Windows 10 Update KB4549951 Causes BSOD For Some Users

[leadeater]

8 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Taking a long time before releasing a service pack meant that a lot more testing was done on them before they were released. And the fewer number of service packs also meant there was less to go wrong with throughout an OSes lifespan.

I'm talking about internal company processes not Microsoft. Once a service pack was released it would be many months before you would actually deploy it across the fleet because you were waiting for all the issues to be fixed by Microsoft.

 

This is a spike nature I was talking about, total numbers is not the full picture. 100 issues fixed over 3 months is always going to be perceived as a less problem than 100 issues over 24 months. That's what is really the problem people are feeling, prolonged cycles of release and fix and many just don't like that. I'm still on 1803, because it's perfectly stable and still get security updates.

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Points related to things I've claimed have been addressed by me. It's not my duty or my interest to engage with mischaracterizations of and irrelevancies to what I've said.

 

 

No you haven't and it is your duty accept when you can't.

 

Things you have claimed that you haven't given evidence for:

 

4 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

it's no secret that Microsoft has deliberately offloaded a large part of the testing of their updates onto Windows owners through the Insider program and also onto non-Insider-Program Windows users.

 

They did not, I provided a comprehensive article that explains the testing process and that insiders only test not security updates.  So far you have provided zero evidence to substantiate this claim.

 

3 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

Microsoft state they're testing patches through the Insider program and through regular Windows Update patches,

 

Again they are not testing patches through "regular windows update patches".  again I have provided a comprehensive articel that expolains why this doe NOT happen and what doe happen.  SO far you have not provided any evidence to support your claim.

 

3 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

 Offloading bug-testing onto developers only increases the burden of developers and means they have to divide their time between developing and testing, which means that there is a cut to both efforts.

You have provided ZERO evidence the developers are doing more work to the point of being burdened.  

 

 

3 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

There is a large net loss in testing happening in that situation.

 

 

Yet again, you have provided ZERO evidence to support that assertion.    Linking to articles that talk about general layoffs is not evidence of anything other than there are 12K who don;' work in the nokia division anymore, and there are 5.5K who no longer work on windows mobile or in middle management.  That's all you can say definitively about those layoff's. 

 

4 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

 

Microsoft pulls so many dirty tricks to manipulate, exploit, and abuse Windows owners t

 

 

I think this attitude and desire to be disingenuous explains why you are so willing to make huge leaps from generic information to very specific claims.

 

Stop telling us you have provided evidence because we all know you haven't given us anything.    You have read a couple of media articles

 that skip around the subject with unqualified accusations and taken them as a cold hard fact.  

[vanished]

I have it on my main system as of the 15th and no obvious issues so far

[Delicieuxz]

18 minutes ago, mr moose said:

No you haven't and it is your duty accept when you can't.

 

Things you have claimed that you haven't given evidence for:

 

They did not, I provided a comprehensive article that explains the testing process and that insiders only test not security updates.  So far you have provided zero evidence to substantiate this claim.

 

Again they are not testing patches through "regular windows update patches".  again I have provided a comprehensive articel that expolains why this doe NOT happen and what doe happen.  SO far you have not provided any evidence to support your claim.

I haven't made any claim about security versus non-security updates for Windows Insiders. So, I don't know why you're arguing about it.

 

And according to Microsoft's own documentation, you are wrong to claim that Microsoft are not testing patches through regular Windows updates.

 

 https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2018/12/10/windows-monthly-security-and-quality-updates-overview/

Quote

We also release optional updates in the third and fourth weeks of the month, respectively known as “C” and “D” releases. These are validated, production-quality optional releases, primarily for commercial customers and advanced users “seeking” updates. These updates have only non-security fixes. The intent of these releases is to provide visibility into, and enable testing of, the non-security fixes that will be included in the next Update Tuesday release (we make these optional to avoid users being rebooted more than once per month). Advanced users can access the “C” and “D” releases by navigating to Settings > Update & Security > Windows Update and clicking the “Check for updates” box. The “D” release has proven popular for those “seeking” to validate the non-security content of the next “B” release.

