Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    WS Lounge VIP mrjimphelps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,405
    Thanks
    447
    Thanked 404 Times in 376 Posts

    Why Microsoft now does the all-in-one comprehensive patch

    John Dvorak gives a possible reason why Microsoft is now doing the all-in-one comprehensive patch:
    http://www.pcmag.com/commentary/3484...update-failure

    Basically, they were fascinated with AOL doing the same thing decades ago. That may be why they are doing it now.

    "Microsoft, then promoting the MSN online service designed to compete with AOL, was in awe of the AOL update system. You would boot the AOL system and it would update the complete program whether you wanted to or not. You would often end up with a whole new version and a completely different graphical user interface. The company was not shy about changing everything. Microsoft always held this as an ideal method for updates so it would not have to deal with the outrageous complexity of a world of half-patched versions of its OS in the wild."
    Last edited by mrjimphelps; 2016-10-12 at 11:41.

  2. #2
    5 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Delaware, US
    Posts
    1,169
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 99 Times in 88 Posts
    Dvorak tends to overthink things sometimes - and this is probably one of them. There are plenty of more recent examples of non-selective updates. Just look at Android or iOS.

    Microsoft has long dealt with the issues associated with piece-meal updates, in part because they weren't entirely in control of their own OS. Windows programs often brought their own baggage in the form of drivers and DLL's that can and did break when MS updated Windows.

    They have tried repeatedly to fix this problem. Back when NT first came out, they tried to separate the programming layer from the hardware layer to ease driver problems, but the software makers ignored that and continued to write things the way they wanted.

    MS created a massive SDK with all kinds of tools and rules and software makers that stuck to the rules got screwed when they found out MS wasn't abiding by their own rules and were using stuff unavailable in the SDK.

    Now, they think that enough is enough and have taken the bull by the horns and said, "If an update breaks your software, it's your problem." Unfortunately, they don't have all the bugs out and can't seem to get their head out of the dark place long enough to see what kind of problems they are causing.
    Graham Smith
    DataSmith, Delaware
    "For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert.", Arthur C. Clarke (1917 - 2008)

  3. #3
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Durham UK
    Posts
    6,623
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 879 Times in 841 Posts
    If past experience is anything to go by, I can see dark times ahead for Win 7 users.

  4. #4
    WS Lounge VIP mrjimphelps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,405
    Thanks
    447
    Thanked 404 Times in 376 Posts
    Dvorak has been around for a very long time, and he probably knows what he is talking about when he says that Microsoft was awed by AOL's way of updating everything whenever you ran the program.

  5. #5
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Durham UK
    Posts
    6,623
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 879 Times in 841 Posts
    Yes, but it's still nice to be asked if you want to update.

  6. #6
    4 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    561
    Thanks
    51
    Thanked 68 Times in 66 Posts
    Even if true, AOL being a thing was a long time ago. Controlling complexity in computing is a general good cause, AOL or no AOL. Since the leadership at Microsoft is very different now versus the 1990's, I'd take the whole AOL-envy story with a big grain of salt.

    BTW I've been reading Dvorak (and many others) the whole time. Dvorak loves a good conspiracy-style story.
    Last edited by BHarder; 2016-10-12 at 17:16. Reason: Added Dvorak history

  7. #7
    5 Star Lounger Lugh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    620
    Thanks
    166
    Thanked 77 Times in 68 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BHarder View Post
    Dvorak loves a good conspiracy-style story.
    Good to hear John hasn't changed since the 90s, when I used to get the paper PC Mag. Altho I must thank him for the inspiration to make my own browser home page.

    His AOL theory makes no sense, it requires the tail to seriously wag the dog. MS is simplifying its code base in the wild, narrowing it towards only Win10 being still alive next decade sometime. At the same time, it's seen how most other software vendors have been accepted when they 'force' one version of their product, and rollout compulsory updates.

    This transition period will be bumpy, but long term this is great for MS, and its customers too--in the sense quality should improve quite a bit if MS only have to deal with getting a small few predictable code bases solid.

    AOL has nothing to do with this, it follows naturally from the big push to Win10 across all platforms.
    Lugh.
    ~
    Windows 10 Pro x64 1607; Office 2016 (365 Home) x32; Win Defender, MBAM Pro

    ASRock H97 Anniversary; Xeon E3-1231V3 (like i7)
    Gigabyte GeForce GTX 970; 12GB Crucial DDR3 1600
    Logitech MX Master mouse; Roccat Isku kb

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •