Yet another
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the
Windows update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive
further security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update
to fix it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
introducing their own new bugs?

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

>Yet another
><https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
>in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the
>Windows update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive
>further security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update
>to fix it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
>introducing their own new bugs?

Just incompetent, isn't it? Why do they keep making the same
mistakes, again and again, releasing beta software as if it's ready
for prime time. In 2019 it was what caused me to switch to Linux for
the first lengthy time (I'd installed it a few times but never used it
long-term).

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 12/31/24 03:19 PM, Joel wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Yet another
>> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
>> in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the
>> Windows update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive
>> further security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update
>> to fix it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
>> introducing their own new bugs?
>
>
> Just incompetent, isn't it? Why do they keep making the same
> mistakes, again and again, releasing beta software as if it's ready
> for prime time. In 2019 it was what caused me to switch to Linux for
> the first lengthy time (I'd installed it a few times but never used it
> long-term).
>
It's probably because none of them use it 24/7 or even 10 hours a day? IIHO if they did, they would
see more issues.

--
Linux Mint 22, Cinnamon 6.2.9, Kernel 6.8.0-51-generic
Thunderbird 128.5.2esr, Mozilla Firefox 133.0.3
Alan K.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> Yet another
> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
> in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the
> Windows update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive
> further security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update
> to fix it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
> introducing their own new bugs?

This is a bit of a corner case, i.e. limited timeframe, uncommon
way to update and somewhat uncommon way to install.

Also the article is messing up the terminology, so I would take it
with quite a lot of salt.

FWIW, my updates went without any glitches. Knock on wood.

And FTR, in 20+ years I've had only one case - on only one of two
systems - where Windows Update was somwhat messed up. Not broken, but
re-offering already installed updates, so I wanted to clean it up.

Alan K. <alan@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 12/31/24 03:19 PM, Joel wrote:
> > Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Yet another
> >> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
> >> in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the
> >> Windows update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive
> >> further security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update
> >> to fix it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
> >> introducing their own new bugs?
> >
> > Just incompetent, isn't it? Why do they keep making the same
> > mistakes, again and again, releasing beta software as if it's ready
> > for prime time. In 2019 it was what caused me to switch to Linux for
> > the first lengthy time (I'd installed it a few times but never used it
> > long-term).
> >
> It's probably because none of them use it 24/7 or even 10 hours a day?
> IIHO if they did, they would see more issues.

Yes, the problem is that for home/personal/<whatever> use, *'we'* are
the beta-testers. Where 'we' are those users who tinker to a smaller to
larger extent. Normal users, who just buy complete systems and let them
run, normally do not encounter these 'corner cases'. Pity for 'us', good
for 'them'.

And in a business environment, there is (read: should be) no way that
IT departments let random updates loose on their tens/hundreds/thousands/
hundreds_of_thousands of systems.

On 31 Dec 2024 20:45:03 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> And FTR, in 20+ years I've had only one case - on only one of two
> systems - where Windows Update was somwhat messed up. Not broken, but
> re-offering already installed updates, so I wanted to clean it up.

You're volunteering to be a beta tester but I had a machine on the
Insiders releases. About the time they juggled the developers and canary
classifications it would repeatedly try to update and fail. I was not the
only person affected. There was no path forward other than a complete
reinstall.

I have been to the point where you need to stop the updater service and
blow away the Software Update directory before restarting the service a
couple of times. Not a big deal but not something Aunt Tilly is going to
figure out without a visit by the Geek Squad.

On 2024-12-31 14:08, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> Yet another
> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
> in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the
> Windows update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive
> further security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update
> to fix it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
> introducing their own new bugs?

Dear Lord is this embarrassing.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

On 2024-12-31 15:19, Joel wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Yet another
>> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
>> in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the
>> Windows update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive
>> further security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update
>> to fix it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
>> introducing their own new bugs?
>
>
> Just incompetent, isn't it? Why do they keep making the same
> mistakes, again and again, releasing beta software as if it's ready
> for prime time. In 2019 it was what caused me to switch to Linux for
> the first lengthy time (I'd installed it a few times but never used it
> long-term).

