Another Win10 update gone bad -

[Diggs]

It's KB4535996 this time. (Not sure if it's been mentioned as there has been so many.) I promptly delayed any updates for 2 weeks on all my machines.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordon...roblems-upgrade-windows-10-free/#6c61259a641f

 

[britechguy]

In all seriousness, and no insult to you, @Diggs, but using Forbes for any information regarding Microsoft and Windows 10 is a very fraught proposition.

Mr. Kelly is one of the worst offenders in the world of hand-waving and creating click-bait. Never go on Forbes alone.

I can find a couple of scattered articles on this update causing problems, but that's all. And *every* update causes issues on some small subset of machines. And those problems are generally idiosyncratic to something "not quite right" on those machines prior to the update being applied, not the update itself.

When there's a truly bad update that causes widespread problems the reporting is far and wide and Microsoft also tends to stop those dead in their tracks these days, as telemetry clues them in that something is going wrong on a statistically significant number of machines.

The tone taken by Lawrence Abrams in his article, Windows 10 KB4535996 Update Issues: Crashes, Slowdowns, Audio, More, on Bleeping Computer is far more measured and realistic. Statements like Mr. Kelly's that, "the early problems with Microsoft’s new KB4535996 Windows 10 update are now spiralling out of control," are hyperventilating BS.

 

[Diggs]

Agreed. I bumped into the article and thought I'd throw it out for discussion.

 

[britechguy]

Agreed. I bumped into the article and thought I'd throw it out for discussion.

When it comes to Mr. Kelly (and Forbes in general when it comes to technology) and his characteristic hysteria, I'd just "throw it out," period.

 

[timeshifter]

I play Fortnite. Funny how they always have a current article about the latest update or strategy for playing that game - on Forbes!

In my lifetime Forbes was a serious magazine for business people. Not so much any more.

 

[GTP]

*every* update causes issues on some small subset of machines. And those problems are generally idiosyncratic to something "not quite right" on those machines prior to the update being applied, not the update itself.

This ^^
Out-of-date software, 7 different "free"antivirus programs, Slimware Utilities, PC Tuneup and Power Reg Cleaner, 9 other registry cleaners and optimisers, driver "updaters" and copies of "Office 2019" downloaded from warez sites through Bitcomet, Bitorrent et al, that infest an average end users PC and end users never updating anything all contribute to the update failure paranoia.

 

[britechguy]

@Barcelona,

And, yet, no matter how obvious this is to anyone in the industry, and that should include tech press journalists, the truth of it never sinks in because of the "catastrophizing" of these idiosyncratic issues and pretending (and that's what it is) that they generalize to the full embedded base.

It's just freakin' irresponsible to keep portraying these insignificant sample sizes and very limited issues as though they are broadly applicable to the full embedded base. And it seems that when writing about Windows, in particular, this is the standard operating procedure of far too many "respected journalists" in the tech press. They actually do know better, which is what makes the offense so much worse.

 

[Sky-Knight]

News sites aren't paid to produce news... they're paid via advertisements, and inflammatory articles and headlines generate more clicks for those adverts.

Therefore, everything we know of as news is now propaganda... I thought this was old information? I agree it's irresponsible and destructive, but the financial model exists the way it does for a reason. I see no ready means of fixing that, so therefore the condition will persist.

 

[britechguy]

Therefore, everything we know of as news is now propaganda... I thought this was old information?

Er, no. Plain and simple. There are still plenty of reputable news sources (online, print, radio, and TV) where journalistic integrity still carries weight.

But, I will readily agree, that the old adage, "Consider the source," needs to have much, much greater weight than it once did, as many outlets that were formerly reliable and reputable are either no longer consistently so or so at all.

 

[Sky-Knight]

@britechguy, you say reputable, and most of the time that translates into left leaning. Propaganda is propaganda, though if you have any actually unbiased news outlets I'd love to know what they are. I've been making due with allsides.com as an aggregator recently, but it's far from perfect.

I will admit, it's usually easier to get at the truth via left tilt news than right tilt... especially since 2016.

 

[britechguy]

@Sky-Knight,

Define "left tilt" and "right tilt." I don't consider, from the news perspective, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Guardian, or most mainstream major newspapers "left tilt." In opinion pieces they are, and only to an extent, but to me that's because it's only been the center and center left who have concerned themselves with facts and commonly shared expert opinion for several decades now. Right leaning papers, with the possible exception of The Wall Street Journal, have become pure propaganda machines in their opinion pages and scarily close to the same in their news coverage. One need only look at The Washington Times or the Richmond Times-Dispatch (to name but two) to see that writ large.

