Windows Update Deniers

Do you think "Windows Update deniers" will become a big thing in the future like a flat earth society? What they lack to become a bigger movement? For me looks with the end of life Windows 7 support a lot of people are restarting to saying Update doesn't matter, like happen in 2013 with Window XP. In some cases is visible some users are "ok" with features update, but they don't trust security patches. I other cases they look to be reasonable and acceptable to update by other sources like WSUS Offline.

I don't think they will ever get big. Most people that have this idea are the same type that only want to stay on an old version of an OS or software - any new version is evil (even if their version has been deprecated for a long time) In some instances this is completely fine, some computers just do one task or are simply machines that don't need to be updated. But for every other usecase they are risking vulnerabilities, unless they patch the system themselves or tread lightly.

>>11533 computer science teacher at my high school used to believe in that. "a good piece of software doesn't need updates", so depending on if there's more people in education that have some kind of "authority" to spew their rants during classes

>>11533 Users hate updating. At best, the update changes nothing. Typically, the update breaks or removes old functionality and resets settings. At worst, the update also breaks the system. Updates are aggressively pushed despite requiring unnecessary restarts and relying on users to act as testers with their own computers. >>11545 >"a good piece of software doesn't need updates" He was right.

>>11534 >But for every other usecase they are risking vulnerabilities, unless they patch the system themselves or tread lightly. I am talking about daily use machine. I understand in some cases someone gonna needs to use an old machine with an old O.S. with old software because you don't have money for that and need that specific software. But I don't understand how people think they stay safe in unsupported OS and if something wrong happens, this will be a conspiracy against "tech-savvy people how knows updates are evil". >>11545 This is an early '90s mentality for a machine don't use any kind of network. >>11558 >He was right. Only if the software and software are left alone. No Internet, no external input and a limited network >Users hate updating. They also hate to brush their teeth, eat less sugar, drink less alcohol, use a condom, do exercises and drive safe. But in most cases, they know there is not a conspiracy beyond those things. And most of that bullsoykaf could be fixed if they had chosen a better OS or choose a 3-year plan for features updates. In this point, I can agree with idea Microsoft should show that option on first boot.

>>11558 yes and no. depends on the software and its usecase. but generally updates are a pretty good idea

>>11562 >stay safe in unsupported OS How many win 3.11 attacks are being made today?

>>11581 Actually, as soon as you connect any machine running old windows versions, it gets hijacked in seconds. People are actively seeking for users to unwarily expose outdated systems to the web.

>>11581 don't know, but there are many win xp attacks (that could potentially cost lives)

>>11581 >3.11 Come on, there two big problems there. First, this isn't profitable because of really low numbers of machines run that. Second, the win 3.11 is a 16-bit. I don't have sources to support those claims, but I think the first one is pretty obvious. Also, I have serious doubt there any modern browser can be used on that, even with 32-bit compatibility. >>11583 >>11584 Sources, please.

>>11595 https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/13/15635006/microsoft-windows-xp-security-patch-wannacry-ransomware-attack https://www.computerworld.com/article/2932371/medjack-hackers-hijacking-medical-devices-to-create-backdoors-in-hospital-networks.html https://www.zdnet.com/article/windows-xp-why-hospitals-are-still-using-microsofts-antique-operating-system/ https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/jpgb3y/nhs-hospitals-are-running-thousands-of-computers-on-unsupported-windows-xp https://theconversation.com/hack-attack-on-a-hospital-it-system-highlights-the-risk-of-still-running-windows-xp-53431

>>11599 Thank you.

>>11602 that was too emotional for me. i miss XP... such a great system. and i am gonna be honest, i loved that environment...

>>11608 >such a great system You can say that with your heart, but You can't say that with your brain. WINXP was a pretty messy OS.

>>11609 At least it did not use 100000 billion bytes of memory and 99% processing power to open a menu.

>>11610 Well, maybe not so heavy but still pretty slow on a recommended hardware while 98SE was pretty lightweight and fast and NT and 2000 was "OK". In my vision XP until first SP was a ME of NT family.

>>11602 F Man nothing really complements this quite like seeing what the bliss hill looks like now, it's a stripped down brown vinyard.