We all have reasons to switch to Linux. When you're window shopping as
most of us are when it comes to the operating system, it's hard to find
the motivation to stick to it when we encounter the first few bugs. In
your case, it was how slow 11 was making your new hardware feel; for me,
it was the knowledge that the corporations involved had no interest in
fixing a three-year-old bug that made using the operating system
intolerable.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>On 2024-12-31 15:19, Joel wrote:
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Yet another
>>> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
>>> in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the
>>> Windows update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive
>>> further security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update
>>> to fix it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
>>> introducing their own new bugs?
>>
>> Just incompetent, isn't it? Why do they keep making the same
>> mistakes, again and again, releasing beta software as if it's ready
>> for prime time. In 2019 it was what caused me to switch to Linux for
>> the first lengthy time (I'd installed it a few times but never used it
>> long-term).
>
>We all have reasons to switch to Linux. When you're window shopping as
>most of us are when it comes to the operating system, it's hard to find
>the motivation to stick to it when we encounter the first few bugs. In
>your case, it was how slow 11 was making your new hardware feel; for me,
>it was the knowledge that the corporations involved had no interest in
>fixing a three-year-old bug that made using the operating system
>intolerable.

Win11 23H2 was overweight, on a machine that was ideal to upgrade to
Win11 21H2. That is just ridiculous. Two years. Is that an
eternity, or something? I like Microsoft in the abstract, I think
they're innovators, I think they do some useful things. But that is
irrelevant to my enjoyment of my machine. Win11 outgrew it in *no
time*.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-12-31 22:14, Joel wrote:
> Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>> On 2024-12-31 15:19, Joel wrote:
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yet another
>>>> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
>>>> in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the
>>>> Windows update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive
>>>> further security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update
>>>> to fix it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
>>>> introducing their own new bugs?
>>>
>>> Just incompetent, isn't it? Why do they keep making the same
>>> mistakes, again and again, releasing beta software as if it's ready
>>> for prime time. In 2019 it was what caused me to switch to Linux for
>>> the first lengthy time (I'd installed it a few times but never used it
>>> long-term).
>>
>> We all have reasons to switch to Linux. When you're window shopping as
>> most of us are when it comes to the operating system, it's hard to find
>> the motivation to stick to it when we encounter the first few bugs. In
>> your case, it was how slow 11 was making your new hardware feel; for me,
>> it was the knowledge that the corporations involved had no interest in
>> fixing a three-year-old bug that made using the operating system
>> intolerable.
>
>
> Win11 23H2 was overweight, on a machine that was ideal to upgrade to
> Win11 21H2. That is just ridiculous. Two years. Is that an
> eternity, or something? I like Microsoft in the abstract, I think
> they're innovators, I think they do some useful things. But that is
> irrelevant to my enjoyment of my machine. Win11 outgrew it in *no
> time*.

In exchange for manufacturers bundling Windows with every one of their
machines, Microsoft agrees to bloat the operating system artificially to
encourage users to upgrade more frequently.

It's long been a theory but I would love to someone to tell me that it
is far-fetched.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:

>>> We all have reasons to switch to Linux. When you're window shopping as
>>> most of us are when it comes to the operating system, it's hard to find
>>> the motivation to stick to it when we encounter the first few bugs. In
>>> your case, it was how slow 11 was making your new hardware feel; for me,
>>> it was the knowledge that the corporations involved had no interest in
>>> fixing a three-year-old bug that made using the operating system
>>> intolerable.
>>
>> Win11 23H2 was overweight, on a machine that was ideal to upgrade to
>> Win11 21H2. That is just ridiculous. Two years. Is that an
>> eternity, or something? I like Microsoft in the abstract, I think
>> they're innovators, I think they do some useful things. But that is
>> irrelevant to my enjoyment of my machine. Win11 outgrew it in *no
>> time*.
>
>In exchange for manufacturers bundling Windows with every one of their
>machines, Microsoft agrees to bloat the operating system artificially to
>encourage users to upgrade more frequently.
>
>It's long been a theory but I would love to someone to tell me that it
>is far-fetched.

Boom.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Joel wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

> Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>
>>>> We all have reasons to switch to Linux. When you're window shopping as
>>>> most of us are when it comes to the operating system, it's hard to find
>>>> the motivation to stick to it when we encounter the first few bugs. In
>>>> your case, it was how slow 11 was making your new hardware feel; for me,
>>>> it was the knowledge that the corporations involved had no interest in
>>>> fixing a three-year-old bug that made using the operating system
>>>> intolerable.
>>>
>>> Win11 23H2 was overweight, on a machine that was ideal to upgrade to
>>> Win11 21H2. That is just ridiculous. Two years. Is that an
>>> eternity, or something? I like Microsoft in the abstract, I think
>>> they're innovators, I think they do some useful things. But that is
>>> irrelevant to my enjoyment of my machine. Win11 outgrew it in *no
>>> time*.
>>
>>In exchange for manufacturers bundling Windows with every one of their
>>machines, Microsoft agrees to bloat the operating system artificially to
>>encourage users to upgrade more frequently.
>>
>>It's long been a theory but I would love to someone to tell me that it
>>is far-fetched.
>
> Boom.

