Microsoft yanks Windows 11 update after boot loop blunder

Microsoft has pulled a Windows 11 update after users reported boot loops and startup failures. The problem is the June non-security preview update, KB5039302, which has left some systems requiring recovery operations to get up and running after install. According to a message in its Windows Release Health dashboard, Microsoft …

[anthonyhegedus]

Disingenuous

Here we go again... more meaningless drivel from Microsoft. This is 2024, and Micro$hit is one of the oldest software companies going, and they still haven't defined what testing is, and they still produce unfinished, largely crap, software. This is straight from their playbook: produce untested, unfinished crap that for some reason we've already had anyway, and release it.

A couple of observations:

1. We've had the 'show desktop' button before in windows 10. They removed it, and it's now a 'quality of life' feature to put it back?!

2. The compress file dialogue, crap though it is, has existed for well over a decade, largely unchanged. It's taken them this long to put a few more features in. Over 10 years. And these are features that winzip, 7zip, etc have had for decades.

We shouldn't have to put up with this: dubious changes that just serve to make more money for Microsoft, and unfinished software - all with the addition of moving goalposts (local accounts, anyone) make Microsoft the most disingenuous large company out there.

I don't mind change, IT **IS** change, but with Microsoft it's always change for some nefarious background reason and it's never for security, or to help the users. In this case, they took out features from WIndows when 11 was launched, only to put them back in and call it a feature.

Disingenuous doesn't really cover this!

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't blame MS

Blame the customers. Because they are at fault for buying into this crap.

Literally every business who puts itself into dependency on the Microsoft ecosystem willingly in the light of Microsoft's horrible track record in terms of bugs, security and general business practices actively contributes to cement this sad state of affairs.

The reality is that if customers wouldn't widely and repeatedly give Microsoft a free pass no matter which crap they pull then either Microsoft would change course and improve its offerings or be gone and replaced by another vendor who does.

But because Microsoft customers clearly love being getting it hard while being bent over a barrel, Microsoft actually does everything right - they save a lot of money on QC, they have their customers in a literal stranglehold, free to extort as much money as they want from them, the stock value is up and the business is one of the richest on the planet.

[Zippy´s Sausage Factory]

Re: Don't blame MS

Yeah, but for most customers Microsoft might as well plagiarise the Cabalco slogan from the Blood games: "Who Else Is There?". Most people can't afford Apple, and Linux is too scary.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: "Who Else Is There?

"Yeah, but for most customers Microsoft might as well plagiarise the Cabalco slogan from the Blood games: "Who Else Is There?".

Apple Mac and mac OS.

Linux.

Chromebooks and ChromeOS Flex.

All software platforms which are much more reliable, more secure and require a lot less maintenance effort than Windows.

"Most people can't afford Apple, and Linux is too scary."

If Linux is scary then what is Windows where basic functionality or even whole system installations become non-functional on a somewhat regular basis through bodged updates, where security and privacy are at constant risk because the vendor doesn't give a shit and is only interested in monetizing its users, and where there are constant changes moving around deck chairs rather than fixing the mountain of systemic problems?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: "Who Else Is There?

Only Linux is a real OS. The other two are skins. And Apple cares even less about security that Microsoft.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Only Linux is a real OS.

"Only Linux is a real OS. The other two are skins. And Apple cares even less about security that Microsoft."

BS.

No, Linux isn't the only "real OS", even Windows is a real OS.

And skins, seriously? ChromeOS is a mix of Linux and Android (so much more than a "skin"). And mac OS is a proprietary OS based on a mach microkernel inherited from NextStep, which relies on some userland stuff from BSD. Calling it a "skin" (on what" is beyond ignorant.

Your comment regarding mac OS security is equally ignorant. Seems IT isn't really your thing.

[An_Old_Dog]

Re: "Who Else Is There?

1. Home users: that frog has been slowly-boiled, is vulnerable to FUD, and frequently thinks, despite the M.S. failures they've experienced, "Better the Devil you know than the Devil you don't."

2. Business users: the dimensions here are business size and business specialization. Large businesses, even those which are all-"back-office", are more-likely to have craplets and app interdependancies than small businesses. Many of those are undocumented Excel spreadsheets and VBA things, where the dev - some long-gone beancounter - is unavailable. Manufacturers are at the mercy of whoever made their industrial control systems. Many of those industrial control makers are long-gone, and never provided source code. It's why the Harris/Intersil 6100 - a DEC PDP-8 on-a-chip - was as popular as it once was.

[Snapper]

Re: Don't blame MS

Yeah well, if you add up your time dealing with your computer over a few years you more than get your money back by buying Apple. They last longer and are more secure as OOB as well. Apple doesn't sell your data, unlike Microsoft.

