I thought some of the older ones, like 2000, were more secure, with ability to access on-chip security features. So ofc they threw all that out in favor of 10, the final OS that would come as a subscription service, meaning that you’d never need to buy one again. And then they threw that out too, in favor of the next one… and on and on it goes:-P.
Never said it was user friendly, just pointed out it’s an option that exists. And it’s a good thing that this isn’t user friendly tbh, you dont want to run Windows without updates, if you care that much, just use Linux.
Atleayt they should make the setting to enter a slower updating channel user friendly. That’s how I used before, with slower updated channel and deffering feature updates for a year and making security updates install on saturday’s when I don’t have to use my pc for productive tasks.
They do, you can opt-out if you want, but you don’t, unless you like malware. Windows is just an unsafe proprietary mess of a system. :-P
I thought some of the older ones, like 2000, were more secure, with ability to access on-chip security features. So ofc they threw all that out in favor of 10, the final OS that would come as a subscription service, meaning that you’d never need to buy one again. And then they threw that out too, in favor of the next one… and on and on it goes:-P.
I absolutely hate Windows:-(.
Only way to opt out or chanhe the settings to be better isby either policy edutor or registry editing, both not user frkendly.
Never said it was user friendly, just pointed out it’s an option that exists. And it’s a good thing that this isn’t user friendly tbh, you dont want to run Windows without updates, if you care that much, just use Linux.
Atleayt they should make the setting to enter a slower updating channel user friendly. That’s how I used before, with slower updated channel and deffering feature updates for a year and making security updates install on saturday’s when I don’t have to use my pc for productive tasks.