On 2019-05-06 01:32, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
> We've got a lot of very reasonable, level-headed Linux folk on this board:

lubuntu [1] would be an alternative to Ubuntu. It's within the same family. It has a more traditional UI, like Ubuntu had before.

[1] https://lubuntu.net

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 5/5/2019 4:32 PM, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
> Installing updates...you may as well go watch an entire series on Netflix 'cause you ain't packing up your laptop *or* getting any emails sent anytime soon...

I learned to fire up my laptop some time before giving the presentation.

I've also had many overnight jobs fail because Windows forcibly rebooted to install updates.

On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 05:01:58PM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 5/5/2019 4:32 PM, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
> > Installing updates...you may as well go watch an entire series on Netflix 'cause you ain't packing up your laptop *or* getting any emails sent anytime soon...
> 
> I learned to fire up my laptop some time before giving the presentation.
> 
> I've also had many overnight jobs fail because Windows forcibly rebooted to install updates.

Am I the only one who thinks this is completely ridiculous, and a shame to our industry, that users have to put up with this kind of nonsense?

I mean, with all the talk about user-friendly UI's and designing programs with UI in mind, one would think *somebody* on the Windows team should have stepped back, realized what an insane nightmare of a user experience this kind of behaviour is, and piped up about finding a different way of doing things.  What's the use of all that GUI eye-candy when the *actual* user experience is this horrible??


T

-- 
Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? Who knows? Who cares? -- Erich Schubert

On 5/6/19 8:15 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> 
> Am I the only one who thinks this is completely ridiculous, and a shame
> to our industry, that users have to put up with this kind of nonsense?

*raises hand* Me too.

I think users mostly just accept it because for 90% of people, any problems they face from Windows are just:

"Well, that's just how computers are, right? That's why I don't like computers and usually use a phone or tablet instead."

(Note, that *right there* was the *true* genius of the iPhone - it wasn't the touchscreen or pinch-zoom or aesthetic or any of that nonsense about it being "easy to use" - it was that fact that Jobs managed to get everybody to believe it wasn't really a "computer", it was a "telephone".)

> I mean, with all the talk about user-friendly UI's and designing
> programs with UI in mind, one would think *somebody* on the Windows team
> should have stepped back, realized what an insane nightmare of a user
> experience this kind of behaviour is, and piped up about finding a
> different way of doing things.

Yup, seriously. Makes you wonder just what's going on over there. Not enough workforce because everyone left for Google or Facebook?

> What's the use of all that GUI eye-candy
> when the *actual* user experience is this horrible??

Eye-candy on Windows? Metro? Eye-candy? Whhaaa...???

Eye-cancer perhaps...

On Tuesday, 7 May 2019 at 00:52:38 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
> On 5/6/19 8:15 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>> 
>> Am I the only one who thinks this is completely ridiculous, and a shame
>> to our industry, that users have to put up with this kind of nonsense?
>
> *raises hand* Me too.

ditto.

I am a bit of a Windows fan in many ways, and some of the new stuff they are doing is legitimately cool. But the new update and antivirus policies are actually driving me away.

Don't try to do a public presentation on a Windows box. It knows it is hooked to a projector and decides now is the time for a mandatory update. Ugh.

And don't start to like a built-in program, an auto update will uninsall it later. Ridiculous.

On Monday, May 6, 2019 6:15:07 PM MDT H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 05:01:58PM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> > On 5/5/2019 4:32 PM, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
> > > Installing updates...you may as well go watch an entire series on Netflix 'cause you ain't packing up your laptop *or* getting any emails sent anytime soon...
> >
> > I learned to fire up my laptop some time before giving the presentation.
> >
> > I've also had many overnight jobs fail because Windows forcibly rebooted to install updates.
>
> Am I the only one who thinks this is completely ridiculous, and a shame to our industry, that users have to put up with this kind of nonsense?
>
> I mean, with all the talk about user-friendly UI's and designing programs with UI in mind, one would think *somebody* on the Windows team should have stepped back, realized what an insane nightmare of a user experience this kind of behaviour is, and piped up about finding a different way of doing things.  What's the use of all that GUI eye-candy when the *actual* user experience is this horrible??

