techradar Microsoft could be on the verge of forcibly upgrading Windows 10 on your computer

[ENTERPRISE]

Quote

We have long been told about the importance of keeping Windows up to date, but in order to qualify for updates you need to be running a supported version of Windows. And for some people running older versions of Windows 10, the clock is ticking,Specifically, it's Windows 10 20H2 that will be reaching end-of-life when May rolls around. The exact date in question is May 10, meaning that in three short months, anyone who is still running this particular version of Windows 10 will no longer qualify for support from Microsoft. And this is why Microsoft is planning to forcibly update people to a supported edition of the operating system.

Source

[Avacado]

Lame

 

[Diffident]

It's not your computer.....Microsoft is just nice enough to let you use it.

[ArchStanton]

I assume there's a major MS exec(s) pissed at his/her underlings in reference to W11's abysmal adoption rate, this is their solution to make the graphs look better at the next big meeting.

[ENTERPRISE]

8 hours ago, ArchStanton said:

I assume there's a major MS exec(s) pissed at his/her underlings in reference to W11's abysmal adoption rate, this is their solution to make the graphs look better at the next big meeting.

Pretty much this. I have Windows 11 and enjoy it but it is not much different to Windows 10 other than a facelift im some areas. 

 

I jumped for when Direct Storage becomes a thing on PC but from what I hear Win10 is getting it too now.

 

Not surprised at the poor adoption rate of Win11. There was really no need for it. MS should have just continued with Win10 as per the original plan.

[UltraMega]

This is nothing new. Windows 10 isn't like pervious versions of windows where the first version is the same as the current version minus updates. Windows 10 has had major revisions many times and they regularly drop support for the older versions. 

 

In the past we would have service packs for windows and users could be limited in what they could do if they didn't ever install any service packs. 

 

It makes sense really, if you don't do updates at some point you won't be able to get any updates without updating enough to get updates. 

 

[pio]

46 minutes ago, UltraMega said:

This is nothing new. Windows 10 isn't like pervious versions of windows where the first version is the same as the current version minus updates. Windows 10 has had major revisions many times and they regularly drop support for the older versions. 

 

In the past we would have service packs for windows and users could be limited in what they could do if they didn't ever install any service packs. 

 

It makes sense really, if you don't do updates at some point you won't be able to get any updates without updating enough to get updates. 

 

It only really makes sense according to their original plan.  They originally stated that Windows 10 would be "the last version of windows".  Their promise there, not mine.  With Windows 11 being released, FORCING users to update is no longer something that makes sense, since they now have a new OS to force people onto for up to date service.  So why are we forcing updates when they're just going to cut service to 10 eventually now like they always do when an OS hits EOL?

To me, this is just more bad business habits from Microshaft.  We complained about the forced updates when 10 was released and their answer was because 10 would be the last OS.  Their fix was allowing us to "defer" updates for a few weeks.  Now....it just doesn't make any sense.  Why are we forcing updates on an OS that will eventually hit EOL just like every past OS that did not have forced updates?

[UltraMega]

1 hour ago, pioneerisloud said:

It only really makes sense according to their original plan.  They originally stated that Windows 10 would be "the last version of windows".  Their promise there, not mine.  With Windows 11 being released, FORCING users to update is no longer something that makes sense, since they now have a new OS to force people onto for up to date service.  So why are we forcing updates when they're just going to cut service to 10 eventually now like they always do when an OS hits EOL?

To me, this is just more bad business habits from Microshaft.  We complained about the forced updates when 10 was released and their answer was because 10 would be the last OS.  Their fix was allowing us to "defer" updates for a few weeks.  Now....it just doesn't make any sense.  Why are we forcing updates on an OS that will eventually hit EOL just like every past OS that did not have forced updates?

Who cares if windows 10 is the last version of windows or not. That's a non-issue. 

The logic is simple, older devices that lack security updates are more prone to infection and much like in the real world infections can spread more from devices that have them so having a bunch of out of date devices connected to the internet creates risk for everyone. 

 

It's not like PC will stop working without updates. If people really don't want to update, they don't have to. 

 

 

Again, this has always been the case since at least windows XP and it should not be a surprise to anyone in the slightest. I think the only reason to even write an article like this is to rile people up about nothing. 