Depends, personally I keep a windows 7 computer around for gaymes but I also don't game much anymore and each generation of the stuff is less enticing to me. So people like me who are tech savvy and don't mind keeping their desktop off the internet and use their laptop or phone to go online are definitely in a camp that doesn't need to update. As for a large society of this? I doubt it, the class of people who would be luddites are disproportionately not capable of fixing a computer much less maintaining it at the software level. If someone's hard drive goes and they can't get one thats compatible with a new standard that gets forced ten years from now, they're out of luck. Or if the PSU fails, or something on the board dies. Computer hardware isn't invincible and eternal so eventually they'll be forced to upgrade to something newer. Now remember that most of the consumer market does their computing on a laptop not a desktop. The average consumer laptop is not a thinkpad and isn't worth the cost in the store. Its not a matter of sticking to the software and handling incompatibilities, its that you can't. Everyone who was upset with Windows 10 jumped ship to Linux or is going to just grin and bear it which is what almost everyone who bitched did .

>>11533 We're in for another long decade of Win7 malware from old people unwilling to upgrade or disconnect, just like what happened after XP went into EoL. Microsoft tried to preempt the problem this time by making 10 free, but it didn't really work because it was slow at first and it's full of spyware.

>>11619 >Microsoft tried to preempt the problem this time by making 10 free right, that's why....

>>11602 how touching. still gonna give mercy death (dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda) to remaining XP machines at work in few months

>>11622 Why not just remove the hard drives and replace them? Those things have to be ancient now.

>>11630 Ancient indeed. I can't throw away drives with data, I have to wipe them first. Computers will go too, I have spare newer computers.

>>11619 > full of spyware. Most of the people don't care about that. The mobile system is even worse than Windows 10. >slow That makes sense. I can believe that thing use nearly 2 GB. This made 4 GB looking as 2 and 8 GB becoming the most realistic option for basic machines. But I like the cycle of updates they are doing. Maybe a big mistake of MS has put this cycle model so late. Maybe if they had put in Vista or 7 maybe they would have saved some millions. >>11620 It is stupidly hard to Canonical and Red Hat to support simple update versions of their system, Imagine how much expensive is to Microsoft to support three different of the systems. One of the points that make Linux works so well is the works share between so many groups instead try to keep everything.

>>11620 It's not like charging for it would have cost them market share, seeing as so many people didn't upgrade or switch.

>>11640 sense my sarcasm. thank you.

>>11545 >computer science teacher at my high school used to believe in that. "a good piece of software doesn't need updates" I've worked jobs where I've cleaned up after people who believe this.

I mean I'm not quite a complete moron, so of course I believe security updates are necessary and always will be. But to lay the blame on the users for Windows update refuseniks is kind of wrong-headed. If MS did things properly, there would be three update channels. One STRICTLY for security only, under penalty of death--no spyware sneaking in, no fuarrrking weird features that are half-baked and pushed out too quickly by a sick development culture and result in data loss. You know, like the one released last year and was deceptively imposed on people who vaguely signaled interest in experimental updates in a way that was clearly dark patterned and didn't explicitly inform that using that feature placed you on the experimental channel. So one channel just for security updates. JUST FOR SECURITY UPDATES. One more channel for well-tested long term feature updates and non-security bug fixes. And a third channel that is very explicitly opt-in and clearly labeled as a guinea pig channel. For beta software that the Windows 10 dev team has hastily thrown together over a very compressed six-month cycle and not had time to properly test, as per their awful software culture and habits. Read some articles written by current (but pseudonymous) and ex-MS engineers sometime. It's alarming how things work in there. They are very frustrated and angry--more so than your average software engineer. Security updates should always be mandatory, the second channel could be opt-out for LTSB types, and the third would be opt-in for early adopters / techies who like playing with new (but unpolished) things. If they did this, they'd have plenty of adoption of new features and more luck with deploying security updates to everyone. It would actually be more secure for the entire world than what they're doing now, where they roll up vital zero day fixes in with absolute filthy dog-cock software that nobody needs, like a 3d/AR/VR version of MS paint. Because buzzwords. Can't do bugfixes that have been eagerly awaited for almost a decade, gotta make everything AR/VR/XR/MR/whatever-fuarrrking-R right now. Blaming the users for foolishly rejecting security updates when they're often bundled with unfinished software resulting in user data loss (LIKE THEY DID JUST LAST YEAR) isn't fair. Yes, the update that did that wasn't technically on the default update channel--but if you go into windows update and check for updates manually or click 'see what's new in your latest update' it surreptitiously puts you on the risky channel without properly informing the user. Nearly zero users are able to go on the Microsoft knowledge base and look up the KB number of every update, read the PR text, go on forums to see what it really does, and make an informed decision on whether it's security or fluff. Not every time. With these kind of perverse incentives and terrible UX design, yelling at the users to properly respect updates is like yelling at the sky for raining on you. It might feel satisfying, but it has a zero percent chance of helping to solve the problem. It's a systematic issue--it must be fixed from the top down. Expecting all the varied Windows users in the world to spontaneously become enlightened to the wisdom of updates and also to Windows 10's intentionally obfuscated update system isn't rational. This is Microsoft's problem to solve, pure and simple.

