Replies

When I check for updates, it can take hours but mostly NEVER responds. I always attempt this after I get notification that new updates are available. Actually, I try to install the new updates but that also takes hours or never completes (the download aspect).

What bothers me is that on a recent shutdown, WU announced that it was installing 2 updates, that I never downloaded (a later check indicated is was 2 of the previous 10 that were indicated to be available but never downloaded; download progress ALWAYS stayed at 0%).

I then rebooted to see what happened, and it then went through finish install of the 2 updates (starting at 35% complete moving up to 100%). However, it did not go into Windows 7 (a 32-bit older node), but rebooted AGAIN.

Upon checking, 2 of the former 10 installed and 2 failed plus 2 were dropped from the list as cancelled. What in blazes is going on here?

Now the next blow…

Once again, I received notification that 8 updates were available. I tried to download them but the download NEVER finishes (stuck at 0% progress; operation cancelled as before when stuck in this state for an extended period of time, sometime hours).

The next time I booted (cold boot from power-on), a new operation occurred that I had never seen before. In a pre-boot step, updates were installed, with messages flying by like crazy, including numbers for updates in a package roll-up. These messages were coming out on a single line on the display (no message scrolling).

Then, a reboot with messages at the early stage with 6 updates applied (progress started at 35% completing at 100%). Finally, the reboot progressed to normal Windows 7 startup after 100% achieved (which is -or was- the normal progression).

One again, what in blazes is going on here? There was NO option to select which update to download/install, and success/failure had to be determned from the history report.

Does someone have an explaination for all of ths (maybe Suzanne is working on that)?

Thanks for your attention.

I am sure that one of the updates will eventually be the Win10 upgrade that lots of people are avoiding.

I suspect this is also being done to combat systems that may be dual booted (multiple bootable partitons as supported for years by MS code). A new (forced) update could be a patch that checks for dual boot configurations and looks for more than one Windows OS that is capable of running (wherby such items may be deleted).

There may be contractual challenges here because these may be not the conditions under which paid versions of Win7 and Win8 were acquired.

My workstation, circa 1999, does not qualify for a Win10 install (lack of video driver for Win10). I suppose this qualifies under their “get a new PC” directive. This old workstation is just fine. I own it and MS should not control it.

I was running Win10TP (technical preview) on a workstation node. The boot partition on that node was upgraded to the “free” Windows 10 Pro system, and it acquired the SAME license key as the former technical preview system. Being the same computer, I thought nothing of it.

I then upgraded my laptop from Win8.1Pro to Windows 10 Pro, and it also has the SAME license key!

Both systems are activated and functional.

When did Microsoft start re-using license keys? Is they key no longer for the computer but perhaps for the person instead. The two systems that were upgraded had different license keys before.

Speaking of being more aggressive about Windows 10, from arstechnica:

>>> Skylake users given 18 months to upgrade to Windows 10

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/01/skylake-users-given-18-months-to-upgrade-to-windows-10/

Are there really Skylake equipped PCs/Laptops out there that didn’t already come with Windows 10?

It seems like if Microsoft can’t get you on the software side, they will do it on the hardware side. I suppose the next logical step will be to terminate all of their other product support for non-Win10 computers.

And there is more, from arstechnica…

Microsoft finally has a proper way to opt out of Windows 7/8 to Windows 10 upgrades

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/01/microsoft-finally-has-a-proper-way-to-opt-out-of-windows-78-to-windows-10-upgrades/

Here is the embedded reference to the Micorsoft change:

How to manage Windows 10 notification and upgrade options

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3080351

I am looking forward to what Woody has to say about KB3080351.

This section of the web page indicates the most recent date:

———————————–
Properties

Article ID: 2952664 – Last Review: 01/12/2016 18:34:00 – Revision: 16.0
Applies to

Windows 7 Service Pack 1

Keywords:

kbsurveynew kbfix kbexpertiseadvanced atdownload KB2952664
———————————–
This is a new issue of a patch I have installed from last Fall. However, I suspect it takes GWX to the next level if this update gets to the next level.

If anybody has used this updated patch, feedback would be appreciated. As Woody indicates, Microsoft is on a roll to force feed Win10 everywhere, whether we want it or not.

