Post by Bayer A.User on Mar 10, 2016 16:22:36 GMT -6
Here we go again with the sneaky ass KB's courtesy of MSFT & WU ! Credit to JrMoffett for posting the link
This past update tuesday, marked important security-box pre checked. KB 313 9926 cumulative security for iex11 " patch for remote code vulnerabilities" Burried down deep inside out of sight was KB 314 6449 After some digging i found that this added to iex11 additional capabilities to "provide info & Download/upgrade to 10"
Post by Locutus deBorg on Mar 12, 2016 8:31:02 GMT -6
I have a need to scream at MS
this 6 hours per update cycle of svchost 100% CPU in win 7 is getting old fast
3 hours each side of installing updates is ridiculous power on, wait 3+ hours for svchost.exe to finish its CPU Abuse install update(s), restart or not, wait another 3+ hours for the same CPU Abuse to complete if there are more updates, repeat ad nauseam ad infinitum until all crapdates are either hidden or installed
even though the icon is showing : new updates are available they fail to install even if it's only one if I don't wait for svchost.exe to finish it's BS re-checking the installed updates, superseded, not installed yet, and hidden updates lists
and my poor old socket 478 PentiumD vista machine it's almost 5 hours on each side of installing updates good thing that ends in less than 13 months
really !?, this BS started in XP and they only sort of patched it for XP XP still does it, but it's much quicker than it used to be, instead of taking all day and night, the max I've seen it take now is about 1 - 2 hours on ancient hardware but only once on the first check for and download of updates it's about 5 hours for Server 2003 on the first check for updates on low spec. hardware
the vista, win 7, and win ape update that's supposed to fix this doesn't fix it for those OS versions
the system is not 100% stable while this svchost.exe is hogging like this and every action starts the whole thing over again eg. if you're looking at the updates list and see one that needs a good slap in the head to not be installed, as soon as you select hide, the whole 3 hours long process of checking the lists starts over again running 1 core at 100% CPU Utilization
not impressed with those clowns who can't get updating right, what makes them think that I want this forced on me every month in winders tentanic plus the "emergency out of band" updates that need to hose your productivity at the very instant you power up your system
I wouldn't be doing the crapdates at all if I didn't have some friends who don't have a clue and would get hosed by tentanic if they were on auto
I left them a little scream in the feedback section on the last KB3035583 (get winders tentanic app)
(ö) No this article is not helpful " > When I hide this once, I do not want it offered again Ever ! > stop sending this update after it's been hidden > None of my systems are compatible with win 10 > None of my programs are compatible with win 10 > The way I use MY PC is not compatible with win 10 "
so my strategy is going to be to flip out at them on every update feedback page relating to win tentanic
Last Edit: Mar 12, 2016 8:32:32 GMT -6 by Locutus deBorg: text
I find the lack of configuration options disturbing !
I felt a great disturbance in the force.. as if millions of win 7 systems suddenly cried out in terror.
Post by Bayer A.User on Mar 12, 2016 10:51:40 GMT -6
I agree Locutus. support.microsoft.com gets an earful from me everytime they ask "was this article helpful ?"
The WU lockup- Vista,Win7 seems to be even more belligerent when the machine has been offline for a while. Machines that are used daily online and sit idle overnight respond almost immediately to checks for updates even on less than spectacular internet. I noticed it over a year ago.
KB 303 5583 is like VD, no matter how much penicillin you take it always comes back.
this 6 hours per update cycle of svchost 100% CPU in win 7 is getting old fast
Why do you feel a need to go through such a cycle? What is it they're doing that you want to have on your systems?
Do you feel that their "security" patches are necessary? If so, I suggest you may not be doing all you should be to protect yourself (or whomever you're managing computers for) from bad things.
It's pretty clear they've screwed up Windows Update resource usage on purpose to frustrate users of older systems. There's nothing a Windows Update process could possibly need to go through that's so compute-intensive!
A philosophy of "If it works, don't fix it" is reasonable to consider in light of today's Microsoft... Been there myself since last year...
-Noel
Author of the "How to Configure the 'To Work' Options" series of Windows books. Not feeling enough love to do one for Windows 10.
I was experiencing the exact same problem on my Windows 7 before I had to rebuild my system almost a year ago now. I made sure automatic updates was turned off when all was said and done. SP-1 was installed manually along with anything else I needed after that. My Win7 system has been running very nicely ever since. I'm no longer stuck waiting for that resource hogging svchost.exe thing to finish up whatever it is not supposed to be doing.
