|
spasticColon posted:Should I update to 1809 now? I've read online that it can break things after updating and I'm running an older system (i5-2500K, P67 chipset, GTX1070). Do you need to? then yes. Does you current config run fine? then no. I'm still on 1709 and it runs great. Edit: I'm also on a 2500K with a Asus P67 motherboard and a 980Ti.
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 23:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 18:50 |
|
|
zebez posted:Do you need to? then yes. Does you current config run fine? then no. I'm still on 1709 and it runs great. As long as there are no games that require the update then I won't bother with it for now. Also, sup "holding out with an older-than-dirt 2500K and P67 motherboard" buddy. Are you holding out for Zen 2 like I am?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 23:30
|
|
|
zebez posted:Do you need to? then yes. Does you current config run fine? then no. I'm still on 1709 and it runs great. 1709 will stop getting updates in April. You should update.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 00:03
|
|
|
Lambert posted:1709 will stop getting updates in April. You should update. I'm on 1803 so will I keep getting updates? And I just read online that an update for 1809 slows down some games. https://www.pcgamer.com/a-recent-windows-10-update-is-hurting-game-performance-and-messing-with-mice/
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 01:53
|
|
|
spasticColon posted:I'm on 1803 so will I keep getting updates? Just update and stop obsessing over missing a frame per second.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 01:57
|
|
|
spasticColon posted:I'm on 1803 so will I keep getting updates? Yes - until November 12, 2019. (November 10, 2020 for Enterprise/Edu SKUs) edit: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/13853/windows-lifecycle-fact-sheet astral fucked around with this message at 02:28 on Mar 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 02:25
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Just update and stop obsessing over missing a frame per second. Why? There definitely isn't any upside, everything that was broken in 1803 remains just as broken in 1809
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 02:28
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:From the latest fast ring insider build notes: Given that it's an issue with "some drivers", it's equally likely that it's the drive manufacturers pulling weird poo poo. And given that drives have a tendency to die over time they might not have any left in their compatibility testing lab. It's entirely possible that Microsoft should have caught this through internal testing early but without more details on the specifics of the issue I can't really judge one way or another.  edit: misread drivers as drives for some reason but the gist of it being manufacturers might be doing weird poo poo should still apply isndl fucked around with this message at 02:36 on Mar 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 02:33
|
|
|
dissss posted:Why? Why insist on not updating?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 02:36
|
|
|
You've got that the wrong way around - the real question should be why should you update? Obviously if you should do so before your build drops out of support but otherwise it makes sense to hold off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 03:02
|
|
|
oh lord here we go again
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 03:05
|
|
|
dissss posted:You've got that the wrong way around - the real question should be why should you update? Because you are online. Duh. If you don't like it, go install Windows 98.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 03:11
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/dril/status/1096671912506253313
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 03:27
|
|
|
dissss posted:You've got that the wrong way around - the real question should be why should you update? 1809 is/will be offering better Spectre v2 mitigation performance with Retpoline. After it gets tested for a bit, that might be a good reason to update. Also let us not forget the dark mode file explorer. 1904 will offer Windows Sandbox. After it gets tested for a bit, that might be a good reason to update. Basically what I am trying to say is that, buried among all the new emoji and the pixel issues with the calculator, there are some gems too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 03:32
|
|
|
Sandbox annoys the hell out of me. It's essentially Hyper-V and has a vGPU based on Direct3D command passthrough. Because of former, latter should be easily available for regular VMs, but it's apparently not. Goddamn Microsoft.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 03:47
|
|
|
astral posted:1809 is/will be offering better Spectre v2 mitigation performance with Retpoline. After it gets tested for a bit, that might be a good reason to update. Also let us not forget the dark mode file explorer. Sure those are (or rather might be if they pan out) actual reasons. That's an entirely different thing to fishmechs 'just update' nonsense. Personally the only different I've noticed between builds is usually for the worse UI changed and performance and stability regressions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 03:52
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Because you are online. Duh. New builds are not inherently better. You install new builds so that you can get new features and so you can keep getting patches. Since support lasts 18 months, it's fine to skip half of them. You get fewer unique bugs and spend less time fixing things that the major update process can break.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 04:14
|
|
|
