Now I Remember Why I Hate Windows

cybereality

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,391
Been using Ubuntu Linux straight for over a month and I am more than happy.

Just had to boot into Windows for my school (they use software for the test that doesn't work in Linux).

I am treated to Windows update which has taken an hour and is still not done.

Then I got a friggin advertisement on the desktop. Not feeling Windows at all these days.

Windows.jpg
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,611
I've had Linux upgrades take longer... but an ad?

That's a new one :D
You've had Linux updates take longer than an hour?! I think B00nie's mentioned red flags to you before, but that's not normal - Not by a long shot. I honestly think your PC has issues my friend. Most cumulative updates under Linux should be done in two minutes at most, under KDE Neon I don't even have to reboot - I just keep working like nothing is happening.

I had a client's machine the other day take ~4 hours to apply a Windows cumulative update.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,889
You've had Linux updates take longer than an hour?! I think B00nie's mentioned red flags to you before, but that's not normal - Not by a long shot. I honestly think your PC has issues my friend.
Different PCs (I use at least four), different distributions, and then VMs in the mix.

I've also not had Windows updates take long recently.

Lots of anecdotes...
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,611
Different PCs (I use at least four), different distributions, and then VMs in the mix.

I've also not had Windows updates take long recently.

Lots of anecdotes...
I apply Windows updates daily across a vast number of machines. Considering most Windows PC's are running ~4GB of RAM and mechanical HDD's, an hour to apply an update is not in any way uncommon. Get the exact same machine and install Linux, then install a cumulative update, and I've never had it take any longer than five mins considering the spec of the machine.

It's even worse where Malware stops the Windows 10 update process from functioning. Remove the Malware, do a supposed quick reboot and tear your hair out.

It's ironic that the only real way to stop the updater dead in it's tracks is to install Malware...
 

cybereality

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,391
I've had Linux upgrades take longer.
I update my Ubuntu machine regularly, and usually it only takes a minute.

Even for the big updates (19.04 to 19.10) I think it was only about 10 or 15 minutes.

My Windows machine just finished. I did pause it to take the test, but the whole process probably took 2 hours at least.
 

cybereality

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,391
I don't see what a Nero ad has to do with Windows?
Yes, it is a Nero ad. I have the software installed, didn't realize they setup a service in the background, or that they would serve me ads.

While of course that is not Microsoft's fault, per se, it seems common on Windows for software to install stuff in the background without your knowledge or consent.

I would be very shocked and surprised to see a FOSS product showing me ads on my Linux desktop.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,889
...aside from Amazon and Ubuntu...

I kid ;)

I will also say that I've been using the Decrapifyier script to set up 10 Pro more like the LTSC version. I keep the Windows Store and had to add the Xbox stuff to play The Outer Worlds, but otherwise pretty smooth sailing.
 

auntjemima

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 1, 2014
Messages
6,048
Yes, it is a Nero ad. I have the software installed, didn't realize they setup a service in the background, or that they would serve me ads.

While of course that is not Microsoft's fault, per se, it seems common on Windows for software to install stuff in the background without your knowledge or consent.

I would be very shocked and surprised to see a FOSS product showing me ads on my Linux desktop.
I am definitely feeling the whole update thing under Windows. Linux is definitely faster...

But, I had to reply to this specific post. What do you mean "it's not Microsoft's fault, per se"?

It's not Windows or Microsoft's fault AT ALL. I can write a program that does pretty much whatever I want it to. I'm sure you had to click "continue" on the WUA warning more than once while installing Nero. It's on you, not Windows.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,589
I've had Linux upgrades take longer... but an ad?

That's a new one :D
An hour... perhaps if your counting downloads on a 56k line / pouched internet connection.

Not counting download times... in general all my arch/manjaro installs update in 2-3 min even if I'm doing 2GB+ of updates. And of course being Linux that isn't just system updates but full system updates. Suse installs I have dealt with are about the same. Fast and painless 99.9% of the time. The main issue I find with Linux updates is of course the variety of distros also means a wide range of update server qualities. I know with Manjaro and Suse the most important step when I setup the systems is designating the best update server so they don't default to slow annoying servers in Europe somewhere.

No doubt though the ads... lol man Windows really is terrible. The most annoying thing is windows 10 when its running perfectly fine and not in need of updates and has been tweaked to keep the annoyance down (ie running some form of less annoying Enterprise version) is actually a decently solid OS. MS just makes so many terrible decisions.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,589
Yes, it is a Nero ad. I have the software installed, didn't realize they setup a service in the background, or that they would serve me ads.