That's the origin of the term "Wintel" IIRC.

--
A physicist is an atom's way of knowing about atoms.
-- George Wald

On 2025-01-01 07:50, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Joel wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
>
>> Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>
>>>>> We all have reasons to switch to Linux. When you're window shopping as
>>>>> most of us are when it comes to the operating system, it's hard to find
>>>>> the motivation to stick to it when we encounter the first few bugs. In
>>>>> your case, it was how slow 11 was making your new hardware feel; for me,
>>>>> it was the knowledge that the corporations involved had no interest in
>>>>> fixing a three-year-old bug that made using the operating system
>>>>> intolerable.
>>>>
>>>> Win11 23H2 was overweight, on a machine that was ideal to upgrade to
>>>> Win11 21H2. That is just ridiculous. Two years. Is that an
>>>> eternity, or something? I like Microsoft in the abstract, I think
>>>> they're innovators, I think they do some useful things. But that is
>>>> irrelevant to my enjoyment of my machine. Win11 outgrew it in *no
>>>> time*.
>>>
>>> In exchange for manufacturers bundling Windows with every one of their
>>> machines, Microsoft agrees to bloat the operating system artificially to
>>> encourage users to upgrade more frequently.
>>>
>>> It's long been a theory but I would love to someone to tell me that it
>>> is far-fetched.
>>
>> Boom.
>
> That's the origin of the term "Wintel" IIRC.

Windows = Win
Intel = tel

That's the origin. It has nothing to do with bloat.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

Andrzej Matuch wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

> On 2025-01-01 07:50, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> Joel wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
>>
>>> Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> We all have reasons to switch to Linux. When you're window shopping as
>>>>>> most of us are when it comes to the operating system, it's hard to find
>>>>>> the motivation to stick to it when we encounter the first few bugs. In
>>>>>> your case, it was how slow 11 was making your new hardware feel; for me,
>>>>>> it was the knowledge that the corporations involved had no interest in
>>>>>> fixing a three-year-old bug that made using the operating system
>>>>>> intolerable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Win11 23H2 was overweight, on a machine that was ideal to upgrade to
>>>>> Win11 21H2. That is just ridiculous. Two years. Is that an
>>>>> eternity, or something? I like Microsoft in the abstract, I think
>>>>> they're innovators, I think they do some useful things. But that is
>>>>> irrelevant to my enjoyment of my machine. Win11 outgrew it in *no
>>>>> time*.
>>>>
>>>> In exchange for manufacturers bundling Windows with every one of their
>>>> machines, Microsoft agrees to bloat the operating system artificially to
>>>> encourage users to upgrade more frequently.
>>>>
>>>> It's long been a theory but I would love to someone to tell me that it
>>>> is far-fetched.
>>>
>>> Boom.
>>
>> That's the origin of the term "Wintel" IIRC.
>
> Windows = Win
> Intel = tel
>
> That's the origin. It has nothing to do with bloat.

It has to do with the symbiotic relationship of the two companies, and yes,
bloat did have something to do with it. IMHO.

--
My EARS are GONE!!

On 2025-01-01 09:20, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Andrzej Matuch wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
>
>> On 2025-01-01 07:50, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> Joel wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
>>>
>>>> Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> We all have reasons to switch to Linux. When you're window shopping as
>>>>>>> most of us are when it comes to the operating system, it's hard to find
>>>>>>> the motivation to stick to it when we encounter the first few bugs. In
>>>>>>> your case, it was how slow 11 was making your new hardware feel; for me,
>>>>>>> it was the knowledge that the corporations involved had no interest in
>>>>>>> fixing a three-year-old bug that made using the operating system
>>>>>>> intolerable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Win11 23H2 was overweight, on a machine that was ideal to upgrade to
>>>>>> Win11 21H2. That is just ridiculous. Two years. Is that an
>>>>>> eternity, or something? I like Microsoft in the abstract, I think
>>>>>> they're innovators, I think they do some useful things. But that is
>>>>>> irrelevant to my enjoyment of my machine. Win11 outgrew it in *no
>>>>>> time*.
>>>>>
>>>>> In exchange for manufacturers bundling Windows with every one of their
>>>>> machines, Microsoft agrees to bloat the operating system artificially to
>>>>> encourage users to upgrade more frequently.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's long been a theory but I would love to someone to tell me that it
>>>>> is far-fetched.
>>>>
>>>> Boom.
>>>
>>> That's the origin of the term "Wintel" IIRC.
>>
>> Windows = Win
>> Intel = tel
>>
>> That's the origin. It has nothing to do with bloat.
>
> It has to do with the symbiotic relationship of the two companies, and yes,
> bloat did have something to do with it. IMHO.