To be honest, I still use Windows XP on my laptop. I have no reason to update and it always has worked, even with modern webpages. In fact, I am typing this on XP right now.

>>11558 That would only be the case if hardware never changed.

>>11558 >>11545 >"a good piece of software doesn't need updates" If literally everybody in the production line is a perfect programmer who can see the future and nothing in the underlying hardware and stack has any zero days. Updates don't just fix bugs; the important ones fix zero days. If you think you can make software of any considerable complexity without totally new and unknown vulns, be my guest. And even if you could, unless you're programming on bare metal then you are also working with a stack of software beneath you that might have zero days waiting to be uncovered in the future, and those will need patching if your software opens them up for exploitation. What am I doing? This is lainchan. Y'all supposed to know about this soykaf already. This is basic stuff. Software needs updates unless you're programming something outrageously simple in a 1980s OS on period hardware. Maybe if you're programming a hello world in Basic on an old Kaypro you can get away with no continuing support. But modern stuff is way more complicated and full of unknown elements. Pentesters now are very clever. They'll find a way to own your soykaf eventually.

>>11899 please tell me this a vm....

>>11899 Oh wow. You're not at all worried about the security vulnerabilities?

>>11899 Extremely tempted to delete this post since you've given me every means to do so lmao But honestly, impressive. I'm not even mad. This is like those people who have a fetish about having sex with HIV+ people bareback. You do you. One more bot in the botnet ain't a big deal.

>>11899 Also now I'm buying that sticker. If that was your master plan, well played.

>>11899 >> Win XP That WIN or FAIL?

>>11899 Anon, i think that is very comfy.

>Do you think "Windows Update deniers" will become a big thing hahaha if i ever write a sci fi short story or something i'm going to have to include this idea. i actually work with a guy, at a university (we're both math grad students) who insists that windows updates destroyed his PC, and claims to have installed win 7 fresh and never updated it. he has a lot of strange ideas about PCs and has all these weird rituals that he thinks make it work better, but actually make no sense. another time he told me that he had to re-record a bunch of video that he planned to upload to youtube because the file sizes were too big. i told him he could just compress them, but he thought i meant putting them in a .zip archive: "does that work on youtube? will people have to install 7zip to watch them? i don't think people are going to be willing to do that". i assured him that it would be fine and told him about ffmpeg/vlc, but he couldn't figure out how to use them and just used some web-based transcoding site instead, which obviously took forever. keep in mind, this is a guy who crushes differential equations in his sleep lol. i always sort of assumed all math people understood computers but my coworkers have thoroughly convinced me otherwise.

>>11899 Still use XP on a old laptop (almost 20 years old). Just use it for updating my tomtom GPS (long story short they not provide software for linux users and in a VM it's all messy). I feel insecure but love the nostalgia hit. For sure I not use it for other purpose

>>18330 win10 had several patches that wiped peoples data. He might be right. Its the reason many said fuarrrk ms im gonna stay on 7 the malware cant be worse than ms updates itself.

>>12143 When updates are more intrusive than malware, updating is *worse* than getting owned. Crackers and OS vendors both close up any vulnerabilities they detect; they don't want anyone else on "their" system. However, crackers uniquely have an incentive to ensure the system looks and feels the same. If it looks different, a system admin or user might discover them. Your OS vendor doesn't care about hiding changes. Ultimately, update systems *are* vulnerabilities. Do you trust your vendor?

>>11899 Wait, you don't even use an adblocker? Scary.

>>18330 >> i actually work with a guy, at a university (we're both math grad students) who insists that windows updates destroyed his PC, and claims to have installed win 7 fresh and never updated it. he has a lot of strange ideas about PCs and has all these weird rituals that he thinks make it work better, but actually make no sense. that sounds like a typical lainchan user to be honest

I've never heard of this but if we can turn cyberspace into a 2003-eque disaster that is nothing but good for most of us except maybe when we go into work. Make the internet into a dangerous place again.

>>11899 You know there was a major rendering bug that was found in all 9x versions of windows and I know a dude who apparently had success using the exploit in win95 support forums in the mid 2000s. Who knows there could be outdated industrial machines, and retro boxes infected to this day.