Microsoft skipped over Release Preview with Windows 10 version 1809, and four days later, the update was pulled from Windows Update. This was mainly due to some users’ files being deleted upon upgrading. Moreover, it turned out that the issue had been reported to the Feedback Hub, but it hadn’t been upvoted enough times for anyone to notice.
The company published a blog post a few days after that, explaining the issue and saying that you’ll now be able to indicate severity of a bug in a Feedback Hub report. There was a slight apology, and a sign that Microsoft will do at least the bare minimum to make sure that this doesn’t happen again.
Microsoft hasn’t said a word about it since.
Not a good few weeks for Windows Update and related services.
I think a lot of the problems with Windows today stem from Microsoft’s cost-cutting and laying off of employees. Long-time employees are getting laid off because their salaries are too expensive, and it’s clearly showing in their products.
The fact is, people always want more money, and the people who want the most, are the ones who have been there the longest, and understand the code-base best. By laying off the most experienced employees, microsoft gets to save a fortune in the short-term, but is left with employees fresh out of college with very little knowledge of the code base. This, added with Microsofts rolling-release cycle, means that inexperienced coders are having to write functional code in a short period of time, with very little testing done before release.
This is causing the issues we see today in Windows. A buggy and inconsistent mess that constantly feels unfinished. This is sharply contrasted with the polished OSes we expected from Microsoft before Windows 10. Windows XP, 7 and even 8 still persist today because users enjoy a consistent and stable platform. These were systems designed by Microsofts team of talented engineers, and the quality showed on release. By getting rid of both their talented engineers and any time to test the code, Windows 10 was destined to be a complete disaster when it comes to releases.
I was unfortunate to reinstall new version after problm with the system. fortunatelly I didn’t have a problem with data loos – I experienced a problem that my system didn’t booted one day after upgrade. I reinstalled 1809 and I’m using this version since than. in my opinion this system has some huge problems with performance. everytime I open a task manager performance degradates significaly and task manager is showing wrong cpu usage of processes. I’ve heard that this bug is fixed. I’m experiencing other probably network related problems. scenario – I’m listening to some music and I plug in ethernet cable. music skips a lot for about 30 seconds. I’ve got a laptop with i3, but I feel like I was using i386 for a moment. second scenario – I also had similar effect while watching a movie on netflix app. fortunatelly I don’t have a problem with working on this laptop – vm’s on virtualbox works. atom text editor works. at this moment I don’t plan to reinstall to older version, because I don’t know if I have a working solution to delay updates on home version. (I’m testing it on my desktop).
I didn’t have any of the data loss problems with 1809, but I have found quite a few Legacy Apps, by that I mean typically 32 Bit older than 5 years, have stopped functioning or developed bugs. Mostly they are CAD Electronic / Mechanical that I keep around for compatibility purposes as many are redundant. Unfortunately because they are used only intermittently with archived projects I found the problems after the roll back date had lapsed. I can imagine this is very frustrating for some people because some of the packages I refer to are very expensive and many people would prefer not to upgrade them without very good cause. I suppose they have cause now but not really a choice!
Because I supervise a design department I use my laptop and desktop as a canaries, luckily we didn’t have any other machines updated before the update was pulled.
Edited 2018-11-10 11:42 UTC
cpcf,
I don’t know if this is a clue for you, but a legacy app I work on also stopped working correctly because windows update deleted it’s configuration files. If you reinstall them after the update, they may work again. This was reported to microsoft in a commercial support ticket, they said it was intentional and wouldn’t be fixed, which leads me second guessing their motives. I find it difficult to understand why microsoft would risk breaking the very legacy applications that have helped keep windows mainstream?
Edited 2018-11-10 15:36 UTC
This
This was reported to microsoft in a commercial support ticket, they said it was intentional and wouldn’t be fixed,
shows how much MS cares about its users these days. i.e. Nada, Zilch, Nowt.
If I had ever developed a release that interfered with other products like this, I would accept being fired on the spot.
They simply don’t care.
You use Windows at your own peril (and cost).
I am so glad that I’ve put using windows behind me. 25 years was more than enough.
@Alfman.
We’ve tried repairing as well as clean installs with no luck. I even discovered quite a few reports of similar problems with open source software, so we tried a couple of different packages knowing they would be clean installs and they all suffered the same problems. It seems it must be functionality removed or altered from common libraries, a lot of the problems seem to relate to the use of common libraries from earlier versions of MS Office, pre-2013 version. I know of one case where users can flip a program between an Office 2007 and Office 2013 theme, one works the other doesn’t! Apparently it is related to the way 1809 deals with transparency.
Actually, when Windows 8 Pro came out we had similar problems, compatibility just didn’t work, so back then we opted to run some programs in XP or Win 7 virtual machines to restore access to the legacy Apps. Windows 10 Pro was a breath of fresh air when it first arrived because backwards compatibility improved greatly from Win 8 Pro. Actually some may recall that one of the selling points for going “Pro” was backwards compatibility for Apps and Drivers.