Post by Locutus deBorg on Mar 12, 2016 13:00:12 GMT -6
it's sad and sickening when a P-IV 2GHz single core Socket 478 system with 1 - 2GB of DDR400 or slower or a single Core Athlon
can enumerate all the available XP updates in less than 2 hours and be completed the installation of all 160 updates in the same day doing only 3 at a time starting from the bottom of the list
but to install one update on win vista, 7, or ape.x requires 6 or more hours of it enumerating all the different stages of updates previously hidden newly hidden (as in this round of updates got one or more hidden) previously installed not downloaded or installed downloaded but not installed superseded etc.
XP does it once and only once and then after each update round it checks its internal list in the $hf_mig$ which takes all of a few seconds
but noooooo! vista and up have to hide all this crap in winSxS as multiple billions of copies of the same garbage yup CBS was and still is a joke there was nothing wrong with the old XP update installation method
for those I'm helping out I do have them shut winders update off for now I've had them shut off since the first time that winders tentanic AIDS virus KB3035583 appeared had to remove it twice from one system for that system I changed WUAU to NEVER CHECK FOR UPDATES and turned off update monitoring in action center
ooooh sooo mad
I'm a "security nut" so I'm somewhat expected to be on top of this garbage but it's becoming an über nightmare
I find the lack of configuration options disturbing !
I felt a great disturbance in the force.. as if millions of win 7 systems suddenly cried out in terror.
You're lucky. I've got machines in all the time that don't finish in 3–6 hours, that were brought in precisely because they were running really slow due to all that CPU and RAM usage. I've ended up using WSUS Offline Update to bring them up to date, after which Windows Update finally starts working again. I have to do this on every single Vista/7 machine I reload, and on a good percentage of machines coming into the shop. This has been going on since right about when Windows 10 was released. It's a royal pain!
Last Edit: Mar 12, 2016 20:54:13 GMT -6 by Techie007
Microsoft, is Windows 10 the best you could do? Really? After promising to listen to our feedback, what a letdown!
You're lucky. I've got machines in all the time that don't finish in 3–6 hours, that were brought in precisely because they were running really slow due to all that CPU and RAM usage. I've ended up using WSUS Offline Update to bring them up to date, after which Windows Update finally starts working again. I have to do this on every single machine I reload, and on a good percentage of machines coming into the shop. This has been going on since right about when Windows 10 was released. It's a royal pain!
For what it's worth, here's what i know. Even a Vista/win7 machine thats been offline only 3days to a month will have this problem if WU check for updates is run shortly after startup. WU checking for updates can only be stopped by a restart or wuaserv stop command. Does not seem to matter how out of date the OS is. Seen this consistently on Basic,Home,Premium,Business,Pro - 32 0r 64 bit versions.
Also, while WU seems to be frozen Checking for updates-MSE will do the same thing taking hours to find and dwnld a single definition update.
Last Edit: Mar 12, 2016 15:10:46 GMT -6 by Bayer A.User
The security FUD machine would have us believe that the instant (OMG, zero day!) the world learns that there WAS a vulnerability we'll all be hammered with attempts to break into our systems. And those who are not patched are vulnerable! How people hate to think they're vulnerable!!
The reality is that there was risk, there is risk, and there will be risk, but it's actually manageable.
It's been a long-term grooming for all of us to find it difficult to eschew updates - and thus Microsoft's control. Frankly, I HAVE found it difficult to come to grips with dropping off the update cycle. On the other hand my two Windows systems have been problem free, running on their current bootups for 48 and 87 days now. Nothing convinces of success like actual success itself.
I don't know about you, but employing several techniques, not least of which is THINKING, I haven't seen any evidence that malware has even come into my neighborhood here, much less knocked on my doors, as far back as I can remember. I don't even run active AV software any more, save for daily scans. Not surprisingly, nothing is ever found, and I get the benefit of 100.0% of my resources going to the work I need done.
There comes a point where the decision NOT to follow Microsoft needs to be total and complete. Like Mike says, if you're running Windows 8 or earlier, just don't look back.
Of course, a whole different set of conditions apply for those choosing to run a Windows 10 system. It would be silly NOT to keep up with updates on those systems, although even there they should be applied on the schedule of the user, NOT when Microsoft whims it.
Post by Bayer A.User on Mar 13, 2016 16:17:11 GMT -6
By 1-14-2020 we all will go cold turkey with 7 Anything can happen in the next 4years.
I've always said, If i didn't experience it myself then how would i know. Keeping an eye on the updates means knowing for myself what is really going on. I won't need to ask anyone.I'll know for a fact if MSFT will stoop any lower than they have,already.
A new wrinkle... I was just going over my firewall log and I see that early this morning my Win 7 system that's happily humming in the corner tried several new ways to contact servers...
Specifically, I noted this sequence of events:
6:03:22 - the Windows Activation Technologies service (watadminsvc.exe) tried to contact 23.14.84.162:80 6:03:33 - the Windows Activation Technologies service (watadminsvc.exe) tried to contact 23.14.84.163:80 6:03:33 - the Windows Activation Technologies service (watadminsvc.exe) tried to contact 23.14.84.171:80 6:03:38 - the Windows Activation Technologies service (watadminsvc.exe) tried to contact 23.14.184.154:80 6:03:43 - the Windows Activation Technologies service (watadminsvc.exe) tried to contact 23.62.165.99:80 6:03:48 - a service running under svchost with LOCAL SERVICE credentials tried to contact 23.14.84.162:80 6:03:48 - a service running under svchost with LOCAL SERVICE credentials tried to contact 23.14.84.163:80 10:39:53 - a service running under svchost with my logon credentials tried to contact 23.14.84.163:80
I wonder if it's trying to determine if it should remain activated. Or is this some other latent Microsoft "call the mothership" functionality trying to express itself in order that they might take control?
And of course the $64 question... It's properly licensed and all this is a permanently activated system... Should I let it get through to those servers?
Post by Locutus deBorg on Mar 13, 2016 17:22:42 GMT -6
WAT KB971033 is usually the guilty party it only checks occasionally for cracktivations whenever MS discovers another cracktivated winders it tells WAT to check again
same as the old XP WGA junkware
their excuse for it phoning home occasionally is in the case of if your system was cracktivated, but passed WGA / WAT previously it might / will fail at a later date due to MS knowing about more cracktivation methods than when it first validated winders
I find the lack of configuration options disturbing !
I felt a great disturbance in the force.. as if millions of win 7 systems suddenly cried out in terror.
I wonder... Is it better to just let it continue to fail to contact Microsoft? Or will it ultimately deactivate itself if kept offline for too long? It's hard to imagine the latter, but I wouldn't put it past them.
I've noticed KB971033 is listed on some "hide this update" lists...
I think I'll keep it offline for a while and see what happens. The Application event log implies it's changed its schedule for checking to be now every 129600 minutes == 36 days.
Post by Locutus deBorg on Mar 13, 2016 19:28:11 GMT -6
KB971033 is on my Never Install That Trash !! list
I've seen too many false positives from it on OEM SLP Royalty VLK systems
there's nothing like booting up your Dell or HP etc. system that shipped with win 7 pre-installed get KB971033 and then nuked to "Not Genuine" black desktop, reduced functionality mode, etc.
I find the lack of configuration options disturbing !
I felt a great disturbance in the force.. as if millions of win 7 systems suddenly cried out in terror.
WAT KB971033 is usually the guilty party it only checks occasionally for cracktivations whenever MS discovers another cracktivated winders it tells WAT to check again
same as the old XP WGA junkware
their excuse for it phoning home occasionally is in the case of if your system was cracktivated, but passed WGA / WAT previously it might / will fail at a later date due to MS knowing about more cracktivation methods than when it first validated winders
Yep, its always been more about the system being "Genuine" and less about a valid activation key. I've had valid oem installs with legit keys that were branded non genuine simply because the key was used by me a week earlier on a now defunct install. The wat service verifys the legit key is not being use somewhere else by somebody else. A fully activated/supported OS can some- times show the "not genuine" watermark .
Post by Locutus deBorg on Mar 14, 2016 12:03:09 GMT -6
The wat service verifys the legit key is not being use somewhere else by somebody else ___________________________________________________________________
^ Which is why it screws up, and gives false positive on OEM SLP (System Locked Pre-installation)
because the OEM SLP key is identical across all pre-installed systems of the same SKU
eg. all Dell win 7 Pro SLP systems use the same key for every installation the Dell recovery media is a modified windows installation disc that contains the Dell SLP Royalty VLK and a BIOS etc. check that only works on supported Dell systems that shipped with win 7
> I can take 100,000 Dell systems that shipped with win 7 pro and use a key finder on all of them and they will return the same key
the Key on the COA sticker is not in use on the system when shipped, it's only there for convenience and because MS Licensing demands it be there as proof that the system is allowed to have win 7 Pro, homeless, starter etc. installed the only time the OEM Branded COA gets used is when users want to re-install without all the extraneous trialware / junkware and there is no option to do recovery / factory reset without it
eg. only Dell Recovery Disc has nothing but windows, every other Mfg. uses a recovery media with all the junk in the image on some systems, HP offers "minimized / minimal image recovery" which skips the majority of the pre-installed garbage and only includes the HP software and drivers
Activation, WGA, and WAT was an experimental phase for the move to subscription based windows they even have OGA for MSO (and now MSO is both MSO and subscription based O365)
old Billy boy said it during the days of win 95 > we want to move windows to a subscription model > why should ISP, utilities, etc. and other software like AV get paid monthly or annually and not MS
so they invented activation for winders XP and beyond and MS Office XP and beyond which incidentally there were more false positives of a particular PC Mfg. for "not genuine" in XP for the first round of WGA than subsequent versions
if those clowns like SRSlaveman on the MS forum can't see that winders will eventually slide into subscription base or worse they're cheering it on then, they're stupider than was originally thought
the whole activation experiment was intended as a learning / training phase to discover the method(s) of "cutting off" users who haven't paid their monthly or annual winders MS bill
ya know, if you don't pay your electric bill and then "! Surprise !" the lights aren't on when you come home one day. or you don't renew your AV and it stops updating and stops getting def. updates etc.
