Windows 10: Microsoft launches intrusive full-screen upgrade reminder | Hacker News Reader

Windows 10: Microsoft launches intrusive full-screen upgrade reminder

theguardian.com

64 pointscm218787 comments

My dad called me recently to tell me that while in the middle of using his computer, it rebooted and installed Windows 10 without giving him any way to cancel. I figured that he may have accidentally clicked to schedule the upgrade. But when I looked into it more, I discovered that Microsoft had changed the upgrade popup to default to install (my dad had become used to just clicking the X to close the window after numerous times).

This article mentions that this behavior is being replaced by the full-screen upgrade reminder, which I guess is an improvement. However, I have to admit that for me Microsoft's actions with Windows 10 have destroyed all the good will that they had earned through their open source efforts. Obviously Microsoft's actions with open source have some profit motive, but previously I had also believed that maybe the company had experienced a change of heart.

It's a shame because I'm sure the teams behind things like TypeScript and Visual Studio Code are great people who have nothing to do with this mess. But after growing up with the Microsoft of the late 90s and early 2000s, dealing with MSIE 6 and the antitrust lawsuits, and now seeing this stupid behavior with Windows 10, I feel that I just can't trust this company at all.

I understand that my reaction here may be overly emotional and unfair to the non-Windows divisions of MS that are doing good open source work. But I feel that the company as a whole will only take notice if they are punished as a whole. We in tech should consider this whenever we use MS products, whether they are free (in the temporarily free Windows 10 sense) or open source.

To be fair, if Microsoft had taken the same stance towards upgrading old IE users as they are with old Windows users, web development might have been a lot less annoying.

I still don't really get why people would not want to upgrade. As far as my experience goes, Windows 10 is superior to 7 and 8 in almost every conceivable way.

Apple manages to get quick and extensive uptake on their updates without resorting to this sort of nonsense. If it's really better then all you have to do is show that to people and they'll upgrade willingly.

Really? My iPhone bothers me every single day about upgrading the iOS version. I should've never upgraded any major version since it is now quite unusable (iPhone 4S). But I get an intrusive and annoying popup every day when new upgrade comes. And it is the same thing: install now? no! schedule an upgrade maybe? no! stfu apple!

What you're saying is: you wish to stay with the original iOS 5.0? With hundreds of vulnerabilities unpatched?

I think what he's saying is that he would like the option to turn off the nagging and do it when HE would like to.

Not asking much imo.

I'm on iOS 7 and I get the same constant nag-screens. And I'd say if those hundreds of vulnerabilities are unpatched on iOS 7 too, that's a problem in itself.

That's the reality today. Everything is vulnerable. Your choice is to upgrade, stay vulnerable, or buy a different product.

I'd take my chances with vulnerabilities if that meant my phone would work. With recent versions of iOS it is to slow to open mail once the conversation thread gets too long (30+ replies). But that's beside the point. Nagging about upgrade is not something MS invented. Apple did

They do not get those quick, extensive numbers on their desktop OS.

In no small part because Apple's median user age is so much lower than MS and their higher price point selects for more educated consumers. That, and the Win10 forced upgrades are mostly for managing and trying to convert unpaid copies.

My iPhone is far more aggressive about nagging me - I get pop up modal on my iPhone every day, and about once a week it tells me to enter my passcode to allow an upgrade overnight.

Hardware that can't run it, yet for some reason passes the minimum requirements function.

Fear of new, or having to learn new. Some people may have only just adapted to Metro.

For others, justifiable privacy concerns; having to run third party scripts and manually vet and select updates to avoid telemetry while keeping security is just not feasible.

Because they don't want MS to spy on them under the guise of product improvement and the previous OS version still works fine. Simple as that.

Why are customers expected to accept all changes pushed down their throats?

Compatibility with software, hardware, services, etc. For example my Netgear router got an upgrade lately that was basically "fix the admin panel to work with windows 10".

There's also question of policy. I don't have the company laptop upgraded, because win10 has not been tested with everything yet, so it's not approved across the domain at the moment.

They just applied the approach that browsers have to the OS. Now everyone is freaking out, which is largely legitimate, but it is hard to argue that there is not a non trivial positive result for everyone to standardize on a Windows platform if you use Windows.