Edited February 7, 2022 by UltraMega

[PCSarge]

if they force windows 11 on me without fixing virtual machine support, i will have a knipshit as i need VM software for university courses

 

my PC has sat on 21H2 windows 10 pro for that specific reason, imagine what forcing updates to small companies and office enviroments could do to software compatibility.

 

if microsoft forces us to windows 11, theyll then EOL that and force us to windows 12. never ending story.

Edited February 8, 2022 by PCSarge

[schuck6566]

10 hours ago, PCSarge said:

if they force windows 11 on me without fixing virtual machine support, i will have a knipshit as i need VM software for university courses

 

my PC has sat on 21H2 windows 10 pro for that specific reason, imagine what forcing updates to small companies and office enviroments could do to software compatibility.

 

if microsoft forces us to windows 11, theyll then EOL that and force us to windows 12. never ending story.

from what I read they're just updating to latest release of the SAME OS. "For anyone who is keen to stick with Windows 10 rather than jumping to Windows 11, there's no need to panic. Microsoft is not going to force you onto the very latest version of Windows if you are happy to stick with an older version. " <-- From the article.

[pio]

5 hours ago, schuck6566 said:

from what I read they're just updating to latest release of the SAME OS. "For anyone who is keen to stick with Windows 10 rather than jumping to Windows 11, there's no need to panic. Microsoft is not going to force you onto the very latest version of Windows if you are happy to stick with an older version. " <-- From the article.

My machines are already trying to force Windows 11 in the updates section, it just says my machine isn't capable of running it.  Granted, I can't actually see it since I have TPMS or whatever its called disabled.  So I can't say 100%, it might still be an "option".  It's still annoying that its even a thing though.

The point being here, updates were NOT forced on Windows 8.1, 8, 7, Vista, XP etc.  They were suggested, but never forced.  Microsoft claimed when 10 was released, that the updates being forced on 10 were simply because Windows 10 was the last version of Windows they'd be releasing.  Microsoft lied.  Who's to say that "no need to panic" isn't just another lie?  And what happens when an update BREAKS your computer?  It's forced, so you're forced to have a broken computer because Microsoft wanted you to have this broken update?  That's not okay.

[ozlay]

The latest version is going to be more secure. Because they stop security updates for older builds. So forcing people to update is a good thing. So long as they aren't bricking their system in the process.

 

The only issue i have with updating builds. Is that microsoft sometimes likes to reinstall bloat that i had removed.

Edited February 8, 2022 by ozlay

[ENTERPRISE]

7 hours ago, ozlay said:

The latest version is going to be more secure. Because they stop security updates for older builds. So forcing people to update is a good thing. So long as they aren't bricking their system in the process.

 

The only issue i have with updating builds. Is that microsoft sometimes likes to reinstall bloat that i had removed.

Yeah that can be a pain, some updates also like to re-configure settings too which is a royal annoyance.

 

[steakikan]

I have no problem moving to Windows 11 if only they didn't remove the taskbar ungroup feature. That taskbar grouping is annoying and so far I have to resort alt-tab as a simpler alternatives.

[schuck6566]

16 hours ago, pioneerisloud said:

My machines are already trying to force Windows 11 in the updates section, it just says my machine isn't capable of running it.  Granted, I can't actually see it since I have TPMS or whatever its called disabled.  So I can't say 100%, it might still be an "option".  It's still annoying that its even a thing though.

The point being here, updates were NOT forced on Windows 8.1, 8, 7, Vista, XP etc.  They were suggested, but never forced.  Microsoft claimed when 10 was released, that the updates being forced on 10 were simply because Windows 10 was the last version of Windows they'd be releasing.  Microsoft lied.  Who's to say that "no need to panic" isn't just another lie?  And what happens when an update BREAKS your computer?  It's forced, so you're forced to have a broken computer because Microsoft wanted you to have this broken update?  That's not okay.

I don't see where it's much different from when XP updated to service pack 1,2,or3. The earlier versions of XP weren't supported and didn't get updates.This is similar because the update being installed is the latest supported and EOL for the 1 it's replacing is in may.Yes,it's a little heavy handed,but we're in an era when our govt. has to be TOLD to patch their computers for issues that are being actively exploited.Sadly,not everyone can be trusted to do simple maintenance.

