Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Why Windows 10 users should care about the Azerbaijani Manat


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 JohnC_21

JohnC_21

  • Members
  • 24,311 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:21 PM

Posted 11 February 2016 - 05:02 PM

InfoWorld:

 

Now it's time to take on the second fundamental problem with Windows 10. Microsoft needs to separate its monolithic Win10 patches into (at least) three buckets. We need separate patches for security updates, for nonsecurity updates/bug fixes, and for "optional" patches, such as drivers and minor feature improvements.

 

To explain why the patches need to come out in separate buckets, I'd like to step you through what happened last month with the Windows 7/8.1 patch KB 3102429. That patch added the Azerbaijani Manat and Georgian Lari currency symbols to the list of "valid" currency symbols. To understand the not-yet-learned lesson and its importance for Windows 10, look at how the patch progressed.

Microsoft released the patch as an optional "nonsecurity content" update on Nov. 17, 2015. It turned into a recommended patch on Dec. 8. Although it took a week or two for complaints to surface, Windows 7 and 8.1 customers figured out that installing the patch broke Crystal Reports 9 and 10's "export as PDF" capability. Programs created with Visual Studio 2008 and 2010 also froze when they tried to use Crystal Reports.

 

In the Windows 10 world, all of the patches arrive in one undifferentiated lump. The Azerbaijani Manat and Georgian Lari would make an appearance as a tiny part of a large cumulative update. Admins (and individuals) who follow such details would discover that this big cumulative update breaks Crystal Reports. Those in the know would have two options: Install the CU and gut Crystal Reports and any VS 2008/2010 programs that use Crystal Reports; or wait for Microsoft to come up with its next CU. There's no middle ground.

 

On my Windows7 and 8 computers I would not have touched KB 3102429 with a 10 foot pole. Can't avoid it on 10. Happy Computing



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 sikntired

sikntired

  • Members
  • 1,024 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA
  • Local time:04:21 PM

Posted 11 February 2016 - 06:23 PM

Yeah John, after researching this 'optional update', I hid it. Of course, I may have shot myself in the foot by not downloading and installing this much sought after currency.  :whistle:



#3 rp88

rp88

  • Members
  • 3,048 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:09:21 PM

Posted 12 February 2016 - 05:13 PM

Just as we all knew it would be, a system where users cannot reject unwanted updates is sure to hit these kinds of problems.
Back on this site, for a while anyway, been so busy the last year.

My systems:2 laptops, intel i3 processors, windows 8.1 installed on the hard-drive and linux mint 17.3 MATE installed to USB

#4 britechguy

britechguy

    Been there, done that, got the T-shirt


  • Moderator
  • 8,689 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Staunton, VA
  • Local time:05:21 PM

Posted 12 February 2016 - 06:26 PM

Just as we all knew it would be, a system where users cannot reject unwanted updates is sure to hit these kinds of problems.


And I've yet to see any system, over time, where the user thinks they're smarter than the actual developer of the OS, not hit even worse problems.

Sorry, but I'll gladly take, "Damned if I do," because these occasional glitchy updates get fixed, and these days far more rapidly than they once did.

The same is not true of the heaps of cyber rubble I've had to piece back together, if that could be done at all, because the owners followed the stupid advice to not apply Windows updates or to second guess their criticality. Sorry, thanks but no thanks.

Brian  AKA  Bri the Tech Guy (website in my user profile) - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134 

     . . . the presumption of innocence, while essential in the legal realm, does not mean the elimination of common sense outside it.  The willing suspension of disbelief has its limits, or should.

    ~ Ruth Marcus,  November 10, 2017, in Washington Post article, Bannon is right: It’s no coincidence The Post broke the Moore story


 

 

 

              

 


#5 Chris Cosgrove

Chris Cosgrove

  • Moderator
  • 6,922 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:10:21 PM

Posted 12 February 2016 - 06:31 PM

While I don't, to my knowledge, use either Crystal Reports or VB I too did not install this on any of the machines under my control having no need for symbols for these exotic currencies. But this was always going to be a problem with the compulsory update concept behind Win 10.

 

Like so many things, the intention was good. We have all come across computers which have never seen an update of any sort since the day they were built and users who are oblivious of the existence of updates. But . . .

 

A quick google suggests that the total population of these two countries is 14M people and no doubt symbols for their currencies are important to them and to those trading with them but totally irrelevant to the vast majority of humanity. I can see the sense in making security updates compulsory but there is a case for saying minority updates like these should be left on the MS database for those who need them. And as for hardware updates, go to the manufacturer.

 

Chris Cosgrove



#6 JohnC_21

JohnC_21
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 24,311 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:21 PM

Posted 12 February 2016 - 06:36 PM

 

Just as we all knew it would be, a system where users cannot reject unwanted updates is sure to hit these kinds of problems.


And I've yet to see any system, over time, where the user thinks they're smarter than the actual developer of the OS, not hit even worse problems.

Sorry, but I'll gladly take, "Damned if I do," because these occasional glitchy updates get fixed, and these days far more rapidly than they once did.

