this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2025
302 points (96.9% liked)
Technology
74233 readers
4340 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No one remembers how vulnerable windows server and windows desktop OS’s were before they revamped updates?
Forced updates are great. The internet is safer.
Forced updates a shitty solution to a much bigger problem: proprietary software.
Yeah, I remember, now we still have Windows being vulnerable, but in addition we also have untested changes pushed automatically to paying customers.
Forced updates are great!
Debian: am I a joke to you?
(security upgrades are separate from everything else)
This is a good point, but the issue is that vendors have abused this need by not just pushing security updates, but also regular rewrites that make the products more invasive/full of language model shit - Exhibit A being anything at all from Microsoft
or changing their product from a one time purchase to a subscription model, I predict there's gonna be a lot more of that with this new forced app updates change.
You can’t maintain security and feature changes separately long term.
Windows itself already splits those up in security and feature updates.....
And why not ? Care to explain ?
In a sane development model there is not any technical problem to do it.
Entirely agree.
Ui changes for the sake of pointing out how many ui changes you shipped for your annual review is what is making people upset.
Security packed and system updates is one thing.
The constant reorganization of functions and apps and layouts and compatibility is a very different one.
It is a problem that the operating system is controlled by the largest apps and service company that make money from user data in various forms and keep pushing their business model in every device core operations.
And fuck fuck fuck that Google keeps trying to force Gemeni in every update. Let me keep using Google Assistant and stop making it worse by stripping out functionality or replacing shortcuts to Gemeni. Gemeni can still not do the very few things I want my voice assistant to do, namely set alarms and play music on whatever music streaming service I prefer to use.
I remember how much it sucked when ignorant users ignored updates forever and MS didn't really seem to give much of a shit about security anyway, yes.
Nowadays MS is a great choice if you want to borrow a computer that someone else controls. Less so if you want a computer that is actually yours.
For most people it won't matter, they just want something that works.
Thanks, been reading those words from various commenters, in various contexts, in a browser window on my Linux desktop, for longer than some people at Lemmy have probably been alive. But it's always nice to hear familiar phrases again.
Until they force an update that bricks your device because they want money from you upgrading hardware
Why did they write such shit software in the first place? No, they don't get off the hook.
Processors change, libraries become deprecated or vulnerable, design paradigms shift, and new integrations become possible that weren't there when the application first launched. Should we blame old house builders for using asbestos when they didn't know how poorly that would end up?
We should blame a shitty company for not being able to maintain their code.
Seriously if the world depends on some dumb company with some tiny number of people relative to the planet, then the world is dumb and fucked.
Well updates are "maintenance", I'm arguing against someone who seems to think the code should be flawless from the get go and being any lesser and requiring updates is an issue of the developers.
Processors change? Non-sequitur. Spectre an its ilk arrived on the scene at least a decade after MS had developed a reputation for shipping shit code.
Libraries become deprecated or vulnerable? Non-sequitur. Whose libraries? Who deprecated them? Remember, this is a company that personified Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. If they picked shitty vendors for libraries and did no due diligence on that source code, why are the externalities foisted upon users? Also, libraries don't "become vulnerable" through some magical process. Either the bug was there from the beginning, or a shitty change was introduced and not caught.
Design paradigms shift? And this is an excuse for writing shitty code? I don't buy it.
New integrations require new code and that means taking into consideration the new shape of the system. Sounds like they did a really shitty job of that and they make it the user's problem.
Should we blame the old house builders for using asbestos? Unequivocally, yes. Those shitheads knew or should have known. Don't believe me? Here is a handy link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169500224003623
Do note the decades between when it was understood the shit was dangerous and when the decline as a building material happened.
So, no, MS still does not get a pass.
I suppose he was referring to the ones that used it before it was understood.
All software is either shit to begin with or becomes shit when it gets big enough. If a Linux distro were forced to maintain as much legacy cruft as Windows it would be shit too.
I see you have yet to meetmy old friend Debian, who was supporting i386 until 2 weeks ago, and includes a much broader library of softwate than Microsoft has ever maintained.
This is true, but isn't what I was referring to. The problem MS are facing is not what they themselves have built, but the huge number of apps that other businesses have built over the years which prevent MS from rewriting or deprecating many parts of the bloated zombie that is now Windows.
Except for the fact that linux is even better at running those old apps from other vendors by now. Try running Windows 3.1 or Windows 95 software under linux with wine.
I'm sure all those enterprise clients are positively champing at the bit to switch to Linux 🙄 Can I have a conversation about computers here without it being about Linux? And I say this as somebody who uses Linux full-time on all their computers.
Enterprise clients are paying for legal liability not for security, quality, etc. It's pure theatre.
False dichotomy. That was a business decision with externalities foisted upon users.
Let’s look at your code from 20+ years ago?
Go ahead, bro. It's on CPAN.
Ok whatever dude, you need to provide more details than “go ahead.” 😏
I think I'll continue to enjoy my pseudonymity for the time being. Besides, I could link you to some rando's modules, claim to be that person, and you'd have no way of verifying anyhow since this nick has no resemblance to the handle I used. But let's just say, I shipped well-tested, thoroughly documented modules with very high "kwalitee" used by fortune 100 companies.
Are you the one user of this OS Server side? /s