Now it’s evaporated I’ll probably go back to virtualisation, it’s a pity I had been a Windows 10 Pro booster, not sure I can justify Pro from now on! I’m can see the chiefs are going to have me re-justify Pro licensing. I realise it seems silly, but to a bean-counter the extra few dollars saved pays for a monthly barbecue and they hate spending it on software that isn’t fully utilised! To them Pro is a tax!
Edited 2018-11-11 00:38 UTC
I don’t know what Microsoft is supposed to do when you have loud mobs in the tech community saying we should break things early and often and complaining about any backwards compatibility as “bloat”.
Hmm, stop listening?
I’m not a mainstream developer, I use software and hardware to develop bespoke IoT sensors as part of a larger team I supervise, and have done so for a long time.
Those communities of Devs you reference do not have to provide security and support for stuff designed with their software(In this case I refer to various CAD or Test Suite packages.) it’s basically the user is the sucker.
Architectural or industrial things worth many millions of dollars designed to last many decades, which people don’t just make redundant overnight, depend on the software used to design them. They shouldn’t fall silent just because some Dev wants a new fangled gadget on a Word document, or is bored working the old way so they throw it all out and start again!
It seems a little ridiculous that in my role in a high tech industry, an industry many of those same Devs rely upon for some of the new fangled wizardry, that I have to artificially put the brakes on progress just to keep things working safely and securely!
Don’t get me wrong, I love progress, if not for progress I’d be working on rackmount motherboards instead of postage stamp embedded devices. But it shouldn’t come at any cost, and removing features because they are only sporadically utilised by 5% of users isn’t the correct answer.
Edited 2018-11-12 02:01 UTC
So you, as a developer want to tell other developers to stop listening to other developers.
Those other developers will also tell those developers to stop listening to developers like you.
Everything is easy if you place yourself as dictator.
Is it reasonable that significant piece of software like an OS will be fit for purpose beyond the long term shelf life of a packet of Pringles?
I was, maybe still am, a Win 10 Pro booster. It solved a lot of problems for me because the improved support for devices and software meant I could retire XP Pro, Win 7 Pro and Win 8 Pro platforms and concentrate on just one OS. I never thought that after they did so well, making such an effort, that they would abandon that ground and force myself and others like me to go back in time.
But I guess I was wrong, thankfully they use Java and Scala and not .Net in my car!
Here’s a thought: consider this from another developer’s perspective. Another developer with the same broad requirement of supporting a system beyond the lifetime of a Pringles packet. What if this “improved support for devices and software” had adversely impacted another developer you had no idea existed?
Sounds like you’re all in favour of Microsoft breaking that developer’s work because it worked out great for you.
Well guess what? If you remove yourself from the centre of the Microsoft universe, you’d realize many other developers are in the same boat as you: “please break everyone else’s work for me, but leave mine alone”.
You seem heavily vested in change, almost desperate for it. Is there something in what MS is now doing that is critical for your survival?
Nobody willingly designs a new type of spanner if there isn’t already a market for a new type of nut, and even when a new spanner comes along we won’t throw out the old spanners.
I can see both sides of this argument, because I wait for and implement the new, yet I’ve have already deployed and support the old. In a field like aviation or medicine it can take a decade or more to get even a minor change approved which is why we must support legacy. Breaking something that works so you can have something that’s new won’t cut it with clients who have guarantee functionality for decades to come, and software is no different.
There is absolutely no modern excuse for repeating the mistakes of Cortés!
You seem like you suck at reading minds. You also seem like you’re incapable of seeing things from other developers perspective that you wouldn’t mind breaking as long as it helps you.
All I highlighted was the fact that Microsoft, and other OS vendors really, are being pulled in multiple directions. And in fact, my initial comment on the matter was a bit against people whining about bloat.
Read better next time.
kwan_e,
It depends in what way you go about ending legacy support. Microsoft’s new operating systems have broken things from time to time. Windows vista/7 broke tons of things because they dropped support for xp drivers. However in those days the user chose to install a new OS and new OS breakages were what they were. On the other hand an automatic update in the background that breaks functionality is absolutely irresponsible! This surely isn’t what any developers or users want.
Obviously there is a debate to be had around the role of legacy software going forward. I myself am not particularly favorable to legacy software. However it’s only half the equation, we need to know exactly what we’d be replacing it with. If it involves walled gardens, 30% taxes, and iphone/android-esque app stores, then many of us are going to favor legacy for freedom’s sake.
Edited 2018-11-12 06:41 UTC
Developers!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zEQhhaJsU4
I’m sure as more and more pure software developers get involved in embedded hardware systems they will see a very different side to the “legacy debate.” The line of demarcation between an electronics engineer and programmer have basically evaporated. The rate of progress is terrific, guys writing in Python can now replace FPGAs from a decade ago, not that I recommend it.
If you run legacy hardware, you have no choice, your users who exist in the wild still need the security updates, the Y2K bug fixes, the stuff nobody thought of at the time. But when new features break your million hardware widgets you won’t be so amenable to accommodate an OS change for any yet to be published feature.
If a car maker stops supporting an older car the parts go after market!