Hacker News Reader

Comment by Dalewyn | Hacker News Reader

>Ever tried installing a different browser on Win11 now?

Yes.

Running Windows 11, I use Chromium for my daily usage and Pale Moon for specific tasks, along with Edge for things I want to cordon in another browser altogether.

Windows 11 hasn't given me grief in my so far ~1.5 years of daily driving it, and I don't necessarily hold Edge's nagging against it since it's browsers catfighting each other. Chrome and Firefox also act likewise when given the chance.

I will note that I have Windows Update completely blocked and disabled via Group Policy, which means my system settings never get reset under the guise of "updates" every month unlike most people's setups. In fact, I'm still running 21H2, NT kernel version 10.0.22000.1281.

Windows 11 is quite well behaved if the administrator actually wields his administrative powers, as it turns out.

View on HN

IMHO, I haven't tried Windows 11 yet but having to disable system updates for being able to preserve user configuration says all I need to know about the quality and moral behind that OS. Also, with the due respect, unless you have other measures in place for covering security, I think disabiling system updates is a terrible choice from a user perspective.

The only attack surface I care about are web browsers thanks to JavaShit becoming a practical necessity, but fortunately those are much simpler to update compared to an entire operating system. Even Edge keeps itself updated since it handles its updates separately from Windows Update.

Everyone's threat models are different, mine simply doesn't care about most system-level vulnerabilities. I have had far more of my time and nerves wasted in the past by Windows Update compared to the supposed threats those updates protect against; the cure is worse than the disease.

>I will note that I have Windows Update completely blocked and disabled via Group Policy, which means my system settings never get reset under the guise of "updates" every month unlike most people's setups. In fact, I'm still running 21H2, NT kernel version 10.0.22000.1281.

What is your plan here? Do you manually update after some time, or do you plan on running that version until you reinstall Windows 11? Do you reinstall with an updated ISO?

I update when I feel like the endeavour is worth doing (eg: specific kernel or DirectX updates I want/need) and I can allocate sufficient time and energy to address inevitable downtimes stemming from borkages and unwanted setting resets.

Generally I don't reinstall Windows as I don't mistreat my Windows installations. As we speak, I've got a 15-year old XP install and an 11-year old Windows 7 install running perfectly fine on their machines (a Pentium 4 and i7-2700K machine respectively).

How is disabling OS updates a sensible decision?

It gives me a known, unchanging environment that I can rely on to serve my needs day in and day out. My computers are tools, and the operating system is subservient to its administrator who is absolutely not Microsoft. I do not appreciate my computers reinstalling their operating systems every damn week without my knowledge nor permission.

Been working this way since Windows Update has been a thing, and I've never been let down. Judging by the many tales of people getting grief from Windows Update, I'm perfectly content to continue as I have. I will run system updates when it pleases me, and no sooner.

>My computers are tools, and the operating system is subservient to its administrator who is absolutely not Microsoft.

And you think this administrator is you rather than some botnet master taking advantage of your unpatched system? :-)

That Microsoft refuses to separate security updates from feature updates, so they can treat regular users as beta testers (and worse), is not your parent's fault. Your gripe is with the wrong party here.

I wouldn't say that. If party A creates a problem for party B, does that mean I have to agree with every possible response from party B? Can I not disagree with both of them?

Potentially letting criminals control my machine in order to avoid giving slightly more control over my machine to Microsoft than they already have seems like the wrong choice to me.

If I was so concerned about Microsoft's updates that I would even consider this option, I would be urgently looking to replace Microsoft as my OS vendor. And if that wasn't an option (because lock-in) I would hold my nose and choose Microsoft over organised crime.

Considering there is no such traffic seen: No. :P

What locks you in to windows? Programs? Corporate compliance? Familiarity?

>Programs?

Yup. I use my computer to achieve things, whether extraordinary or mundane. I could run most of my software through WINE or some form of virtualization on Linux, but at the cost of jank. Why would I bother with inferior experience for sake of dogma? It's not even all my software either.

>Corporate compliance?

While compliance doesn't apply in my case, doing business dictates my computer be generally compatible with the other party's computer. So that means Windows and Office.

>Familiarity?

Yup. Windows is reliable, MacOS is limited and Linux just wastes my time.

1. Bigger battery life 2. Decent PDF reader such as STDU, music player such as foobar2000 - if running all of these under Wine the battery life is going to become even less 3. If the computer is not needed to be connected to the Internets even occationally, there is no better option than W7.

> if running all of these under Wine the battery life is going to become even less

Citation? Running a Wineserver should use less resources than a complete Win32 runtime.

In my experience, even a 'light' linux distro isn't optimized enough to match Win or osx battery life on the same hardware.

Maybe things have changed since my last test (Ubuntu on my ~2011 MBA installed ~12mo ago)

Frankly, I think that's more of a Linux problem than a Wine one. You're right that Linux is overall worse at power management than OSX or Windows, but Wine itself is extremely light on any OS it supports. On a resource-constrained machine (eg. >2gb RAM), I'd imagine that Wine would be less resource-intensive than native modern Windows would.

That is quite frankly horrible advice.

> I have Windows Update completely blocked and disabled via Group Policy, which means my system settings never get reset under the guise of "updates" every month unlike most people's setups

That sound unhinged... “so I we handcuffed our manager in my dungeon last year, and since the team has been doing great work; frankly our boss is quite well-behaved if the scrum master actually wields their power”

> I will note that I have Windows Update completely blocked and disabled via Group Policy, which means my system settings never get reset under the guise of "updates" every month unlike most people's setups.

Better to use a long term servicing channel (LTSC) than disable Windows Update entirely.

The LTSC versions of Windows only get security updates, not feature updates.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com