Windows 10 October Update is Losing User Data

[DeathFromBelow]

View attachment 109512

wow windows 10 you're so awesome.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Microsoft is developing windows allright, in the direction of eroding user control, and simply ignoring most of QA. You're willfully blind if you don't see the switch from incremental updates, to disguised full reinstalls as part of that. By assuming that we're arguing against development itself and not the lowering of QA standards, and the erosion of user oversight of ones own computer, you are deliberately strawmanning us. That to me seems as clear clear bias, and a will to use dishonesty to try and somehow misrepresent our stance.

You've yet to prove that this happened to more than this guy, and further, that it was a result of the update and not something else. And there are plenty of other things that could go wrong. Prove that before you start attacking others for pointing out the obvious limitations of the reported occurrence or attacking a company, and worse, attacking others for pointing out the importance of backups.

Further, your claim is that the development on the part of Microsoft is for updates 'that no one asked for'. I find that point logically absurd in the face of common sense, particularly since so very many people and organizations use their products and since no product can ever be perfect for any situation, so I asked for evidence. You refused, so you've negated your own point, no strawmanning required.

So apply the same standard to theft: If you don't have full insurance coverage, the loss of valuables is entirely the fault of the owner? Yes it's stupid to keep gold bars under your pillow, but that doesn't mean we let the thief off the hook because the user didn't take enough precautions for such an occasion.

Shouldn't we find out if said owner left their door unlocked and bragged about how much gold they left under their pillow in their unlocked home? You bet your ass that the insurance company will.

Your analogy is ill-fitted to your position.

And no, supposing that the reported data loss is unequivocally the result of poor QA on Microsoft's part, I absolutely have no intention of letting them off. I do however intend to give them a fair shake. Do you plan on doing the same, or are you really stooping so low as to have judged them for this reported occurrence with such little evidence?

Not to mention the appalling hypocrisy of this: For years the argument for metro and other UI fuckups were: They're trying to make windows more friendly to less tech-savvy people. And when this happens? Well user error, why weren't you more tech savvy and made backups?! You can't have it both ways.

Hypocrisy of what? The hypocrisy that assumes that Microsoft only targets one level of user? Are you serious?

 

[IdiotInCharge]

View attachment 109669

You know, I actually like the new dark theme. I wish it'd come sooner!

 

[cdr_74_premium]

Well, seems that the 0.000000001% or whatever the shills estimate were enough for MS to backtrack.

But keep going, folks. I like to see how innovative some are with the mental gymnastics to make that kind of fuckup look normal.

 

[ManofGod]

Well, seems that the 0.000000001% or whatever the shills estimate were enough for MS to backtrack.

But keep going, folks. I like to see how innovative some are with the mental gymnastics to make that kind of fuckup look normal.

Not banging on Microsoft immediately = shillling, got it. On the other hand, it is easier to hate so............

 

[IdiotInCharge]

I like to see how innovative some are

Who?

Let's get their names out there with quotes!

 

[cdr_74_premium]

Who?

Let's get their names out there with quotes!

You.

 

[cdr_74_premium]

Not banging on Microsoft immediately = shillling, got it. On the other hand, it is easier to hate so............

This is not about hate, this is about calling things what they really are.

 

[Hagrid]

Not banging on Microsoft immediately = shillling, got it. On the other hand, it is easier to hate so............

Much easier to hate, they make it so easy.

At least they recognize that there is a small problem and might fix it? That is a good thing?

 

[ManofGod]

This is not about hate, this is about calling things what they really are.

"Things"? Oh well, you keep going..... On the other hand, they did what they had to do and pulled the update. Still I would like to know if the data was actually removed, the free space increased or where they just moved somewhere else? I guess we will never know.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

You.

Who?

You forgot the quotes there buddy .

 

[polonyc2]

the disturbing thing is that MS knew of this issue with the October update months ago...reports were posted in Microsoft's Feedback Hub for Windows Insider beta testers...

 

[ManofGod]

the disturbing thing is that MS knew of this issue with the October update months ago...reports were posted in Microsoft's Feedback Hub for Windows Insider beta testers...

Yeah, now this sucks. I wonder what the specific cause of this is? Guess I will have to stop using the 1809 created flash drives, just in case. All my systems are on 1809 but since the update is being intentionally delayed, no point in installing it again until the new update is released.