[ArchStanton]

7 hours ago, ENTERPRISE said:

some updates also like to re-configure settings too which is a royal annoyance.

 

YES! Gorram it, if I wanted password protected sharing turned on, it would already be on! #$%^

[Diffident]

If security was the real goal for forcing updates, Microsoft would enable the option to only choose "security updates" on the Home Edition....but they don't.

[UltraMega]

19 hours ago, Diffident said:

If security was the real goal for forcing updates, Microsoft would enable the option to only choose "security updates" on the Home Edition....but they don't.

If you're the type of user who feels the need to sift through updates, you probably shouldn't be on the home version anyway. It makes perfect sense that the version designed for least capable users would have the fewest optional updates. 

 

The straws some of you guys grasp at to find reasons to hate windows is... well highly illogical to put it nicely. In this thread: windows 11 prompt notifications = forced updates, Microsoft does the exact same thing they have always done but suddenly it's a problem, complaing that windows 10 isn't the last windows OS. 

 

The only legitimate complaint about windows updates is when they mess things up for businesses, but business shouldn't be using windows home anyway, and they should have the ability to pick and choose updates. For those of you complaining about it here, why are you using windows home if you care so much about this? 

 

Not much logic to any of these complaints, though by pointing that out I fear I may be inviting even more illogical complaints. 

 

In a time of so much unjustified and false skepticism, I think it's a good thing that Microsoft is proactive about updates. Infected PCs can infect other PCs, it can be hyjacked to send DDOS attacked out, or for somethingas simple as mining. I'd rather they piss off the crowd that can't handle change than leave millions upon millions of devices connected to the internet without updates.

 

As someone who has been doing PC repair for a long time, I can tell you with certainly that whatever Microsoft is doing is working. It's extremely rare for me to see a PC with a virus on windows 10 now. Ten years ago it's was probably most repairs were virus related. 

 

Edited February 10, 2022 by UltraMega

[pio]

56 minutes ago, UltraMega said:

If you're the type of user who feels the need to sift through updates, you probably shouldn't be on the home version anyway. It makes perfect sense that the version designed for least capable users would have the fewest optional updates. 

 

The straws some of you guys grasp at to find reasons to hate windows is... well highly illogical to put it nicely. In this thread: windows 11 prompt notifications = forced updates, Microsoft does the exact same thing they have always done but suddenly it's a problem, complaing that windows 10 isn't the last windows OS. 

 

The only legitimate complaint about windows updates is when they mess things up for businesses, but business shouldn't be using windows home anyway, and they should have the ability to pick and choose updates. For those of you complaining about it here, why are you using windows home if you care so much about this? 

 

Not much logic to any of these complaints, though by pointing that out I fear I may be inviting even more illogical complaints. 

 

In a time of so much unjustified and false skepticism, I think it's a good thing that Microsoft is proactive about updates. Infected PCs can infect other PCs, it can be hyjacked to send DDOS attacked out, or for somethingas simple as mining. I'd rather they piss off the crowd that can't handle change than leave millions upon millions of devices connected to the internet without updates.

 

As someone who has been doing PC repair for a long time, I can tell you with certainly that whatever Microsoft is doing is working. It's extremely rare for me to see a PC with a virus on windows 10 now. Ten years ago it's was probably most repairs were virus related. 

 

10 years ago, Limewire still worked mate.  It's kind of difficult to get a virus these days because there's less chances available.  You still see just as many people falling for scam emails, that hasn't changed.  Heavy handed take downs have affected virus replication on PC's moreso than what Microsoft has done.  I'm sure Windows 10 can get a virus, its just not as easy to come across one anymore.

People used to get a virus because they knew that you could get free music on the internet.  Now, most people just use Youtube for their free music, or Pandora, or Spotify.  At least, that's what I've personally seen the average user do.  Adult content websites were another, but in general web browsing is considerably safer these days with modern browsers.  Again, not exactly 100% Microsoft's fault here either since Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Brave, and all the other browsers aren't made by Microsoft.

[UltraMega]

27 minutes ago, pioneerisloud said:

10 years ago, Limewire still worked mate.  It's kind of difficult to get a virus these days because there's less chances available.  You still see just as many people falling for scam emails, that hasn't changed.  Heavy handed take downs have affected virus replication on PC's moreso than what Microsoft has done.  I'm sure Windows 10 can get a virus, its just not as easy to come across one anymore.

