image caption: A Microsoft Windows screen showing “Active Hours” with start time set to 12 AM and end time set to 12 AM and an error that says “Choose an end time that’s no more than 18 hours from the start time”.

  • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    If CrowdStrike has taught us anything, it’s that blindly trusting automation can be equally (if not more) disastrous.

    It’s one thing to ask me to update, but give me options; including to not update. There are machines out there in the world that still run Windows 95. They are vital to manufacturing processes, and cannot be updated because they run software that is no longer updated and there is no inexpensive alternative. It happens.

    While that may not be the case in this circumstance, the point is that it’s up to the operator to determine when it’s time to update, not Microsoft.

    Anecdotally, the only reason Microsoft does this is because people historically do not update their software regularly. Why? Because it’s burdensome and problematic. Whose fault is that? I’ll give you three guesses; the first two don’t count.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      If you stay up to date it won’t force you to update. The problem is when you keep putting off updating. It is the same for any system.

      Also the manufacturing type machines are not internet connected and are in a high security environment.

      • thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        The point the other commenter is making, which I fully agree with, is that I can have legitimate reasons for not wanting to update. Windows shoving updates down my throat when they can potentially break critical stuff on my machine is pretty much just equivalent to forcing malware on me.