 

[ChadD]

It any of the major Linux distros had user data deleting bugs that went ignored for months.... it wouldn't be a major distro anymore. One very nice thing about having multiple distros... dropping the ball that bad can have consequences.

I mention it because... guess what. MS isn't loosing any of its sheep. If all the other things MS hasn't already swayed them to dump MS this won't either.

Really though.... a /home that the OS doesn't need to ever touch would fix the issue. Well that and a proper replacement for NTFS... even the open source NTFS implementation is better. (I don't know what issue on their end is causing deletion but I wouldn't be surprised to hear it has something to do with the way Chkdsk handles non conforming files... which is to toss them) I wouldn't be surprised if this issue is some MS engineer who grew up on a *nix system not thinking and appending colons to journal data or something stupid, which would cause chkdsk to wipe those files assuming they where corrupt.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Well that and a proper replacement for NTFS

ReFS isn't there yet- but for the purpose of host OS storage, NTFS isn't out the same league as say the ext* filesystems; ZFS is perhaps mature for *BSD distributions, and I'm using it now, but I've found all but the latest ZoL implementations on the latest Linux distributions to be ready for prime-time. BTRFS, an alternative, certainly isn't ready either from what I've seen.

ZFS is probably the closest of the new breed and I do like it more for mass storage at the moment. I also see ReFS on paper as reaching a bit further in terms of preventing data loss at the filesystem level regardless of the hardware used, but I'm also still researching it.

Of course, using anything but NTFS is going to be out of the reach of your average desktop user, assuming they have any control of the system at all. If anything I'd recommend picking up a NAS with a mirror for most home users that are serious about keeping their data safe in any way, and of course, there are further reasonable options as well.

 

[M76]

You've yet to prove that this happened to more than this guy, and further, that it was a result of the update and not something else. And there are plenty of other things that could go wrong. Prove that before you start attacking others for pointing out the obvious limitations of the reported occurrence or attacking a company, and worse, attacking others for pointing out the importance of backups.

First off how would I even prove that, and second why do I need to prove that? If it happened just once it is already too much, explanation in my previous posts. Even if you ignore them, the facts aren't going away.

Second: you're predictable: If someone cited another occurrence you'd just ask for a third, and so on. I'm not playing that game.

Further, your claim is that the development on the part of Microsoft is for updates 'that no one asked for'. I find that point logically absurd in the face of common sense, particularly since so very many people and organizations use their products and since no product can ever be perfect for any situation, so I asked for evidence. You refused, so you've negated your own point, no strawmanning required.

Your word salad, is just that, a word salad. "Absurd in the face of common sense" that holds no information to anyone.
You're not even responding to my statement, you make the claim that people want windows feature updates shoved down their throats every 6 months. You make the claim, not me. How would I find evidence for an absence of something?

Again for the six hundred thousandth time: I'M NOT AGAINST UPDATES, I'M AGAINST FORCED UPDATES THAT CHANGE THE BEHAVIOR OF THE OS, AND DO A FRESH INSTALL WITHOUT USER OVERSIGHT.

Shouldn't we find out if said owner left their door unlocked and bragged about how much gold they left under their pillow in their unlocked home? You bet your ass that the insurance company will.

What? That makes literally zero sense, as an analogy to the current situation.

Your analogy is ill-fitted to your position.

Is the pot calling the kettle black?
Because your above analogy would only work if the person who lost their data was bragging to microsoft about how he doesn't makes backups of his important data.

And no, supposing that the reported data loss is unequivocally the result of poor QA on Microsoft's part, I absolutely have no intention of letting them off. I do however intend to give them a fair shake. Do you plan on doing the same, or are you really stooping so low as to have judged them for this reported occurrence with such little evidence?

If the reports of microsoft pulling the update are true, then that is case in point And even if on this occasion MS wasn't at fault. Their lack of QA is evident.
Just look at one piece of evidence: Why do you think these updates are released in installments? As in not to every user at the same time like security updates? And, no it's not to save bandwith. They literally take months until the update is rolled out to all computers. They do it in phases because they are very aware of their lack of QA, and if they push the update to only 10k computers at a time, they can wait for the effects, and pull the update if necessary before the shitstorm becomes one of epic proportions.