In my experience, having installed Windows 10 on 7 computers so far, Windows 10 has been unstable and full of small bugs. From blue screens and freezes to missing drivers to blurry fonts to the File Explorer failing to open or taking a couple of minutes to open, there seem to be common bugs at all levels and not much movement on Microsoft's part to fix them. The design is opaque, with settings scattered between two quite separate areas (Control Panel and Settings), and the start menu is less functional than the one in Windows 7 (for example, the frequently used programs don't really seem to be your most frequently used programs, and the tiles are a waste of space and hard to organize). The upgrade advisor will recommend that you upgrade even on machines where crucial components will be missing drivers after the upgrade. In several cases the upgrade has taken me from a stable, functioning machine to an unstable machine with some non-functioning hardware. Windows 7, by contrast, has felt stable for years, and even Windows 8.1 felt more stable than Windows 10. Add the concerns about MS's spyware and it's not hard to see why users don't want to upgrade.

I would upgrade, if it wasnt for the extreme disregard for user privacy in windows 10. Basically you have to go through a mile long checklist just to get to what I would consider should be the default baseline(see https://fix10.isleaked.com/). I would rather pay for a non-spyware version of their product, than be the product.

> web development might have been a lot less annoying

That's not a concern most of the people resisting W10 have.

> I still don't really get why people would not want to upgrade.

For lots of people, Windows has been good enough since XP SP2. For those people, Windows 10 is better in ways that are mostly irrelevant to them and the benefits are less than the cost of changing. They use their computer for four things and that's about all they know or want to know about the computer. In other words, if it isn't broke, don't fix it.

I wish there was a universe where Microsoft just a version of their OS that is exactly like XP SP2, but with the latest security updates and a browser that from then on updates independently and Chrome-style. Most people I know who use Windows would happily use that OS. To be fair, my environment is Apple-heavy and most of these Windows users are of the "put all my stuff on the desktop because I don't understand folders" variety, but this is a pretty huge group, and I suspect, also the group most bothered by this upgrade evangelism.

EDIT: and that's not even getting into the privacy issues of Windows 10.

I'd be fine with a perpetually updating XP as well. For that matter Vista, W7, W8.1, or W10 are all fine. For me, operating systems are a solved problem. It's boring infrastructure (IMHO) for which I value stability and security over any new feature that has been added in a long, long time.

I'm glad Microsoft has decided to settle on W10 for the long haul. I just wish their LTS operating system were a little skinnier. I'd rather have things like Cortana be an installable (or at least removable) application rather than a core part of the OS. I don't want it or need it so for me, it's just using resources and lowering the security of my machine and network.

Exactly this for me.

I simply don't want to deal with new interfaces. I feel that Windows has reached its interface peak around Win7 and Office around version 2003. Everything since has been driven by the need to justify having a team which develops new interfaces for each platform.

Incidentally I feel the same way about OSX - I stopped upgrading my machine with 10.9.5. Don't like the new look and feel that there isn't anything worth upgrading to in the new version that will make me look at that candy-store like design all day long.

Will hold out as long as I can - probably until I get a new machine.

On that, the idea that Windows 10 is more secure is a fallacy. What Microsoft refers to when they say it is more secure is that Windows 10 supports Windows Store apps, which follow a similar model than iOS apps, limited access to local resources. But as most people know, the Windows Store is pretty much empty and the vast majority of the applications you will run on a Windows 10 machine will be the same applications you ran on a Windows 7 machine, particularly if you are using Windows 10 as a result of an automatic upgrade. The firewall is the same. The app model is the same. It's not "more secure". In fact because it has more new code, it also probably has more attack surface.

I'm super skeptical when a company claims their new product is more secure. That seems like something that only be determined with the passage of time.

Two control panels with settings scattered all over the OS, privacy invasion, in-OS advertising, frequent forced reboots, and more generally, inability to turn down future OS features. Keep in mind the "geniuses" who came up with Windows 10 are also the idiots who came up with Windows 8: contextual menu at the bottom of the screen, very very far from where the mouse is when it clicked, full screen everything (at the age of 4k monitors...why???), hiding the option to create local windows account behind several layers of non obvious opt-out buttons, etc. If these guys take the same moronic design decisions, they will flow through your OS update whether you like them or not. And if Microsoft wants to launch Candy Crush Soda on every start up, there might be nothing you can do to prevent it.

Fully and 100% agree. I've said as much before and I always get shouted down (on reddit, mostly, but sometimes here). You got my upboat.