So, if a person manually searches for new updates in Windows Update, they're receiving experimental patches to literally serve as Microsoft's beta testers.

 

Windows 10 Servicing Branches (CB, CBB, and LTSB), Semi-Annual Channel

Quote

This is the latest version of Windows and is called Semi-Annual Channel (Targeted), this version receives all upgrades (new versions) and updates (patches) from Microsoft within a few days of their release. Semi-Annual Channel(Targeted) is what all home users get and what most small business corporate Pro users will get.

 

...

 

New feature update releases are initially considered as Semi-Annual Channel (Targeted) releases: organizations will use these for pilot deployments to ensure compatibility with existing apps and infrastructure. After about four months, the feature update will be declared as Semi-Annual Channel, indicating that it is ready for broad deployment.

So, Windows 10 Home and Pro are used as test-beds for updates to prepare them for broader deployment.

 

 

Quote

You have provided ZERO evidence the developers are doing more work to the point of being burdened.

I didn't say "to the point of being burdened". I said, "Offloading bug-testing onto developers only increases the burden of developers and means...", which has a different meaning and isn't gauging how tired workers are. Your lack of comprehension of what you've read is a recurring issue in your responses to me.

 

But if you have a sense for logic, then you can grasp that adding the duties of testing to a worker who already has the duties of developing means they now have more duties to accomplish. That means they are burdened more than before and their time either has to be divided between the two tasks, or they have to work more hours to accomplish both tasks without a reduction in attention to either one.

 

You might as well be arguing that I haven't provided evidence that 2 + 2 = 4.

 

 

You have provided nothing but incorrect claims and misrepresentations of what I've said. But I have reasonably substantiated my claims and provided much solid evidence for them.

[Delicieuxz]

23 minutes ago, leadeater said:

I'm talking about internal company processes not Microsoft. Once a service pack was released it would be many months before you would actually deploy it across the fleet because you were waiting for all the issues to be fixed by Microsoft.

 

This is a spike nature I was talking about, total numbers is not the full picture. 100 issues fixed over 3 months is always going to be perceived as a less problem than 100 issues over 24 months. That's what is really the problem people are feeling, prolonged cycles of release and fix and many just don't like that. I'm still on 1803, because it's perfectly stable and still get security updates.

An interesting LTT video could be an examination of whether past Windows OSes had overall less problematic update histories compared to Windows 10, and whether people are justified or not in believing that Windows 10 has made OS life more frustrating due to update issues, and whether we actually have it better or worse now, in regards to update experiences.

[leadeater]

23 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

An interesting LTT video could be an examination of whether past Windows OSes had overall less problematic update histories compared to Windows 10, and whether people are justified or not in believing that Windows 10 has made OS life more frustrating due to update issues, and whether we actually have it better or worse now, in regards to update experiences.

Pretty sure that would be rather hard to get that information now, I'm not even sure it really matters. What matters is the here and now and it's perfectly acceptable to want a better update experience as well as less bugs making it through, we all want that naturally.

 

If you just target user experience then it will be worse; removal of optional updates, removal of update selection, reduction in update settings, fast track feature release cycle.

 

The other thing to be mindful of is Windows usually goes through a 3 year version release cycle with some kind of mid point service pack. Windows 10 is just about to cross in to it's 6th year of service, that means there would have been a minimum of 1 version release and 2 services packs with a 2nd version release coming up. All those feature and function changes have instead been released when deemed production ready rather than packaged together. We are getting a lot of changes applied to our computers that we would normally wait a significant amount of time to get, most home users don't really upgrade OS version and do so when getting a new computer or when required to utilize a feature they want/need i.e. DX12.

 

Windows 10 has expanded the coverage of people/computers receiving feature and functionality updates to a degree that was not done before in the domestic/home user market. It's actually quite a different playing field than before. 

 

I went through a large many thousand computer Windows Vista upgrade project, it sucked hard. Lots of things were broken, UAC caused so many problems most had it disabled via GPO, many GPO settings didn't work correctly or were still being added after the fact, printing and font handling was just broken and to top that off Windows Updates itself on computers would regularly corrupt itself which was a pervasive issue that never really went away until Windows 8.1/Server 2012 R2 but at least it did get better with Windows 7.

