LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.It is using a newish 'Known Issue Rollback' technique to withdraw the faulty updates.
Read more.It is using a newish 'Known Issue Rollback' technique to withdraw the faulty updates.
Typical Microsoft!
Typical! Knee-jerk! Reaction!Originally Posted by 567
Lol, my games where starting in windowed mode even if set to full screen.
Thought I had broken computer again.
Why, after so many years, we have the same problems that we had back in windows xp updates?
Can you think of any similarly sized software projects that haven't had patches that sometimes need subsequent work? I mean it's great that MS are addressing problems still and it's worth Hexus pointing out especially those that impact on gaming, but it's not otherwise astounding. Security will always take priority over gaming.
Nope. But it's why I object to Win10 mandatory updates, whether the user likes it or not.
And yeah, sure, we now have some ability to delay/defer, the extent of which depends on version.
Also, I see the other side of the argument. A large section of users either don't know any better, or don't care enough, to do regular updates unless they're given no choice.
But the logic of that is that to protect the idiots, or ignorant, or just plainly naive, those of us that know the risks are still forced into updates (sooner or later and, yeah, version-dependent) whether we want them or not, and after that delay, whether we want them yet or not.
For my games machine, when I still had a dedicated one, getting what (for me at least) was "optimum" performance was quite a trial, took a lot of work, testing, etc, and was (probably still is) quite a touchy balance. So much as a single driver update could beggar it up thoroughly, if not done under controlled circumstances. More seriously, some of my machines supported (legacy) hardware that :-
a) still worked for me,
b) would be expensive to replace (if it was possible at all)
c) would give me little or no payback to replace
but was reliant on driver version to continue to work. The OS supplier deciding they were going to update my system, to their needs and timetable, to protect the naive and idiot-level users previously mentioned, and in the process, dirsupt my workflow and disable some hardware/software, was anathema to me. Still is, to be honest.
My needs have changed, including some of that hardware/software and I no longer use a 'finely honed' gaming setup, but still, I sympathise with why gamers might get the hump when an update they have limited ability to prevent, beggars up their system.
Ultimately, who's machine is it? The owners, or MS's?
A lesson learned from PeterB about dignity in adversity, so Peter, In Memorium, "Onwards and Upwards".
Pleiades (27-04-2021)
I suspect the OS remains the property of MS and we just buy a license to use it on our machines. That certainly used to be the case but I know the EU were looking into licensing vs ownership and I think were considering saying that it should be treated as ownership.
EDIT: yep, a perpetual license *is* ownership according to EU, so you do have the right to do anything legal that you like to Windows.
Last edited by kalniel; 27-04-2021 at 10:37 AM.
Oh, that is a can of worms. There are (obviously) a list of thingsit would not be reasonable (or legal) to do with a software licence, and most of the dubious ground comes from the distinction in legal ownership between physical and intangible goods. If I buy, oh, an apple, a PC, a car, whatever, I can decide to use it, eat/drive it (according to the nature of the thing) or, sell it. It is, whether for legal or "reasonable" grounds, a bit trickier with an intangible. If I "own" a CD, I can sell on that CD, but I can't (legally, or in my view at least) copy the tracks onto a different media and sell them. And I certainly can't do it repeatedly.
So "ownership" is a somewhat cplex issue.
So is what can, or cannot, be mandated by a licence. I had a long discussion (admittedly quite a few years ago) with a friend/colleague who, by coincidence, was a specialist IP rights lawyer, and a software developer. Weirtd combination. Anyway, I asked him if the terms of his software licence were enforceable, given that you don't usually get to see the licence prior to opening the software, and normally, by that time, you've bought the software, the contract is complete and the standard "ticket" precedents suggest it's too late to start imposing terms on an already existing contract.
So .... ownership?
EU rules or not, and subject to more recent court cases, I'd suggest there are limits to what the buyer/licencee can and cannot do with his ownership that aren't identical to those rights pertaining to physical goods.
However .... what MS are seeking to do, by enforcing mandatory upgrades, or changes to system settings, flies directly in the face of what at least appears to be clear statute law, or at least the principle of it, that being s.1 of the Computer Misuse Act and making ANY unauthorised changes to someone else's computer system. Or, seeking to exert control and "authority" over that system by virue of the licence T&Cs. There is no way they should, and as far as I know, no way they can, override stature law with their licence.
My machines atre MY machines. MS might, and I stress might (though your EU reference suggests a limit) be able to dictate what I can do with their software but it doesn't give them the right to beggar about with my computer, or how I choose to configure it.
My lawyer friend's view of the enforceability of his licence was .... "to be determined, jurisdiction-dependent, by the courts .... but probably not". It may well depend on who seeks to do what, with "ownership".
A lesson learned from PeterB about dignity in adversity, so Peter, In Memorium, "Onwards and Upwards".
Nah.
I've done all the updates and everything, but Star Citizen still runs like an absolute dog... !!
_______________________________________________________________________
Maybe they rushed it to market?Nah.
I've done all the updates and everything, but Star Citizen still runs like an absolute dog... !!
Oh wait ....
A lesson learned from PeterB about dignity in adversity, so Peter, In Memorium, "Onwards and Upwards".
Can you think of any similarly sized software projects that haven't had patches that sometimes need subsequent work? I mean it's great that MS are addressing problems still and it's worth Hexus pointing out especially those that impact on gaming, but it's not otherwise astounding. Security will always take priority over gaming.
Whilst that is true, Windows isn't the most secure OS and I know many people use Windows just for gaming
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote