The rest of the story on KB 3035583 version 11

Topic

New Reply

More of the same, but at least the Get Windows 10 subsystem still honors registry (and gpedit) settings, so GWX Control Panel will still keep you from
[See the full post at: The rest of the story on KB 3035583 version 11]

Reply | Quote

Replies

Reluctantly, after my Win 7 system had run for 97 days straight without fault, I decided to go through the updates last night.

It was a tedious process. I sweated through the hard CPU looping, I researched every offered update, I scoured lists of those recommended to be hidden, hid those I will not allow (many of which have shown up AGAIN), then sweated through the update and reboot.

When the dust settled, and the system had rebooted, I saw no evidence of GWX. Whether Microsoft will have broken a system that ran perfectly remains to be seen…

I really don’t need this level of stress from the company I chose to partner with to provide my operating system environment!

By contrast, I set up a Vista x64 virtual machine yesterday to do product testing. What a calm, quiet system that is, and clearly one that’s got user features and needs in mind. Remember when not every update required a reboot? Vista was inefficient back in 2006, but on today’s hardware it’s snappier in some ways than Windows 10. Some important ways.

What can you get done with a Windows 10 system today that you couldn’t do with Vista or Windows 7?

It’s amazing just how far we’ve come, in SO the wrong direction!

-Noel

Reply | Quote

“If you don’t have GWX Control Panel in Monitor Mode, you should run GWX Control Panel once again to make sure everything’s scraped off.”

…and then switch on Monitor Mode.

With regard to the comments on your main article, I would stress the need to have updates set to not download and install. I fear some are having problems because their updates are set to download but not install. The difference appears to be critical, you really need to be in total control of both the download and the installation of updates. By allowing downloads you are halfway to them being installed with or without your knowledge and consent.

I suspect we are not far off the time when the recommendation will be to disable updates totally, and only do a manual search for them once a month following the recommendations of the experts such as Woody and Susan Bradley that it is safe to do so.

Reply | Quote

IMHO Vista got a bad rep because people were unaccustomed to the significant changes it introduced such as UAC and other security improvements such as session 0 isolation. I’ll grant that MS did well with Win7 by making UAC confirmations less prevalent, but in the overall scheme of things that is small stuff.

Vista has worked well for me.

Reply | Quote

Yet again the comments in that slashdot link you posted blame the user for having the default settings on. As they brought up in the recent TWiT episode having the default settings on does NOT give microsoft permission to upgrade your machine.

Reply | Quote

“I suspect we are not far off the time when the recommendation will be to disable updates totally, and only do a manual search for them once a month following the recommendations of the experts such as Woody and Susan Bradley that it is safe to do so.”
This is exactly what I do–is there some reason not to do this? I don’t see the point in letting windows update run at all if I’m not going to download and install. I do update windows defender manually every day–was just wondering if I’m missing something…

Reply | Quote

“disable updates totally, and only do a manual search for them once a month following the recommendations of the experts such as Woody and Susan Bradley”

That is what I’ve been doing since last spring, and it works well for me.

Reply | Quote

I hope you have lots of RAM!

Reply | Quote

“I suspect we are not far off the time when the recommendation will be to disable updates totally, and only do a manual search for them once a month following the recommendations of the experts such as Woody and Susan Bradley that it is safe to do so.”

Yup.

That’s the way I do it …

Reply | Quote

Although there is still some question in my mind as to the precise sequence of events two weeks ago, starting on last Sunday, I believe it’s true: “Get Windows 10” puts a combined warning/EULA on the screen and does not run the full upgrade unless the user clicks Agree.

See http://www.infoworld.com/article/3048152/microsoft-windows/microsoft-re-releases-kb-3035583-get-windows-10-installer-again.html for details.

Reply | Quote

Unfortunately this seems to be Microsoft’s view, certainly not ethical but likely legal, that if a user has Auto Updates on, then Microsoft is entitled to install whatever they consider useful and in addition they can make the claim that the upgrade is for free and installing a technically superior product.

Reply | Quote

Correct me if I’m wrong Woody but didn’t the most recent sneak attack by M$ have the EULA presented at or near the end of the upgrade process requiring a rollback to the original OS if the user didn’t agree?

A former M$ sneak attack (the one they called a mistake) had the EULA at the beginning of the upgrade installation if I remember correctly and if the user disagreed nothing got installed, no rollback was necessary and no real harm was done.

It appears to me that where they placed the Agree/Disagree prompt for the EULA this time completely removed the user’s ability to opt out of the upgrade.

Reply | Quote

That was true in at least one of my test runs, and was rumored to be true in many others. The problem is that many people can’t really tell what happened, Microsoft is changing its methods, and none of this has any documentation.

Clearly, there should be some sot of opt-out before the 3+ GB of data is downloaded, and the update is applied – even if the update is held pending reboot. I believe that’s the way it works now. Or at least, today. Tomorrow… who knows?

Reply | Quote

The verbiage of the EULA for Windows 7 isn’t something I’d want to attempt to decipher… but the auto-update function should be for automatically installing UPDATES to make the OS that I purchased and agreed to auto-update better/safer.