The same is not true of the heaps of cyber rubble I've had to piece back together, if that could be done at all, because the owners followed the stupid advice to not apply Windows updates or to second guess their criticality. Sorry, thanks but no thanks.

Unless it's a kernel update that bricks your computer. 

 

http://www.hotforsecurity.com/blog/some-windows-7-pcs-bricked-by-microsoft-after-faulty-patch-tuesday-update-9945.html



#7 britechguy

britechguy

    Been there, done that, got the T-shirt


  • Moderator
  • 8,689 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Staunton, VA
  • Local time:05:21 PM

Posted 12 February 2016 - 09:04 PM

 

 

Just as we all knew it would be, a system where users cannot reject unwanted updates is sure to hit these kinds of problems.


And I've yet to see any system, over time, where the user thinks they're smarter than the actual developer of the OS, not hit even worse problems.

Sorry, but I'll gladly take, "Damned if I do," because these occasional glitchy updates get fixed, and these days far more rapidly than they once did.

The same is not true of the heaps of cyber rubble I've had to piece back together, if that could be done at all, because the owners followed the stupid advice to not apply Windows updates or to second guess their criticality. Sorry, thanks but no thanks.

 

Unless it's a kernel update that bricks your computer. 
 
http://www.hotforsecurity.com/blog/some-windows-7-pcs-bricked-by-microsoft-after-faulty-patch-tuesday-update-9945.html

 


The use of the term "bricked" followed by fixed by a patch to a patch does not compute.

Again, emphasis:  Sorry, but I'll gladly take, "Damned if I do," because these occasional glitchy updates get fixed, and these days far more rapidly than they once did.


Brian  AKA  Bri the Tech Guy (website in my user profile) - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134 

     . . . the presumption of innocence, while essential in the legal realm, does not mean the elimination of common sense outside it.  The willing suspension of disbelief has its limits, or should.

    ~ Ruth Marcus,  November 10, 2017, in Washington Post article, Bannon is right: It’s no coincidence The Post broke the Moore story


 

 

 

              

 


#8 JohnC_21

JohnC_21
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 24,311 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:21 PM

Posted 13 February 2016 - 10:14 AM

I agree that "bricked" was too strong a word for the problem but if a person did not know how to get out of the BSOD how would they be able to patch the patch? I agree though that for the average person, they may be better off doing automatic updates but I still think "Give me recommended updates the same way I receive Important updates" should be unchecked in settings. 

 

Personally, I wait a week before I do any updates to see how things shake out.


Edited by JohnC_21, 13 February 2016 - 10:16 AM.


#9 britechguy

britechguy

    Been there, done that, got the T-shirt


  • Moderator
  • 8,689 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Staunton, VA
  • Local time:05:21 PM

Posted 13 February 2016 - 12:17 PM

I agree that "bricked" was too strong a word for the problem but if a person did not know how to get out of the BSOD how would they be able to patch the patch? I agree though that for the average person, they may be better off doing automatic updates but I still think "Give me recommended updates the same way I receive Important updates" should be unchecked in settings. 

 

Personally, I wait a week before I do any updates to see how things shake out.

 

I guess all I'm saying is that I've seen BSOD situations very rarely from an official Microsoft Windows Update, and only rarely has an official Windows update caused me any issues.  I've had one during the months since Windows 10 rolled out but that's the only one I remember in years.  It was also interesting to see just how quickly the glitchy update that was the original Fall Update (1511) was stopped dead in its tracks by Microsoft when telemetry told them within a few hours that something just wasn't right.  Having been a developer (not for Microsoft) for years I am only too familiar with the far-too-common approach of IT management that, "There's always time to do it over, but seldom time to do it right in the first place," when it comes to release deadlines.  That's one of the reasons I don't program for a living anymore, I just couldn't stand the endless fire fighting because we were never allowed to delay releases that we developers knew should have waited anywhere from a couple of extra days to, possibly at the extreme, several months before they would actually be "ready for primetime."  When the use of telemetry wasn't even in existence yet, you ended up having your entire user base, or close to it, crash and burn and had to try to pick up the pieces afterward.  We've come a long way since then in averting meltdown when something gets rushed out that shouldn't have been rushed out.

 

Seriously, I don't even know where that setting you refer to is located under Windows 10.  I've certainly never been able to find anything similar.  I know it from Windows 7, and I think it exists in 8/8.1, but Microsoft changed approach with Windows 10 and now the only choices I have are whether to go full automatic or let me schedule restart and whether or not I get updates for other Microsoft products when I get updates for Windows.

 

No matter which way MS would have gone with this there would have been hell to pay.  Windows 10 was still nowhere near to "ready for primetime" at it's July 2015 release date and those of us with a long history with MS knew that this would be the case.  But issues have been fixed far more quickly, and sometimes before an update roll-out was anywhere near to complete, than they ever have been before.  Having been "on the Microsoft side of the fence" in the past, I can understand entirely why they want to have the OS as "perfectly consistent" as they can across all installations.  One of the reasons I always encouraged my clients to apply all critical and important updates was because, in the event that something went wrong and you hadn't, Microsoft's first response when you sought support was, "apply all the updates and see if that fixes it."  Often times that did "fix it."   The average user is not well-equipped to monitor updates and make decisions on whether to apply them, thus, I get entirely why MS decided to go this route.  They did so in the full knowledge that a certain contingent of their users, power users who constitute a tiny minority of their embedded base, were going to be furious.  They did a cost-benefit analysis and made their choice.


