SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Two users have submitted stories about Microsoft's intended change to how it provides updates and patches in the future.:
Running Windows 7 or 8? From October, Monthly Patches Are All-or-Nothing
El Reg reports
As of October, users of Windows 7, Windows 8, and various server products can [say farewell to] a Patch Tuesday of downloading multiple files: Microsoft is implementing the monthly patch rollup it promised in May.
At the same time, however, Redmond has decided to kill off individual security patches, something that might not please sysadmins. Instead, a monthly security-only rollup will collect "all of the security patches for that month into a single update".
[...] Instead of individual patches for each platform, for Windows 7.1 SP1, Windows 8, Windows Server 2008 R2, Windows Server 2012, and Windows Server 2012 R2, there'll be a single set of updates.
The monthly rollups will include security patches and bug fixes, and each month's update will include the previous month's. That will reduce the chance that an update fails because it's got a dependency on a prior update (which, as Microsoft's Nathan Mercer writes in the announcement, can often mean hunting for a file that's hard to find).
[...] Servicing Stack and Adobe Flash won't be included in the rollups.
[Continues...]
In the comments we found these gems
I am already imagining having to miss out on critical fixes as some not-too-critical update in the package is broke and affecting the overall result.
The fact that you have to take the crap with the updates is one of the reasons so many of us rejected 10. Linux, as always, will be patched as soon as the updates become available; no waiting a month for MS to get around to providing a big monolithic update.
I shudder to think how this will affect environments with WSUS for the purpose of limiting specific patches to specific machines.
Does this mean Windows Update won't 'think about it' for 15 minutes?
A double whammy for those on restricted bandwidth [because a) everyone gets the patches for other versions, and b) last month's patches included
Just call it a Service Pack. By the end of next year, we'll have Windows 7 SP17. It's not elegant, but it's much clearer than KB6765431123134654741324.
Windows 7, 8.1 Moving to Windows 10's Cumulative Update Model
In with a story from Ars Technica — Windows 7, 8.1 Moving to Windows 10's Cumulative Update Model
October 2016's Patch Tuesday will see the release of the first Monthly Rollup for Windows 7 and 8.1. This will be a single package delivering all of the security and reliability improvements released that month. Patch Tuesday will be delivered through Windows Update (WU), Windows Server Update Services (WSUS), and System Center Configuration Manager (SCCM). Subsequent months will have new Monthly Rollups, and these will be cumulative, incorporating the content of all previous Monthly Rollups.
[...]
Microsoft will also create security-only updates that include all the security fixes released each month, without any reliability or feature changes. These updates won't be cumulative. They will only be offered via WSUS and SCCM; WU users won't see them.
What Microsoft won't be doing after October, however, is shipping the individual hotfixes any more. Fixes will only be available through the Monthly Rollup or security-only update. This means that the ability to pick and choose individual fixes to apply will be removed; they'll be distributed and deployed as a singular all-or-nothing proposition. Microsoft argues that this will improve patch and system reliability. The company only tests configurations where every update is applied (with hundreds of individual updates, it's simply not possible to test all the individual combinations that a user might choose). This means that users and organizations that cherrypick their updates and only install a subset of the patches that ship each month are actually using configurations that Microsoft itself has not tested. Combining the updates should mean that end-user systems are closer to Microsoft's tested configurations.
[...] Going forward there will also be an equivalent patching regime for the .NET Framework. WU and WSUS will both distribute a Monthly Rollup of security updates and reliability improvements, with a security-only update offered to WSUS alone. The corresponding server operating systems—Windows Server 2008 R2, Windows Server 2012, and Windows Server 2012 R2—will also move to the same rollup model as the desktop platforms will use.
(Score: 2) by darnkitten on Thursday August 18 2016, @01:30AM
About 1/3 of the Win10 users I know have suffered system problems due to infrastructure problems/interruptions during the massive Win10 updates--and now Win7/8?
MANY rural areas lack the necessary network infrastructure to support massive problem-free downloads, and we aren't going to get real improvement anytime soon! G-D---T, I wish I could kidnap a couple of execs (MS, Google, Mozilla) and force them to live here for a month or three.