 

Sure a lot of issues were program compatibility and 3rd party software but the root cause of many of these Windows 10 updates have also been the very same thing, just more isolated to AV vendors.

[Delicieuxz]

50 minutes ago, mr moose said:

That is all ex0plained in the link I provided.  Will you ever read anything? or just keep with the blinkers?

If it were explained in the link you provided that I haven't made any claim about security versus non-security updates for Windows Insiders, then why you've multiple-times appealed to the distinction between which updates the Insider program handles is even more puzzling to me.

 

But as I said and showed you with Microsoft's own documentation, Microsoft are testing patches through regular Windows updates.

 

Quote

This thread is about the automatic security updates, not checking for updates manually.  They are different.  I have had toi explain this before too, it is getting tiring that you are being so intellectually dishonest by conflating many different issues to peddle your narrative.

Hmm. I can say that I haven't actually done that. But I note, and hopefully others do as well, the intellectual dishonesty in your arbitrarily deciding that the discussion doesn't include manual Windows Update checks, and also the intellectual dishonesty in you feigning ignorance that I didn't additionally show that Microsoft use regular automatic Windows updates for testing:

 

Windows 10 Servicing Branches (CB, CBB, and LTSB), Semi-Annual Channel

Quote

This is the latest version of Windows and is called Semi-Annual Channel (Targeted), this version receives all upgrades (new versions) and updates (patches) from Microsoft within a few days of their release. Semi-Annual Channel(Targeted) is what all home users get and what most small business corporate Pro users will get.

 

...

 

New feature update releases are initially considered as Semi-Annual Channel (Targeted) releases: organizations will use these for pilot deployments to ensure compatibility with existing apps and infrastructure. After about four months, the feature update will be declared as Semi-Annual Channel, indicating that it is ready for broad deployment.

 

So, even if humouring your arbitrary personal decision to not count manual Windows Update checks, it's still proven that, by Microsoft's own words, Microsoft are using regular Windows updates to test patches. So much for me not providing evidence of that claim... which I've now done 3 times over.

 

 

Quote

The rest of your post was just school yard arguing.  I have made the issue abundantly clear, if you wish to continue discussion then provide the evidence to support your claims, otherwise don't expect any further input from me.  I'll have more luck convincing puttin to stop being a cunt.

Aside from the obvious projection, your strategy here (and by the way, I've long noticed that it's a go-to one which you use often), is to simply impersonate the appearance and mannerism of someone who has put up a sound defence and hasn't been proven wrong over, and over. In a word, to bluff. But the opposite of that bluff is true.

 

I haven't desired to carry on a discussion with you in a very long time, and I don't consider you equipped for many of the discussions you get yourself wound up in. And if you didn't repeatedly attempt to misdirect and mischaracterize things I'd said, I wouldn't be responding to you. I am, pretty much only to correct your obfuscation of facts and to expose your efforts to concoct a fictional narrative about the discourse.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

Which will be offset by a much larger number of people who don't experience issues which doesn't get reported, because no one reports on things that go right

 

It's almost dumbfounding that people put so much stock in those media articles,  this article talks about audio issues as if there are thousands of problems, their entire source is three complaints on thee answers.microsoft help forum.  

 

It makes me wonder just how many of These issues are wide spread and how many of them are just  coincidental.   I am sure if I look hard enough I can find someone who has said they have a problem with every single update for every single product that exists.  Therefore I can conclude quite accurately that the failure rate for everything is 100%. 

[Falkentyne]

So is this the I hate windows 10 thread or the windows bug report thread?

[Arika]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

It's almost dumbfounding that people put so much stock in those media articles,  this article talks about audio issues as if there are thousands of problems, their entire source is three complaints on thee answers.microsoft help forum.  

On a side note, and not directed to anyone in this thread, or in response to anything else already said.

