You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
17

[–] tribblepuncher 0 points 17 points (+17|-0) ago  (edited ago)

It is profoundly disturbing that Microsoft believes that the correct answer to essentially having your fate dictated by Microsoft is "pay more," which boils down to Microsoft easing themselves back into their old tricks again. Not that that would change the firmware situation for one moment, although the answer to that is probably "pay more," too.

Though moves like this are obviously working hard to change that.

On top of that, you should advise whoever talks to your committee from Microsoft corporate that they had better put to rest speculation about Windows 10 Professional in terms of updates, because just about every story I've heard has it set that upgrades can be at most "deferred," not refused.

Here's one source on that: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-10/defer-upgrades-in-windows-10

This prevents them from coming down the pike for "several months" but doesn't stop them, and gives you no option as to the security updates.

It is unfortunate that Microsoft seems to be going the way of DVDs, in that the pirates are able to offer a better user experience than the company itself, by stripping off what is forced on them. This is especially bad if they're using home users as beta testers, as indicated by @SO_TRIGGERED and backed up by a citation from @Mixplate.

My computer, not yours. 'tis that simple, and that Microsoft is unwilling or unable to accept that without additional money (and at some point, probably not for any price) bodes very ill for all involved.

0
5

[–] dingo_bat 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Forced updates for home users is the best decision Microsoft has ever taken. Your kind of thinking leads to horribly insecure systems running 20 year-old Win XP and websites made for IE6.

2
2

[–] lawofchaos 2 points 2 points (+4|-2) ago 

Using Windows itself leads to horribly insecure systems. I'd rather stick to Linux as a solution for security then use an OS that is so broken and faulty out the box that if you don't auto install their constant updates you are considered a security risk. How is this even a selling point? It just tells me that they are incompetent and just make things up as they go along.

0
0

[–] somerandomteen ago  (edited ago)

Only Enterprise and Education editions will be able to refuse fully security updates. In terms of "defer" vs. "refuse", I'm not wholly sure, but I'll take a look around and keep an ear out.

To clarify, I'm in no way an official Microsoft source.

0
1

[–] tribblepuncher 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

OK, so... Professional can not accept updates (although it looks like they can only delay or 'defer' them, from that web site), and... Enterprise and Educational can defer or reject?

Seriously, official or not, if you have their ear (or have the ear of someone who has their ear), please ask them to clarify this, because this confusion is going to persist even after it's been out for a while and it's in no one's best interest for this to be unclear.