I mean, a week or so ago, I heard about a tech company that does "2G Tuesdays" where it scales back connectivity across the company for an afternoon to remind employees that "Not everyone has high speed access..." Yeah. My community doesn't have reliable 2G--most of the town doesn't even have cell access at all! My library and a local diner have the only wifi hotspots in town, and right this minute, my (library) connection is averaging 3.5Mbps down, 1.2Mbps up, shared between two active machines (out of as many as 8 possible).
Several of my patrons still use dial-up!
I already recommend that Win10 users turn off automatic updates unless they are connected to a UPS and a wired connection, but updates still occasionally bork their systems.
-
I dunno. I'll have to see how many problems this causes, before I start telling them to run unpatched.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Thursday August 18 2016, @06:01AM
Perhaps your library could have DVDs of some of the most popular Linux distributions on hand. Often they have copyleft licences so loaning them out for installation is allowed.
(Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Thursday August 18 2016, @02:26PM
This actually reminds me more of how it used to be. Windows NT and Windows 95 had service packs. Even Windows 98 and 2000, while filled with numerous little fixes, still had large updates. Also consider Windows XP SP2 -- one of the biggest service pack pushes filled with features and fixes to any OS of the era. It was XP SP2 that introduced the concept of an OS based firewall to the masses.
Prior to then, people and their always-on cable modem connections were subjected to really bad security concerns by simply doing as the marketing told, rather than doing something stupid like running viruses they got in email or pirated software or codec viewers from porn sites. The PC merely had to be connected to the cable modem -- and remember, it was against the terms of service to use NAT at the time. Cable companies demanded you got a public IP for EVERY device you connected.
It was a big deal.
And--many people on-dial up benefitted from this as well, because dial-up often also provided direct public IP addresses.
I state this because this isn't a new paradigm in screwing people. It's the old way of doing it, and it's come back into fashion.
Personally, I prefer to check each update and decide yes or no -- I prefer the selective model.
The difference is that back in the old days, changing the OS after the fact was not considered a good thing to do. Detailed notes were provided and it was not uncommon for systems to remain on a certain patch level because of compatibility or performance concerns -- not security concerns.
The piece-by-piece model allowed for a greater adherence in a corporate environment -- install what you need, and don't introduce new problems by installing what you don't need. Often in the giant packs, you had to go in and turn off new features you didn't want -- and then go patch them later because they were found to have problems. Just because its turned off doesnt mean someone doesn't turn them on later, or some new software does it for you without asking, etc.
In this case, I would guess they are seeking greater control. I can imagine the future patches including stuff you do not want...just as I described, but so much harder to keep track of because of constant change instead of once every few months.
I have to think that if you don't want telemetry... well it's bundled in this pack, and if you don't install this pack, then you are going to be exposed to whatever the problem we're fixing is. Or our new version of what you do want requires a tweak made to a DLL in that pack with the telemetry etc, so no now you can't install the dot net fixes because of it.
Get on the train or go off the rails is the message they are sending, I think. Screwing rural customers isn't the intent, because they came out with SCCM, SMS, SUS and WSUS a long time ago to help with centralized management. You even can install a local MS patch file executable you bring around on a USB drive, like what I used to do at clients with low bandwidth. You don't HAVE to use windows update on windows 7. It just makes it very convenient in an unmanaged scenario.
(Score: 2) by darnkitten on Friday August 19 2016, @02:06AM
Yeah, its probably about time to revive that programme--We used to distribute Ubuntu and Mint in several desktop flavours, until I got too busy to help people maintain their own systems. The local tech guy, while he uses SUSE KDE personally, doesn't have Linux support experience and is reluctant to offer it.
I might have to do an "Ask SN" on low-maintenance distros I could distribute. I'm also currently in the process of converting some of our older PC workstations to Linux (generally some flavour of Mint) to expose the patrons to alternatives to Windows (might be good to "Ask SN" about desktop environments and distros that won't scare people unfamiliar with Linux, too--Ubuntu Unity on the library public computers didn't work out so well, the last time I tried it).
With October so close, I guess I will just have to move up the timetable.
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Friday August 19 2016, @04:16AM
Xubuntu shouldn't scare users too much, especially compared to Unity. What might scare people more is inability to run That One App that's rated Garbage in Wine or use That One USB Device that needs a proprietary driver exclusive to Windows and macOS.