Microsoft releases Windows 10 tool to hide/block updates

[HEXUS]

Recently a forced Nvidia driver update has been causing issues for Windows 10 users.

Read more.

[Corky34]

Who would have thought that Microsoft doesn't in fact know my PC better than I do.

/sarcasm

[leepen@scan]

I'm running 10 Pro with "features deferred" - but this update still got me. Really confused me if I'm honest, wasn't "smooth" ... but was straight forward enough once I read the notification about a new GPU driver, then a single reboot (which isn't worth mentioning as it's so fast anyway)... Either way, installing this tool when I get home

[Merson]

353.62 released today via WU fixed all the multi-monitor tearing and SLI issues for me. So if you have those issues, do not hide the update as it's not currently available on the nVidia website.

[Jonj1611]

I would imagine Microsoft will do a u-turn on not allowing home users to choose their own updates, wouldn't be the first time.

[ZaO]

So this includes third party updates as well? I don't really mind if it's just for MS software, but I've allowed W7 to install motherboard related drivers at times, and sometimes that's caused constant blue screens/being unable to boot my computer. I usually like to pick and choose my own drivers based on what I find most useful/stable. I hope I'm not gonna lose that :/

[iranu]

There is no way I would want automatic updating from a 3rd party such as video card vendors. What is so wrong with me being able to control my own machine and choose what I install/update?

[PuremasterZ]

So Microscope found another way to take people's freedom away

[Ironbuket]

Not being able to block updates is the main reason I wont be taking up the free upgrade offer. When Windows 11 comes out all the Windows 10 users will be stuck with an update that puts a permanent advert on their screen that they cant get rid of? Don't like the direction Windows is headed, if it was free fair enough, but many people will be paying for Windows 10. Is it my imagination or are they trying to turn all our PCs in to Xboxes which they have total control over? If I wanted an Xbox, I would buy an Xbox... I foresee vast numbers of customers pouring through their fingers if they continue this trend of trying to tighten their grip.

[Brian224]

...I foresee vast numbers of customers pouring through their fingers if they continue this trend of trying to tighten their grip.

I am not sure Apple's experience supports your prediction. The PC market appears to be shrinking yet Mac sales are climbing. Anyway, what percentage of users actually care about these things or look at forums like this? Corporate customers are unaffected, and the vast majority of PC buyers probably need automatic updates, as they will not be well enough informed to make a decision on which to install and which to block.

(I may be a little cynical about this as I have just waited through over 200 updates to my sister-in-law's laptop, which has not been turned on for two years - her 24 month KIS subscription expired without a single database update).

[Saracen]

Not being able to block updates is the main reason I wont be taking up the free upgrade offer. When Windows 11 comes out all the Windows 10 users will be stuck with an update that puts a permanent advert on their screen that they cant get rid of? Don't like the direction Windows is headed, if it was free fair enough, but many people will be paying for Windows 10. Is it my imagination or are they trying to turn all our PCs in to Xboxes which they have total control over? If I wanted an Xbox, I would buy an Xbox... I foresee vast numbers of customers pouring through their fingers if they continue this trend of trying to tighten their grip.

I completely ageee with you on the direction, but I'm not convinced being free matters on this issue, or that vast numbers will even see the issue, let alone worry about it.

When I think of my ranfe of family, friends, and contracts, a few are pretty PC aware, ysually because it's their job. Some are broadly capable but by no means tech experts, and the large majority see Windows as something that's on their PC, but are barely aware of quite where the increasingly blurred line being OS and application software is. They know how to write letters, do emails, browse the web, etc, but wouldn't know where to start updating a video dtiver, let alone setting up security software, etc.

And, IMHO, that large majority just want to turn the thing on, browse the webm send emails, write letters, help the kids do their homework, and maybe play a game or two.

In other words, it's about doing things with a PC, not caring at all how it does it provided, when they turn it on, it starts up and does it.

And that's why this auto-update thing is a double-edged sword.

Yes, RIGHT NOW, updates have a great ability to break things. Buy why? Because we've all got different versions, different patch levels, different service packs, different drivers, etc, and it's simply impossible for MS, or anyone else, to test the millions of combinations any patch, update or driver will encounter out there in the wild. And the lower level any 'drivers' out there work at, the greater the potential for trouble.

In my opinion, MS have been working steadily towards this for quite some time, slowly increasing the isolation between low level OS functions and forcing everything to go through interfaces, and the unified driver model was part of that. But it still left a wide variety of patch levels, driver version numbers, etc, out in the wild.

So, this latest step is a move to ensure everyone has the same basic OS status, the same versions of critical drivers and OS components, etc. and those bits that vary, like hardware drivers, are less able to cause problems because they're forced through a sort of virtualisation. Or at least, given Pro 'deferral' a much, MUCH reduced set of variants.

Double-edged sword. Forcing updates means a 'rogue' update can do damage to more people, as mist will get it, want it or not, but the hugely increased homogeneity of the OS component versions means testing should be hugely easier, much more effective and a lot, LOT less likely to break things.

