Are Win10 version 1909 users being pushed onto version 2004?

Topic

New Reply

Günter Born just published an article Windows 10 Version 2004: Forced upgrade without user consent I’ve seen reports (some noted in Born’s article) wh
[See the full post at: Are Win10 version 1909 users being pushed onto version 2004?]

2 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, rontpxz81

Reply | Quote

Replies

Are any of the people who are forced to update delaying updates?

I have feature updates delayed by 90 days. I have not been forced to update.

Byte me!

Reply | Quote

If you are on Win10 Pro v1809 and you have Feature deferrals set to 365 days, be aware that v1809 will be at something like 361-days on Patch Tuesday.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, Pim

Reply | Quote

My Win 10 Home 1909 was paused for updates and after defcon 4, I booted the laptop and resumed not checked for updates. After I installed the May Win 10 updates, did not DOWNLOAD AND INSTALL the Windows 2004 FEATURE update.

After the Monthly updates installed, I paused updates well into July. When I did this, the Windows 2004 update disappeared and also paused as well. I wonder if we continue to do this as described, if we can continue to defer the update until we are ready and able to receive it.

Win 10 Home 22H2

2 users thanked author for this post.

rontpxz81, jburk07

Reply | Quote

[Pim]

Woody said in his ComputerWorld article about blocking v2004 that preventing an upgrade from v1809 would be pretty easy by selecting Semi-annual channel and 365 days for feature update deferrals. Apparently, this is not anymore the case next week. Is there any way to stay on v1809 longer? How do I prevent an update to v1903/1909?

• This reply was modified 4 years, 11 months ago by Pim. Reason: Link added

Reply | Quote

Do you have, in Group Policy, “Configure automatic updates” = Enabled, value 2 (notify download/install)? if so, the Feature Update may show up in the queue and not download. In that case, you can use wushowhide to hide it. That should give you 1809 monthly CUs till its EOL.

The safest thing at this point is to go ahead and update to v1909 as Woody recommends. If you take that route, set the Feature deferrals to 100 or 150 and you should be offered v1909 through WU. (Quality update deferral = 0, GP setting =2 (notify download/install), NO Pause, metered connections OFF) before the end of the 365 days. Don’t forget to put the Feature deferrals back to 365 after the upgrade is finished.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, Pim

Reply | Quote

Thanks for your reply. I have indeed Group Policy “Configure automatic updates” on Enabled, value 2 (notify download/install). I have just set the feature updates deferral on 30 days to avoid v2004 but try to get and see v1909 in the update queue. After I clicked Check for updates v1909 started downloading automatically, so I broke that off and restored an image that I made just before I did that. Hopefully tomorrow v1909 will just appear and not install so that I can use wushowhide.

I already tried upgrading to v1909 about a month ago, but reverted back to v1809, because v1909 introduces a new update task in task scheduler that wakes the computer to check for updates (something with Update Orchestrator). Because the PC should not wake up by itself at unwanted times (I have it in my bedroom) and because I also cannot disable wake timers (I need that for a program that does need to wake up the computer) I need to find a good solution to disable the update orchestrator task. I have found a script/task somebody wrote, but I need the time to sort this out when I upgrade to v1909. That is why I want to stay at v1809 at this moment.

Reply | Quote

Last week on the 27th I pushed the “Check for updates” button on 1909 thinking it would just “present” me with the 2004 upgrade opportunity which I could freely accept or reject.  I pushed no other button and agreed to no other installations. 

Windows Update began immediately upgrading my PC to version 2004 without any other consent.  And BTW, I had both the Quality Updates and Feature Updates settings delayed to 14 and 365 respectively, it seems WU simply ignored them.  I didn’t want to be the only guinea pig in the room…but now I’ve come clean.

5 users thanked author for this post.

rontpxz81, Great Lake Bunyip, cmptrgy, jburk07, woody

Reply | Quote

I have utilized Win 7 for many years and have noted that WIN 10 definitely has a mind of it’s own. from now on, will never physically check for updates, and if I am on pause, I will resume and not physically check. All of the barriers are gone to defer the feature updates for 365 days or when MS wants to send it down the computer.