 

This makes me wonder how much the issues are compounded by sensationalist reports of "windows 10 updates are broken" which makes non-tech savvy people freak out and google how to disable them. Which then causes problems that they wouldn't have had, had they left it alone, which them makes them blame Windows Update.

[The1Dickens]

On topic: I've no issues with my recent (or any) updates, but I'm already on 2004. The article did say it was for people on version 1904 or 1910, right?

 

Also, I tend to run the update-checker every night before turning my PC off, and about once a month, I run through all (or most of) my programs and manually check for updates. That might bite me in the bum one day, but so far, I've no issues.

[mr moose]

Just now, Arika S said:

On a side note, and not directed to anyone in this thread, or in response to anything else already said.

 

This makes me wonder how much the issues are compounded by sensationalist reports of "windows 10 updates are broken" which makes non-tech savvy people freak out and google how to disable them. Which then causes problems that they wouldn't have had, had they left it alone, which them makes them blame Windows Update.

I imagine it has a huge effect,  Media has to keep readers clicking and coming back to earn their living, if their headline was " windows 10 updates reached 600Million pc's. 3 people report audio problems"  and they would be out of business.   Therefore people read the death and despair article, freak out and search "how to disable windows updates" which uncovers something like 30-40 articles with instructions.  If they articles did not exist I highly doubt tall the how to's would exist either. 

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, The1Dickens said:

On topic: I've no issues with my recent (or any) updates, but I'm already on 2004. The article did say it was for people on version 1904 or 1910, right?

 

Also, I tend to run the update-checker every night before turning my PC off, and about once a month, I run through all (or most of) my programs and manually check for updates. That might bite me in the bum one day, but so far, I've no issues.

It may become a problem with windows because manually checking for updates gives you the beta updates (not fully tested).  This is something MS really need to make more apparent rather than burying the information in an article about Quality control.  Anyway's I never click that button, I leave updates set to recommended and never have an issue (fingers crossed).

[jagdtigger]

6 hours ago, StDragon said:

Pride in one's work?

That doesnt exist anymore, cheap non-existent quality and short life-span the trend nowadays.....

 

  

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

Which will be offset by a much larger number of people who don't experience issues which doesn't get reported

Because its irrelevant since not everyone gets it at the same time.....

[TechyBen]

12 hours ago, TetraSky said:

And that's why I deferred all updates for 7 days in the advanced settings. Because 7 days is usually long enough to let the peasants others test it for me.

This is why I deffer all updates forever, until I decide.

 

"Customers won't install updates if we let them choose

"Customers won't install updates if we don't let them choose".

 

Law of unintended consiquences.

[TechyBen]

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

I imagine it has a huge effect,  Media has to keep readers clicking and coming back to earn their living, if their headline was " windows 10 updates reached 600Million pc's. 3 people report audio problems"  and they would be out of business.   Therefore people read the death and despair article, freak out and search "how to disable windows updates" which uncovers something like 30-40 articles with instructions.  If they articles did not exist I highly doubt tall the how to's would exist either. 

I only tole and ate 3 peoples dogs yesterday. Thousands and millions of others are fine. It's only a little thing. "Most consumers are fine".

 

I agree the media is horrid at reporting this. But belittling and playing down those affected is the worse kind of brainwashing the commercial marketing department to these companies (Apple/Samsung etc) has caused.

 

The number of actual super intelligent people with channels on Youtube I've seen do a 180 and "Covid 19 is the same as the flu, no different" yet not notice the hospitals full of ill people, makes me wonder if it's an even worse problem.

 

We live in a world of billions now. Billions! But does that make the harm or social/mental affects of our/companies/others actions less important and impacting? "Let's push this code out... oh, one person might lose a days work and their job and then house if it is wrong, it'd take us an extra day to check... but then 1000s might lose their job/days work if we delay the release!" Hard problem, no easy solution... but does it make it *less* a sad affect to those who do get the problem? (And I know we can mitigate it else where, hence why I don't depend on tech, but more use it for convenience)

[mr moose]

42 minutes ago, TechyBen said:

I only tole and ate 3 peoples dogs yesterday. Thousands and millions of others are fine. It's only a little thing. "Most consumers are fine".