Alert: from Microsoft

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/2952664

“Compatibility update for upgrading Windows 7

Introduction
This update helps Microsoft make improvements to the current operating system in order to ease the upgrade experience to the latest version of Windows.”

Bruce Schneier is also covering this…

Windows 10 Whole-Disk Encryption without Key Escrow

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/01/windows_10_whol.html

Just because some folks think this is “old news” doesn’t mean it is not important.

My bad.

I only saw it today for the 1st time.

Update from ArsTechnica:

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/12/microsoft-may-have-your-encryption-key-heres-how-to-take-it-back/

It appears the naysayers outnumber those who post information of interest to Windows users. Just because “they know” doesn’t mean the rest of us aren’t interested.

Did the naysayers also go to Slashdot and TheIntercept and tell them about their “old news”? Probably not.

But that’s okay, the more you put it down, the more others want to know about it.

Update: with a low degree of confidence for long term success, from Dec 4 to today (Dec 8), I have been able to boot WITHOUT a DCOM failure. That covers 9 boots without the DCOM failure.

Updates that may have influenced this:

– used the GWX control panel (a misnomer if there ever was one) to eliminate the possibility of this 32-bit system ever upgrading to Win10 (primarily since GWX said the computer DOES NOT QUALIFY due to lack of driver support for my Nvidia GEForce 7300).

– I shut down SuperFetch and ReadyBoot (please don’t confuse that with ReadyBoost, which I don’t use anyway).

– installed the latest version of Classic Shell (the successful boots started before this operation).

There are still issues:

– in the old failed boot where DCOM prematurely terminates, the taskbar hidden icons view would usually have a half dozen or more entries. All the successful boots, even the last 9, only show 1, 2, or 3 items in the hidden icons view. Others must be manually invoked.

– my network connection is unstable in that it always shows as no internet connection available. However, I can bring up my mail client and access emal, plus bring up a browser and access the internet (after the browser starts, the “no internet connection” flag goes away.

– the boot process is significantly slower (minutes rather than seconds, though better than multiple boots to get one that avoids the DCOM failure).

On a side note, today is patch Tuesday and out of 6 bootable partitions across my systems, none found any updates via Windows Update. One failed with a Windows Update error code, which has been hit in the past, and the Microsoft provided resolution for that error was of no help.

Keeping my fingers crossed for continued avoidance of the DCOM failure. By the way, I have no feedback from Microsoft whatsoever on this problem. I have reached out to a few industry experts and they have nothing either. As it stands, the root cause is indeterminate which leaves a real solution unobtainable. Further, nobody has responded with any feedback on how to identify the DCOM databases that might be infolved so they can be checked out. Apparently this is some kind of industry secret.

DoNotSpy10 changes a registry setting that it does not “unchange” when you back out all of its adjustments.

I unchecked all of the changes, applied them, and my Settings in advanced options indicates that some of my windows updates are controlled by the organization that controls my computer. I don’t know what registry setting was changed but it seems to have cut me off from Win10TP access.

In response to earlier comments:

Msinfo32 reveals no problem devices (nor much other information that might apply).

Clean boot and safe boot constrain much of what can be done in those configurations. In particular, one or both of these can behave much like the DCOM failure situation. One or both were tried very early in the game, yielding little to help out (but will be tried once again for clarification).

Updates:

In my boot scenario, I have 4 active partitions across 3 drives. XP (disk 0) is no longer used but the disk holds the MBR and essential boot information. Disk 1 (also MBR) has my Win8 partition (the only partition), while disk 2 (also MBR) has 2 partitions with Win7 – one is the normal configuration and one is the clean install configuration.

Up to this point, the Win8 boot manager was in charge of booting and presenting the selection list of which OS to bring up (Win8 is the default selection). This is a GUI selection list. It has the predictable sequence of needing to boot and select my Win7 normal configuration 6 times, where the 6th rendition now always yields a running system where DCOM does NOT fail.

I have switched the default selection to my Win7 normal configuration. Of course, this changes to a text selection screen, but yields EXACTLY the same result – I must endure 5 failed boots (DCOM fails) in order to get the 6th boot where DCOM does not fail. This sequence takes about 1/2 the time (5-6 minutes versus 10-12 minutes).

In that specification, the dump option activation is greyed out and can’t be set.

The same on my computer.