I won't deny the symbiotic relationship between the two, but I don't
believe that it was any kind of conspiracy behind it. Intel was making
the x86 chips, and IBM and Microsoft's software ran on that platform.
While AMD worked for Intel to produce x86 chips and even after they no
longer worked together, Microsoft ran just as well on AMD's x86 chips.
People have always criticized the x86 platform for not being as good a
the RISC variants, but it doesn't mean that there wasn't a need for x86.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

On 2025-01-01 09:45, Gregg Fowler wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 15:19:23 -0500, Joel wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Yet another
>>> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-
> future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
>>> in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the Windows
>>> update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive further
>>> security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update to fix
>>> it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
>>> introducing their own new bugs?
>>
>>
>> Just incompetent, isn't it? Why do they keep making the same mistakes,
>> again and again, releasing beta software as if it's ready for prime
>> time. In 2019 it was what caused me to switch to Linux for the first
>> lengthy time (I'd installed it a few times but never used it long-term).
>
> Beta software is beta software. An OS is an OS.

What he meant is that the Windows updates Microsoft was releasing might
as well have been considered beta since they weren't properly tested and
caused many machines to become unbootable.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

>>> That's the origin of the term "Wintel" IIRC.
>>
>> Windows = Win
>> Intel = tel
>>
>> That's the origin. It has nothing to do with bloat.
>
>It has to do with the symbiotic relationship of the two companies, and yes,
>bloat did have something to do with it. IMHO.

Nope. It's only shorthand for the computing platform of Windows on
x86.

--
"What's happened is that the advocates have been beaten by the
implications of their own words." - lying asshole "-hh", lying
shamelessly

Gregg Fowler <totsob@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 15:19:23 -0500, Joel wrote:
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>Yet another
>>><https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-
>future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
>>>in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the Windows
>>>update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive further
>>>security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update to fix
>>>it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
>>>introducing their own new bugs?
>>
>> Just incompetent, isn't it? Why do they keep making the same mistakes,
>> again and again, releasing beta software as if it's ready for prime
>> time. In 2019 it was what caused me to switch to Linux for the first
>> lengthy time (I'd installed it a few times but never used it long-term).
>
>Beta software is beta software. An OS is an OS.

So an OS is not software? They can't release poorly tested code for
an OS, just like an app?

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Tue, 12/31/2024 2:08 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> Yet another
> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
> in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the
> Windows update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive
> further security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update
> to fix it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
> introducing their own new bugs?
>

Wow, you take two minutes to have a piss and this happens :-)
I had trouble spotting the byline, and using archive.org and
the mess that makes of the screen, made it stand out better.

Written by Lance Whitney, Contributor
Dec. 30, 2024 at 11:04 a.m. PT

Someone reported a Windows Update failure, where a Windows Update
"complained it could not find the manifest of a previous update".

This is not how Windows Update is supposed to work. Remember that
the word "Cumulative", a little-understood English word, no longer
means "Cumulative". It means "whatever-we-want-it-to-mean".
Your updates aren't stateless, after all.

In fact, your machine has a *number* of state-machine related
failure conditions (such as properly fixing BlackLotus, sometime
after the Windows-Update-mediated method did it).

The OS has some items, that need to be repaired if your
machine suffers a related calamity. Say for example, your
little brother does a factory reset on the UEFI security
materials. Does Windows "measure" the fucking mess and fix it?
No. Of course not. There could be portions of that which remain
broken.

*******

The way to cover off some Windows issues of this sort, is the

Repair Install

which is a procedure that ordinary users can handle
without hair loss. But it does not "guarantee" much of anything,
it's merely a "best effort" from the user community, to help you.

For example, the Windows installer media *still* does not handle
the SafeOS feature properly. The partition still isn't the right
size, defensively designed for the next shit-show.

For a company that is to "Do Security", um, what are you doing ??? Exactly ?

Yes, out here, we can whack at it, like it was a mole. Whack-a-mole.

I would say all the good staff are working on <cough> Windows 12.
Which will come with AI ash trays.