While of course that is not Microsoft's fault, per se, it seems common on Windows for software to install stuff in the background without your knowledge or consent.

I would be very shocked and surprised to see a FOSS product showing me ads on my Linux desktop.
MS allows it by not denying it in their API....

These wouldn't pop up in Linux cause it wouldn't be possible unless you knowingly gave a piece of Linux software permission. No major distro I can think of would allow that behaviour for FOSS or commercial installs via the package manager... and installed via a DEB or RPM ect you would have to go out of your way to give such software that power.

One of the reasons the big software companies like Adobe ect don't want to support Linux. They can talk install numbers ect (which in the case of Adobe as an example is stupid as the industries they serve use TONS of Linux boxes including lots of workstations for things like Houdini) the truth is installing software to Linux doesn't give them access to your meta data. Serving Ads isn't the most lucrative way to make money of that type of information. Having a list of the top 1% of major photoshop/premier users personal contact info. There is the real money... did that email offering to sell you RED cameras at big spender pricing just arrive my magic or did Adobe sell RED a whale list... they will never tell. lol ;)
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,611
One of the reasons the big software companies like Adobe ect don't want to support Linux. They can talk install numbers ect (which in the case of Adobe as an example is stupid as the industries they serve use TONS of Linux boxes including lots of workstations for things like Houdini) the truth is installing software to Linux doesn't give them access to your meta data. Serving Ads isn't the most lucrative way to make money of that type of information. Having a list of the top 1% of major photoshop/premier users personal contact info. There is the real money... did that email offering to sell you RED cameras at big spender pricing just arrive my magic or did Adobe sell RED a whale list... they will never tell. lol
There is absolutely no doubt that Adobe could make big money out of Linux, especially with Apple dumping Nvidia (or was it the other way around?)

Do people still use Nero?
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,589
There is absolutely no doubt that Adobe could make big money out of Linux, especially with Apple dumping Nvidia (or was it the other way around?)

Do people still use Nero?
Seems so... I remember getting a copy of Nero with my first burner (or was it my second) anyway it was a long long time ago. lol
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,589
Only reason I installed Nero was because I got a M-Disc Blu Ray burner and the Windows default burning was coastering the discs.
Its been awhile since I have need of windows burning... but I think this is still one of the better options, there may be better not sure.

https://cdburnerxp.se/en/home

Its created by a FOSS programmer... but its not actually OSS. Having said that it means they are using some libraries they couldn't if it was in fact FOSS. All in all not a bad trade off for that type of software imo.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,611
Its been awhile since I have need of windows burning... but I think this is still one of the better options, there may be better not sure.

https://cdburnerxp.se/en/home

Its created by a FOSS programmer... but its not actually OSS. Having said that it means they are using some libraries they couldn't if it was in fact FOSS. All in all not a bad trade off for that type of software imo.
Same here, I tend to use Linux more these days so I'm not really up with the current state of Windows software usage...
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
11,863
You've had Linux updates take longer than an hour?! I think B00nie's mentioned red flags to you before, but that's not normal - Not by a long shot. I honestly think your PC has issues my friend. Most cumulative updates under Linux should be done in two minutes at most, under KDE Neon I don't even have to reboot - I just keep working like nothing is happening.

I had a client's machine the other day take ~4 hours to apply a Windows cumulative update.
And that is not normal for Windows either, just saying.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
11,863
I apply Windows updates daily across a vast number of machines. Considering most Windows PC's are running ~4GB of RAM and mechanical HDD's, an hour to apply an update is not in any way uncommon. Get the exact same machine and install Linux, then install a cumulative update, and I've never had it take any longer than five mins considering the spec of the machine.

It's even worse where Malware stops the Windows 10 update process from functioning. Remove the Malware, do a supposed quick reboot and tear your hair out.

It's ironic that the only real way to stop the updater dead in it's tracks is to install Malware...
Most Windows PC's are not running 4GB of ram a mechanical hard drive, unless you just time warped from 2010.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,611
And that is not normal for Windows either, just saying.
Yes it is. It's actually quite common.

Most Windows PC's are not running 4GB of ram a mechanical hard drive, unless you just time warped from 2010.
Incorrect, a great many people are running Windows on fairly ordinary hardware as they assume that because it's sold in a shop it must be capable of their simplistic needs - Sadly most of the time this is far from the case. I've seen 32GB eMMC based laptops that can't even perform a Windows 10 update due to a lack of physical storage space.

Enthusiasts and gamer's run better hardware, the computer illiterate users outnumber the enthusiasts and gamer's.
 

SuperSubZero

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 21, 2000
Messages
3,640
Yes it is. It's actually quite common.
I guess the commonality depends on the environment. I'm surrounded by i7 laptops and desktops with SSDs and 8GB+ of RAM. Typical Windows 10 cumulative updates take what.. a few minutes to download and install (can do other things during that, ya know) and on a reboot typically what.. 30 seconds to install? Maybe? One of my laptops is a circa 2012 Lenovo T520, small SSD and 8GB RAM and it's not far outside of these parameters. I go to work and it's "i7 with 16GB+ and an SSD" as far as the eye can see.

If a particular environment is very low income or cash strapped and they are kinda stuck with older equipment with low specs and slow hard drives, well, I dunno, I guess that's where they are. I can't speak for how common that is, I mean sure on walmart.com they are selling very, very refurbished Core 2 Duo setups, but they also have like, modern systems with SSDs and stuff.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,611
I guess the commonality depends on the environment. I'm surrounded by i7 laptops and desktops with SSDs and 8GB+ of RAM. Typical Windows 10 cumulative updates take what.. a few minutes to download and install (can do other things during that, ya know) and on a reboot typically what.. 30 seconds to install? Maybe? One of my laptops is a circa 2012 Lenovo T520, small SSD and 8GB RAM and it's not far outside of these parameters. I go to work and it's "i7 with 16GB+ and an SSD" as far as the eye can see.

If a particular environment is very low income or cash strapped and they are kinda stuck with older equipment with low specs and slow hard drives, well, I dunno, I guess that's where they are. I can't speak for how common that is, I mean sure on walmart.com they are selling very, very refurbished Core 2 Duo setups, but they also have like, modern systems with SSDs and stuff.
In my experience this isn't always the case. The longest part of installation is downloading the update, and Microsoft's servers are slow as all hell more often than not, doesn't help that you're pretty much downloading a full OS considering a major update. Then you have to prepare the update which can take a considerable amount of time even on an i7 based laptop CPU with limited cores compared to their desktop counterparts, then you have to install the update and proceed with around three restarts in the process.

Under Linux, I can download and install the update in five minutes tops with no downtime whatsoever and I reboot when I want to reboot with no perceptible increase in boot time. In fact when I updated from KDE Neon 5.16 to KDE Neon 5.17 I didn't even have to reboot and the whole cumulative update took 2 minutes.

I'm not going to get into an argument over such a silly topic as to do so is pointless - You cannot even begin to compare the Windows updating process to the Linux updating process and Windows updates can be slow as hell. Very annoying when the PC is not your own and you just want to get the job done. Most computer illiterate users are not running PC's with SSD's, they don't even know what an SSD is and still think bigger capacity is better, many Mac's still sell with 5400RPM mechanical HDD's.

Try not to compare corporate IT to the real world, it doesn't translate well.
 
Last edited:

SuperSubZero

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 21, 2000
Messages
3,640
In my experience this isn't always the case. The longest part of installation is downloading the update
As I said, updates can be downloaded without interfering with work. In fact consumer editions of Win10 by default will just download whatever updates, prepare them, and then the Shut Down options have "Update and.." prefixed to them. The update process gets moved to a chunk of time the user isn't using the PC anymore anyway.

Under Linux, I can download and install the update in five minutes tops with no downtime whatsoever
One interesting point here is "Linux." Which Linux? Arch? Ubuntu? Fedora? Kali? Gentoo? Do they all update the same?
 

SmokeRngs

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - April 2008
Joined
Aug 9, 2001
Messages
16,114
As I said, updates can be downloaded without interfering with work. In fact consumer editions of Win10 by default will just download whatever updates, prepare them, and then the Shut Down options have "Update and.." prefixed to them. The update process gets moved to a chunk of time the user isn't using the PC anymore anyway.


One interesting point here is "Linux." Which Linux? Arch? Ubuntu? Fedora? Kali? Gentoo? Do they all update the same?
It's unlikely any of them are significantly slower than any others unless you're manually compiling everything. The vast majority of time required for updates on my Manjaro and openSUSE installs is the download because I only have a 5 mbit connection. The time needed for the processing of installing the updates is quite short. And that's using spinners. I don't even have an SSD yet.

The amount of time it takes to update Windows is a hell of a lot longer than the time to update either of the Linux distros I use and my Win10 and Manjaro installs are on the same hardware. The exact same system on the exact same boot drive. Also, my Linux updates don't require or even care about a reboot unless the kernel was updated whereas almost anything other than a Defender virus definition update requires a reboot on 10.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,611
As I said, updates can be downloaded without interfering with work. In fact consumer editions of Win10 by default will just download whatever updates, prepare them, and then the Shut Down options have "Update and.." prefixed to them. The update process gets moved to a chunk of time the user isn't using the PC anymore anyway.
Which is all fine and dandy, until you realize that getting that update done is work.