[nematoad]

Re: Don't blame MS

Apple doesn't sell your data, unlike Microsoft.

No, given the prices they charge they don't have to.

Yet.

[Yankee Doodle Doofus]

Re: Don't blame MS

> "Apple doesn't sell your data..."

No, they just sell Google the ability to harvest your data.

[Who-me]

Re: Don't blame MS

I never cease to be amazed that people are still putting in genuine data. I've been feeding them with complete nonsense for years. If more people did, the data they are selling would be complete rubbish, eventually become discredited and the whole rotten system would collaspe. In fact I'm registered on this website as Stuart Peade. (Think about it).

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: sell Google the ability to harvest your data

You don't have to use google (apart from those stupid capcha things).

It is easy to make say 'Startpage.com' your homepage and default search engine.

I main goto browser is WaterFox and uBlock/noScript takes care of the crap.

Time to get out from under that MS horse blanket perhaps? Those darn horse flies bite!

[Elongated Muskrat]

Re: Don't blame MS

Here we are, in 2024, and I'm still seeing the same tedious "Apple vs Microsoft" arguments. Guess what? They're both big companies that want your money, and neither is your friend.

Businesses use Microsoft, or, if they're a design house, probably Apple, because that is the tech stack their business processes are built upon. Arguments about "move to Apple" or "move to Linux" or move to X, Y or Z seem to miss the point that this involves change and change management is both costly, and uncertain. Expense and uncertainty are two things that businesses avoid, for some reason. Can't think why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Don't blame MS

I'm not surprised you can't think why. Leaving aside the fact that the notion that Macs are only predominantly used for DTP or photo editing is something that was last true in the early '90s. your idea how modern business IT works also seems to based on ideas from around that same era. Nor do you seem to really understand what change management is or how it's realized.

In reality, the majority of today's business applications are actually server based and web driven, and have been for a long time. And those that aren't so yet are on their way there because vendors want to get rid of on-premises applications and push customers towards the cloud (ironically, this also includes Microsoft, who has been very busy retiring on-premises and standalone applications with cloud versions and is pushing hard to get customers into Azure, but I guess you missed that).

What this means is that for the majority of business application the kind of end device doesn't matter as long as it has a compatible web browser.

And for where local applications are still required it's mostly a number of industry specific applications which are only available for a single platform and where some are only available for Windows while others are only available for something else than Windows. As far as commodity applications (such as office applications) are concerned, all named platforms cover far more than just the basics. And all non-Windows platforms do so with notably lower costs.

Lastly, few businesses stick to Microsoft because they "built their tech stack" on it (in fact, most businesses do not even have their own tech stack, they just buy services from a number of providers). They stick with Microsoft because it's a single provider for many services which is easier from a c suite perspective. In addition, because Windows is widely used, the idea is that staff already knows how to handle the platform. There's also the problem that many decision makers are non-technical and don't really know much other than Microsoft so it's often the path of least resistance for them (and when the shit hits the fan then they will have moved on and it's someone else's problem to sort it out).

But lots of businesses do eventually wake up to the massive costs (monetary and otherwise) of being embedded into the Microsoft ecosystem and decide to go with alternatives, which I know because my employer has supported a larger number of medium and big businesses in doing so. In literally every case the result has been a massive drop in TCOs, mostly because support costs dropped on average between 60% and 80%. Simply because, from a management and reliability perspective, Windows is literally the worst of all available options.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Don't blame MS

This is an interesting argument. Apple have their own variety of $hit, however, and what else can you "buy" that fits retail mold?

I am a long-since converted penguinista but I am under no illusions that is a viable alternative for the majority of users.

MS would do well to give people what they actually want. A clean, minimalist OS to handle hardware, and negligible attack surface and space to launch programs. The point is not lost that all the "value added" crud would also be a very sizeable proportion of MS workforce they could sack off...

[Anonymous Coward]

@anthonyhegedus - Re: Disingenuous

We have to put up with this. And we surely will.

If I only had 1 USD each time this discussion was started, I'd be stinking rich by now.

[TVU]

Re: Disingenuous

" This is 2024, and Micro$hit is one of the oldest software companies going, and they still haven't defined what testing is, and they still produce unfinished, largely crap, software"

I fully agree, and one of the great underlying problems goes back to a decade ago when Microsoft pretty much sacked all their quality assurance staff as a cost cutting measure. We are still getting the fallout today from that penny pinching decision what with all the shonky Windows 11 updates, etc.

[Pascal Monett]

Re: they still haven't defined what testing is

Oh, but they have.

It's just that they decided they're not interested.

[bazza]

Re: Disingenuous

> I don't mind change, IT **IS** change

Bad IT is change. Good IT is keeping perfectly acceptable systems running, current and effective for its users, which generally involves as little change as possible (ie sec patches).