and that's why I never install WGA on XP or WAT on win 7 no matter what type of installation it is > OEM SLP > OEM System Builder > Retail FPP > Retail Upgrade FPP etc.
I find the lack of configuration options disturbing !
I felt a great disturbance in the force.. as if millions of win 7 systems suddenly cried out in terror.
And God forbid they should at some point "accidentally" invalidate the activation of older systems that have avoided GWX.
"Oops, sorry."
At this point I have multiple levels of protection from Microsoft's whims and "mistakes"... Firewall, reconfiguration, removed updates, good bare metal backups... But I am under no misconception that "going rogue" from the almighty cloud will be easy forever. Much as I dislike Unix for all the pith helmet, unshowered, undisciplined disciples I've run across in my career, that's still a better alternative than following Microsoft down the dark path.
Post by Bayer A.User on Mar 14, 2016 12:28:52 GMT -6
Agreed, Win8 was their attempt to get away from the wild-west activation/validation process . Lets be honest. Like hemi-cuda's there are FAR more activated quasi' legit Win XP,Vista,7 installs online today than MSFT ever intended much less got a dime for with licensing royalties.
As far as i'm concerned if i paid cash for the media from MSFT or a manufacturer and have legitimate ways to activate it,then its a legitimate install. Period. As long as i don't provide copies of it to anyone or profit from it then there is no terms of use violation.
Whole new ballgame with 8 and 10. They 'giveth, they can 'taketh away.
Post by Locutus deBorg on Mar 14, 2016 12:32:29 GMT -6
you'll also note that if you install and attempt to configure winders ape and up without a net connection
winders ape / ape dot one, lasts about 4 days before it goes not genuine
and winders tentanic goes not genuine in the first 24 hours and resumes the old practice of shutting down every hour until you go online to "validate" it
what I haven't attempted is to see how long winders ape and up can stay offline without going not genuine again
I find the lack of configuration options disturbing !
I felt a great disturbance in the force.. as if millions of win 7 systems suddenly cried out in terror.
you'll also note that if you install and attempt to configure winders ape and up without a net connection
winders ape / ape dot one, lasts about 4 days before it goes not genuine
and winders tentanic goes not genuine in the first 24 hours and resumes the old practice of shutting down every hour until you go online to "validate" it
what I haven't attempted is to see how long winders ape and up can stay offline without going not genuine again
Now the conversation gets interesting ! Fact, Win10 installs done completely OFFLINE with all customization and settings and NO key typed in whatsoever will result in a fully functional OS (unactivated) That will update/upgrade successfully month after month after month.No shut- downs. No blackscreens, No Problemos.
Post by Bayer A.User on Mar 14, 2016 13:32:30 GMT -6
Before the "Unactivated" clean install is ever online, Customization features,settings, registry is wide open for change. After going online most of this is grayed out or nonfunctional as usual. 10240(unactivated) will update and upgrade to the next version via WU. 10586.14,29,36,63,104,164.
If it was'nt possible to test 10 this way then i wouldn't bother at all.
Since I don't let my systems talk online without permission (courtesy Sphinx firewall), I have a 14279 setup that I've been testing my re-tweaker script with that has never been allowed to reach Microsoft's servers. It still seems happy to remain up, though it now says "Connect to the Internet to activate Windows":
I saw the attempts to connect, presumably to re-check activation. I noted them up above, in reply #73. It tried initially, right after the "upgrade", but hasn't tried on its own since.