Win 10 Home 22H2

Reply | Quote

Did you have Pause Updates set prior to clicking Check for updates?

Reply | Quote

Adding to my own post #2269067 above and to answer Woody’s question here:  Yes, I also had the Pause Updates button pressed for the maximum number of days allowed since my last press.  Of course, I usually wait for Woody’s MS-DEFCON all clear, but sometimes after several weeks I make my own judgement based upon what I’m seeing.  Regardless, I’m neither MS fanboy nor hater, but this unreliability is getting ridiculous.

BTW — upon completion of the upgrade to 2004 I also noticed as did others found by Günter in his post, that both of the individual deferral option buttons (Quality Updates and Feature Updates) were removed from the OS and replaced with a single Pause Updates button in the Advanced options menu of WU.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rontpxz81

Reply | Quote

Are you using Win10 Pro as opposd to Home? Do you have access to Group Policy w/ 2004 ?

Thank you

Reply | Quote

I refuse to click “Check For Updates” because it has been proven to be dangerous in the past.

On the one occasion where I did click on that link, my PC was put on the insider program. You may want to make sure you are not in that situation if you don’t want to be running preview builds which are often buggy.

 

To check … Settings -> Update & Security -> Windows Insider Program.

Byte me!

Reply | Quote

This intrigued me. I’m on Windows 10 1909, QU deferral 15 days, FU deferral 90 days, and I never “Pause” updates. I was willing to take the risk of being pushed to 2004, so I opened WU and clicked the “Check for Updates” button. All I got was KB4497165 and a pending restart. I was not forced onto 2004.

So, for me, my deferral settings are being respected.

3 users thanked author for this post.

abbodi86, rontpxz81, jburk07

Reply | Quote

And BTW, I had both the Quality Updates and Feature Updates settings delayed to 14 and 365 respectively, it seems WU simply ignored them.

I noticed an issue with feature update deferral as well and posted about it in an earlier thread. In my case, the issue was the opposite. I had feature deferral set to 0 but was not getting the update until I changed it to 1.

I do think there’s some sort of issue with deferral settings not taking effect properly, but I don’t understand why your issue and mine happened in opposite directions.

1 user thanked author for this post.

jburk07

Reply | Quote

My “device isn’t quite ready” and as such I have no means of determining if this is a forced update.

On permanent hiatus {with backup and coffee}
offline▸ Win10Pro 2004.19041.572 x64 i3-3220 RAM8GB HDD Firefox83.0b3 WindowsDefender
offline▸ Acer TravelMate P215-52 RAM8GB Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1265 x64 i5-10210U SSD Firefox106.0 MicrosoftDefender
online▸ Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1992 x64 i5-9400 RAM16GB HDD Firefox116.0b3 MicrosoftDefender

Reply | Quote

There are 1 or more files that are not yet available for your particular hardware. They are working on it. You are not being forced yet. But you could see the option to update when they have the file(s) ready … or, you could be forced.

You could delay the feature update.

Byte me!

Reply | Quote

Posting for @willjstewart on Twitter:

Yes. Last night on a domain connected PC that was 1903(9) previously

I hope he drops by and give us more details – specifically whether he’s using WSUS or some other update manager and, if so, what were its settings?

Reply | Quote

a Question does Wushowhide still works in 1909 and beyond (currently in 1903 and debating wether or not upgrade to 2004 or upgrade to 1909)

Just someone who don't want Windows to mess with its computer.

Reply | Quote

wushowhide still works in 1903 and 1909.
Haven’t had the opportunity to check it in 2004 yet, but I’m almost certain it will still work there too.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Zaphyrus, jburk07, pHROZEN gHOST

Reply | Quote

Just checked and we have not been forced to update.

Computer – HP ENVY desktop – 795 – 005:

• Microprocessor Intel Core i7 – 8700 @3.20 GHz;
• System memory 16 GB;
• Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060; and
• Audio Andrea PureAudio USB.

All hardware drivers are current as per HP, Nvidia, and Intel.