What many devs fail to realise is that just because the tech exists to radically overhaul, beautify, and generally up-swank a system or software, what most users want is nothing more than bug fixes, with any upgrades carefully designed and integrated. Web services like Google docs are awful because you never know what they’re going to look like one day to another. I’ve seen companies walk away from such things because of the constant changes made without warning or consultation.

[anthonyhegedus]

Re: Disingenuous

I agree with you up to a point. The desire to incorporate new technology into everything is mostly too great and overshadows the real issues - bugs and meaningful enhancements. The problem starts when you need to look at security. Threats are evolving, and hardware and software need to evolve to counter these threats. So there are always updates, and changes. Microsoft Windows XP had a crap security model to start with, in 2001, but it didn't matter too much because the threat actors weren't sophisticated enough yet. But it had to evolve. First the introduced the firewall with SP2, then they replaced it with Vista, then 7 etc.

Unfortunately, because hardware improves, and manufacturers want a differentiator, it means that software has to change too. There's no point in having a new phone with a processor that's twice as fast if it's basically the same as last year's phone. So it includes some AI stuff. But then the PC users will say "why can't we have AI stuff?" and so on.

But I guess you're right. Perhaps if Microsoft only changed security, but kept the basic functionality the same, people would be happier. New features are great, but why do they keep changing existing features, and how can they continue to release unfinished software. Look at "New Outlook" for example. It doesn't do everything outlook does, and yet they make it too easy to switch. Users get upset.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Disingenuous

"Look at "New Outlook" for example. It doesn't do everything outlook does, and yet they make it too easy to switch. Users get upset."

And, like "New Teams", it's not really an option, they are just pushing the change as an option for now, but it WILL become compulsory soon.

[Michael Strorm]

I see MS's problem...

Their dev has a non -standard keyboard with an "Oops" key where Return normally goes:-

https://regmedia.co.uk/2020/11/17/shutterstock_oops_button_on_keyboard.jpg

That's just asking for trouble... you go to input a line of code and accidentally enter a horrible mistake instead.

[that one in the corner]

Re: I see MS's problem...

I like that "Oops" key cap.

But I wonder if we could fit "Are you sure? Really sure" instead? Maybe onto one of those double-height return keys.

[jglathe]

Azure doesn't run on Windows if I remember the rumours correctly

not exactly easy to test bare metal boot with these features then, but you could just use bare metal. We're seeing the effects of firing the people that actually did essential work, but the managers didn't know or care.

[ecofeco]

25 damn years

And they STILL can't get updates right.

[JRStern]

Let's jump directly to Windows 13

That should be a winner.

[The Oncoming Scorn]

Strangely Enough

I have a little script that runs on every boot, that sets Windows to give me the old classic F8 boot menu for about 5 seconds just in case that its there if I ever really need it (Just in case a Windows update decides I don't need that simplistic useful utility & removes it).

[Missing Semicolon]

Re: Strangely Enough

Right up until Windows "helpfully" removes it as "that should not happen".

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Strangely Enough

Maybe it's time someone with deep pockets brought a case against MS using the Computer Misuse Act? Updates are forced, you can't put them off forever and they override choices and settings you have made, even hiding, disabling or in some case removing s/w you installed. MS may claim that the licence agreement allows that, but that would be a lopsided and therefore unfair contract. It'd be interesting to see that tested in court.

[Refugee from Windows]

Re: Strangely Enough

The danger is that if found to have broken the rules, then they'll simply remove their product and support from the marketplace. That'd hurt both their finances and be a shot in the foot for whatever country or region does that.

There is an example that if you're a very large company you've a turnover bigger than that country, can afford the legal bill, and just ignore it anyway.

[sabroni]

Name one organistion that manages to do this properly

At this scale, with this amount of hardware support and with this number of users, who has managed to regularly update an operating system without ever needed to revert an update?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Name one organistion that manages to do this properly

"At this scale, with this amount of hardware support and with this number of users, who has managed to regularly update an operating system without ever needed to revert an update?"

And yet the majority of Windows update problems are completely unrelated to the underlying hardware.

As are the many security lapses.

Besides the fact that at least corporate IT tends to be rather homogenous (companies mostly use business systems from Dell, HP or Lenovo which use standard hardware components without the many frills and specialties found in consumer systems), yet Microsoft's blunders tend to affect everyone indiscriminately.

And then of course there's the fact that it's not just Microsoft's on-premises software which sucks, it's cloud environment Entra formerly called Azure exhibits the same lack of reliability and shoddy security, with the highest amount of outages and security incidents amongst all the big cloud providers.

[CorwinX]

Props for fhe Princess Bride quote-alike.

[Ken Moorhouse]

"Tested"

There is a version which includes the word "patience".