• Announcements

    • xper

      MSFN Sponsorship and AdBlockers!   07/10/2016

      Dear members, MSFN is made available via subscriptions, donations and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, become a site sponsor and ads will be disabled automatically and by subscribing you get other sponsor benefits.
JorgeA

Aggressive Update Function in Win8

5 posts in this topic

Is it just me, or is the Windows 8 updater the most aggressive version that we've seen in any edition of Windows?

Microsoft has been offering a certain "important" (not "critical") update, KB2730450. Here's the introductory paragraph for the update from the MS page:

This article describes an update that lets Windows 8 Release Preview send anonymous traces to Microsoft without obtaining explicit user consent. The anonymous traces contain no personally identifiable information and are used to support the identification and correction of operating system (OS) performance issues.

The bit about sending anonymous traces to Microsoft "without obtaining explicit user consent" got my alarm bells ringing, and so I unchecked it. As there were two "optional" updates to review as well, I hit the Back button and then looked at the optional updates. But when I hit the Back button from there to return to the general update screen, I noticed that it reported all important updates had been selected!? Huh? I was certain that I'd unchecked this particular update. So I went back in, unchecked it, hit the Back button, and -- once again, it told me I had all the important updates selected for download!! :angrym:

What's the deal with this? No previous Windows Updates function has worked like this. It's like the process is rigged to get the user to download as many updates as possible, even if you have chosen not to download them automatically. I have enough experience with Windows Updates to know that sometimes they cause more trouble than they fix, and sometimes they require a fix themselves; so for questionable updates I prefer to wait a week or two and watch for reports of trouble. Now I have to be extra careful when reviewing the updates, just to make sure that I don't inadvertently tell it to download something I did not want. Now, instead of being able to go back to the summary updates window, if I desire less than the full selection of updates I have to execute the downloads from the screen for the specific category ("important" vs. "optional" updates).

Another way in which Windows 8 circumscribes the user's scope of action, and channels him/her into doing things Microsoft's way.

I have Windows Updates set to notify before downloading. Is there a way to change the WU behavior for this setting in Win8, to the way that it works in Vista and Windows 7?

--JorgeA

P.S. Note that this update behavior doesn't have anything (necessarily) to do with MS's wish to monitor performance issues. I also have the Consumer Preview, and it keeps pushing an Nvidia driver update the same way: if I uncheck it and then return to the summary updates page, the update miraculously shows up as selected once again. :angry:

Edited by JorgeA
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No previous Windows Updates function has worked like this.

Correction :whistle: :

No previous Windows Updates function has worked.

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, that's not correct in the slightest. Windows update works extremely well and has for a decade :).

But with that said, I don't see what the OP's problem is with sending back anonymous telemetry about the OS's functioning to Microsoft. This kind of low-level data helps developers to identify key areas where the OS can use some improvement or is prone to certain kinds of failures or shortcomings, and allows them to create fixes proactively. This is a GOOD thing. Personally, I ALWAYS opt in to sending anonymous software statistics to the developers, because I selfishly want them to make the software I've bought and paid for better :)

J

No previous Windows Updates function has worked like this.

Correction :whistle: :

No previous Windows Updates function has worked.

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, that's not correct in the slightest. Windows update works extremely well and has for a decade :).

Sure, it was just an occasion for a quick laugh :lol::angel , though the "aggressive" part has always been there and waiting a week or so before allowing it to install certain updates has always been a good idea, that is if you are concerned about "stability".

Example :whistle: :

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But with that said, I don't see what the OP's problem is with sending back anonymous telemetry about the OS's functioning to Microsoft. This kind of low-level data helps developers to identify key areas where the OS can use some improvement or is prone to certain kinds of failures or shortcomings, and allows them to create fixes proactively. This is a GOOD thing. Personally, I ALWAYS opt in to sending anonymous software statistics to the developers, because I selfishly want them to make the software I've bought and paid for better :)

Microsoft has a long history of violating or ignoring user privacy. Therefore I have little confidence in their privacy pledges, policies, or practices, and I do not send them any more information than necessary.

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-245680.html

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-948922.html?tag=fd_lede

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/good-microsoft-versus-bad-microsoft-on-privacy/2287

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/users-outraged-over-windows-live-privacy-violations

http://wmpoweruser.com/watch-what-you-store-on-skydriveyou-may-lose-your-microsoft-life/

I have no more desire for Microsoft to know how I use Windows, than I do for the manufacturer of my soap to know how I take a shower, or for the maker of my car to know how I drive it. You may not mind being tracked and monitored, but I certainly do.

--JorgeA

Edited by JorgeA
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.