Windows specifications:

• Windows 10 Pro 64 – bit; Version 1903;
• Installed on 12/23/2019
• OS build 18362.778; and
• Last Quality Updates May 7, 2020.

Windows Update Advanced options:

• Receive updates for other Microsoft products when you update Windows – off;
• Download updates over metered connection – off;
• Restart this device as soon as possible when a restart is required to install an update – off
• Show a notification when your PC requires a restart to finish updating – on
• Pause updates;
  • Feature updates deferred 365 days;
  • Quality updates deferred for 30 days.

Reply | Quote

[darynman@gmail.com]

So until we get further data can we be extra safe and just manually install May from the Master patch list.   I have never seen a manual install change any of my defer settings so far.

1909 deferred 365 and 5 July 20

• This reply was modified 4 years, 11 months ago by darynman@gmail.com. Reason: more infio

Reply | Quote

Not sure if this could be part of the issue, but back when 1909 came out I had my 1903 machines set to delay the 1909 update for approx. 75 days through group policy.   They use Win 10 Pro and also are configured to never automatically install the monthly updates.  The machines just notify me.  All worked great.  Anyway,   I discovered when the 75 day wait was up ,  instead of offering me the update separately as I expected, the update to 1909 was INCLUDED with the monthly updates.  On one machine I did not notice this and when I manually processed the monthly updates 1909 was also installed.  NEEDLESS to say, I was not happy lol.  Fortunately all went well.  Could this same behavior cause a machine to automatically apply 2004?

The work around was to either extend the delay days or turn off the delay configuration in group policy.  The next time the machine checked for updates it showed the new release separately as expected.

Reply | Quote

Yes, I have set FU to 365 days as a safeguard to protect my PC from the 2004 upgrade, but am wondering if this is after all wise. Does it mean that I will get the upgrade this time next year whether I want it then or not?

Reply | Quote

With the Feature deferrals, you can pretty much determine what version you upgrade to. For example, if you had 1809 now, you could set the Feature deferral to 100 or 150 days and be offered 1909. If you set it to 250 days, you’d be offered 1903.

But the deferral pulldowns in the WU GUI are going away in 2004, so to do the same thing you would have to use the Windows Update for Business in Group Policy (until MS takes that away too).

1 user thanked author for this post.

Elly

Reply | Quote

Thanks, PK. I have 1909, Home and Pro. If we’re going to lose the WU GUI in 2004, I don’t think I’ll ever want it! Does that mean I should return my FU setting to 0?

1 user thanked author for this post.

rontpxz81

Reply | Quote

If you do that now, you’ll get 2004. The setting depends on how long it’s been since the version release.
Ride it out. Time will come when you may want to choose between 2004 and 2009 and 2104(?)

1 user thanked author for this post.

Elly

Reply | Quote

I’m still waiting for the push for my NAS.  I used the MCT USB for my desktop and laptop as soon as 2004 was available.

There is one issue I’d like to report on 2004; it is noticeably faster.  By that I mean that it is caught-my-attention quicker.  So yesterday and today I’ve been frequently booting back and forth from the A side to the B side of my desktop (2004 on both) using a stopwatch.

I’ve done this in the past on 1909, and the average has been ~56 seconds to go from clicking “Restart” to being signed in and ready to go on the other side.  On 2004, that has dropped to ~45 seconds to go from “Restart” to signed in, ready to go on the other side.  And that’s with having both Outlook and Firefox running when I click “Restart”.

Always create a fresh drive image before making system changes/Windows updates; you may need to start over!

We all have our own reasons for doing the things that we do with our systems; we don't need anyone's approval, and we don't all have to do the same things.

We were all once "Average Users".

Computer Specs

2 users thanked author for this post.

Barry, cmptrgy

Reply | Quote

There is one issue I’d like to report on 2004; it is noticeably faster.

I have also noticed this. But I think “faster” is giving Microsoft too much credit. 2004 is less slow.

For example, Windows performance blogger Bruce Dawson (@randomascii) reported an issue where right clicking on explorer in the taskbar was doing over a hundred thousand kernel calls every time, causing significant lag. MS said they fixed the issue for 20H1, but he reported a less than 10x performance improvement, when a 100x or 1000x improvement should’ve been trivial.