I also consider both NPR and PBS to still be sterling examples of what the news should be in terms of broadcast media.

Once journalism became a profession they also became, for many decades (almost a century), the gatekeeper for the truth. "Fair and balanced" is only that when the facts are presented as known. "Alternative facts" don't serve as legitimate counterpoint to verifiable facts and "the opinions of Uncle Joe down the street" on international relations, climate science, monetary policy, you name it, don't serve as legitimate counterpoint to the subject matter experts in those respective fields. The invalid is not a balance for the valid.

 

[Sky-Knight]

@britechguy All media has implicit bias, there's no way to remove it. The wonderful thing about the Internet however, and the age we live in is that we can mine the data created by the bias, and study it just like anything else. Here is one such example: https://www.adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/?v=402f03a963ba

If you take a peek at it you'll see data that supports exactly what you describe.

The Washington Post, isn't a bad source but it is left of center. New York Times... basically in the same place, though more reliable. All of the rest of what you listed are basically the same. That is, you live life in a filter bubble made out of left leaning media. This predisposes you to accept concepts of central authority, and government regulation being the best way to manage just about any problem. NPR and PBS... also left. All of the sources you cited however are very reliable, which is great... they tone down the propaganda in that sphere, which is why I also use them a ton.

Now, you'll note on the chart... as you go right... how far DOWN you go before you get news. The left's news is more reliable, the right's news is more propagandized. That isn't to say there isn't left propaganda... but it does indicate an utter failure in the market to support right leaning, reliable news outlets. The Independent Journal Review is the closest thing the right has... and it's... an odd beast. Beyond that you've basically got The Wallstreet Journal, The Hill, Financial Times, MarketWatch, and Business Insider.

So there are a few right leaning news sources that are reliable... but they aren't the ones making all the money either. That places me personally in a very difficult spot, because I have no choice but to support political forces that are leaning left, because as you said (and the data supports)... they're the only ones using reason to guide them. But they are far too authoritarian for my tastes, and blind to simpler, less expensive solutions to problems that don't involve the government so much.

 

[GTP]

@Barcelona,

And, yet, no matter how obvious this is to anyone in the industry, and that should include tech press journalists, the truth of it never sinks in because of the "catastrophizing" of these idiosyncratic issues and pretending (and that's what it is) that they generalize to the full embedded base.

It's just freakin' irresponsible to keep portraying these insignificant sample sizes and very limited issues as though they are broadly applicable to the full embedded base. And it seems that when writing about Windows, in particular, this is the standard operating procedure of far too many "respected journalists" in the tech press. They actually do know better, which is what makes the offense so much worse.

Journalists aren't "techs" no matter how "tech savvy" they may think they are. I'd bet most of them out there would have PC's infested with this kind of garbage and when they have a problem with an update misfiring - of course its the update that went wrong!
Hell, when you have respected guys like Mike Smith (Mike Tech Show) endorsing Slimware utilities, it just makes everything worse.

 

[Galdorf]

1. that KB is still buggy i have left it sit till they sort out the issues i have checked microsoft forums seems some people that installed it slows down web browsing had it happen to customer removed that KB and everything was back to normal.

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/ne...6-update-issues-crashes-slowdowns-audio-more/

 

[Diggs]

1. that KB is still buggy i have left it sit till they sort out the issues i have checked microsoft forums seems some people that installed it slows down web browsing had it happen to customer removed that KB and everything was back to normal.

Agreed - Just Google it. Bleeping Computer, Beta News, Windows Central, Windows Latest, etc., etc., are all reporting issues.

 

[britechguy]

Journalists aren't "techs" no matter how "tech savvy" they may think they are.

Never said that they are, but journalists dedicated to certain subject matter areas, and those writing for the tech press fit that category, have handy access to a cadre of subject matter experts among their contacts unless they just started yesterday.

It is irresponsible to consistently give an inaccurate representation of the scope and severity of any given issue. There are several `well-respected` members of the technical press who seem to do nothing but - and that's wrong.

The article referenced as the starter for this topic is a QED of everything that could be wrong with reporting on technical issues.

By the way, I'm not trying to say that anyone should "rush out and immediately apply" any Windows Update. Let it arrive when it arrives. But if it were to cause issues on a given machine, it's a straightforward process to roll back a specific update.