One interesting point here is "Linux." Which Linux? Arch? Ubuntu? Fedora? Kali? Gentoo? Do they all update the same?
They use different package managers, but the time taken to update is, in my experience, basically all the same unless you're some neckbeard manually compiling everything - I don't think such individuals exist anymore.
 

cybereality

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,391
Typical Windows 10 cumulative updates take what.. a few minutes to download and install (can do other things during that, ya know) and on a reboot typically what.. 30 seconds to install? Maybe?
That is not my experience at all. Of course, Defender only updates are fairly quick, but any major version upgrade can take upwards of 1 or 2 hours.

Like the other day (when I posted this thread), Windows had to update to 1903 and then 1909 and it took at least 2 hours to finish. This is simply not the case in Ubuntu, where even big updates can be done in 10 to 15 minutes without a reboot.
 

auntjemima

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 1, 2014
Messages
6,048
I am not one to usually rag on windows update. I find it takes time, but it's updating an entire OS each time, for whatever reason. I won't agree with the download speed, as I find MS servers can max my 120mbit connection.

But, with that said, Linux updates aren't even comparable to Windows. Linux is so fucking hassle free, it's insane. I open a terminal, type two commands and that's it. Rarely a restart (I can't ever think of one I had to restart except maybe a new Ubuntu release... Lol 18 to 19).

The download takes the longest on Linux.. installs as painless and very fast.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,611
I am not one to usually rag on windows update. I find it takes time, but it's updating an entire OS each time, for whatever reason. I won't agree with the download speed, as I find MS servers can max my 120mbit connection.

But, with that said, Linux updates aren't even comparable to Windows. Linux is so fucking hassle free, it's insane. I open a terminal, type two commands and that's it. Rarely a restart (I can't ever think of one I had to restart except maybe a new Ubuntu release... Lol 18 to 19).

The download takes the longest on Linux.. installs as painless and very fast.
Bear in mind that download speeds could be related to region. But when you're just trying to get a job done, especially when you've had a brain fart and rebooted after a malware scan without checking to see what the updater's doing first, it tends to get a little frustrating...To say the least. :)

I can honestly state that sometimes I find MacOS just as frustrating, in fact MacOS is in many ways getting just as annoying as Windows when it comes to pushing Apple software on the user - The pop up reminders go a little overboard at times.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,889
I find it takes time, but it's updating an entire OS each time
I do think that they're trying to get away from this. The latest quarterly (1909), if you did it with a system that was fully updated prior, was surprisingly quick. We had a thread about it and everything.

In a sense it seems that Microsoft is trying to move toward the 'package' model that Linux uses. They're already pretty close overall if you take a close look at how system actions can be initiated through Powershell and how services and apps are referenced.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,889
Bear in mind that download speeds could be related to region. But when you're just trying to get a job done, especially when you've had a brain fart and rebooted after a malware scan without checking to see what the updater's doing first, it tends to get a little frustrating...To say the least. :)
I'm kind of wondering at this point why you're not using WSUS here. We use it to keep site installs up to date, with sites that have as few as four Windows machines (servers and clients).

Only one system has to download from Microsoft in this case, the rest are at gigabit or faster.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,611
I'm kind of wondering at this point why you're not using WSUS here. We use it to keep site installs up to date, with sites that have as few as four Windows machines (servers and clients).

Only one system has to download from Microsoft in this case, the rest are at gigabit or faster.
This isn't corporate IT, this is where people get the wrong idea about Windows and make assumptions regarding the hardware used by the Mum/Dad, Grandma/Grandma types out there. Work on the machines owned by these sorts of individuals and your opinion of Windows will change completely once you're thrown in the deep end regarding all it's issues in the real world away from the tightly controlled networks of corporate IT.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,889
This isn't corporate IT, this is where people get the wrong idea about Windows and make assumptions regarding the hardware used by the Mum/Dad, Grandma/Grandma types out there. Work on the machines owned by these sorts of individuals and your opinion of Windows will change completely once you're thrown in the deep end regarding all it's issues in the real world away from the tightly controlled networks of corporate IT.
I see both.
 