> Two control panels with settings scattered all over the OS

I still don't understand this. What's the point of a UI refresh if you're going to do it really half-assed.

I have the feeling it is more half-baked than half-assed. I have no doubt they will unite them at one point. I just find surprising they would ship a half finished product like that, particularly given that it wouldn't take very long to an intern to redesign these few forms.

It's by far my biggest complaint. There are even issues where one control panel does one set of features and the settings window does a whole different set.

I also had a sticky problem where it was convinced I had a Canadian French keyboard even after deleting it from both keyboard control panels. I ended up having to solve that with a registry modification.

The new CP doesn't offer enough granularity to be fully useful. I'm guessing this was not addressed in time, so they threw in the classic CP to appease users.

My desktop was WinXP until I had to move and couldn't take it with me, because Vista and onwards were gimped, heavily, due to DRM (I didn't knew it was DRM-related until a month ago).

Vista removed 3D Sound Card support (because it could be used to circunvent HDMI audio DRM), and made many CRT features unusable to incentive people to use HDMI cable and DRM-supporting monitors (CRTs, because they are inherently analog, doesn't work with DRM at all).

Vista also doesn't supported parallel port properly (thus anyone using parallel port to contorl stepper motors, be it parallel-port scanners, CNC machines or hobby hardware had to stick with XP).

When I had to buy a laptop after moving, Linux-based machines were usually 120 USD more expensive, even when they had 100% identical hardware, I bought a Win8 laptop, wanting to replace WIn8 with Linux, but my laptop has buggy UEFI and even disabling Secure Boot it keeps preventing boot of anything that is not the OEM windows.

Win8 is terrible, and did something that REALLY annoyed me, upgraded to Win8.1 forcefully when I was busy, it just showed a dialog box written it was going to update now and reboot, and a "reboot" button, but no way to re-schedule, cancel, anything, not even a "X" (it showed a metro-style modal box, over my desktop environment).

When Win10 was announced, I liked what was described, and wanted it badly... but then I learned of the extremely hard to turn off telemetry and update policy, and other shady policies, and became suspicious of it, then MS started to nag people to install it, this made me not want it.

Then I had to install Win10 on some of my parents business computers... and then I learned how nightmare Win10 is.

1. On Win10, the only software some of the users use for e-mail, that is Windows Live Mail, doesn't work properly, MS even made an update in december that deliberately sabotaged it. (update, as you remember, install mostly mandatorily, specially if you don't have windows 10 enterprise, or a windows 10 server to control windows 10 pro with policy).

2. Win10 updates frequently break random shit, usually banking or tax related (my country is heavily moving toward online-only bureaucracy, and is also the world leader in bureaucracy amount...)

3. Printers randomly stop working on Win10, when they work fine on Win7.

4. Tested some games on my Win8.1 machine and Win10 machines, and older DirectX is very broken there, depending on your hardware the broken DX + Hardware combo make some games completely unplayable.

5. MS promised 3 or 4 years ago to fix the broken DX emulation, and has an employee in the official forums gathering all bug reports in a thread, but released not even a preliminary fix.

I had to build a new PC (the laptop was failing, and I couldn't use a WinXP era machine anymore...), since most new games doesn't work on WinXP anymore, then I finally installed Win7 for the first time...

Almost best Windows ever, so far (I installed Win7 a month ago, thus I don't used it much yet).

I am hoping Linux people will stop some desktop-user hostile behaviour and that Linux will be actually useable on desktop before Win10 become "mandatory" for hardware reasons, so I don't have to ever install it on my personal computer.

Of course, MS can attempt to get goodwill again by reversing all their crappy policies, but they did that (crap policy, reversing it, unreversing it) now so many times (example, launch Games for Windows + Xbox 360, that was terrible, kill it off, only to "relaunch" it in the form of Xbone + UWP + DX12 Win10 only) that I doubt I personally will trust them again.

The flip side of this is that much of the reason the internet is a dangerous place is because MS didn't force or even acknowledge the vast number of illegally obtained installs of older, unmaintained OSs.

Owning a network connected computer is something more than a consequence-free. Like car ownership, it affects the world around the owner in many ways.

As much as I find the approach crass and poorly explained, the world of allowing users to pass on updates for network security has to come to an end or the internet will continue to be an economic resource for criminals on a grand scale.