People used to get a virus because they knew that you could get free music on the internet.  Now, most people just use Youtube for their free music, or Pandora, or Spotify.  At least, that's what I've personally seen the average user do.  Adult content websites were another, but in general web browsing is considerably safer these days with modern browsers.  Again, not exactly 100% Microsoft's fault here either since Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Brave, and all the other browsers aren't made by Microsoft.

That may be a small factor, but no, that's not how most people get viruses. Feel free to include a source that says otherwise if you have one. 

 

And no, ten years ago in 2012 people were not still using limewire. Pirating music is the same now that it was then for the most part. 

 

People get viruses most often because they try to do something with their computer that they don't understand; or even just something basic that leads them to the wrong place. It could be anything, one could search for baking recipes and end up on a site that tries to trick them into entering personal data for bad actors to use against them without going part the first page on Google. Get an e-mail that tricks the recipient into something bad. 

 

Sure, it's not 100% Microsoft that has bolstered security but it's a huge factor, likely the largest factor. Browser security is a big factor too, but I wouldn't try to argue against Windows having some limits on dodging updates by listing a bunch of browsers the update automatically. If anything, you have pointed out another positive aspect of maintaining as strong update schedule across the board. 

 

All that said, this isn't even really about updates. It's about people not understanding that Microsoft doesn't do service packs anymore and instead they make new version of the same OS and put EOL dates on older non-updated versions. It's the same thing as Microsoft dropping support for Win XP while still supporting XP Service Pack 1,2,3 and so on. 

It doesn't even make sense to argue that you should get continued support while avoiding updates. Updates are the ongoing support. If you don't want that, you are essentially choosing to be unsupported so it's a non-issue. We all know already this isn't an issue for pro versions of Windows anyway, so businesses are not affected by this, unless they're using home or not paying any attention and in both cases it's probably best for them to just get updates so getting mad about it just makes zero sense at all. 

Edited February 10, 2022 by UltraMega

[pio]

55 minutes ago, UltraMega said:

That may be a small factor, but no, that's not how most people get viruses. Feel free to include a source that says otherwise if you have one. 

 

And no, ten years ago in 2012 people were not still using limewire. Pirating music is the same now that it was then for the most part. 

 

People get viruses most often because they try to do something with their computer that they don't understand; or even just something basic that leads them to the wrong place. It could be anything, one could search for baking recipes and end up on a site that tries to trick them into entering personal data for bad actors to use against them without going part the first page on Google. Get an e-mail that tricks the recipient into something bad. 

 

Sure, it's not 100% Microsoft that has bolstered security but it's a huge factor, likely the largest factor. Browser security is a big factor too, but I wouldn't try to argue against Windows having some limits on dodging updates by listing a bunch of browsers the update automatically. If anything, you have pointed out another positive aspect of maintaining as strong update schedule across the board. 

 

All that said, this isn't even really about updates. It's about people not understanding that Microsoft doesn't do service packs anymore and instead they make new version of the same OS and put EOL dates on older non-updated versions. It's the same thing as Microsoft dropping support for Win XP while still supporting XP Service Pack 1,2,3 and so on. 

It doesn't even make sense to argue that you should get continued support while avoiding updates. Updates are the ongoing support. If you don't want that, you are essentially choosing to be unsupported so it's a non-issue. We all know already this isn't an issue for pro versions of Windows anyway, so businesses are not affected by this, unless they're using home or not paying any attention and in both cases it's probably best for them to just get updates so getting mad about it just makes zero sense at all. 

You sincerely underestimate how out of touch the average person is.  You want sources, I am my source, as the resident Craigslist PC repair guy for my local area at the time.  I can tell you, without a doubt, that Limewire was still being used in the early 2010's era.  I remember very vividly fixing a Windows XP box in about 2014 / 2015  or so, that still had Limewire on it, that the user was upset with because Limewire had quit working and wanted to know another way to get their free music.  Yes, it was a few years after Limewire was shutdown, since Limewire shut down in 2010.  You really think in 2012 regular people weren't still trying to find an alternative to it?

 

Eventually, it seems anyway, that the masses have switched to Youtube, Pandora, and Spotify.  But that wasn't the  case in the early 2010's mate.  Streaming wasn't massively adopted by the general populace until just very recently.  Yes, there's PLENTY of other ways to acquire malware, but general idiots trying to pirate was certainly a much larger factor.  Microsoft had very little to do with that change in user behavior.