I wish MS was more transparent about what performance improvements were made, but I’m sure they decided it’s bad from a PR perspective to highlight how abysmal their performance was; publicizing the low hanging fruit that gets fixed just looks bad.

2 users thanked author for this post.

DriftyDonN, rontpxz81

Reply | Quote

anonymous wrote:

For example, Windows performance blogger Bruce Dawson (@randomascii) reported an issue where right clicking on explorer in the taskbar was doing over a hundred thousand kernel calls every time, causing significant lag. MS said they fixed the issue for 20H1, but he reported a less than 10x performance improvement, when a 100x or 1000x improvement should’ve been trivial.

Disgraceful! Who can bear to wait 100ms for a menu to display? Don’t MS know we’re all too busy to wait that long?

2 users thanked author for this post.

bbearren, Barry

Reply | Quote

I know you jest, but the initial issue was 700ms on a fast machine with an SSD. That’s bad. The better part of a full second to open a context menu. It would be worse on an older machine.

Even if you are not a power user and don’t care about lag, this is important for power efficiency reasons. The delay was all CPU usage. Useless cpu usage worsens the battery life of laptops. There’s a reason chromebooks, ipads, etc are gaining popularity.

And when a machine is actually doing something useful and not idle, the delay will get much much worse. I like my UIs to be responsive when compiling or encoding video.

This is not one isolated problem, but emblematic of Windows 10 UI regressions.

Reply | Quote

anonymous wrote:

I have also noticed this. But I think “faster” is giving Microsoft too much credit. 2004 is less slow.

“Less slow” as compared to what?  I’ve been using Windows since Windows for Workgroups 3.11, and every Windows upgrade since that time has been faster than the previous version.

Over the years I’ve upgraded hardware, but every Windows upgrade/update has been on existing hardware, which means that a direct comparison can be made.

When I double-click an Excel shortcut on my desktop the spreadsheet is open in 1.6 seconds.  In other words, by the time I get my hands to the keyboard, the spreadsheet is ready for input.  Outlook is much the same; I see the splash screen for about a second and then it’s open and checking my email.

So, “less slow” as compared to what?  In my experience, certainly not to previous versions.

Always create a fresh drive image before making system changes/Windows updates; you may need to start over!

We all have our own reasons for doing the things that we do with our systems; we don't need anyone's approval, and we don't all have to do the same things.

We were all once "Average Users".

Computer Specs

Reply | Quote

I manually updated using the upgrade assistant so I have nothing to say on this bug.

Reply | Quote

Earlier last week, I had “Feature update to Windows 10, version 2004. The Windows 10 May 2020 Update is on its way. We’re offering this update to compatible devices, but your device isn’t quite ready for it, Once your device if ready, you’ll see the update available on this page. There’s nothing to do at this time.” on my Dell Inspiron 580 desktop. On Wed morning May 27, it reported, it’s ready. I waited until this Monday June 1 at about 7 PM to set a time to get it on Mon June 2 at 1 AM to get it. It wasn’t forced for 5 1/2 days and all is well.

On my HP EliteBook laptop I have had “Feature update to Windows 10, version 2004. The Windows 10 May 2020 Update is on its way. We’re offering this update to compatible devices, but your device isn’t quite ready for it, Once your device if ready, you’ll see the update available on this page. There’s nothing to do at this time.” for at least 3 days (today being Wed Jun 3). It wouldn’t surprise me if it comes along on Patch Tue, June 9. I’ll be watching for what happens.

HP EliteBook 8540w laptop Windows 10 Pro (x64)

Reply | Quote

I have feature update set to 365 days and “2004” hidden via “wushowhide”.  I figured two layers of protection from Microsoft is better than one.

Reply | Quote

Just applied May patches.

Feature update 365

QU 15

No offer for 2004

1 user thanked author for this post.

DGTidmore

Reply | Quote

[Wibbly]

Win10 1909 Home.

I did the May updates, checked wushowhide which had no updates to hide then paused again until early July and set back to metered connection.