As frustrating as that is for your relative and as typical as it is that it passed the minimum resource check, I can't help but maintain two minds on the subject. Emissions laws are a good analogue. They do disproportionately affect the poor and are often poorly enforced on the rich, but maintaining and strengthening them is essential. I wish we had similar laws for network connected computers running commodity os's.

I appreciate your view. However, I think it may be a false dichotomy to say that the only way to keep Windows secure is to require updates that bring along privacy concerns, software and hardware incompatibilities, and radically different UIs.

Furthermore, we should also consider the responsibility that _Microsoft_ bears for releasing vulnerability-laden operating systems in addition to users who decline OS updates for the above-mentioned reasons.

The privacy co concerns are not specific to Microsoft, just fashionable to reference with them in this venue.

I see these upgrade policies as Microsoft taking responsibility. They're not inexpensive and do not help with consumer protection. But modulo messaging and fairness, it sorta has to be done.

Could have sworn that MS have done the exact opposite, by allowing any Windows install to get security patches.

It's hard to believe that the same company putting out such awesome stuff as the fully open-source .NET Core is also displaying nagware popups with "OK" buttons that can easily be accidentally clicked. Talk about dark patterns...

Even more amusing: My wife has an older Dell Precision laptop that, according to Dell's own website (and my own experience trying to upgrade it) cannot be upgraded to Windows 10. Yet, the upgrade icon is in the system tray. I've warned my wife to be aware of this nagware popup and to be careful about accidentally accepting the upgrade.

To Microsoft: Remove your invasive, difficult-if-not-impossible-to-disable telemetry and data-gathering services and you will eliminate perhaps the biggest reason to remain unupgraded. Until then, this nagware screen just throws fuel on the fire.

>It's hard to believe that the same company putting out such awesome stuff as the fully open-source .NET Core is also displaying nagware popups with "OK" buttons that can easily be accidentally clicked. Talk about dark patterns...

https://i.imgur.com/nfMeFm0.jpg

That was true once, but Microsoft has since been reorganised internally, IIRC.

It's a question of differing incentives, I think. Pushing open-source and aggressively trying to reduce fragmentation are not really contradictory.

That reorganization hasn't made it to all teams equally I'm quite sure.

The telemetry is what gets me about Windows 10... why do they need so damn much of it?

In days gone by it was a purely opt-in process for various applications at install time and their applications seem to have benefited from it (SQL, Visual Studio and so on) so why do they need to monitor the living daylights out of everything now? And why can it not just be opt-in?

I had been using Windows 7/8.1 for several years and decided to try 10... in the whole time I used 7/8.1 on my computer I had no issues at all. No crashes and everything just worked.

I had Windows 10 for 1 month and I had 3 blue screens. This was around Feb this year.

Uninstall!

Back to 8.1 with Stardock and cannot see any reason to upgrade.

I have "fixed" my neighbours's computers and my parents several times now with the Windows 10 stuff.

It's malware/adware plain and simple.

>And why can it not just be opt-in?

Right now, it is opt-out.

The reason it can't be opt-in is that basic users will never enable it. They want data on how the majority of the users (mentionned above) are using their OS to improve it for their use case.

I'm not saying I agree with it (I disabled every telemtry option there is), but I see their point.

Previous versions of Windows didn't require all this 'telemetry' and those operating systems did just fine without it. Why now all of a sudden it's this important? Pretty suspicious imo.

It's nice to know what's popular and what's largely unused; this helps Microsoft figure out where to allocate scarce engineer time for feature development and maintenance. You'd generally want them to fix the most common crashes and UI weirdnesses before fixing the uncommon ones, right?

Sure it's nice. Sending data to Microsoft is fine if and only if someone gives their informed consent to give that information (which includes a manifest of the exact information that will be logged and transmitted).

Microsoft isn't entitled to this information. Asking is fine, but tricking people with opt-out settings - which they know most people won't notice or understand - or simply exfiltrating data unasked or against the user's wishes is patently unethical. Stealing data like this should really be seen as the digital version of trespassing or larceny. Unfortunately, the law is slow to change and this isn't a crime.

"Legal" does not imply "moral" or "acceptable to society", and extrapolating your own opinions to other people is the "projection" fallacy.

Compared to web apps which have this * 1000000? Have you seen how many xhr tracking calls a SaaS product does to often dozens of different services?