This is NOT an “update”! This is an upgrade to a different OS than the one I purchased and agreed to allow automatic updates to take place and regardless of the free offer and (debatably) superior technology Windows 10 is NOT an “update” for Windows 7.

It still amazes me how they can get away with all of these unethical tactics that are duping the “technically challenged” users to hop on their Windows 10 train!

Reply | Quote

People check out the new tool by Gibson Research…

https://www.grc.com/never10.htm

Reply | Quote

This tool only provides one of the numerous functions that Josh Mayfield’s GWX Control Panel provides for users to be in control of the GWX siege by M$.

Although I have a very high regard for Gibson Research as I’ve been using other free tools provided by them for years, I’d have to rate this one far inferior to GWX Control Panel.

Also, upon downloading this tool I received a warning that “The signature of never10.exe is corrupt or invalid”. My virus/malware scan gave it a clean bill of health but something isn’t 100% up to snuff with it.

Reply | Quote

I got the impression that they do two different things – Steve’s utility checks to make sure you have a late version of Windows Update installed, which apparently is a precursor to setting the registry flags.

Did I miss something?

Reply | Quote

I think the GRC tool checks the version of the Windows Update client and has buttons to enable/disable the upgrade to Windows 10. It is true that without a later version (post June 2015?) of the Windows Update client the important registry flags cannot be set either in the Group Policy or directly by editing the Registry or if they are set don’t have any effect. That version of the WU client also updates the administrative templates for the Local Group Policy Editor which makes the setting visible.
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3050265
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3080351
From past reading it appears that the WU client released in June 2015 had some bugs fixed by later versions.

Reply | Quote

No, you didn’t miss anything Woody I did… my bad. I don’t know how the Control Panel reacts if it is ran before that update is installed.

Josh released the version including the button to disable OS upgrades after I had already installed that update, so I don’t know what text would be in that button or if any warning would appear if you don’t have that update already installed.

Reply | Quote

He hasn’t updated his certificate from SHA-1 to SHA-2. Microsoft changed its certificate policy and issued a Windows Update to enforce it.

This has affected a number of apps, such as Sublime Text. When the certificate was updated, the problem went away. It takes some time to acquire a new certificate.

I doubt if anything is wrong with the app, although I haven’t installed it, because of the reason you gave. GWX CP is enough for me.

But Gibson Research has a solid reputation, going back to the ’80s.

Reply | Quote

Windows Security Compliance Manager has a setting for no GWX. Am I the only one using that?

It seems to use something other than GWX Control Panel and never10, it seem to make any Windows 10 related updates fail even if i try them installing manually.

**Edit because of possible misunderstanding:

The updates can be installed successfully (i have both kb2952664 and kb3035583 installed), but upgrading to Windows 10 is not possible, no GWX on the taskbar etc…

Reply | Quote

@Eric: well Vista also worked well for me, that’s the good news since I still have one old PC (a Compaq SR1303wm desktop PC using AMD Athlon XP 3200+ 2.20Ghz CPU with 2Gb of RAM, 120Gb hard drive) that has Vista. Bad news is that Microsoft will end ALL support for Windows Vista on April 2017. I’ll consider upgrading that old PC to Win7 early next year.

Reply | Quote

Configuration as documented by Microsoft here
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3050265
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3080351
is enough without using the GWX Control Panel or the GRC tool.
In fact as I understand it, GWX Control Panel implements the same settings with a nice GUI plus few other bits making things easy for everyone.

Reply | Quote

I am “D.” I found that trying to search for my past posts (to see if there had been any replies left in the meantime) was impossible because the letter d is everywhere, of course.
Recently I tried changing to “D. (searchable)” as my user name, but searching for that, or a few shortened segments thereof, has returned no search results at all.
It’s a terrible username in any case, so I’ll change it.
I think that the site knows who I am based on my IP address (if that’s what the yellow/gold ball next to one’s prior comments indicates), so I’ll just switch to a new name that probably isn’t being used by anyone else and that hopefully will be findable with the search function.

Reply | Quote

The Search function on this site (inherited from WordPress) is horrible. I find myself constantly going out to Google and searching site:askwoody.com

Reply | Quote

Sounds good, I’ll try it with an external search engine…
Results: At the moment, I get no results on this site for my new username, but I do get accurate results for an unusual word that I put in a couple of my posts here a couple of weeks ago, so it might take a while for things to be indexed (or whatever the term is) into the search engines, and I’ll try it again down the road.

Reply | Quote

And I’m wondering if searching is somehow more accurate on words that appear in the body of a comment rather than in a username, so I might endeavour always to put a certain word in or at the end of all of my comments here, hopefully without making it look too odd.

Reply | Quote

BTW, I’ve realized that the gold/yellow dot that is next to people’s usernames seems to be next to all nested replies, so perhaps has nothing to do with who is on the site currently.

Reply | Quote

Yep. It’s kind of like indenting, emphasized.

Reply | Quote