I haven’t had 2004 being offered yet.

 

 

• This reply was modified 4 years, 11 months ago by Wibbly. Reason: typo

Reply | Quote

On 4 machines with Windows 10 Pro 1909 with the following settings:
Feature deferrals=0, Quality deferrals=8 in GUI the below had occurred:

On a Dell Inspiron 5477 – Windows 10 2004 had installed automatically.

On a Lenovo Thinkpad T560 – the “incompatibility” message had appeared in Windows Update

On an old Sony Vaio laptop (Intel Core i3 + AMD Radeon) – it installed automatically.

On an old HP Laptop with Intel Core + NVIDIA GeForce – the “incompatibility” message had appeared in Windows Update

All the automatic upgrades to Windows 10 2004 had occurred on May 30, 2020.

Reply | Quote

I seem to be the only one who hasnt even been offered it yet, not even the compatibility message. Everyone else i ask seems to have at least seen it appear. I know they’re rolling out gradually though

Reply | Quote

Out of the blue my Windows 10 1909 Pro upgraded itself without me clicking on anything. The day that Windows 10 upgraded itself (3-jun) the machine was idle. Today (4-jun) I discovered that Windows 10 did the upgrade and wants to reboot.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rontpxz81

Reply | Quote

I have 3 PC’s on 1909 2 Home one Pro version. One says it has a block because of a know issue as per Microsoft placing notice in Windows update. The other two have no indication of a block but manually checking for updates offers no option for the 2004 upgrade. Given Microsoft’s flaky respect for users I would not be surprised that Microsoft forces the upgrade on known compatible devices. I think Microsoft has admitted they take the telemetry and use that to determine which devices are most likely going to be stable with the upgrade. Obviously Microsoft wants more feedback before increasing the number of devices offered the upgrade. I guess unless you have a specific block in place on your device for the upgrade. I would guess that anything goes with Microsoft.

Reply | Quote

Assuming there are no Pause and no Deferrals set, and you are not using a third-party update blocker, v2004 should show up eventually in the “Download and install now” optional update section below the “Check for updates.”

Try using wushowhide to see if the Feature Update is available for your system.

Reply | Quote

Two Dell machines, both 1909 Pro. Feature updates set t0 360 on both. Registry settings as advised by PKCano.

May cumulative update plus .NET update downloaded and installed.

No issues or other offerings as yet.

 

Win10 22H2 Pro, MBAM Premium, Firefox, OpenOffice, Sumatra PDF.

Reply | Quote

Microsoft is rolling out Windows 10, version 2004 over time so everyone is not getting the “upgrade” at once.  In addition, if a PC is likely to have a problem with the update the rollout may be delayed for that machine.

The link  https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/release-information/status-windows-10-2004  will take you to the Microsoft support page for Windows 10, version 2004 and Windows Server, version 2004  that contains an extensive list of known issues associated with the update. If your machine has one of the issues you may not be pushed to 2004.

1 user thanked author for this post.

cmptrgy

Reply | Quote

I run 1909 Home on a desktop and laptop. I got the 2004 “Download and Install Now” option on the desktop, but haven’t received it yet on the laptop, even after clicking on “check for updates”. Not that I am in any hurry to install it.

Reply | Quote

If 2004 is available when you click “check for updates” you might just find it downloads/installs.

Reply | Quote

PKCano wrote:

If 2004 is available when you click “check for updates” you might just find it downloads/installs.

This is what I really want to know … who’s going to be the guinea pig to ‘check for updates’ once the ‘download and install’ option appears?

I’m on 1909 Home and haven’t received the option to install yet.  But I’m getting ready to pause updates ahead of patch Tuesday.  I do have concerns that when I eventually click to resume updates I’ll get a forced update to 2004 in the process.

 

Reply | Quote

When you resume updates, you should see the June monthly updates in the queue.
If 2004 is available for your computer, it should appear in the “Download and install now” optional section below the “Check for updates.”

Don’t check for updates.