I use NoScript and UBlock so I see that $hit all the time unfortunately but I have come to expect that with cloud-related stuff but we are talking about a stand alone product here... not some cloud-based scheduling app.

It should be my call whether I want to "improve" their product.

Block it on your firewall then? What's the difference?

Really? Is this what you have to do nowadays in order to just use your computer?

You sound like this is acceptable to you but what about my parents and neighbours and so on... should I tweak their firewalls?

What is M$ changes the URLS/IPs!

I am not in a position to boycott them and I don't know what the answer is except to not use Windows 10 but I know I can't use Windows 8.1 forever.

You don't have to disable it to use your computer.

You have to disable it if you don't want to be tracked.

It's malware compared to actual software applications. "Web apps" are, by definition, spyware.

> SaaS

Service As A Software Substitute[1] has always been about lock-in. It shouldn't be a surprise when developers that use an unethical, user-hostile business model also write spyware.

[1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-s...

Which is why most people who comment on HN confess using adblockers. Are you suggesting that because there is Ebola in africa, it is fine to introduce in the US? How does websites being infested with trackers justify introducing tracking inside the OS?

Shouldn't be hard to believe. Sure, theirnipen source projects viewed in isolation might give one a certain impression. But, when considering corporations one must consider the whole picture. One must "incorporate" all aspecta of behavior and structure. To this point I would point out their stewardship of Skype. Once a secure platform, no longer secure. Looking forward, consider their motivations for purchasing LinkedIn. Personal information. Direct relationship with the customer. Very much in linenwith their investment in Facebook. To Microsoft, the customer is just as much a resource as any of their employees.

These tactics kind of remind me of the Uber/Lyft vote in Austin: it reached the point where people didn’t even care what the companies wanted because the way they were over-spamming and aggressively campaigning was leaving a poor taste in everyone’s mouths.

At what point do people start auto-hating solely because of the way Windows 10 is being advertised: not wanting to upgrade, not wanting to learn more but simply wanting to make it all stop?

I still receive those spammy emails. And Sendgrid is fully in bed with them.

Forwarded spam to Sendgrid and they said they will follow up with Uber (so apparently they are Uber's customer support at this point - great!)

The spamming practice never changed or stopped despite Sendgrid telling me they will send my email to them (!!) to unsubscribe me from their list, when I didn't even subscribe in the first place.

As I received more Uber spam I kept updating Sendgrid ticked (zendesk). Eventually some 2 weeks later they closed it as "resolved" and never replied to my emails again. I still get Uber Spam from Sendgrid. Stay away from that piece of shit as long as you can!! (both Uber and Sendgrid)

PS. As of Uber, I copied all my emails and forwarded them to FCC. In short telephone conversation I was told I'm not the only one and as they have reached over 1,000 complaints in short period of time, they will be investigating both into Uber practices and also Sendgrid as an accomplice to their alleged crime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN-SPAM_Act_of_2003

The media is going far too easy on Microsoft. MS isn't just resorting to "adware tactics." This is adware.

We all go far too easy on companies doing shitty anti-customer things like this!

What the hell is wrong with Microsoft? It's like they have lost their mind with Windows 10.

Surely they're aware of how much they're pissing people off with stuff like this, it blows my mind that they're still doing it

And we know they read Hacker News...

They don't respect their customers, they're thinking only of the money that can be made by having hundreds of of millions of people on Windows 10.

Well at least they now give a "Do not notify me again" option, which they previously didn't even include in popups according to earlier reports.

Which probably turns the notifications off and schedules the update in the background anyway.

This is not unprecedented with big companies. Remember when Google set to convert every YouTube user to G+?

My theory is there's some internal incentive system set up, and the users suffer the ugly consequence of it. Am sure some people bonuses over there depend on quarterly user conversion rates.

Microsoft are determined to reduce fragmentation of the Windows install base and to get Windows 10 widely adopted, and will do whatever it takes to get there.

Their customers have few alternatives, and there's no future Windows versions, so Microsoft don't have to play fair.

There IS a simple solution, and it's not like they can stop providing updates for the old version anyway: just wait a few years !

I think there is a large and closing window of opportunity for new open-source advocacy in light of Windows 10. A very large number of people have been exposed to this: Windows 10 upgrades illustrate all the risks of leaving your infrastructure dependent on a single corporation. Messages could be broadcast pointing out how open-source systems might avoid or reduce these concerns.

