Microsoft Issues Warning For 800M Windows 10 Users

lcpiper said:

I'm not myopic enough to see it as MS lying to me. Software development is normally conducted by teams. The software team that did this either screwed up and failed on the notification part of the code, or the testers failed to write a correct test case, or any number of other explanations short of being a simpleton and calling them liars.

If something doesn't work right, report the bug, don't cry that you were lied too. If MS doesn't patch your bug, there is a chance that the patch would be overcome by other changes and make it a wasted effort, it's a company's product and they never claimed it would be perfect for everyone always. If it doesn't work for you find one that does.

Click to expand...

Not that this is really worth us arguing back and forth... however it isn't myopia.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb...-longer-backed-up-to-the-regback-folder-start

"This change is by design, and is intended to help reduce the overall disk footprint size of Windows. "

MS has stated in an official document that this change which took effect in april 2018 was designed.... no claim of a bug or someone missed a fix. They claim it was designed and is working as intended.

It was changed over a year ago, no one noticed...

That's a clue as to how big of a deal this isn't.

This change is by design, and is intended to help reduce the overall disk footprint size of Windows.

Click to expand...

Let's face it, Microsoft has never worried about the 'disk footprint' size of Windows. With bloated code which, heaped on top of each previous bit is probably taller than Everest by now, Windows is loaded with stuff nobody wants. It's never been about making the best OS that they can, it's almost always been about selling another copy to people who very likely already have what should be a more than adequate one, though with planned obsolescence by design it simply doesn't work anymore; without an easy way to reinstall, they have no option but to pay MS again for essentially the same thing. Who benefits? Society? Nope. The customer? Nope. Only MS and the manufacturers, while millions of perfectly good computers fill the landfills because of MS' shenanigans.

So now that all those customer created restore points and such are using 'disk space', MS will simply eliminate stuff that the customer actually wants to keep, while retaining all the junk that MS wants you to keep but you don't want.

And, it's been Microsoft's mantra that the end user has no reason to know what's going on 'behind the curtain', ever since Windows 95. 'Just trust us, and give us your money. Anything goes wrong, you can just buy a new computer with another new version of Windows on it, because newer is better!' has basically been their advice.

ChadD said:

Not that this is really worth us arguing back and forth... however it isn't myopia.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb...-longer-backed-up-to-the-regback-folder-start

"This change is by design, and is intended to help reduce the overall disk footprint size of Windows. "

MS has stated in an official document that this change which took effect in april 2018 was designed.... no claim of a bug or someone missed a fix. They claim it was designed and is working as intended.

Click to expand...

No, I mean the message erroneously stating the backups were a success. I know the software change was deliberate, intentional, engineered to happen. It's the incorrect message claiming the backups happen and are successful that I believe were an honest oversight and not an overt lie. That is what I am saying is myopic, making the assumption that it was done "under the table".

Now if I am missing something about this. If it is left out of the change log announcements for the hot-fixes, etc, Then if I'm wrong I'll accept that no issue. I've just been around developers long enough to know that they miss things all the time.

OH, and I agree, not really worth an argument.

THRESHIN said:

Yes the start menu like many things really is personal opinion. I'm rather resistant to change, so its no surprise I am not so happy with the interface on 10.
I have not needed backup options such as system restore, but I didn't find I used them in 7 either. Long term stability seems about the same to me.
As I mentioned, its all the small bugs that really have turned me off 10. Its not that they exist, its the fact that MS clearly doesn't care and is not fixing them.

Click to expand...

For the menu (and I know I'm a broken record on this), but if you use the menu as it's designed, which is mostly to type what you want then select from the list, there's really been no change to how you use the menu since Vista, or maybe 7 if Vista didn't have that...not sure, since I didn't understand that's how it worked back then and by the time I did, I'd moved to 7.

That said, there is someone on H that had a specific use case where search didn't work...can't remember why, but it seemed legit. Truth is peopel complained about 7's menu when it came out. I still remember all the "pros" swearing that the users at work would never be able to use the new UI (esp the start menu) without extensive training. Ditto for 8...but again by then I was typing what I wanted, so side from the way it looked (big ass screen size menu), it worked identically to 7.