EDIT: I screwed up and crossed up activation check attempts from my Win 7 and Win 10 test systems. A Senior Moment I guess. The stuff in post 73 is for Win 7. I'm not sure I've captured the attempts Win 10 made right after bootup. I'll look for them.
I've just booted it up. I'll let it sit here and see if anything interesting happens. At one point the other day I saw it go to the lock screen on its own, but I altered the power configuration and that seemed to have stopped. I will advise...
--
In other news, my Win 8.1 system has not talked to Microsoft's servers for several months, and it's still ticking along.
I DO see a hidden scheduled task called "\Microsoft\Windows\WS\License Validation" whose schedule very curiously gets changed to one day further in the future every night, even though it never reaches its time to run. Maybe it's some kind of failsafe mechanism to thwart hackers who might stop something else that's checking licenses.
For example, SCHTASKS /Query on two subsequent nights showed:
I've seen stuff logged by the "Office Software Protection Platform Service" that implies there's some kind of license check that happens every day or so... It puts up stuff that looks like this:
Log Name: Application Source: Office Software Protection Platform Service Date: 3/14/2016 9:16:53 AM Event ID: 1003 Task Category: None Level: Information Keywords: Classic User: N/A Computer: NoelC4 Description:
Up a few hours so far and no sign of shutting itself down or locking the screen, and not another peep online. Either it's reverted to a slow poll or waiting for something special to trigger an activation check. Hm, maybe it's one of the scheduled tasks I've disabled.
-Noel
Author of the "How to Configure the 'To Work' Options" series of Windows books. Not feeling enough love to do one for Windows 10.
<Rick> Good video. It's almost hard to believe that at one time Windows 98 was the resource hog, but even then, it still ran circles around what Windows 10 can do on today's modern hardware and look a heck of alot better doing it.
May 25, 2021 22:55:12 GMT -6
<Rick> As stated elsewhere, So much for the launch of Windows 11, "The Great Crash." Myself, I had a hard time getting into the site listed above, when I did get in, the video was partly done and then it crashed. There has been many other reports of crashing.
Jun 24, 2021 9:52:33 GMT -6
*
<Rick> I see Microsoft has been very quick to pull down reports of site crashing regarding the Launch of Windows 11 on the Microsoft Insiders forum.
Jun 24, 2021 9:57:31 GMT -6
*
<Rick> The rebroadcast is working okay.
Jun 24, 2021 11:00:25 GMT -6
<Rick> With reports of people being able to install the dev-edition of Windows 11 on machines not meeting spec, I thought I would give it a what-the-heck try. Lucky me, I'm caught in the downloading, doesn't meet spec, clearing, re-downloading loop on my machine!
Jul 2, 2021 7:08:46 GMT -6
<Rick> I've recently purchased a license for ArcaOS from www.arcanoae.com/ to play with. First impressions, it's still OS/2, but it now has a Linux twist to it.
Jul 2, 2021 7:32:53 GMT -6
*
<dozrguy> laptop shit out and am stuck buying a new one. os win11 as fucked as win10 was?
Oct 2, 2021 12:56:10 GMT -6
<Rick> Let's see ..., my impression of Windows 11 is that it is a spruced up version of Windows 10 requiring a 64-bit processor plus a piece of security hardware that is less than 4 years old in order for it to run.
Oct 4, 2021 18:25:49 GMT -6
*
<Rick> On the plus side, Microsoft is supposed to be supporting Windows 10 for some time to come for those of us still using systems with I7 or older processors.
Oct 4, 2021 18:44:35 GMT -6
*
<dozrguy> i tried installing win10 om the 'shitout' pc this morning usung media creation. EPIC FAIL! went into an endless bootloop. win7 reinstalled just fine
Oct 21, 2021 11:23:38 GMT -6
<dozrguy> STILL so much bullshit and so little time for the kiddie ideas from the hill. My new laptop (MSI GE 11-UH461) would be an awesome "10" machine but because of Winblows I can only give it a "2"......wasted $3500
Oct 27, 2021 9:36:47 GMT -6
<Rick> Hello. Just checking in.
Mar 17, 2022 10:46:54 GMT -6
<isidroco> Each new w10 update adds >100000 useless files to \Windows\Servicing\LCU\Package_for_RollupFix... folders. Even in a SSD takes time to delete that stuff. In each version they manage to worsen stuff.
Mar 27, 2022 16:14:51 GMT -6
*
<dozerguy> still traffic here?
Oct 9, 2022 17:32:44 GMT -6
<Rick> No, there does not seem to be very much traffic these days. I still check in from time to time.
Oct 9, 2022 20:08:58 GMT -6