 

I agree the media is horrid at reporting this. But belittling and playing down those affected is the worse kind of brainwashing the commercial marketing department to these companies (Apple/Samsung etc) has caused.

 

The number of actual super intelligent people with channels on Youtube I've seen do a 180 and "Covid 19 is the same as the flu, no different" yet not notice the hospitals full of ill people, makes me wonder if it's an even worse problem.

 

We live in a world of billions now. Billions! But does that make the harm or social/mental affects of our/companies/others actions less important and impacting? "Let's push this code out... oh, one person might lose a days work and their job and then house if it is wrong, it'd take us an extra day to check... but then 1000s might lose their job/days work if we delay the release!" Hard problem, no easy solution... but does it make it *less* a sad affect to those who do get the problem? (And I know we can mitigate it else where, hence why I don't depend on tech, but more use it for convenience)

I'm not too sure exactly what you are trying to say here,  but my comments are basically that the problems in windows update isn't as bad as the media make out and highlighting that one article that used 3 peoples posts on MS's help forum, was me highlighting the issue with the media and why we should take everything they say with a grain of salt. I was not saying we should play down every issue as if it is nothing.   

 

The problem that seems to reoccur a lot on these forums is the inconsistency people apply to the media,  when the media try to claim video games cause violence everyone is quick to shit on them and call out the media for their sensationalist behavior, but then when they report on something like this everyone's jumping up and down like they are incapable of lying and have all the facts.   Now I don't mind people using the media to strengthen an argument, but when the media is at odds with other evidence and quite frankly has an obvious lack of information and is then being used as the only source to underpin an ideal, then I have problems.

[TechyBen]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

I'm not too sure exactly what you are trying to say here,  but my comments are basically that the problems in windows update isn't as bad as the media make out and highlighting that one article that used 3 peoples posts on MS's help forum, was me highlighting the issue with the media and why we should take everything they say with a grain of salt. I was not saying we should play down every issue as if it is nothing.   

 

The problem that seems to reoccur a lot on these forums is the inconsistency people apply to the media,  when the media try to claim video games cause violence everyone is quick to shit on them and call out the media for their sensationalist behavior, but then when they report on something like this everyone's jumping up and down like they are incapable of lying and have all the facts.   Now I don't mind people using the media to strengthen an argument, but when the media is at odds with other evidence and quite frankly has an obvious lack of information and is then being used as the only source to underpin an ideal, then I have problems.

Nah. I'm saying those of us affected by this, care not what the media does. Yes the media is wrong. But that is not the people on this forum.

 

Even if some on this forum are wrong, that is not all the people on this forum.

 

We seem to have lost the care and empathy for individuals.

[mr moose]

7 hours ago, TechyBen said:

Nah. I'm saying those of us affected by this, care not what the media does. Yes the media is wrong. But that is not the people on this forum.

 

Even if some on this forum are wrong, that is not all the people on this forum.

 

We seem to have lost the care and empathy for individuals.

Fair enough,  It does get tiring when people resort to insults,because it means they are arguing for the sake of trolling and the only way to stop the thread derailing is to stop responding to them.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

I haven't seen any issues but theres a very noticeable performance drop. Feels sluggish even.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

On 4/19/2020 at 11:07 PM, leadeater said:

 

Microsoft is shifting to a more modern development model using more modern processes and team structures while also developing better tools and workflows to accommodate it, things other companies are already doing.

 

Is "modern" used as an euphemism in this context? 

 

 

On 4/19/2020 at 11:07 PM, leadeater said:

 

 

[DildorTheDecent]

Update is installed on my 1909 machine and nothing weird has happened.

 

Audio, bluetooth and performance is fine. Not that I'd probably feel it bog down S I X T E E N CORES YO!

[Curious Pineapple]

I would like to report that this update is on all my machines and is causing zero issues.

[leadeater]

3 hours ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Is "modern" used as an euphemism in this context? 

Well I didn't say they were doing well at it just that they changed structure 

[Pickles von Brine]

Luckily I have this update an no issues. Thank god.