Hypocrisy of what? The hypocrisy that assumes that Microsoft only targets one level of user? Are you serious?

Hypocrisy of the shills. Who on one side say "streamlined UI" is necessary for basic users. And when an inexperienced user has a problem they say: Haha he should've known better.

I don't know how did you get to the "Microsoft targets one level of user" thing. If anything the low level user is the most susceptible to these faults, because he is the least likely to postpone feature updates.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

If it happened just once it is already too much

If the updated directly deleted the data, sure. If the data was lost by some other confluence of circumstances, then the angst doesn't apply.

I'M NOT AGAINST UPDATES

You said you were against development of new features, which you claimed no one asked for (lol).

What? That makes literally zero sense, as an analogy to the current situation.

I know, right? I wouldn't use that analogy either.

If the reports of microsoft pulling the update are true

It's a good face-saving PR move.

Their lack of QA is evident.

Based on what? They failed to account for some extreme corner case on the most used desktop operating system in the world? What do you even compare that to?

Hypocrisy of the shills.

Which are who? And you can quote their hypocrisy for us so you can support your point?

 

[mufcfan]

Oh, sry for assuming that the report is truthful and accurate. What is dishonest about that? If you don't even believe the report, what the hell do you want to discuss even?

Should we add "assuming the report is accurate" to the beginning of every sentence to make you feel better? Of course we assume it is accurate, we have no reason to doubt the credibility of the account. While your reason for not believing the account: You don't want it to be true, how is that more honest?

Did you read the post you're replying to? I've explained it there why this shouldn't happen if MS did their due diligence.

Did you read my reply? I didn't and still do not question that quality should be better.
However, I've clearly explained why I have doubts about this report. I have some reservations about believing a report citing one unknown person's account without any evidence, regardless of the topic or my views.
I have gathered as much that you believe it, makes no difference in pointing it out. Although, I find it weird that you create kind of an 'end of the world' story about this, because 'one person on the internet reported it'. Not surprising though.

The problem with this line of thinking is that any issue reported can/will be blamed on MS or Win10 even if it is unrelated. On the other hand, if MS or Win10 does anything that follows those same people's logic then it is not a good thing, but the absolute minimum. This kind of bias achieved nothing over the past - let's say - 20 years. Other than having a laugh with friends/colleagues from time to time. But always painting these pictures and trying to force them onto others as the reality is plain wrong.
I think that discussions on (information) technology should be less misleading than the ones on any other topic.

To give you an analogy: I assume you don't have a car, because car manufacturers have a much worse failure rate than where you set the bar, which failures keep causing actual fatalities, right?
(Setting aside monetary, health or any other unrelated issues you may or may not have.)

This is not about hate, this is about calling things what they really are.

Please, do enlighten us! Or just keep attacking the people who disagree with you, because this method always has a bigger effect, as history clearly tells us.​

---

OT: I also find it weird that the word 'luck' was used in the other news item to describe why not more people were affected. I believe that programming has very little to do with luck.

 

[pendragon1]

^yup! and

If the updated directly deleted the data, sure. If the data was lost by some other confluence of circumstances, then the angst doesn't apply.

that's the part that everyone that hasn't lost data but is screaming dont seem to get, nobody knows what the cause was yet. they shouldnt scream evil ms until they are sure.

 

[ManofGod]

^yup! and
that's the part that everyone that hasn't lost data but is screaming dont seem to get, nobody knows what the cause was yet. they shouldnt scream evil ms until they are sure.

Well, I am not going to install it anymore, at least until they officially release it again. Better to be safe with the computers of others, just in case.

 

[pendragon1]

Well, I am not going to install it anymore, at least until they officially release it again. Better to be safe with the computers of others, just in case.

and that's totally reasonable. not that theres much choice since they removed it...

 

[M76]

If the updated directly deleted the data, sure. If the data was lost by some other confluence of circumstances, then the angst doesn't apply.

Every bug is a confluence of circumstances, try another excuse.

You said you were against development of new features, which you claimed no one asked for (lol).

They can develop new features as long as they aren't forcing everyone to apply them. What can't you understand about that? No-one is asking for forced feature changes. Yes, some new features might be useful, but that doesn't mean people asked for forced upgrades. Where are the users who asked for this?
But if the choice is only forced upgrades vs. no new features. I choose no new features.