Dylan16807 posted:Are you ignoring the part where they are still installing normal updates and making sure their version of Windows is supported? Keeping up to date on Windows is inherently better than randomly halting updates for months at a time. It is not "fine" to skip half of them, it is something you may be forced to do by a specific issue your hosed up system has, and should not be done by anyone as a routine thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 04:19
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Keeping up to date on Windows is inherently better than randomly halting updates for months at a time. You don't seem to understand. They're installing every single update to their build of windows. Each build is supported for 18 months for good reason, and that's because people need flexibility in when they install them. Skipping normal updates is terrible, but skipping builds is just fine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 04:32
|
|
|
Dylan16807 posted:You don't seem to understand. They're installing every single update to their build of windows. Each build is supported for 18 months for good reason, and that's because people need flexibility in when they install them. Skipping normal updates is terrible, but skipping builds is just fine. No I understand. They are skipping updates. There is no reason to skip these updates. Whining about how they're 'builds' in your strange lingo is pointless.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 04:35
|
|
|
fishmech posted:No I understand. They are skipping updates. There is no reason to skip these updates. You can be 100% up to date and secure without the most recent one (or two). Dylan16807 fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Mar 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 04:42
|
|
|
Dylan16807 posted:"Builds" is what Wikipedia seems to call them. They're the replacement for service packs. They are a categorically different thing from normal updates. No. You should be doing them as soon as possible, just like service packs. Because they are necessary updates. What, were you one of those weirdos who refused to install XP SP2 for years on end too?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 04:56
|
|
|
fishmech posted:No I understand. They are skipping updates. There is no reason to skip these updates. fishmech posted:No. You should be doing them as soon as possible, just like service packs. Because they are necessary updates. "Feature" updates are not necessary and do not become so until all previous ones are EOL. You could make a good case that "Quality" updates are necessary, though. Nobody in this recent discussion has claimed you shouldn't get the "Quality" updates, thank goodness.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 05:32
|
|
|
fishmech posted:No. You should be doing them as soon as possible, just like service packs. Because they are necessary updates. They aren't though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 05:56
|
|
|
brb, mailing a printout of fishmech's posting history to redmond with a post-in that says "THIS is the person you are relying on to QA test windows"
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 06:41
|
|
|
Klyith posted:brb, mailing a printout of fishmech's posting history to redmond with a post-in that says "THIS is the person you are relying on to QA test windows" Remember that its actually fishmech + Nintendo Kid total posts. I mean if you do it, do it right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 07:10
|
|
|
installing he newest beta updates for windows is not recommended. My go to strat is to wait til they get tested by the new QA team for a few months. Let em marinate for a bit, then install thanks and have a blessed Sunday
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 07:11
|
|
|
I did the dumb thing and put myself on the slow beta updates Its good though because they unbundled cortana from search which had the unintended side-effect of fixing the start menu jankiness (also search is instant and not poo poo now). There's always one feature worth getting the big updates for and this one is it for me tbh 1809 was dark theme explorer, even as half-baked as it was
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 09:32
|
|
|
astral posted:"Feature" updates are not necessary and do not become so until all previous ones are EOL. Actually they are, and the only reason to skip them is if specific issues crop up on your particular hardware/software. And when that happens, you should be constantly checking back for when the issue is resolved so you can move on. I get that some of you were the idiots who gleefully installed "xp slim" pirated isos back in the day and never updated them til absolutely forced due to misguided beliefs about stability and speed. But that was dumb then and you're dumb now. Update your poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 14:30
|
|
|
Can you comprehend the meaning of the word "feature"? A feature update is just that, it doesn't add more security, it adds new and exciting features like bugs, and security holes! The creators update did some poo poo with the paint program or tried to make it easier to manage content, it didn't improve security, it improved ease of use. A security update is what keeps the operating system actually secure. To put it another way, consider Ubuntu, you have an LTS like 15.04, then you have 15.10, 16.04, etc up until the next long term support release. 15.04 continues to get security updates the whole time up until the next LTS release, you could update to 15.10 and 16.04 in between but most people would say that is kinda stupid unless you just absolutely always want to have the most up to date bleeding edge (and buggy) software. Or I can still choose to run Windows 7 for about another year until support finally ends, it is NOT getting any new features, but it is still getting security updates, same for Windows 8/8.1. A feature update is not the same as a security update.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 15:06
|
|
|
i hate err'ing on the side of Fishmech, but aren't they having trouble actually patching security holes in Win 7 recently? I remember MS made some blog post about it but I can't find it
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 15:44
|
|
|
Crotch Fruit posted:To put it another way, consider Ubuntu, you have an LTS like 15.04, then you have 15.10, 16.04, etc up until the next long term support release. 15.04 continues to get security updates the whole time up until the next LTS release, you could update to 15.10 and 16.04 in between but most people would say that is kinda stupid unless you just absolutely always want to have the most up to date bleeding edge (and buggy) software Ubuntu LTS releases are a bit problematic because only a small set of software actually gets long-term support as part of their program and there's no support for new hardware - if your hardware isn't old, Linux gets important improvements for newish hardware pretty regularly. With LTS, you're missing out on those.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 15:49
|
|
|
Crotch Fruit posted:Can you comprehend the meaning of the word "feature"? Can you comprehend the meaning of the word update? It's an update. There is no reason to skip it unless you specifically have a specific issue come up, and then you need to still update once that has been resolved. If you're just so angry about being made to update, feel free to put your computer back to an OS that doesn't receive any. Crotch Fruit posted:
You can choose to do a lot of stupid things. You shouldn't make those choices any more than you should choose to intentionally run malware. Last Chance posted:i hate err'ing on the side of Fishmech, but aren't they having trouble actually patching security holes in Win 7 recently? I remember MS made some blog post about it but I can't find it There are fundamental security changes that have occurred in the structure of Windows since Windows 7 10 years ago, yeah, which will never be patched into Windows 7. Just as even though XP still had updates for a long while, it was never going to be as secure as running Vista or later 7 once they'd come out. This is what the "buh it's just features" people refuse to understand. They want to act like it's still 1999, not 2019, and you can just choose to leave things alone forever. fishmech fucked around with this message at 16:02 on Mar 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 15:50
|
|
|
Fishmech, you're being at least a little disingenuos. No one in this discussion has advocated never updating at all. One side seems to be arguing that security updates are totally separate from feature updates, while you seem to be arguing that all updates are security updates. I don't have any expertise regarding which is the case for Windows, but it seems to me that there could be some overlap: the big updates add new features and perhaps some security as well, but the intermediate smaller updates tend to be more like patches.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 16:11
|
|
|
hooah posted:Fishmech, you're being at least a little disingenuos. No one in this discussion has advocated never updating at all. One side seems to be arguing that security updates are totally separate from feature updates, while you seem to be arguing that all updates are security updates. I don't have any expertise regarding which is the case for Windows, but it seems to me that there could be some overlap: the big updates add new features and perhaps some security as well, but the intermediate smaller updates tend to be more like patches. There is 0 reason to hold back on updates, period, unless a specific issue occurs. Because when you start having people do that we start having exactly the kind of mess that started this conversation, people who don't know what they're doing wondering if they should move off of one random update point to another but being scared to because other people told them it will hurt nebulous "performance" metrics. It is precisely the same thinking that led to a bunch of people staying at arbitrary custom revisions of XP and other bad moves like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 16:56
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Actually they are, and the only reason to skip them is if specific issues crop up on your particular hardware/software. And when that happens, you should be constantly checking back for when the issue is resolved so you can move on. Janitor on high alert
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 17:00
|
|
|
fishmech posted:There is 0 reason to hold back on updates, period, unless a specific issue occurs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 17:28
|
|
|
Crotch Fruit posted:Please explain why up until January this year, my main desktop was still on 1709 and receiving automatic security updates. What's there to explain? You refused to update your computer for no good reason, I can't explain that bonehead decision.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 17:33
|
|
|
Do you also get super angry whenever you see someone driving an old car that has an updated model available? Those newer ones might have more safety features that protect those inside and outside! I know this isn't exactly a fair comparison because MS doesn't ask you to pay money for updating, but it's actually less dumb of an argument.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 18:50 |
|
|
fishmech posted:What's there to explain? You refused to update your computer for no good reason, I can't explain that bonehead decision.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 17:42
|
|