Being a long time Windows user I learned many years back to wait for a week or two after a new patch came out before applying it, to let others try it out and report any problems.
However these days patches seem to go in O.K. and on Windows 8 there doesn't even seem to be an easy option to stop automatic updating.
So - any reason not to turn Windows Update onto full automatic for XP, Vista and 7?
Cheers
Dave R
Not for long...
April 18th 2014 for final EOSL for XP
Darren
I didn't think there were any updates to XP any more.
Depends if you object to machines deciding to update and often need a reboot at times that might not be convenient fr you.
There are, until next April.
I'm on Windows 7 and a few weeks ago the upgrade to IE10 caused problems (I can't remember exactly what they were) and the advice was to roll back to IE9. It's for that kind of reason, and that I don't want anything like the Bing toolbar installing, that I prefer to have a look to see what update wants to do before allowing it.
Agreed.
(Well it is OT).
As a Windows kinda person (professionally) I am repeated amazed at Linux's ability to go forever without a reboot.
My Media server has been up for 51 days now. Since I rebuilt it, and swapped Ubuntu for Debian. Under Ubuntu, it was regularly up for over 100 days at a time ... and even then I suspect the reboots weren't strictly necessary. I used to used the NX server for remote access, and it would crash. I'm sure I could have worked out how to find the rogue process and killed it or restarted it, but it was quicker to reboot.
To stop the reboot until the time of your choosing and stop the reboot popup appearing every 10 minutes (at least in XP)
Let the update proceed
Wait until the reboot appears
Start - Control Panel - Adminstrative Tools - Services
Right Click 'Automatic Updates'
Left Click 'Stop'
The other week, I encountered a Cisco switch that hasn't been rebooted in 13.5 years
+1
On Friday 19 July 2013 12:30 David.WE.Roberts wrote in uk.d-i-y:
I have auto patch and reboot on all bar one of my Windows Server 2008 machines (only a very few machines). No problems yet.
The one thing that has blown me up are Oracle Java updates buggering up a VMWare/EQLLogic component so those are disabled.
I have Win7 on auto update - but it only ever applies the update when you go to power down. And of course may finish the process when you next switch on - which could be a problem if you're in a hurry to use the computer. But I'd just use another one if that happened. ;-)
I have my 7 set to only apply the updates at power-down. It actually downloads them during the day, so I just log off & go to bed & it applies them, then powers down. Seems to work a treat, so far.
Hurrah!
We have (Unixy) servers at work that have uptimes measured in years.
On Friday 19 July 2013 13:27 Jethro_uk wrote in uk.d-i-y:
That's not technically true - any system update that affects things across the board requires a reboot (say core libraries used by everything, eg libc).
And of course kernerl updates.
However, I probably reboot my servers once a quarter - usually when VMWare wants to shove new guest drivers on.
But it does seem a *lot* less than Windows in frequency...
vps:/var/log/apache2# uptime 16:55:25 up 167 days, 6:09, 1 user, load average: 0.02, 0.02, 0.00 vps:/var/log/apache2#
THAT only went down because the hosting company had a massive weirdness in their network infrastructure.
Last time I did an OS update on SWMBO's desktop, I was amazed to find that it had been up for a little more than 400 days. The previous reboot was after the previous OS update....
Not Windows.
FWIW, I don't see a single reason to bother with Windows Updates for home machines and certainly not for XP. Bogs it all down a million temp and backup files and some of the new "features" (IE7/8/9 and, on one struggling XP laptop, a pointlessly updated Search function) stretch the performance of older hardware.
As for having to put up with "Please wait while configuring/installing updates" when you just wanted to quickly reboot it for whatever reason is infuriating.
Install, run updates once (and sometimes not at all if it arses about doing it), turn off and leave off. Never caused me grief. Never left me missing some feature or other and if it turns out that you really need a Hotfix, this can still be done. And, above all, never given me a machine that runs dog slow and as stable as an elephant on a tightrope.
Well I just apply updates - can't recall last time one required a reboot.
I was convinced Linux was different to Windows when my brother (who is a Linux expert) logged into my system remotely, and while I was surfing, managed to recompile and reload the audio driver so the speakers suddenly started working. Try doing that in windows.
On Friday 19 July 2013 17:32 Jethro_uk wrote in uk.d-i-y:
They don't always tell you - depends on the distro.
But any kernel or core library update needs a reboot. As to whether you
*need* to reboot there and then depends very much on whether the update was a security patch and whether you are exposed to whatever security flaw.Windows is reboot happy. I'm just cautioning that just because linux isn't doesn't totally make it the case that it does need odd reboots :)
Indeed. Windows wants a bloody reboot just to install certain programs.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.