I know, right? I wouldn't use that analogy either.

Yet you did. You changed the subject of the analogy, and you claim it is the same as it was before. You really can't tell the difference?

It's a good face-saving PR move.

You're clearly suffering from an acute case of denial. If you still think this has no merit, even after they pulled the update. Don't you think it would've been much better PR if they confirmed that they examined the issue and found no evidence that this could've been caused by their update. The only problem is examined with what QA department?

Based on what? They failed to account for some extreme corner case on the most used desktop operating system in the world? What do you even compare that to?

It was in the news, that they laid off most of their QA department. You can't be this much in denial, it is common knowledge that they 'streamlined' both update and QA processes. Since then every update was cumulative, they no longer make incremental patches that can be applied individually to any system. they make upgrades, even for W7, the updates have been cumulative since then. Security patches used to be a few hundred K to a few megs, in size. Why do you think they became hundreds of megabytes suddenly? Because they're not patching anything, they're replacing things, and if they fail to account for a possibility this happens.

Which are who? And you can quote their hypocrisy for us so you can support your point?

What do you want, names? Does it matter who they are? What would it change? You know damn well I won't be able to find these specific posts from years ago.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Every bug is a confluence of circumstances, try another excuse.

So it doesn't matter who's at fault? Your position is falling apart here...

They can develop new features as long as they aren't forcing everyone to apply them.

They're not forcing everyone to run Windows. Perhaps this will bring about the fabled Linux desktop revolution!

Yet you did.

I used your analogy.

You're clearly suffering from an acute case of denial.

About what?

It was in the news, that they laid off most of their QA department.

So you can prove that not only is this Microsoft's fault, but also that it happened due to their cut in QA staff?

What do you want, names?

If you're going to make accusations, yes.

 

[triwolf]

If I were a lawyer I would enjoy suing MS, they deserve some payback for the cluster that is Win 10. They knew the users would have to take the steaming pile that is Win 10 because there is no other option, it is a monopoly, users treated like a poor beaten wife, and now they are caught red handed being incompetent. It's corn popping time.
Read up:
https://www.pcworld.com/article/331...ows-10-october-2018-update-file-deletion.html

 

[Hagrid]

If I were a lawyer I would enjoy suing MS, they deserve some payback for the cluster that is Win 10. They knew the users would have to take the steaming pile that is Win 10 because there is no other option, it is a monopoly, users treated like a poor beaten wife, and now they are caught red handed being incompetent. It's corn popping time.
Read up:
https://www.pcworld.com/article/331...ows-10-october-2018-update-file-deletion.html

Sad part is they could make windows great again with a few changes.

 

[triwolf]

Sad part is they could make windows great again with a few changes.

Like humans usually are, they will be given a second chance at least. They will still have all us gamers that are locked in, maybe they will loosen the chains and straighten up a bit, it wouldn't surprise me if their management is starting to wake up and see a lot of the decisions in Win 10 (forced updates, removing or changing settings for update control, moving features to Windows Store, etc etc.) are not working out.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Sad part is they could make windows great again with a few changes.

I'd actually just like for them to charge for it again, and let us choose what level of features we'd like, including being able to strip it down to the latest LTSC release.

Or make that an option versus the 'free' version with telemetry!

 

[Mazzspeed]

If I were a lawyer I would enjoy suing MS, they deserve some payback for the cluster that is Win 10. They knew the users would have to take the steaming pile that is Win 10 because there is no other option, it is a monopoly, users treated like a poor beaten wife, and now they are caught red handed being incompetent. It's corn popping time.
Read up:
https://www.pcworld.com/article/331...ows-10-october-2018-update-file-deletion.html

Bah, lawyers are terrified of big tech. Just look at Louis Rosman's video's on YouTube, he legitimately highlights to CBS News that Apple are ripping off their customers and the CBS legal team won't touch the story unless Louis provides more evidence than what's proven on video - And it was a CBS news reporter that contacted Louis for the story!

 

[Hagrid]

I'd actually just like for them to charge for it again, and let us choose what level of features we'd like, including being able to strip it down to the latest LTSC release.

Or make that an option versus the 'free' version with telemetry!

I have said this in other threads. I would pay for a windows that I could get rid of metro, telemetry, update when I feel like, rid of the store and all the extra crap.