Reply | Quote

2004 is optional update, unless any deferral settings / policies are enabled

not to mention that WU UI has a habbit of not recognizing changed settings until a scan is initiated

and since you can’t press “Check for updates” button, you have to wait until WU do its scheduled scan

or it’s better to mimic it
https://www.askwoody.com/forums/topic/chasing-the-elusive-upgrade-for-win10-pro-v1803/#post-2016748

2 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, woody

Reply | Quote

abbodi86 wrote:

and since you can’t press “Check for updates” button, you have to wait until WU do its scheduled scan

or it’s better to mimic it
https://www.askwoody.com/forums/topic/chasing-the-elusive-upgrade-for-win10-pro-v1803/#post-2016748

Why is that better than clicking Check for updates, as it requires Notify before download to be set anyway?

Reply | Quote

Clicking Check for updates start to download/install any found updates

4 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, woody, geekdom, PKCano

Reply | Quote

So you’re saying we’re back to the old grind – click “Check for updates” and you get queued up Optional updates including, in this case, the 2004 upgrade?

I thought it was supposed to be held back behind a “Donwload and install” link.

Ouch.

Reply | Quote

anonymous wrote:

I seem to be the only one who hasnt even been offered it yet, not even the compatibility message. Everyone else i ask seems to have at least seen it appear. I know they’re rolling out gradually though

2 posts up from yours I wrote “I haven’t had 2004 being offered yet”

so, you’re not alone

 

Reply | Quote

Per request from my Twitter post/reply, here are screenshots of my experience upgrading to 2004 without warning. Connected to Windows Server 2012 AD server. But no deferrals on the local machine.

Will J Stewart
Independent IT 25 years
Austin, Texas

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

Is your domain attached to a WSUS or similar update server?

Reply | Quote

Wibbly wrote:

anonymous wrote:

I seem to be the only one who hasnt even been offered it yet, not even the compatibility message. Everyone else i ask seems to have at least seen it appear. I know they’re rolling out gradually though

2 posts up from yours I wrote “I haven’t had 2004 being offered yet”

so, you’re not alone

 

Maybe both of you have blocked Telemetry (using 3rd party blocking app) so Microsoft can’t harvest your hardware/drivers data and know what sort of PC you have ? -)

1 user thanked author for this post.

DriftyDonN

Reply | Quote

Wibbly wrote:

posts up from yours I wrote “I haven’t had 2004 being offered yet” so, you’re not alone

There’s a lot of us who haven’t been offered yet … which I look at as a good thing, or at least I’m in no hurry.

PKCano wrote:

When you resume updates, you should see the June monthly updates in the queue. If 2004 is available for your computer, it should appear in the “Download and install now” optional section below the “Check for updates.”

Whenever I ‘resume updates’, the Update window appears to act just like if I clicked on ‘Check for Updates’ manually.  I guess I’m just a bit concerned that when I resume Win10 will also perform a check by default causing 2004 to install.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Wibbly

Reply | Quote

That is the expected behavior when you “resume updates” from Pause. If initiates an immediate download/install of the pending/available important updates.
That should not include the optional updates like a version upgrade (with the exception, possibly, that your current version is EOL)

3 users thanked author for this post.

The Surfing Pensioner, cmptrgy, Brocktoon

Reply | Quote

[Wibbly]

Alex5723 wrote:

Wibbly wrote:

anonymous wrote:

I seem to be the only one who hasnt even been offered it yet, not even the compatibility message. Everyone else i ask seems to have at least seen it appear. I know they’re rolling out gradually though

2 posts up from yours I wrote “I haven’t had 2004 being offered yet”

so, you’re not alone

 

Maybe both of you have blocked Telemetry (using 3rd party blocking app) so Microsoft can’t harvest your hardware/drivers data and know what sort of PC you have ? -)

Nope, no 3rd party blocking software of any description here.
I’m currently just assuming it hasn’t rolled out to me yet.
Not that I’m in any rush to install it anyway.
I just thought I’d put the info there to add to the bigger picture.

I’m going to guess it’ll probably show it’s face after patch Tuesday, I think that’s how it went last time.