The sheer aggression and fervor suggests ulterior motivations.

More so if you view them as a company that is normally less hostile (these days). Though I suspect these decisions are being made by a separate silo from the developer-friendly "new Microsoft" groups.

Why do they need an ulterior motive? They want a single, non-fragmented userbase running the latest software, so there's a simple platform for third-party developers and for Microsoft themselves. That's more than reason enough.

They can wish all they want for a unicorn; that doesn't mean they will get it. There will always be different versions of Windows in use (the same is true for browsers).

Anybody that thinks that fragmentation will ever go away needs to spend some time in the real world, which doesn't conform to a nice and simple abstraction.

That was the case, but it won't be now. Microsoft are not making a Windows 11. Slowly, but surely, Windows 10 will win, and it is an evergreen operating system.

Businesses get a special deal, they get to use the “current build for business”. But the future of Windows is like the versioning of Firefox and Chrome, not Internet Explorer.

It's not exactly unprecedented from them.

Contrary to others here I like the upgrade reminder:

- it looks good

- you can disable the update (the text in the left lower corner really is not hard to find)

- standardizing to up-to-date OS is a good thing (if the product is good, which, imho, Win10 is)

- it's not different to what my Mac or Chrome does

- (telemetrie etc. ... well, compared to what google and facebook gather, this is peanuts (and can be disabled))

> (telemetrie etc. ... well, compared to what google and facebook gather, this is peanuts (and can be disabled))

Only some can be disabled. The rest happens whether you want it to or not.

You can block it with a third party firewall though.

The screenshot their provide clearly shows there's a "Don't remind me again" option in the bottom corner. Put down the pitchforks.

That button actually installs Windows 10. So there is no need to remind you again. /joke

So, do we have evidence that we can actually joke about it and this is really not what that link does? That does sound very much like something they would do...

Actually, I find any “don’t remind me again” button in a pop-up message to be a sign of poor application design. In every case that I’ve seen one, the message was completely unnecessary in the first place. Instead, software should have better default settings, or be redesigned to avoid the message-spamming situation from the beginning.

Even the concept of a focus-stealing message is an anachronism. We saw it a lot in software from the 80s and 90s but those machines were not as powerful. Today, we know people have tons of stuff to do with their computers and that they are always multitasking; the idea that any single message could be considered important enough to stop the user from doing anything else is misguided.

If I turn on my computer, or wake it from sleep, or start working on it, I have stuff to do. If a message is going to demand my attention, it had better be saying “your laptop appears to be on fire” and not “Windows 10, oh please oh please!?”.

It's not a button, it's a link in a low-contrast colour. Designed not to be easily noticed by the casual user.

Meanwhile apple attempt to force me to upgrade by popping up my passcode screen when I unlock my phone to authorise an iOS upgrade to be performed overnight, and I don't see people complaining about that.

This is quite pathetic. In their desperate attempt to reach the 1 Billion mark to remain relevant they've started to emulate malware tactics. They should have learned by now that if people wanted Windows 10 they would have "downgraded" to it by now.

What are they going to do after the deadline? They'll still be dying for users to upgrade. No more nagging and a $95 charge, I doubt it.

... hence this push. They want people to get on board while it's still possible to convince them.

Well, yeah, or they'll announce that due to customer feedback, they have decided to allow upgrading for free for some more time.

Or the nagware to upgrade for free will turn into nagware to upgrade for money.

This won't happen if one has unchecked the "Give me recommended updates the same way I receive important updates" box, right?

Not sure, but I wouldn't count on it based on what I heard so far. I used a third party tool to remove any installers since I am far less confident than Microsoft that Windows 10 will run on my ancient, underpowered netbook.

Even though I don't approve these tactics I can predict that in a month's time when the free upgrade will no longer be available we'll be seeing the opposite news from people who "missed the free upgrade boat".

On that subject, wondering whether to upgrade mine, it seems if you upgrade to 10 and then revert to the old system, your license for 10 remains so you can upgrade again free anytime. I think.

thats true. if you update once and revert you can upgrade at any point later. I upgraded 6 PCs and none faced any issues I also have a PC on Insider builds and the changes in the update are very positive. Now I also have a colleague who upgraded his 2 year old laptop and his WiFi adaptor no longer works so he had to revert back. It its a gamble.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com