 

[triwolf]

Bah, lawyers are terrified of big tech. Just look at Louis Rosman's video's on YouTube, he legitimately highlights to CBS News that Apple are ripping off their customers and the CBS legal team won't touch the story unless Louis provides more evidence than what's proven on video - And it was a CBS news reporter that contacted Louis for the story!

You are probably right, seems justice doesn't really win out very often. It does seem someone that loses data might have a good case though. I have seen some of Rosman's videos, I like his honesty. It must be CBS being paid or beholden to Apple due to Ad revenue if they won't run the story. I own zero apple stuff, if they priced it reasonably I might bite.

 

[polonyc2]

A Microsoft representative says that if you still have files in your Docs folder (presumably \users\[username]\Documents\) after installing the update, then you are not affected by the file deletion issue...

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Then the two I force updated were fine

 

[DPI]

I am dying to know how this selfie-obsessed millennial Dona still has a job running the Insider shitshow. Seriously. Show stopping bugs are reported for months to the feedback hub, and still bleed through to public release without a care. Did she catch Nadella in the act with another man in a parked car, and now holds the incriminating photos over him? There is no other explanation for the multitude and chronic fuckups.

It's seeming more and more like the feedback hub is nothing more than to satisfy some internal bureaucracy or initiative and nobody actually looks at it.

 

[ChadD]

ReFS isn't there yet- but for the purpose of host OS storage, NTFS isn't out the same league as say the ext* filesystems; ZFS is perhaps mature for *BSD distributions, and I'm using it now, but I've found all but the latest ZoL implementations on the latest Linux distributions to be ready for prime-time. BTRFS, an alternative, certainly isn't ready either from what I've seen.

ZFS is probably the closest of the new breed and I do like it more for mass storage at the moment. I also see ReFS on paper as reaching a bit further in terms of preventing data loss at the filesystem level regardless of the hardware used, but I'm also still researching it.

Of course, using anything but NTFS is going to be out of the reach of your average desktop user, assuming they have any control of the system at all. If anything I'd recommend picking up a NAS with a mirror for most home users that are serious about keeping their data safe in any way, and of course, there are further reasonable options as well.

There are plenty of options for data storage as long as your not using windows. Or if your willing to run *nix running NAS software to server your crap windows boxes for some reason.

My point really is though that MS needs to kill NTFS with fire. They should have oft it years ago.

The reason their update system sucks... NTFS.
The reason they have an issue with fragmentation with spinners... NTFS.

I am guessing (it wouldn't be very humble to call it an educated one, but a semi educated one perhaps) that this deletion issue is directly related to NTFS. MS is at a point where a lot of their own employees and contractors are likely making little mistakes like forgetting NTFS limitations. I would assume if people are loosing random data it has something to do with Windows own tools such as chkdsk deleting them because they have some meta data or perhaps even file names that are not ok. MS seems to be playing odd games the last few updates with resizing parts for no good reason and copying data to them in odd bit numbered clusters to make them unreadable (perhaps telemetry related perhaps some unknown 100% illogical update process). IMO its very possible some MS engineer who owed a Mac in collage used a colon or some other no no character in the meta data appended to those files on the drive... and chkdsk killed them on the next boot assuming they where corrupt.

Updates resizing partitions, user data or at leasts its meta being copied for some unknown reason... I mean what is the worse that could happen. LMAO (Class action suit I think is the answer)

Anyway... Yes ReFS is a complete bust. MS has already abandoned it for the most part. At this point frankly MS would be wise to find a good open source file system... BtrFS / Open ZFS, or heck even EXT4 (I mean really why not its free to use), insert themselves heavily into the project even if it just means throwing $$$ at the people actually developing it. Apple has already shown that switching over a base to a new file system doesn't have to be a gigantic mess.... MS is already fucking with partitions, would it really be such a big deal to switch to something proper. They could instantly solve their at times hours long update process, issues with fragmentation... and perhaps if they do use a BtrFS type system they could add some copy on write goodness to windows server.

 

[ManofGod]

I have said this in other threads. I would pay for a windows that I could get rid of metro, telemetry, update when I feel like, rid of the store and all the extra crap.

$499 for a single user copy that can be transferred to new hardware.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Anyway... Yes ReFS is a complete bust. MS has already abandoned it for the most part.