It also means that MS can force critical security patches, etc, thereby knowing that all, or almost all, systems have bugs, backdoors, weaknesses, attack points, fixed.

So in that way, it's a good thing.

It's also why, IMHO, Pro users can 'defer', and Home users can't. Home users are far more likely to switch off updates, including critical patches, without understanding the risks, and the subsequent responsibility to review patches very regularly, and manually install those necessary to fix real risks. And in these days of internet shopping, internet banking, and ever-increasing amounts of highly personal data on all (or rather, almost all) our PCs, decent security uo to scratch is increasingly important, and a subject on which most people sadly don't know the difference between their backside and a hole in the ground.

So, I can see two broad sets of motivations, and justifications, for automatic updates. One is to secure a stable, homogeneous OS base, which is on both MS and user's broad interests. The other is, as you suggested, to be able to dictate future OS feature, function and UI changes.

Sadly, MS also have previous in doing that, such as the (IMHO, at least) god-awful Win8 Metro UI which so many people loathed, to the point of rejecting Win8 because of it. From Win10 onwards, that option vanishes, because as MS have previously stated, Win10 is the last 'version' of Windows. Why? Because it seems, from now on, changes will be dribbled out, one at a time, instead of requiring a major "upgrade" to he installed. Instead, we'll ALL, get whatever MS decides, including Metro-type disasters, and the option to stick with existing versions and not upgrade won't exist, as upgrsdes will occur via silent, background slipstream installs not only without bothering to ask us, but whether we want it or not. That includes forcing it on us, even if we adamantly don't want it, as was my reaction to Metro.

It comes down to there being good reasons for mandatory auto-updates that benefit US, but also real risks to allowing MS to dictate the form and function of our OS, and taking away our option to remain with the status quo.

Which it turn comes down to ..."Do we trust Microsoft?"

In my case, and due to MS history, that would be answered with "Hell, no".

Will MS about-turn and give up on mandatory updates? I don't believe they will. What they may well do is delay it a bit, perhaps until we've all updated to Win10. Or they might 'spin' it, like they did over bringing back the Start button after the MUI farce, but that, of course, was nothing more than a deceitful and cynical PR exercise, and is partly why I said "Hell, no". But give up on it? In my opinion, not a chance.

Which is why I find myself wondering what the best OS isfor a couple of my machines. If I could still get (legit and reliable) Win7 Pro or ultimate licences, from a rrputable source and at a reazonable cost, I probably would. Short of that, a change in direction is coming, but not from Win7/8 to 10, but rather to Linux. I now think, for me, it's no longer 'if' but 'when'. Win 10 being 'free' isn't enough to tempt me, not by a large margin.

[shaithis]

I find it amusing that the OS hasn't released yet and already they are back-tracking on features I said they would need to.

Obvious problems, are obvious.

[MustardCutter]

B.. B... But I thought Nvidia's drivers are always amazing and only rubbish AMD had driver issues...?

On topic: the last time a Windows update messed up my PC was back in the days of Vista. From my perspective this approach is probably best for the majority, not the savvy minority.

[shaithis]

On topic: the last time a Windows update messed up my PC was back in the days of Vista. From my perspective this approach is probably best for the majority, not the savvy minority.

It isn't a problem with Windows Updates (although there have been a few bad ones over the years) but that it treats everything that WU can deliver as a critical patch.

Therefore, 3rd party drivers are forced. Any gamer will tell you that is not acceptable and that's just video-card related. Add in dubious driver manufacturers such as Marvell, Realtek and Asmedia (as well as a slew of other less-known companies!) and you have the potential for situations where Windows won't start and if you re-install it will force the same broken driver on you.....

[Corky34]

B.. B... But I thought Nvidia's drivers are always amazing and only rubbish AMD had driver issues...?

Not defending Nvidia, but are they Nvidia driver causing problems or Microsoft drivers, yes there Nvidia drivers but there supplied by Microsoft (afaik).
I've not researched the details but I read the ones installed by Microsoft don't come with PhysX and don't recognise some Nvidia cards like a 908Ti.

On topic: the last time a Windows update messed up my PC was back in the days of Vista. From my perspective this approach is probably best for the majority, not the savvy minority.

I can't even remember when an update caused a problem, at least one that stopped me using my PC.
I agree it's probably best for the majority, as long as they don't experience many problems that starts costing them time and money.
I also agree that it's not for the tech savvy minority, although I also get the feeling that Windows is heading in the direction of not being for the tech savvy user.

[ZaO]

It isn't a problem with Windows Updates (although there have been a few bad ones over the years) but that it treats everything that WU can deliver as a critical patch.

Therefore, 3rd party drivers are forced. Any gamer will tell you that is not acceptable and that's just video-card related. Add in dubious driver manufacturers such as Marvell, Realtek and Asmedia (as well as a slew of other less-known companies!) and you have the potential for situations where Windows won't start and if you re-install it will force the same broken driver on you.....

Yeh this is gonna be a big issue if that's how it is! Is this to make us fork out extra for the Pro version just so we can pick our own drivers? Haha..