Paul

On Wed, 01 Jan 2025 14:45:44 GMT, Gregg Fowler wrote:

> Beta software is beta software. An OS is an OS.

And Microsoft is the only one shipping a beta-quality OS and expecting its
users to rely on that for mission-critical production work.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Wed, 01 Jan 2025 14:45:44 GMT, Gregg Fowler wrote:
>
>> Beta software is beta software. An OS is an OS.
>
>And Microsoft is the only one shipping a beta-quality OS and expecting its
>users to rely on that for mission-critical production work.

Yeah, weird, huh? It's like they can't make it right from the
beginning, they need people to put up with bugs to test it in the
wild, how is their internal testing so poor? Being on the cutting
edge with M$ is just spinning one's wheels. Linux is the refuge.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jan 2025 14:45:44 GMT, Gregg Fowler wrote:
>
> > Beta software is beta software. An OS is an OS.
>
> And Microsoft is the only one shipping a beta-quality OS and expecting its
> users to rely on that for mission-critical production work.

Don't be silly! Any such 'users' are total idiots. The consumer
versions of Windows are totally unfit for "mission-critical production
work". And even business/enterprise versions need competent IT staff and
procedures to properly manage such systems.

FYI, I've been supporting Five Nines systems (obviously not Windows
ones), so remarks like yours tend to push my button.

Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:

>User-Agent: tin/1.6.2-20030910 ("Pabbay") (UNIX) (CYGWIN_NT-10.0-WOW/2.8.0(0.309/5/3) (i686)) Hamster/2.0.2.2

Fascinating that you prefer using that for Usenet, I'm the reverse,
using Forte Agent under Wine, lol.

>Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>> On Wed, 01 Jan 2025 14:45:44 GMT, Gregg Fowler wrote:
>>
>> > Beta software is beta software. An OS is an OS.
>>
>> And Microsoft is the only one shipping a beta-quality OS and expecting its
>> users to rely on that for mission-critical production work.
>
> Don't be silly! Any such 'users' are total idiots. The consumer
>versions of Windows are totally unfit for "mission-critical production
>work". And even business/enterprise versions need competent IT staff and
>procedures to properly manage such systems.
>
> FYI, I've been supporting Five Nines systems (obviously not Windows
>ones), so remarks like yours tend to push my button.

That's a good point - the business Winblows users will not be using
24H2, in the first place, M$ is testing it in the wild with early-
adopter types, masochists one might surmise.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
> Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>
> >User-Agent: tin/1.6.2-20030910 ("Pabbay") (UNIX) (CYGWIN_NT-10.0-WOW/2.8.0(0.309/5/3) (i686)) Hamster/2.0.2.2
>
>
> Fascinating that you prefer using that for Usenet, I'm the reverse,
> using Forte Agent under Wine, lol.

I started with 'notes' ('notesfiles', not Lotus Notes) on Unix/UNIX
(HP-UX), so tin was the logical next step. Anyway, why would I want to
use a GUI+'mouse' for a pure text medium? No need to go forwards and
backwards between keyboard and mouse. But that's just my choice/
preference.

As to Cygwin, for my personal use, Windows programs and all GNU tools
is the best combination, ever since early 2003. WSL came way too late
for me considering to switch to it.

> >Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 01 Jan 2025 14:45:44 GMT, Gregg Fowler wrote:
> >>
> >> > Beta software is beta software. An OS is an OS.
> >>
> >> And Microsoft is the only one shipping a beta-quality OS and expecting its
> >> users to rely on that for mission-critical production work.
> >
> > Don't be silly! Any such 'users' are total idiots. The consumer
> >versions of Windows are totally unfit for "mission-critical production
> >work". And even business/enterprise versions need competent IT staff and
> >procedures to properly manage such systems.
> >
> > FYI, I've been supporting Five Nines systems (obviously not Windows
> >ones), so remarks like yours tend to push my button.
>
> That's a good point - the business Winblows users will not be using
> 24H2, in the first place, M$ is testing it in the wild with early-
> adopter types, masochists one might surmise.

Indeed. I only updated to 24H2 after some months passed and most of
the dust had settled. Update went fine and the power efficiency
enhancements indeed seem to make my laptop's battery to last longer.
Who would have thought that! :-)

On 1 Jan 2025 20:19:01 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> And Microsoft is the only one shipping a beta-quality OS and expecting
>> its users to rely on that for mission-critical production work.
>
> Any such 'users' are total idiots.

You said it, I didn’t ...