I don't disagree with most of what you said (though I have a different perspective), but I will say both that ReFS isn't a bust and that Microsoft hasn't abandoned it yet. When I get my hands on Server 2019, I'll see if they've fixed the issues I was having with it with consumer hardware, some of which may just be my lack of education on how to make it work for my application, which could stem from a lack of documentation and/or application refinement on their end.

Still, their feature targets are at parity or better compared to ZFS and BTRFS, and their RAID implementation is ahead of BTRFS. If I'd been able to get Storage Spaces to do what I want it to, I'd be running it now instead of ZFS, but FreeNAS in Hyper-V was a just plain quicker solution.

 

[cdr_74_premium]

"Things"? Oh well, you keep going..... On the other hand, they did what they had to do and pulled the update. Still I would like to know if the data was actually removed, the free space increased or where they just moved somewhere else? I guess we will never know.

First, it was user error. Whoever said otherwise was "hating".

Now, they did "what they had to do". Still, it's not like those of us that are trying to be heard and pointing out that many issues are hauting regular users left and right have any point to make. It's all "hate". All that matters is Microsoft's official stand on whatever matter.

I did not lose a single file. I never do. Honestly, I've never ever experienced a problem with any Windows 10 install I've ever done from scratch. It all works, nicely, fast, awesome.

Yet, go out and work customer support, and you'll find the weirdest things ever. On OEM machines with Windows stickers that were never fiddled with.

Then, go research for solutions. Since Windows 10, there's way more material trying to convince the problems doesn't even exist in the first place than dealing with the issue at hand. Not only the problems do exist and blaming grandma is absolutely pointless - she's doing what she did since Windows 3.11 or whatever, it should not even matter! - we spend more time scavenging to find information to deal with the matter at hand.

Most of the official solutions from MS are now along the lines of "reinstall everything". Here on H it's quite common to see someone saying the right way to do a Windows update like this one is to just do it from scratch. And it is the nicest one, fact. But that's not feasible in the wild. Some people have specialized software that's a PITA to reinstall, it's just not efficient to do it all the damn time. Especially on a 6 month schedule.

I could be cynical about it, as people I've worked for, as they were billing by the hour. I don't *hate* Microsoft, Windows or whatever, I think it does its job and it's a nice product in many aspects. Unfortunately, I will not pretend nothing is happening, or try and paint a rosey picture only because that means I'll earn more businesses fixing other people's computers. I do this because I love it and I want people to enjoy their computers, I don't want unnecessary bullshit going on only because it would help my bottom line. That's disgusting.

Still, as it happened with others who pointed out those and other points on this thread, instead of coming up with something constructive that could actually be used as feedback by Microsoft or by all the people who rely on their products, be it as users or supporting them, let's go back to "Win an Argument 101" because that's so more important than having a operating system that's compatible with everything and doesn't break twice a year.

 

[Nenu]

First, it was user error. Whoever said otherwise was "hating".

Citation.

 

[M76]

So it doesn't matter who's at fault? Your position is falling apart here...

No, you just don't seem to have any idea how bugs actually "work".
I take it you never developed any application, deployed it assuming it is all good, then an user had a problem with it?
No that doesn't mean the user was at fault, that means specific circumstances needed to coincide for the bug to happen.
And that's why you have a QA department to test your application in as many conceivable situations as reasonably possible.

They're not forcing everyone to run Windows. Perhaps this will bring about the fabled Linux desktop revolution!

Aren't they? So I can play all games and run all the apps I use, without windows? Why didn't you tell me before?

I used your analogy.

How can I put it that you'd understand? You changed the subject, therefore it is no longer the same analogy.

About what?

About MS can do no wrong.

So you can prove that not only is this Microsoft's fault, but also that it happened due to their cut in QA staff?

How is a bug this serious slipping trough not a fault of QA? As I've said you're clearly in denial.

If you're going to make accusations, yes.

I'm not accusing any one person, I'm accusing the whole community of MS shills that they'd use the same argument and it's opposite too whichever suits their needs at a specific moment.

I remember there where people saying that we need the streamlined UI and new settings apps because MS wants to include users who don't know shit about computers. And now they use (not necessarily the same person, but in defense of MS) that the user should know better than to let an automatic non-optional forced update run without making backups.

 

[cdr_74_premium]

Citation.

Thank you for proving my point.