Simplified Windows Update settings for end users in Windows 10 v2004

VBF said:

Not just me then! I read it several times too, and it appears backwards to me! If you defer updates for 365 days how the **** can it install a new feature update every 6 months?

It defers each update for 360 days so if there are two updates a year you will still continue to get two updates but they will each be a year late. This means that the frequency of updates is not changed, just shifted in time. With the new setup you can simply not install updates until your current version goes eol.

At least that's how I interpret it.

bobfrost said:

Well, I ran update Assistant on 4 different computers - two laptops and two desktops - and on one it installed 2004 without any problems. On the others it ran until it came to an incompatible driver and stopped. The Stop screen showed the file that was incompatible, and then reverted to 1909 without any problem. That allowed me to delete/rename the offending driver, and run the Update Assistant again. On one machine it found two more incompatible drivers, which I deleted, and reran update assistant after it reverted to 1909, on the other it ran without finding any more problems. So four computer updated to 2004 and Update Assistant DID tell me what the problem was. Have you tried it?

Bob Frost

Ah, really? If update assistant can tell you that it is an incompatible driver that's blocking the update, then they can implement that in Windows Update aswell if you ask me. I'll wait until much later this year to update anyway because of all the issues with it, but my point is that windows update is not really that transparent as Microsoft is letting out.

kado897 said:

It defers each update for 360 days so if there are two updates a year you will still continue to get two updates but they will each be a year late. This means that the frequency of updates is not changed, just shifted in time. With the new setup you can simply not install updates until your current version goes eol.

At least that's how I interpret it.

With respect I still don't see how that equates to ".....will install a new feature update every six months, twice as often as an end user who has not configured any settings."

Taking that literally, the frequency has changed, hence the "twice as often"

VBF said:

With respect I still don't see how that equates to ".....will install a new feature update every six months, twice as often as an end user who has not configured any settings."

Taking that literally, the frequency has changed, hence the "twice as often"

Each update is delayed for 360 days but no updates are missed out completely so there is a gap of 360 days then the first update is applied. Six months go by and the second update reaches it's 360 days delay and so is applied and so on ad infinitum, The only effect is an overall delay of 360 days in applying the updates. The frequency after the initial delay is not changed.

Does that make sense?

kado897 said:

Each update is delayed for 360 days but no updates are missed out completely so there is a gap of 360 days then the first update is applied. Six months go by and the second update reaches it's 360 days delay and so is applied and so on ad infinitum, The only effect is an overall delay of 360 days in applying the updates. The frequency after the initial delay is not changed.

Does that make sense?

Actually, yes it does thanks. 👍

So if I interpret your explanation as to what actually occurs, it's basically just another way of deferring updates - right?

However......where I disagree is with the "the official line" that includes the phrase:

"will install a new feature update every six months, twice as often as an end user who has not configured any settings."

That "twice as often" most certainly implies a change in frequency. Would you not agree?

Best just assume either the author changed thinking mid-sentence or expressed one thought, changed it and didn't edit correctly, and accept as stated the statement is logically inconsistent. I think we understand what will happen. Probably.

VBF said:

Actually, yes it does thanks. 

So if I interpret your explanation as to what actually occurs, it's basically just another way of deferring updates - right?

However......where I disagree is with the "the official line" that includes the phrase:

"will install a new feature update every six months, twice as often as an end user who has not configured any settings."

That "twice as often" most certainly implies a change in frequency. Would you not agree?

Have to admit I don't understand that bit. I suppose they mean that if you don't do anything you will only be forced to update approaching eol but I thought that was 18 months for us plebs. Ho hum!.

Thinking about it if eol is 18 months then you would be force updated to the version previous so you would lose almost six months that had been out so 12 months would not be far out.

kado897 said:

Have to admit I don't understand that bit. I suppose they mean that if you don't do anything you will only be forced to update approaching eol but I thought that was 18 months for us plebs. Ho hum!.

Thinking about it if eol is 18 months then you would be force updated to the version previous so you would lose almost six months that had been out so 12 months would not be far out.

Aw, come on....just when I thought I understood it!

I quite like what @dalchina said in #17...it's definitely a probably........well maybe!

Seriously though, I guess we'll wait and see (as they'll probably (!!!) change it anyway), but it does make one wonder how an organisation the size of MS can create so much FUD with so little effort.

Still, I suppose we must all do what we're best at