for individual devices.

I'm not going to deny that it's frustrating to deal with forced updates, but tbh I'm more inclined to blame the hardware vendors than Microsoft. After all, they're the ones pushing borked drivers to Windows Update. But I guess so many people are so willing to blame Microsoft every time something goes wrong that the hardware vendors probably reckon they can push any old rubbish out and get away with it...

As far as I know on Win 10 Home and Pro, it's only possible to temporarily stop specific drivers from updating https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3073930

This is one of the reasons I'm no longer using Windows 10.

Even after hiding the drivers from updating, Windows eventually 'forgets' after a few months and I have to go though the rigmarole of rolling back and hiding the updates again.