I gotta say, if I went back to XP, the start menu would drive me crazy. It's just not as efficient. That said, most of my commonly used programs are on the task bar, so it's only the less used programs that I do a quick search for in the start menu.

People really need to stop relying on MS bundled backup stuff and go use a 3rd-party tool or two. 1 for local backup and 1 for cloud backup.

auntjemima said:

While I don't support this decision at all, especially when they say it's completed successfully and yet hasn't, one has to wonder if Microsoft can ever do the right thing in people's eyes.

If the reason was disk footprint, why say "that's classic"?

For YEARS people have been complaining that windows takes up too much space. They attempt to fix that issue, albeit with a ridiculous solution, and they get snuff about the reasoning.

Click to expand...

Because windows (after a year or two) will be taking up 40-50GB of disk space, for no apparent reason.

Saving ~100MB of potentially system-saving data doesn't even make a scratch in the size of windows.

My work laptop hasn't been running for even 2 years now, from the last clean format. WinSXS folder is ~12GB alone. Windows is over 35GB. Pruning that down would actually make an impact. 100MB doesn't do shit.

Guarana [BAWLS] said:

Because windows (after a year or two) will be taking up 40-50GB of disk space, for no apparent reason.

Saving ~100MB of potentially system-saving data doesn't even make a scratch in the size of windows.

My work laptop hasn't been running for even 2 years now, from the last clean format. WinSXS folder is ~12GB alone. Windows is over 35GB. Pruning that down would actually make an impact. 100MB doesn't do shit.

Click to expand...

I covered this already. Who is to say the system doesn't keep every registry backup it's ever made? I know windows doesn't like to delete older things, from sheer laziness, I imagine (although, if they did remove it SOMEONE would complain their 2002 backup isn't there), so maybe they have like 50 or 100 backups there, which would quickly make it an issue.

westrock2000 said:

Some readers may find this useful content from the story:



So on the surface, sounds bad...but anytime I have recovered from a Windows error, I have used System Restore point. Which according to the above still works. I have never recovered JUST the registry. Using a restore point from a couple days previous has gotten me out of a jam. But, here is the danger. System Restore was turned off by default at some point in Windows 10. I don't know if they have re-enabled that by default. But I did get burned a couple times where I went to System Restore in the recovery screen and it would say "You first need to enable System Restore in Windows 10 first"......the fuck is this?!?!?!?

Click to expand...

Pretty much this. You can still make your own registry backups, but I feel for 99% of most users restore points are just a better way to go.

trandoanhung1991 said:

People really need to stop relying on MS bundled backup stuff and go use a 3rd-party tool or two. 1 for local backup and 1 for cloud backup.

Click to expand...

I actually thought they'd removed the backup program a long time ago...I think I tried it once years ago and just went back to Acronis.

Guarana [BAWLS] said:

Because windows (after a year or two) will be taking up 40-50GB of disk space, for no apparent reason.

Saving ~100MB of potentially system-saving data doesn't even make a scratch in the size of windows.

My work laptop hasn't been running for even 2 years now, from the last clean format. WinSXS folder is ~12GB alone. Windows is over 35GB. Pruning that down would actually make an impact. 100MB doesn't do shit.

Click to expand...

Wow that's odd. I installed 10 in September 2015 and SXS uses 10GB (which is still a lot, but not compared to yours).

nilepez said:

Wow that's odd. I installed 10 in September 2015 and SXS uses 10GB (which is still a lot, but not compared to yours).

Click to expand...

All of my 10 installs start out that small but inevitably end up over 30GB after a year or two. I'm not sure why but might have something to do with a combination of various drivers(printers, display, etc.) and the near endless Visual C+/dot net installs needed by over 10 years worth of games(on separate drives). All I know is that I've done a little checking and that the Windows folder is definitely hogging all that space.