Microsoft slows Windows 11 24H2 Patch Tuesday due to a 'compatibility issue' Microsoft set a new record with June's security update for the time between release and an admission of borkage. The patch Tuesday update arrived yesterday and contained a number of critical fixes. However, after trumpeting its arrival for Windows 11 24H2, Microsoft hastily followed up with a warning that: "We've identified a …
Quote from the Late, great Bill Paxton in Aliens:
“That’s it, man! Game over, man! Game over! What the f*** are we gonna do now? What are we gonna do?”
Coming a close second is Sigourney Weaver:
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
Choose your adventure.
but surely these things should be testable ? I would have thought that their contacts with hardware vendors would enable them to have pre-patch-release test builds that could be sent out and installed. To do so is in everyone's interest.
Why is it that the Linux distributions, with their much smaller budgets and not so good relationships with the hardware people, have a much, much lower incidence of borkage ?
"Why is it that the Linux distributions, with their much smaller budgets and not so good relationships with the hardware people, have a much, much lower incidence of borkage ?"
At a guess, because a greater proportion of changes are well-considered, and made by and/or go through people who care more (or at all).
But while I share your perception I am mindful that reported impact may be reduced by one or more of lower hardware diversity, lower user numbers, and higher probability of self-resolution.
Years ago, I was hired to do the server side of a project, and the customer hired another company to do the web front end. The differences in attitude between the two groups couldn't have been greater.
The back end people mostly came from avionics, which had a "if the software crashes, so does the plane" mindset. Every permutation was tested, and the front end complained that we were holding them up.
Once we shipped, we were done. The web side said they were done, too, so the customer then changed the site passwords, and they couldn't get in. And then the bug reports started to flood in.
They weren't back end issues, they were all web problems. Of course, the web developers said, you changed the passwords so we can't administer it. And by "administer", they meant debugging. To those of us in the back end, administering meant making backups, adding hardware for load balancing as demand grew, and things like that. But to the web team, software was never actually finished, it was a live thing that they just kept changing.
I see the same difference in mindset between the Windows and Linux arenas.
Windows has a much larger user base, a much larger range of hardware and software to support, and a far less technical user community, all of which makes testing more difficult. But they also have a different mindset of "if it doesn't work this week, we'll just put it in next week's patch".
Windows actually has a far smaller range of supported hardware.
If you're talking about legacy computers, yes. Windows won't support 80486 or 32 bit machines any more that Linux does, absolutely.
But when you're dealing with peripherals, it's a different story.
If you buy any USB device, it's expected to work on Windows. Device creators write device drivers for their new USB music synthesizer, or Bluetooth security dongle, when they release it. Few of them bother with Linux.
One of the first thing Linux users have to get used to is confirming Linux support for any peripheral because we can't make the assumption that the hardware will work on Linux. Windows users can.
Why is it that the Linux distributions, with their much smaller budgets and not so good relationships with the hardware people, have a much, much lower incidence of borkage ?
Because there are far, far, fewer systems running Linux than Windows?
This post has been deleted by its author
Did something get past quality control? Erm... yes, it's very easy to slip past a - and I'm being generous here - department which is so far underfunded it's a wonder it exists at all. Quality control at Microsoft is abysmal. Their "OS" is riddled with bugs and fixes and patches all over the place to make it work. So much of what I encounter day-to-day with microsoft is inconsistent, flaky or poorly designed in the first place.
It wouldn't surprise me if the problem was the it's now so big and so old and so ill-conceived that nobody there has enough understanding to know how it is supposed to work. It's taken on a life of its own and the software engineers at MS probably need to spend a lot of time trying to second-guess how something is meant to work.
Unwieldy piece of shit.
But they just have to keep on fiddling with it to add new shiny features that few people want or need just because....well because of what? In the early days most new features were welcomed and probably increased the sales...but now?
I wish they would just leave things alone and fix the bugs ...a forlorn hope it seems.
Again - I've had to use "fix problems with windows update" - which I've had to use for the last two security updates.
Just updating the patch, by itself causes the system to crash, and corrupt the component store.
Running SFC -its OK, then DISm see's a problem - Restore health just comes up with an error after waiting ages while monitoring the CBM log.
But when I run "fix problems with windows update" it works
SFC is ok, and DISM reports no component store problems.
The whole process takes another 3 hours of wasted time MS, and my system spec is well capable of running Windows 11.
Other updates install no issues, its always security patches.
Fed up with this monthly farce MS
CS
Perhaps the issue is the "cause to fail to run on incompatible hardware" incompatibility patch requiring another patch because Win11 still actually works on incompatible hardware by bypassing the patched patches ...
Just let us run it on older hardware, we know it does! We may be mad but you could make money out of us and we could have a stress-free life. Give up the fight!
They have an ulterior motive. Or motives actually. They want people to move onto hardware that isn't necessary now, but WILL be necessary to run some as-yet-unanncounced piece-of-shit facility that they can charge for. Older hardware can't run it. There'll be another one of these "culls" where older hardware won't be able to run Windows 12 or 13 or whatever, and it'll have something to do with AI, no doubt.
"Can't run Windows 13 on hardware which does less than 400 TOPS on its NPU. And you have to have TPM 4.0 because the government said so. And Windows 12 won't work for much longer. Sorry not sorry"
The real problem is the Agile development methodology. It’s a crap approach and it’s time we acknowledged it as such.
Anyway, anyone identified what the issue is? I see I’ve just received this patch for the patch as an ‘optional’ update and yet I’ve not seen any problems today…on both an Intel machine and an AMD. Both seem to be working fine.
I’m so very tired of this shit. How often do we see this kind of headline now? I might have to put up with this at work but I’ve not long installed mint on to my own machine, and mostly down to updates. While Win 10 was the mainstay of MS I used to hear people complain about updates rebooting machines while they were working, a problem I, thankfully, hadn’t experienced, but since my move to Windows 11 it just seems to reboot whenever the hell it wants, regardless of the settings I set. So fuck you microsoft, and your bloated, spying, pos OS. I won’t be looking back.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
