|
BangersInMyKnickers posted:Hahahaha I can't believe this general use computer configured to execute arbitrary code has to reboot occasionally unlike a television! You jest but my parents LG 'smart TV' has done just that a couple of times
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 23:17 |
|
|
Medullah posted:Note to self - create ransomware that presents itself as a program to delay automatic restarts for Windows Update.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
It's weird too that since like at least Windows 95 (or earlier?) programs can add event hooks for when the system is shutting down, allowing them to save work in progress. Like sure, if it reboots to a login prompt nothing will start again so a long running job might pause till you re-login but it seems sloppy for any compute jobs to not gracefully exit or at the very least checkpoint their work.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 03:08
|
|
|
So I tested not rebooting for several days after the last round of updates, and it popped up a window asking what day I wanted to schedule a reboot. Very good, really. So the mechanism to force rebooting without having unexpected reboots already exists. It's not a dichotomy between "no reboots" and "unexpected reboots". Let's not treat it like one. If Microsoft removed the "reboot when 'idle'" code, other code would still force timely reboots. There would be no explosion of vulnerability. But it would be a lot less user-hostile. Edit: It would also be nice if they stopped changing the mechanism without saying anything, because it didn't do the same thing the last time I put off rebooting for a week. Dylan16807 fucked around with this message at 05:05 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
Klyith posted:did I claim to be? they wouldn't be automatic then??????
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
Dylan16807 posted:So I tested not rebooting for several days after the last round of updates, and it popped up a window asking what day I wanted to schedule a reboot. Very good, really. So the mechanism to force rebooting without having unexpected reboots already exists. its "reboot when idle within this time period i configure" so, and they are plenty of indications it will happen before it does.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 06:29
|
|
|
necrotic posted:its "reboot when idle within this time period i configure" so, and they are plenty of indications it will happen before it does. By "period I configure" do you mean active hours? Those don't help at all with the problem of "I left for the day and it installed updates and rebooted before I got back". There's no warning in that case. Am I misunderstanding how that works? As far as I understand it, the only way to get reasonable behavior is to have something open that prevents the system from registering as idle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 07:03
|
|
|
Dylan16807 posted:By "period I configure" do you mean active hours? Those don't help at all with the problem of "I left for the day and it installed updates and rebooted before I got back". There's no warning in that case. why did you leave with unsaved stuff? and if its all saved who cares if it restarted to update? i dont get why thats a problem at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 07:04
|
|
|
necrotic posted:why did you leave with unsaved stuff? and if its all saved who cares if it restarted to update? Not every program can save everything. Some programs can't save intermediate state at all. And god forbid I have an IRC client where I don't want a 20 hour gap in the logs. With warning I can finish up some things, save others, and make sure I relaunch my active programs immediately.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 07:14
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:That's not how botnets work. That's when you turn on your PC and instead of the usual computer stuff it's just a rotating wireframe skull saying HA. HA. HA. HA. HA. at full-blast through the speakers, right? You see there's this thing called Common Sense 2017, where you get angry at your computer trying to keep itself secure because it's not like it can manually inspect and verify every single 1 and 0 on the thing like I can 
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 07:45
|
|
so I could say that I finally figured out what this god damned cube is doing. Get well Lowtax.
|
fishmech posted:Doing that for 20 years is why we have it hard to do now. fishmech posted:Nah, if you let people not do the update as long as they want, a bunch of them will simply never update. Citation: Literally The Last 20 Years Of Windows Updates Existing BTW this is a prime example of why your arguments are poo poo. If you reduce the question to "How to make spherical updates happen in a frictionless vacuum." then yes, this is literally the only correct answer. Just look at how much you narrowed the history we're supposed to look at. Pay no attention to genius ideas like "Hey, let's render fonts in ring0!" "Hey, let's stuff the GUI in ring0!" "Hey, let's run untrusted code from the network in ring0 with undocumented ASM traps to give it direct system access if it knows about them just so we can see what it does." Please also ignore that they've had 20 years to fix the insurmountable (to literally only themselves) problem of making updates happen without reboots. Or to rethink how they deliver services to new code so at least you could just force a reboot of the legacy sandbox instead of the whole system. Or to harden the whole OS and isolate programs from each other. So yes, you're right. The only way to get people to update when it's a process this loving awful is to try to sneak it past them when they're not watching. It's almost like the rest of us are talking about improving the garbage-fire that's the status quo and you're laser-focused on one insignificant aspect.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 08:05
|
|
|
Klyith posted:times i've been pwned by win10 updates and lost work: 2 Harik posted:Just look at how much you narrowed the history we're supposed to look at. Pay no attention to genius ideas like "Hey, let's render fonts in ring0!" "Hey, let's stuff the GUI in ring0!" "Hey, let's run untrusted code from the network in ring0 with undocumented ASM traps to give it direct system access if it knows about them just so we can see what it does." Create a scenario in your head where you are pitching at a MS board meeting why you should re-write from scratch 20 years of (essentially working) code, with no greater or lesser sale value, instead of patching and making new things instead. Yes it's kinda bad but as you so rightly said, but wrongly applied, the problems don't exist in a vacuum, especially without money/dev time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 09:41
