Hacker News Reader

Microsoft gets blamed when updates are applied because it makes the system less responsive.

Microsoft gets blamed when users don't install updates and their systems get owned.

In either case, Microsoft gets blamed.

Yes — but there’s a difference:

- in one case, Microsoft seizes control from the owner performing unwanted actions that make the machine not function

- in the other case, Microsoft didn’t do anything; people turned off a feature they can turn back on

There’s a difference there important to free society.

You think of it that way, the customer doesn't.

What do you mean?

This thread started off with my customer complaint that Windows stops me from using my PC to play games.

HN posters are not my example of a typical customer.

The typical customer does not understand what an OS update is, or what it entails.

They know "man, my computer freezes" and "man, I keep hearing about this vuln/oh no I got my hard drive ransom'd"

Those are the people Windows primarily has to appease, otherwise they have the problems that Linux does.

So maybe they should figure out an update mechanism that doesn't have such a heavy performance impact. At least for background automatic updates.