EDIT:

All I'm arguing here is that Microsoft and their forced updates has a LOT less to do with virus acquirement by the average user than you're giving them credit for.  Instead, I'm proposing that a change in average user behavior has been the bigger change in virus replication on PC's.  Dude, I can still browse the internet on an unpatched version of Windows XP.  Updates don't affect what you click on.  Updates have VERY little to do with average user security.  They help....sure, when the updates are stable.

Edited February 10, 2022 by pioneerisloud

[UltraMega]

21 minutes ago, pioneerisloud said:

You sincerely underestimate how out of touch the average person is.  You want sources, I am my source, as the resident Craigslist PC repair guy for my local area at the time.  I can tell you, without a doubt, that Limewire was still being used in the early 2010's era.  I remember very vividly fixing a Windows XP box in about 2014 / 2015  or so, that still had Limewire on it, that the user was upset with because Limewire had quit working and wanted to know another way to get their free music.  Yes, it was a few years after Limewire was shutdown, since Limewire shut down in 2010.  You really think in 2012 regular people weren't still trying to find an alternative to it?

 

Eventually, it seems anyway, that the masses have switched to Youtube, Pandora, and Spotify.  But that wasn't the  case in the early 2010's mate.  Streaming wasn't massively adopted by the general populace until just very recently.  Yes, there's PLENTY of other ways to acquire malware, but general idiots trying to pirate was certainly a much larger factor.  Microsoft had very little to do with that change in user behavior.

Talking to you about anything is pointless because all you do is raise really bad points that have no relevance (also called moving the goal post) while making wildly false assertions over and over with no real evidence at all. It's tiresome. I wish you had better points so reading your comments didn't feel like a chore. Having to hear someone claim windows is "forcing" them to upgrade on an PC that doesn't even have TMP enabled is so cringey. 

 

Limewire ended in 2011. There were ways to keep using older versions, but really, why bother with torrents being so much easier? And either way, it's completely beside the point unless you are arguing that Limewire is the reason people used to get so many viruses which would be an idiotic thing to argue. Yes, people have gotten a bit better at avoiding viruses, but that is just another small factor. The vastly larger reason is better security practices across the board. 

 

I do not accept you as a valid source of info on this and I find your argument completely meaningless. Some people are so skeptical of everything they can hardly ever see the Forrest through the trees. I'm sure you could find a reason to be fearful of just about anything. 

 

 

I'm sure there are a few people who would read my comments and think I am a big Microsoft fan. Beyond hoping their stock does well for me, I don't really care about Microsoft other than simple being interested in tech in general. More than anything else I am just really annoyed by bad faith arguments, especially when they're over such trivial things and whenever Microsoft is the topic it becomes a lightning rod for people to regurgitate the same mindless complaints about Windows over and over. 

Edited February 10, 2022 by UltraMega

[pio]

Just now, UltraMega said:

Talking to you about anything is pointless because all you do is raise really bad points that have no relevance (also called moving the goal post) while making wildly false assertions over and over with no real evidence at all. It's tiresome. I wish you had better points so reading your comments didn't feel like a chore. Having to hear someone claim windows is "forcing" them to upgrade on an PC that doesn't even have TMP enabled is so cringey. 

 

Limewire ended in 2011. There were to keep using older versions, but really, why bother with torrents being so much easier? And either way, it's completely beside the point unless you are arguing that Limewire is the reason people used to get so many viruses which would be an idiotic thing to argue. Yes, people have gotten a bit better at avoiding viruses, but that is just another small factor. The vastly larger reason is better security practices across the board. 

 

I do not accept you as a valid source of info on this and I find your argument completely meaningless. Some people are so skeptical of everything they can hardly ever see the Forrest through the trees. I'm sure you could find a reason to be afraid of a free lunch. 

Well you know what, if my opinion is worthless then just keep scrolling mate.  You want to sit here and argue on and on about how wonderful saint Microsoft is.  As somebody who has used PC's since PC became a freaking term, I think my opinion should be counted.  And I can tell anyone, flat out....updates DO NOT AFFECT WHAT YOU CLICK ON.  But by all means, keep defending Microsoft FORCING THINGS on people.  Updates and new OS rollouts have NEVER been forced.  NEVER.  Up until Windows 10.  I'm not arguing that updates are a good thing or a bad thing, but the forcing of them is what I'm against.  I always run my updates.  But that's a choice that I make myself as it should be.

