I don’t like Windows, but at the point where the laptop updates automatically hasn’t it been bugging you about the update for hours or even days? I generally file complaints about bad update timings in the “fucked around and found out” folder
Honestly I don’t even remember, this was a long time ago, but if I recall the shitass Dell computer I was given had an SSD that repeatedly disconnected and required a forced reboot. Updates were managed automatically by the org so I don’t think I was ever prompted to update during my short time there. When I powered the shitter on Windows decided it was apparently a good time to update.
I mean, shouldn’t you be able to refuse updates anyway ? Like if there is something you don’t like or that will break your workflow in the update, shouldn’t you be able to accept the risks and keep the old version indefinitely ?
No, not on a business owned device. The updates should give warnings, of course. Some companies don’t seem to know how to supply those warnings before mandating the install, for some reason.
It doesn’t require „newest technology” (or Intune;)), you could send sensible notifications with SCCM 2007. Not that people would read or act upon them. Some of them would obviously complain there were no notifications (because they simply ignored them and forgot about it) :D
My company uses a third-party deployment platform that gives you dialog with a 60 minute countdown and a button to start immediately. And I think the deployment dialog can’t pop up if you’re not on the computer. Because nobody likes nonsense like five minute countdowns that can start while the screen is locked.
Companies lock out the computer because it is lacking updates rather than have it working. Apple broke ssh on all their macs with an update for three months or so. Managed to postpone it for a while until the called and said I have to update or be locked out. Luckily I had postponed it for so long that the next update arrived just like a week later.
A personal laptop of an employee is a very good entrypoint for an attacker. First thing you do is log in to your job. It may be a vpn, a site login, some token gets stored on your computer for the day. If someone gets access to this, it can be devastating. So, if a vulnerability gets discovered and patched by the OS, it can be very important to update as soon as possible. So companies scan their empoyees laptops, is one thing, and if the try to connect they also try to check that the computer appears up to date, is known, and so on.
Do they really imperatively need to be compliant ? (i genuinely don’t know, but it seems weird to me, it feels like i can just postpone updates indefinitely on linux)
Or is this that it’s way better to be compliant, so companies need to enforce it on their computers (but individuals may not have this need) ?
You can postpone them but it’s a risk. Companies try to mitigate risks, because they don’t want to get hacked or fined because they don’t follow regulation. And to be honest it’s in your best interest to be up to date too. It’s not such a pain in the ass to reboot your computer every once in a while :)
Updating is not as much PITA as you think they are, and it’s worth doing it. Obviously nothing will protect you fully, but the more frequently you update l, the safer you are.
I don’t like Windows, but at the point where the laptop updates automatically hasn’t it been bugging you about the update for hours or even days? I generally file complaints about bad update timings in the “fucked around and found out” folder
Honestly I don’t even remember, this was a long time ago, but if I recall the shitass Dell computer I was given had an SSD that repeatedly disconnected and required a forced reboot. Updates were managed automatically by the org so I don’t think I was ever prompted to update during my short time there. When I powered the shitter on Windows decided it was apparently a good time to update.
I mean, shouldn’t you be able to refuse updates anyway ? Like if there is something you don’t like or that will break your workflow in the update, shouldn’t you be able to accept the risks and keep the old version indefinitely ?
Edit : a word was missing.
No, not on a business owned device. The updates should give warnings, of course. Some companies don’t seem to know how to supply those warnings before mandating the install, for some reason.
The admins are not InTune with the latest technology
It doesn’t require „newest technology” (or Intune;)), you could send sensible notifications with SCCM 2007. Not that people would read or act upon them. Some of them would obviously complain there were no notifications (because they simply ignored them and forgot about it) :D
My company uses a third-party deployment platform that gives you dialog with a 60 minute countdown and a button to start immediately. And I think the deployment dialog can’t pop up if you’re not on the computer. Because nobody likes nonsense like five minute countdowns that can start while the screen is locked.
Companies lock out the computer because it is lacking updates rather than have it working. Apple broke ssh on all their macs with an update for three months or so. Managed to postpone it for a while until the called and said I have to update or be locked out. Luckily I had postponed it for so long that the next update arrived just like a week later.
When you say “companies”, do you mean Apple/Microsoft or the company you’re working for/with ?
I meant the one you are working for
Okay, i see, i’m not that familiar with tech companies. I wouldn’t have guessed they’d be that aware of what version of OS people are using.
A personal laptop of an employee is a very good entrypoint for an attacker. First thing you do is log in to your job. It may be a vpn, a site login, some token gets stored on your computer for the day. If someone gets access to this, it can be devastating. So, if a vulnerability gets discovered and patched by the OS, it can be very important to update as soon as possible. So companies scan their empoyees laptops, is one thing, and if the try to connect they also try to check that the computer appears up to date, is known, and so on.
No, because devices need to be compliant, there needs to be an unskipable deadline. Otherwise everyone would just defer.
Do they really imperatively need to be compliant ? (i genuinely don’t know, but it seems weird to me, it feels like i can just postpone updates indefinitely on linux)
Or is this that it’s way better to be compliant, so companies need to enforce it on their computers (but individuals may not have this need) ?
You can postpone them but it’s a risk. Companies try to mitigate risks, because they don’t want to get hacked or fined because they don’t follow regulation. And to be honest it’s in your best interest to be up to date too. It’s not such a pain in the ass to reboot your computer every once in a while :)
Plus, he is on Linux. It would take him all of 5 minutes to update on the slowest of hardware.
As long as he’s not using Gentoo with ebuilds (which I’m 99% positive he isn’t);)
Both of you are spot on, updates are blazing fast, and i’m clearly not on Gentoo x) thx for the explanation, its clearer for me now
Updating is not as much PITA as you think they are, and it’s worth doing it. Obviously nothing will protect you fully, but the more frequently you update l, the safer you are.
nope. it can just come out of nowhere sometimes.
Not in the EU region lol
Still, though, I prefer an OS where I can fuck around in that regard and not find out.