• This reply was modified 4 years, 11 months ago by Wibbly. Reason: adding text

Reply | Quote

Out of 4 pc’s three of them are updating to version 2004. I clicked the pause updates button 4 times last month to get me into June. This morning when I went to install updates they were already installing along with 2004. I was NOT given the opportunity to defer the update, it just started installing on its own because apparently the pause date I had set expired. There was no resume updates button, just the  status of the updates download progress. Not wanting this update I hit the pause for seven days to stop until I can figure out what to do next. I have not gotten the May updates that I need and I’m getting upgraded to version 2004 that I don’t want at this time.

Not sure what if anything I can do now to stop version 2004. Any suggestions?

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

[woody]

Are you running 1903 or 1909 on those machines? (1809 doesn’t have “Pause”.)

• This reply was modified 4 years, 11 months ago by woody.

Reply | Quote

1909 on all 4. They are all Win 10 pro.

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

This morning when I went to install updates they were already installing along with 2004.

So you’re in Win10 1909. You click Settings, Updates & Security. Then what happened? How do you know that 2004 started installing?

This is… disconcerting…

Reply | Quote

I went to push the resume updates button to install May updates. When I got there Windows Update reported that it had checked for updates earlier that morning and was already installing 2004. It was at 80%. The updates I wanted were also queued, but not installed yet.

I think that Windows Update reached the pause date and started downloading and installing updates. I now have the pause date on my calendar, so I can keep an eye on it next month.

Not sure what to do next. I paused Windows Update for a week to see if I can get this sorted out before more updates arrive on Tuesday. I didn’t get the May updates and if I resume 2004 will continue to install.

Do I go unpatched or take my chances with letting 2004 finish and see what happens?

I got luckier on my laptop. It installed the May updates and then failed trying to install 2004, so I restarted and it reverted back to pre 2004. I paused until 7/2.

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

That isn’t how it’s supposed to work… supposed to…

@abbodi86 / @PKCano

Any idea if deleting the download folder will stop the 2004 update?

Reply | Quote

If you stop it in the download phase, there is a chance that taking it off the network, stopping the WU Service, and deleting the download folder can stop the upgrade. You may have to clear the cache also.

It looks like resuming Pause may be initiating not only the download of the monthly updates, but the download of 2004 as well. I would have to SEE the circumstances for myself though, before I could say that was the case.

2 users thanked author for this post.

woody, abbodi86

Reply | Quote

I think that may be what happened with @jimmythesaint53 – he may have mistakenly clicked “Check for updates” — and ended up triggering the 2004 upgrade.

If that’s the way it works, I need to warn people.

Any confirmation?

Reply | Quote

I didn’t get to click anything in Windows Update. On Saturday my task was to get the May updates installed after going through  email. When I went to Windows Update the updates were downloading. It said that it had checked for updates earlier and went ahead on its own with no input from me downloading the monthly updates along with 2004.

What happens when the paused date is reached? I didn’t keep track of the date last month, I  just pushed the pause button until I was in June. If for instance I was paused until 6/5 what happens with Windows Update on 6/6? I will be keeping track of the paused date from now on. Not sure if that allowed the download, but I want to be sure.

Reply | Quote

I’m very curious, too.

Pause updates is passive. Windows does an internal check for updates according to a pre-determined schedule (daily?). If Windows Update sees that Pause Updates is still in effect, it skips that check.

That’s why I recommend people click “Resume updates” and then wait. Let Windows Update kick in under its own cycle.

@abbodi86’s observation about “Check for updates” bringing in all available updates is disconcerting. I thought MS had fixed that.

Reply | Quote

I’m all in with your update advice. My intention was to click the resume button after looking through the mail, but it wasn’t there.

If the updates are no longer paused because the pause date has been reached won’t they install on their own eventually?

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

Yes, exactly – monthly cumulative updates should install shortly after “Pause updates” expires.

But you should NOT be getting new versions – Feature updates. Those are supposed to be held until you click “Download and install.”