 

Here, here's a challenge for you.  You appear to be the generation that enjoys challenges right?  Don't worry, its not a tide pod challenge.  Go run a Windows XP box for a week.  Just use it daily, use it for whatever you still can use it for.  Browse the internet with it like you normally would (after you get it working of course, IF you can lol).  Tell me after a week how much updates really affected your ability to browse safely.  Then come back and talk.  I've done this.  Did it just a few weeks ago actually.  I still have a few old boxes left to finish, and guess what?  I'll be using them daily to ensure they're working too.  Funny......updates being disabled has NOT affected their ability any at all in the slightest.

Until you've browsed on an "unsecured / unupdated" system, I don't think you have much room for discussion about updates.  They're absolutely pointless unless you are specifically being targeted against a certain attack that is being patched.  And guess what?  You have to click on something to acquire a virus.  If you're using a modern enough browser, your browser is already your first layer of protection.  Followed by your antivirus.

But sure, common sense and actual real life experience means nothing when the almighty Microsoft wants to force things on people yet again.   We'll just go ahead and go with it right?  Right.  K.

[UltraMega]

20 minutes ago, pioneerisloud said:

You appear to be the generation that enjoys challenges right? 

Bro we are the same age. 

 

You are the same guy who asked me on Steam for that fake space weather site was fake or not and then proceeded to tell me about your other conspiracy beliefs. 

 

Absolutely no, your personal experience using retro PC's has no relevance here and I'm not going to waste time listing the reasons why. Everyone in this space should be fully aware that viruses are designed to attack whatever people are actually using today, which in this case, is windows 10. It's not at all surprising to hear that you can use the internet on a super old OS without getting infected right away because it wouldn't even make sense to have viruses actively targeting XP in 2022. Such a bad argument, predicated on bad knowledge and misunderstanding. 

 

I guarantee you if people started using XP today in high volume again for some reason, many viruses would follow. 

Edited February 10, 2022 by UltraMega

[pio]

13 minutes ago, UltraMega said:

Bro we are the same age. 

 

You are the same guy who asked me on Steam for that fake space weather site was fake or not and then proceeded to tell me about your other conspiracy beliefs. 

 

Absolutely no, your personal experience using retro PC's has no relevance here and I'm not going to waste time listing the reasons why. Everyone in this space should be fully aware that viruses are designed to attack whatever people are actually using today, which in this case, is windows 10. It's not at all surprising to hear that you can use the internet on a super old OS without getting infected right away because it wouldn't even make sense to have viruses actively targeting XP in 2022. Such a bad argument. 

Age is just a number, it has nothing to do with your real life experience.

I asked your opinion on Steam about a youtube channel, yes.  I received your opinion, and made my own decision on it after hearing your opinion, and doing research on my own about it later.  That's how a regular person makes up their mind when taking in new information.  Those other "conspiracy beliefs" were political, and I'm not bringing them to a tech forum, and guess what?  They're more of a real problem than what Microsoft and their stupid forced updates is.  I can choose a different OS and avoid forced updates.  I can't choose the laws and if they're being followed or not.  Big difference there talking about things within my control, and things outside of my control.  Talking about moving goal posts.....  For the record, my complaint that I had about a local problem was a real thing.  You said it was conspiracy mumbo jumbo, but yet it made national headlines when the outrage in my state hit.  Again, political, so leaving the details aside.

And what are you smoking and can I get some?  My experience using retro PC's on old OS's without security patches has nothing to do with forcing updates on people?  Really??? You do realize that a very large percentage of people STILL use Windows 7 right?  Fine, go use Windows 7.  I don't care.  Point was, just turn updates off and see how far you can get browsing the internet.  I'll bet you $100, right here, right now, that you can browse the internet JUST FINE on an outdated / not updated OS.  It'd be an easy $100, so long as you don't click on things that you already know not to click on.  The browser, anti-virus, and the lack of opportunity are more of a reason behind less viruses than forced updates is.

Edited February 10, 2022 by pioneerisloud