qubit
Overclocked quantum bit
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2007
- Messages
- 17,865 (2.98/day)
- Location
- Quantum Well UK
System Name | Quantumville™ |
---|---|
Processor | Intel Core i7-2700K @ 4GHz |
Motherboard | Asus P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3 |
Cooling | Noctua NH-D14 |
Memory | 16GB (2 x 8GB Corsair Vengeance Black DDR3 PC3-12800 C9 1600MHz) |
Video Card(s) | MSI RTX 2080 SUPER Gaming X Trio |
Storage | Samsung 850 Pro 256GB | WD Black 4TB | WD Blue 6TB |
Display(s) | ASUS ROG Strix XG27UQR (4K, 144Hz, G-SYNC compatible) | Asus MG28UQ (4K, 60Hz, FreeSync compatible) |
Case | Cooler Master HAF 922 |
Audio Device(s) | Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Fatal1ty PCIe |
Power Supply | Corsair AX1600i |
Mouse | Microsoft Intellimouse Pro - Black Shadow |
Keyboard | Yes |
Software | Windows 10 Pro 64-bit |
Microsoft makes updates mandatory in W10 for everyone except for enterprise users. This is good in that it keeps one's Windows fully updated at all times, but I think there are a few downsides to forcing users to have the latest updates.
- How will they handle updates and reboots to minimise disruption to workflow? For gamers, imagine some fat updates installing in the middle of an intense online game. It would completely wreck it with tanking framerates, lagging and potential errors, as well as bombing out of the game. Presumably Microsoft have thought of this and will avoid such scenarios.
- Bandwidth limits. Many people don't have high bandwidth internet access and on top of that they may not have an unlimited usage quota. Being forced to download the updates would cause problems, especially with using up allocated bandwidth and either being shut off, throttled or having to pay more for it.
- It gives Microsoft an easy way to force updates which are only in their own interests and not in those of the user's. The one I can think of is the product activation anti-tampering update 971033 which many people avoided since it was very intrusive, checking up on an installation every month. A later version stopped this behaviour after a public outcry. However, such outcries might be ineffective if one has to accept every update. This last point is the biggest reason in my book to be against such forced updates.
What do you all think? Check out the article and let me know.
www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/16/windows_10_will_update_whether_you_like_it_or_not_unless_you_have_enterprise_edition
- How will they handle updates and reboots to minimise disruption to workflow? For gamers, imagine some fat updates installing in the middle of an intense online game. It would completely wreck it with tanking framerates, lagging and potential errors, as well as bombing out of the game. Presumably Microsoft have thought of this and will avoid such scenarios.
- Bandwidth limits. Many people don't have high bandwidth internet access and on top of that they may not have an unlimited usage quota. Being forced to download the updates would cause problems, especially with using up allocated bandwidth and either being shut off, throttled or having to pay more for it.
- It gives Microsoft an easy way to force updates which are only in their own interests and not in those of the user's. The one I can think of is the product activation anti-tampering update 971033 which many people avoided since it was very intrusive, checking up on an installation every month. A later version stopped this behaviour after a public outcry. However, such outcries might be ineffective if one has to accept every update. This last point is the biggest reason in my book to be against such forced updates.
What do you all think? Check out the article and let me know.
www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/16/windows_10_will_update_whether_you_like_it_or_not_unless_you_have_enterprise_edition