Edited by britechguy, 13 February 2016 - 12:18 PM.

Brian  AKA  Bri the Tech Guy (website in my user profile) - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134 

     . . . the presumption of innocence, while essential in the legal realm, does not mean the elimination of common sense outside it.  The willing suspension of disbelief has its limits, or should.

    ~ Ruth Marcus,  November 10, 2017, in Washington Post article, Bannon is right: It’s no coincidence The Post broke the Moore story


 

 

 

              

 


#10 JohnC_21

JohnC_21
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 24,311 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:21 PM

Posted 13 February 2016 - 12:33 PM

Nice post. The update setting I refer to is Windows 7 and 8.

 

 Having been a developer (not for Microsoft) for years I am only too familiar with the far-too-common approach of IT management that, "There's always time to do it over, but seldom time to do it right in the first place," when it comes to release deadlines.  That's one of the reasons I don't program for a living anymore, I just couldn't stand the endless fire fighting because we were never allowed to delay releases that we developers knew should have waited anywhere from a couple of extra days to, possibly at the extreme, several months before they would actually be "ready for primetime

 

I think a perfect example of this are the big day one patches on high profile PC and console games. Borderlands > 16GB day one patch.



#11 rp88

rp88

  • Members
  • 3,048 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:09:21 PM

Posted 13 February 2016 - 05:22 PM

Post#5: Bricked is defined as "unrepairable by software means", if a system image can save your computer, if a recovery disc can save your computer, if you can reset to factory fresh manufacturers recovery media then it's not bricked, but if certain parts of say, the BIOS/UEFI are damaged then bricking can occur, some updates to firmare or drivers may sometimes do this.
Back on this site, for a while anyway, been so busy the last year.

My systems:2 laptops, intel i3 processors, windows 8.1 installed on the hard-drive and linux mint 17.3 MATE installed to USB

#12 rp88

rp88

  • Members
  • 3,048 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:09:21 PM

Posted 13 February 2016 - 05:28 PM

Post #8
A week is a bit long to wait, I aim to do security ones within a day. Non-security updates however I generally reject entirely.


Post #9, "The average user is not well-equipped to monitor updates and make decisions on whether to apply them"
I do not think that to be the case, the average users can learn to look at the descripton pages and use those to make reasonably informed decisions, furthermore they can definitely set themselves a routine of when to do it, however even if the statement were the case it doesn't make it right to deny them the freedom to do so. Rather ms could have kept doing what they do on xp/7/8/8.1, have updates by default on so users with new systems who don't know about updates don't have to do anything, have a big word "recommended" next to the setting they think is best, but still let users change this when the user disagrees with that recommendation, which as KB3035583 and many updates relating to new currency symobls have shown us is often the wiser move.

Edited by rp88, 13 February 2016 - 05:29 PM.

Back on this site, for a while anyway, been so busy the last year.

My systems:2 laptops, intel i3 processors, windows 8.1 installed on the hard-drive and linux mint 17.3 MATE installed to USB

#13 britechguy

britechguy

    Been there, done that, got the T-shirt


  • Moderator
  • 8,689 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Staunton, VA
  • Local time:05:21 PM

Posted 13 February 2016 - 07:36 PM


Post #9, "The average user is not well-equipped to monitor updates and make decisions on whether to apply them"
I do not think that to be the case, the average users can learn to look at the descripton pages and use those to make reasonably informed decisions, furthermore they can definitely set themselves a routine of when to do it, however even if the statement were the case it doesn't make it right to deny them the freedom to do so. Rather ms could have kept doing what they do on xp/7/8/8.1, have updates by default on so users with new systems who don't know about updates don't have to do anything, have a big word "recommended" next to the setting they think is best, but still let users change this when the user disagrees with that recommendation, which as KB3035583 and many updates relating to new currency symobls have shown us is often the wiser move.

 

We shall simply have to agree to disagree.   I have decades in both the computer world and now in the health care world as well and I can say, to an absolute certainty, that "patient compliance" with any regimen that relies on them doing something repeatedly is sketchy at best.  The sketchiness increases with increasing time intervals between required action(s).

 

Microsoft has, in my opinion, made a choice based upon what they've observed over decades being congruent with my observation above.  Full automatic is going to be far less problematic for a large user base over time than giving users too much choice has been.  This is a legitimate difference in opinions and approach.


Brian  AKA  Bri the Tech Guy (website in my user profile) - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134 

     . . . the presumption of innocence, while essential in the legal realm, does not mean the elimination of common sense outside it.  The willing suspension of disbelief has its limits, or should.

    ~ Ruth Marcus,  November 10, 2017, in Washington Post article, Bannon is right: It’s no coincidence The Post broke the Moore story


 

 

 

              

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users