@abbodi86 has noted that you may get moved to version 2004 if you click “Check for updates” — but that isn’t supposed to happen

I’m worried because I’ve seen numerous reports now that say people have been moved to 2004 without clicking “Download and install.” I’d like to narrow down under what circumstances they’re getting pushed on to 2004.

Reply | Quote

jimmythesaint53 wrote:

Do I go unpatched or take my chances with letting 2004 finish and see what happens?

You can let the updates finish and in case of problems you can restore to previous version or restore from your latest image backup.

Reply | Quote

My NAS is on 1909. It has always been on Auto-update.  It has not been offered 2004, even when I click on Check for updates.  The only updates I’ve received are Security Intelligence updates for Windows Defender.  Still no offer for 2004.

I don’t think Microsoft is pushing 1909 to 2004.

I’m in the process now of updating it using the MCT USB tool.  It’s currently at 58%.

Always create a fresh drive image before making system changes/Windows updates; you may need to start over!

We all have our own reasons for doing the things that we do with our systems; we don't need anyone's approval, and we don't all have to do the same things.

We were all once "Average Users".

Computer Specs

Reply | Quote

PKcano says:

But the deferral pulldowns in the WU GUI are going away in 2004, so to do the same thing you would have to use the Windows Update for Business in Group Policy (until MS takes that away too).

So then upgrading to win10Pro from Home version would be sort of a waste then?

Has Msft decided the consumer has to much control and Gates has enough $?

Sheesh! I was about to blow $100.  I have a pro version but truly except for Group Policy I see no difference.

Thoughts?

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

DriftyDonN wrote:

except for Group Policy I see no difference

We’ve already mentioned that is the case since v1903.

cheers, Paul

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

There are differences, and for some people moving to Pro makes sense. But ever since MS put “Pause updates” in version 1903 Home — and started yanking other deferral settings from Pro — I don’t see much reason for individual users to pay extra for Pro.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Elly

Reply | Quote

Woody  … Thanks for the link to your post and the replies.  As I posted before finding this thread (thanks for the link), I was in v1909 and when I went to “resume updates” per your email for the previous week or two, the system automatically started downloading and then installing v2004 — I was NOT given the opportunity to delay v2004 upgrade.

Fortunately you and your superusers pointed me in the right direction to revert to a prior version, so I am now safely sitting on v1909 and will likely stay here until you given the clean ok to upgrade to v2004.

Thanks again …. TerryGH

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

Hey Woody, thanks for the heads up. Well, before yesterday (ie, on Wednesday 6/10) I was running 1909. Using Win 10 pro x64 in a domain environment. I have plain vanilla update settings … no pause, and “Update other Microsoft Products…” turned on. screen shot:

Yesterday morning I just saw the “Windows update needs to reboot” icon in the tray. I let it reboot, and it did its thing, requiring several reboots. I am now at 2004.

• i did not pause updates
• i did not manually check for updates
• i was not asked anything – no prompt of any kind

This morning the computer was *really* sluggish. It took about a minute to go from the lock screen to the login screen (usually less than a second). When I finally got to log in (another 1-2 minutes wait after entering my password, usually 1-2 seconds), I saw the “i need to reboot” icon in the tray again, I let it do that – it took about 3 minutes to do the shutdown part of “restarting”.

Performance seemed normal after that, but the reboot icon was still there, when i clicked it it said i was “up to date”. I rebooted again, and all seems normal … including Microsoft deciding that it did not like my file associations. I really hate it when they get changed (pdf to edge, txt to notepad, etc)

2 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, woody

Reply | Quote

ARRRGH…

At least it’s comforting that you’re OK.

Reply | Quote

FWIW, I have updates paused ’til mid July, and I am also set to Metered Connection to prevent updates without my clicked approval. Nevertheless, when I looked at Settings/WindowsUpdate today, I saw a notice that an attempted update yesterday had failed.

So I clicked retry and saw, “Update for Microsoft Defender Antivirus antimalware platform – KB4052623 (Version 4.18.2106.5)       Pending download”.

I will not click to download now, out of the usual fears. But it seems noteworthy that Win10 tried to install it without permission yesterday. (I do have to manually get the definitions every day via Windows Security.)

 

Reply | Quote