|
|
|
necrotic posted:why did you leave with unsaved stuff? and if its all saved who cares if it restarted to update? Some people use their general purpose computing device to run software that is sensitive to being shut down unexpectedly. Is that really hard to understand?  If you want to argue that programs should be designed to handle those shutdown announcements, sure, that's the ideal for an ideal world. We've got twenty years of old software still in use however, and new software being made on shoestring or hobbyist budgets that aren't necessarily conforming to that ideal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 09:46
|
|
|
isndl posted:Some people use their general purpose computing device to run software that is sensitive to being shut down unexpectedly. Is that really hard to understand? But they aren't being shut down unexpectedly, the system performs its standard shut down procedure. It's no more unexpected to any given program than the user hitting Start > Shut Down themselves. And what 20 year old programs are people using that need to be kept running, anyway?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 10:19
|
|
|
Doctor_Fruitbat posted:But they aren't being shut down unexpectedly, the system performs its standard shut down procedure. It's no more unexpected to any given program than the user hitting Start > Shut Down themselves. And what 20 year old programs are people using that need to be kept running, anyway? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 10:24
|
|
|
Doctor_Fruitbat posted:But they aren't being shut down unexpectedly, the system performs its standard shut down procedure. It's no more unexpected to any given program than the user hitting Start > Shut Down themselves. And what 20 year old programs are people using that need to be kept running, anyway? The standard shutdown procedure when you hit Start > Shutdown will fail if a program is waiting for user input. It will not force kill the process unless the user tells it to. I don't know what programs people are using that are literally twenty years old, but I'm sure they're out there and it's not my place to judge whether it's justified. Microsoft put in the effort to make Windows backwards compatible and that should be reason enough.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 10:41
|
|
|
Doctor_Fruitbat posted:But they aren't being shut down unexpectedly, the system performs its standard shut down procedure. It's no more unexpected to any given program than the user hitting Start > Shut Down themselves. And what 20 year old programs are people using that need to be kept running, anyway? Hi, I run a $6000 surveillance system on a box that runs Win 10. Blue Iris, the surveillance software has the perfect combination of features and capability to perfectly coordinate this system. It sits in a a locked area, and I remote in to change things. I touch the physical box maybe twice a year. It's not recording 24/7, but I need it ready to record whatever motion it may see. It can't do that if it's rebooting. So I disabled automatic updates and firewalled it from the world. Now I get to choose when the downtime will happen, same as on 8.1 Pro and 7 Pro. Can you understand that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 11:18
|
|
|
bobfather posted:Hi, I run a $6000 surveillance system on a box that runs Win 10. Maybe you shouldn't run a $6000 surveillance system on a consumer desktop OS?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 11:23
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:Maybe you shouldn't run a $6000 surveillance system on a consumer desktop OS? It could be a $75 surveillance system running just 1 camera. Who cares about the scale. Lots of people run Blue Iris for diy surveillance systems. And truly, a consumer OS is what the software was designed for. Server-grade processors don't even have the correct QuickSync instruction sets to offload the video streams to hardware, but consumer processors usually do. Are you thinking Win 7 or Win 8.1 would actually be better for those folks, because those OSes don't spontaneously reboot? Or are you recommending that people pay LOL money for Server 2016,? Do tell - what's the reasonable answer for getting a system that lets me fully manage reboots?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 11:30
|
|
|
bobfather posted:Do tell - what's the reasonable answer for getting a system that lets me fully manage reboots? The Pro version, which has several options for deferring updates and has an option to sign you back into Windows with your credentials before locking the system, so even if your surveillance system was taken offline during the update, it will come back online when Windows restarts shortly after.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
Doctor_Fruitbat posted:The Pro version, which has several options for deferring updates and has an option to sign you back into Windows with your credentials before locking the system, so even if your surveillance system was taken offline during the update, it will come back online when Windows restarts shortly after. Unexpected downtime? Even for 1 minute? Can't have / don't want. I need a better option. Edit: regarding the auto sign in, are you talking about Netplwiz (aka control userpasswords2)? Now when my system reboots spontaneously it stays auto logged in for 1 minute before it locks? So now any employee can gain access to a secure system and tamper with footage just by forcing a reboot? bobfather fucked around with this message at 12:02 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 11:58
|
|
|
bobfather posted:Unexpected downtime? Even for 1 minute? Can't have / don't want. I need a better option. No, not Netplwiz. It installs any update components at the log-in screen that would otherwise require the user to log in, then locks again, before hitting the physical desktop. Also, if you have an office with employees, why would you use Home edition? Are you seriously trying to operate a business with consumer software, with zero downtime for maintenance, with not even a half hour a month (or less, if you defer upgrades) where you can lock up shop and run some system updates?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 13:07
|
|
|
We don't use Home in our Office, we use Pro. I'm merely providing an example of how forced reboots could be a bad thing for a user that critically values uptime, for one reason or another.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 13:19
|
|
|
Fair enough, I probably should have asked.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 13:29
|
|
|