auntjemima

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 1, 2014
Messages
6,048
This isn't corporate IT, this is where people get the wrong idea about Windows and make assumptions regarding the hardware used by the Mum/Dad, Grandma/Grandma types out there. Work on the machines owned by these sorts of individuals and your opinion of Windows will change completely once you're thrown in the deep end regarding all it's issues in the real world away from the tightly controlled networks of corporate IT.
His point still stands. If you spend a lot of your time downloading updates over and over again for each new user PC, you're better off having a PC running WSUS to save the hassle.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,611
His point still stands. If you spend a lot of your time downloading updates over and over again for each new user PC, you're better off having a PC running WSUS to save the hassle.
If that's what I need to do to keep Windows updated I think it's safe to assume the updater is a bit of a failure? Furthermore, WSUS is pretty much designed with corporate environments in mind, I'm not paying for a Windows Server license just to run WSUS to update some randoms laptop.
 

SuperSubZero

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 21, 2000
Messages
3,640
Which is all fine and dandy, until you realize that getting that update done is work.
Windows 10 hasn't really presented a hurdle to updates to me. I boot up, I use it, I do whatever, at the end of the day I go to shut down and "oh, it has an update, it will update and shut down. OK." Click, grab my coat and go. This was such a huge crisis to the people that know better that MS had to backpedal on the major updates being done this way on Pro versions.



They use different package managers, but the time taken to update is, in my experience, basically all the same unless you're some neckbeard manually compiling everything - I don't think such individuals exist anymore.
My Xubuntu VM at work, which kept getting confused I guess because it would offer me 19.10, but then have other updates for the current one and then it wouldn't offer 19.10 anymore, finally started that update today. I had to save the VM state because it was taking so long. I'll resume that tomorrow.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,611
Windows 10 hasn't really presented a hurdle to updates to me. I boot up, I use it, I do whatever, at the end of the day I go to shut down and "oh, it has an update, it will update and shut down. OK." Click, grab my coat and go. This was such a huge crisis to the people that know better that MS had to backpedal on the major updates being done this way on Pro versions.
I'm sure it hasn't. The problem is, the point people keep refusing to acknowledge, is that I'm a tech, I repair Windows PC's for a job and waiting one to four hours for an update along with three reboots - Which does happen, is annoying when you just want to get a job done. It takes long enough on some machines with mechanical HDD's that people force the machine off against the advice printed on the screen and corrupt the entire install, all because they just want to get work done.

I know because I'm the one cleaning up the resulting mess.

However this is beside the point, as the original point was that the Linux method of updating is vastly better than the Windows updating process, this is a fact that is quite simply not even open to debate it's so valid.

As for your VM issue, this sounds like a blatant lack of familiarisation. You need to research the difference between system updates and updating from one release to another, updating from one release to another is always offered as an option and not in any way forced - The way updates should be handled.

I can assure you that updating from one release to another is vastly faster than the same process under Windows. We're talking 10-15 mins vs 1-4 hours in the case of 1804 to 1903.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
11,863
His point still stands. If you spend a lot of your time downloading updates over and over again for each new user PC, you're better off having a PC running WSUS to save the hassle.
Yeah and besides, I usually find Linux Zealots, which the OP is not, exaggerates what Windows does and does not do in a big way. Then they say that they use Linux most of the time and do not know what Windows Software does nowadays, since they have not kept up.

A person like the OP, I can respect since he is simply saying what he personally thinks but, most Linux users are not like that.
 

auntjemima

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 1, 2014
Messages
6,048
If that's what I need to do to keep Windows updated I think it's safe to assume the updater is a bit of a failure? Furthermore, WSUS is pretty much designed with corporate environments in mind, I'm not paying for a Windows Server license just to run WSUS to update some randoms laptop.
Your internet speed isn't Microsoft's problem. You complained about internet speed. This will solve your issue. Either accept that your internet speeds are adding to the time needed to update and stop complaining, or do something about it.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
11,863
I usually find that Windows zealots, which you are, exaggerates how insignificant Windows problems are in a big way and pretend no better options exist.
Nah, I am a computer user zealot and have never hidden that fact. But you already know I have been using Linux since 1996 and all other OSes since then. I gave up on claiming one is somehow real bad or that one is somehow the best and everything sucks. Dude, I do not hide who I am and am quite familiar with software across the board.

I see you are pointing fingers again but hey, you said yourself that you do not know much about Windows software anymore, since you primarily use Linux now. At least the OP is honest is what and why he does what he does, for personal reasons but does not shove it down our throat, like we believe him or.......... :rolleyes: :bigtears:

Edit: Oh, and I did not mention you or your name in the previous post, taking things a bit personally?
 
Top