- #1
Haorong Wu
- 413
- 89
Even I turn the damn update off in service and group policy, it turned itself on last night! It rebooted my computer while my program is still running! It ruined my last three days!
Haorong Wu said:Even I turn the damn update off in service and group policy, it turned itself on last night! It rebooted my computer while my program is still running! It ruined my last three days!
How do I permanently disable Windows 10 update?
To disable the Windows Update service in Services Manager, please follow the steps below:
1 Press Windows key + R. ... then enter "Services.msc"
2 Search for Windows Update.
3 Right-click on Windows Update, then select Properties.
4 Under General tab, set the Startup type to Disabled.
5 Click Stop.
6 Click Apply, and then click OK.
7 Restart your compute
Before you start your program again, maybe it would be worth to consider switching to Linux, where these problems never occur.Haorong Wu said:Even I turn the damn update off in service and group policy, it turned itself on last night! It rebooted my computer while my program is still running! It ruined my last three days!
Maybe it's not because of saving; probably it's because the program takes a number of days to complete the computation, and the OP would have to wait a long time again to finish the execution.MikeeMiracle said:If you lost 3 days worth of work because you didn't save it then that's hardly Windows "fault."
When you get the time, do explore that possibility. Initially, I too was afraid of using Linux, but when one Windows upgrade broke my PC, I had no choice but to shift to Ubuntu. It has been a great experience since then.Haorong Wu said:Currently, I may not turn to Linux. It will take me some time to learn it. Maybe later when I have the time, I will try it.
This problem is solved by checkpointing, which has been around for half a century at least and it is something all grownups do when running long jobs. I have seen applications for computer time rejected because of lack of checkpointing.Wrichik Basu said:Maybe it's not because of saving; probably it's because the program takes a number of days to complete the computation, and the OP would have to wait a long time again to finish the execution.
However, I am using others' packages. It is really hard to read programs not written by me. Let alone modify it.Vanadium 50 said:This problem is solved by checkpointing, which has been around for half a century at least and it is something all grownups do when running long jobs. I have seen applications for computer time rejected because of lack of checkpointing.
If you don't checkpoint, how is it Microsoft's fault? (Or Linus', for that matter)
This happens to me work computer every few weeks. Pretty annoying indeed.Haorong Wu said:Even I turn the damn update off in service and group policy, it turned itself on last night! It rebooted my computer while my program is still running! It ruined my last three days!
FactChecker said:In addition to forcing a Windows update before you start the run, can you detach it from the internet during the run?
This is called "checkpointing".FactChecker said:If at all possible, a program that will run for several days should store some intermediate results and have an option to restart near the step that it stopped at. By "near" I mean near enough that it is a lot better than starting over.
I use (mostly) Macs and I find their updating mechanisms to be useful, make sense, and are easy to control.anorlunda said:It should be mentioned here that unpatched computers figure prominently in many of the security/data breaches that happen in the world.
Those who would rather update manually rather than suffer the annoyance of having autonomous updates take on a responsibility.
I believe Microsoft has another reason to force people to install the updates.BillTre said:This works fine and I don't see why its so difficult for others to do it that way.
I guess I should have said you can force an update and install before starting a long run.MikeeMiracle said:You can, but if the updates have already been downloaded that won't help, it will still restart to install the already downloaded updates. This is easy to check by going to the Windows Update section and seeing if there are any updates downloaded and waiting for install.
BillTre said:I use (mostly) Macs and I find their updating mechanisms to be useful, make sense, and are easy to control.
You are clearly given several, easy to find options, for how updating occurs.
I use the: alert me when its available, but wait for my to OK to install it approach.
If I put it the installation for some reason, it reminds me periodically, until I do it, or until I change the update alerting process.This works fine and I don't see why its so difficult for others to do it that way.
Its hard to imagine that Apple has patented it.
I love it when someone says that I am to blame if I don't protect myself correctly, but if others get hurt because I didn't protect myself, apparently others don't have that responsibility to protect themselves as I do.Vanadium 50 said:If you don't plug these holes, your machine could be used to attack others. Like mine. Not very good citizen-y.
You can do that with Linux too. That is the major reason I switch from Windows to an Ubuntu flavor.BillTre said:This works fine and I don't see why its so difficult for others to do it that way.
It is for this reason that our satellite tracking control software and data haul servers use Linux. When some tons of dish hardware is moving, with servo-motor and positional encoder technology required to be pointing correctly at a particular celestial time, there is no room for an OS to be going off doing update housekeeping, not even in a background interrupt manner.Haorong Wu said:Even I turn the damn update off in service and group policy, it turned itself on last night! It rebooted my computer while my program is still running! It ruined my last three days!
I think you are missing @Vanadium 50's point: if you don't protect your devices correctly and they become a bot participating in e.g. DDoS attacks then you are doing damage regardless of whether the DDoS target is protected.jack action said:I love it when someone says that I am to blame if I don't protect myself correctly, but if others get hurt because I didn't protect myself, apparently others don't have that responsibility to protect themselves as I do.
Not at all.pbuk said:I think you are missing @Vanadium 50's point:
Look at that, it happens anyway, even after years of auto-updating. There will always be bad things happening to you, whether one considers there is someone responsible for it or not.pbuk said:if you don't protect your devices correctly and they become a bot participating in e.g. DDoS attacks then you are doing damage regardless of whether the DDoS target is protected.
Protecting against distributed malware costs businesses, governments and academia billions.
I'm against taking money from ignorant users. If you don't know how to use a computer and are not willing to learn, don't use it.pbuk said:I'm all for Microsoft forcing system updates on ignorant users if it saves some of that.
I'm not, that's why I switched OS. But what I'm afraid of, is being forced to live my life according to other people's fears. It always begins as an option, and then someone proposes "Anyway, everyone should do it, right? Why not make a law about it? We've already done it before so it must be OK."pbuk said:I'm also willing to live with any consequences for my systems