Harik posted:BTW this is a prime example of why your arguments are poo poo. If you reduce the question to "How to make spherical updates happen in a frictionless vacuum." then yes, this is literally the only correct answer. bobfather posted:Unexpected downtime? Even for 1 minute? Can't have / don't want. I need a better option. Buy a backup system that can take over in case the first system is down. You already need this anyway if you truly can't have any downtime, a single system just can't do that. fishmech fucked around with this message at 15:05 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
bobfather posted:Unexpected downtime? Even for 1 minute? Can't have / don't want. I need a better option. Don't run windows. Spend the money for an enterprise-grade UNIX OS and hardware or adjust your expectations. I feel like this is a no brainer, but maybe I've just been in IT for too long.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:43
|
|
|
bobfather posted:It could be a $75 surveillance system running just 1 camera. Who cares about the scale. Lots of people run Blue Iris for diy surveillance systems. And truly, a consumer OS is what the software was designed for. Server-grade processors don't even have the correct QuickSync instruction sets to offload the video streams to hardware, but consumer processors usually do. The answer is don't run Windows for 24/7 service roles unless you can justify the version of Windows intended for 24/7 service roles. Yes lots of people do it. That doesn't mean it's ever been a good idea, nor that it ever will be. If you want a cheap 24/7 appliance type platform, run it on Linux or BSD. If you have software which is designed around the idea of using consumer versions of Windows as a server maybe that should have been a red flag. wolrah fucked around with this message at 15:08 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:05
|
|
|
I just set up a task to automatically shut down people's machines after five minutes of no hard drive read/write activity. I find that breaks bad habits pretty fast. Plus it makes sure the updates are always installed!
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
wolrah posted:The answer is don't run Windows for 24/7 service roles unless you can justify the version of Windows intended for 24/7 service roles. What's the difference between unpatched Windows Server and unpatched Windows Home except that the first one costs a lot more? I thought we were worried about getting vulnerabilities patched.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
Typically people aren't clicking on dumb poo poo on your windows server box. I'm not nearly as worried about servers that aren't on the dmz as I am about user workstations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
How do I keep windows from auto-locking when I disconnect from Remote Desktop?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
PRADA SLUT posted:How do I keep windows from auto-locking when I disconnect from Remote Desktop? I'm pretty sure you don't. It's just how Remote Desktop has always worked. When you take over an existing login session via RDP, any terminal (local or remote) currently controlling the session gets locked. When you then disconnect from the session again, those other terminals remain locked. If you want to take over a current login session without booting any user on the console, you need to use some different remote control software.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
I love how you misread the question as the opposite of what he asked, but still got the right answer. But to be more clear, Remote Desktop, by design, is tied to a login session. When you log out of RDP, that session goes away and Windows has no choice but to lock because there's no display for the desktop to remain active on. You want something like VNC instead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
biznatchio posted:I love how you misread the question as the opposite of what he asked, but still got the right answer. You can disconnect without logging out. A single session can go back and forth between local use and remote use.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
Dylan16807 posted:You can disconnect without logging out. A single session can go back and forth between local use and remote use. You, also, apparently misread the question. The question wasn't about logging out. The question was about locking.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
biznatchio posted:The question wasn't about logging out. biznatchio posted:Remote Desktop, by design, is tied to a login session. When you log out of RDP, that session goes away Huh? I think I did misunderstand what you were saying, but if you're just talking about the RDP 'logout'/disconnect, then I don't know why you're saying it locks at the end, because it locks the screen at the start of RDP connecting. Which is what nielsm said. Dylan16807 fucked around with this message at 01:10 on Jun 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
Dylan16807 posted:Huh? Yes, but the question was this: PRADA SLUT posted:How do I keep windows from auto-locking when I disconnect from Remote Desktop? Which has nothing to do with locking when you connect and everything to do with locking when you disconnect.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
I have a Surface Pro 2 that came with Windows 8. I did the Windows 10 free upgrade when it first became available. I'm wanting to factory reset my device and the reset info states something along the lines of "will install the Windows that came with the computer". If I do the factory reset, does anyone know for sure if it will automatically install Windows 8 again? If so, will I be able to upgrade back to Windows 10 for free?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Hughmoris posted:I have a Surface Pro 2 that came with Windows 8. I did the Windows 10 free upgrade when it first became available. I'm wanting to factory reset my device and the reset info states something along the lines of "will install the Windows that came with the computer". According to Microsoft's support page, when you did the Windows 10 upgrade it replaced the onboard copy of Windows 8.1 in "recovery" storage with Windows 10. If you go to Start > Settings > Update & security > Recovery and then under "Reset this PC", select Get started, you should then select "Restore factory settings" if present, otherwise select "Remove everything"
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 23:17 |
|
|
fishmech posted:According to Microsoft's support page, when you did the Windows 10 upgrade it replaced the onboard copy of Windows 8.1 in "recovery" storage with Windows 10. Great, I'll give it a go. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 01:43
|
|