Hacker News Reader

Comment by vageli | Hacker News Reader

> I can delay updates for a while but if we're talking about a 'home' OS... updates should happen eventually. There are good security reasons for that.

You can delay them for a while. Is that the control you alluded to in the above comment? That doesn't sound like much control over anything, if anything it's just a temporary delay of the inevitable.

View on HN

I can delay (for a long while last time I did it, I don't recall getting forced anytime in the past few years) and do what I generally need to.

If the requirement is to run for month(s) without updates, I suspect a 'home' OS was the wrong choice.

I think for your typical home user required updates with the option to delay is very reasonable.

The scale of bad bot activity out there would be tremendous without requiring updates. We see enough security discussion oh HN to make that clear.

The best solution I've found so far is setting your internet as a metered connection, then telling windows not to update over a metered connection. The OS complains every time you boot up, but thats a small price to pay for control over when an update is installed.

I've resorted to using a third-party tool that periodically updates the Active Hours setting, so that Windows will never decide that my desktop has been idle long enough for it to be okay to install updates, reboot, and dump all the stuff that I have open. That way I can apply updates when it is convenient, and cuts down considerably on the swearing when I come in on a Monday morning.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com