It seems to be that their current approach is their response to the problem that tons of people don't bother to update Windows (or actively avoid it), and they're sick of all of the fallout that comes from that - including Windows getting a bad rep for security issues than already have been fixed. And I can certainly sympathize with that, though as a power user, I don't like losing control over when and how my system updates, and they don't seem to have managed to go about things in a way that forces people to keep their systems up-to-date without causing problems. And I don't know how solvable that problem is. As a power user though, it's one more reason to avoid using Windows when I can.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Monday, 6 May 2019 at 17:01:21 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
>
> - The LTSes are still, what, 3 or so years IIRC? I'm figuring her next machine will probably last her about another decade, so that's well beyond that. So what's the LTS-to-LTS upgrade process like? Is it basically an OS re-install like upgrading Windows traditionally is? Or is it as simple/transparent/painless as 'Uknown' describes Ubuntu's regular day-to-day update process to be?
>

Yep, 3 years I think, but recently some of them are 5 years.

dunno about LTS->LTS updates, but regular to regular is as simple as
  - install all available updates (having all updates is a requirement, it just doesn't show that upgrade available otherwise)
  - click update distro in the same window (what is really sucks it doesn't show any progress, or i'm blind?)
      *or*
    sudo apt-get update
    sudo apt-get dist-upgrade

I don't remember if reboot necessary immediately after upgrade.
LTS to regular migration is also possible, can't say the exact steps but you only need to mark that you are willing to get "unstable" updates and do upgrade.

Updates will show small window on start up showing estimated download size (last few times it was just about 50mb for me, most of it are kernel stuff and libc), you can close it and do it later from updates app, or install immediately. Usually no reboot needed and it takes just few minutes.

You can certainly put some older LTS on VM and see how it works for yourself. Having fast net connection this shouldn't take much time, an hour or two is probably enough to test the process.

On 5/6/2019 5:15 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> Am I the only one who thinks this is completely ridiculous, and a shame
> to our industry, that users have to put up with this kind of nonsense?

Heck, it would be so much better if it installed updated on shutdown, not startup!

The same goes for Ubuntu Linux, btw. When I log into Ubuntu, I want to do something now, not wait for 10 minutes clicking Ok, Yes, Install, Ok, ...

On 5/6/2019 6:19 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> Don't try to do a public presentation on a Windows box. It knows it is hooked to a projector and decides now is the time for a mandatory update. Ugh.

BTW, I carry another copy of my presentation on a USB stick. It has saved my presentation several times :-)

I also emailed a copy of it to Mike Parker just to be sure!

On 5/6/19 11:02 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> 
> It seems to be that their current approach is their response to the problem
> that tons of people don't bother to update Windows (or actively avoid it),
> and they're sick of all of the fallout that comes from that - including
> Windows getting a bad rep for security issues than already have been fixed.

I'll definitely agree with this. However...

> they don't seem
> to have managed to go about things in a way that forces people to keep their
> systems up-to-date without causing problems. And I don't know how solvable
> that problem is. 

It's entirely solvable. And conceptually speaking, not too difficult, either. Things like Nix, 0install, Arch, and probably most Linux distros at this point, all prove that quite conclusively (their only flaws in this regard are merely implementation and UI flaws, nothing theoretical or otherwise fundamental).

All it really boils down to is:
1. Download/extract data to a new location.
2. Update the links, preferably atomically.
3. Have at the new data.
4. Don't go out of your way to add in things that people obviously don't want, like resetting their preference to disable cortana, knowingly add new vectors of directly invading their privacy, force-installing Win10 on Win7 users, random UI rearranging, and other such suit-and-arse-driven folleys that only serve to give people *more* reason to kill updates with napalm and hellfire.

The mere fact that MS has spent so many years failing at these basics so incredibly badly (I imagine legacy has a lot to do with #1-3, though not #4) is the ONLY reason anyone even suspects that there might be something fundamentally difficult about it (which, again, there just isn't, as other systems and package managers clearly demonstrate...at least, to the minority of users familiar with non-Windows desktops/laptops).