Windows 10: More local account trouble

That's simply not true. You can create a local account by choosing "Owned by me". You simply click "Create New Account" and then click the link at the bottom that says "Create my account later" (or something like that, recalling it from memory). The next screen lets you create the local account.

The benefit is that you can use all of Windows features with a MSA, you can't without one. So yes, there is a difference in choice.

You might argue that this is non-intuitive, but Microsoft is doing this for a reason. Anyone that doesn't know why they would need a local account shouldn't be creating one. If they made it ridiculously easy to create a local account, they would have ton of tech support issues from users that created local accounts and didn't understand that doing so means you can't use most apps. Those who know what they're doing, want a local account and understand the consequences can find it if they really want to. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out. But it does take someone interested in figuring it out, rather than just complaining about it.

"Important" doesn't mean what you think it means in Windows Update. Microsoft has several levels of updates. Critical, Important, Moderate and Low.. These relate to the severity of the flaws they fix, or the level of which it is suggested they be installed. Important means :

For patches that are not security related, they are typically marked as "Optional" or "Recommended", These do not get auto-selected most of the time from what I remember.

I've just looked through my update history going back almost a year in Windows 8, and I can't find any "Important" updates that weren't important from what I can tell. What are you referring to exactly?

 

That is what I always thought was the definition of important. And that is why a lot of people got disturbed when they marked some of the 'marketing updates' (PUPs) for Windows 10 in Windows 7 as important.

I have no idea why those updates could effect "the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of user data, or of the integrity or availability of processing resources".

 

Can you provide a reference or screenshot of that? If it's not a security update, it shouldn't be marked as Important, but rather as "Recommended".

According to this article, it was indeed marked as "Recommended", and not "Important".

http://www.computerworld.com/article...g-notices.html

 

If I recall right, there were 4 updates for that matter. 3 were marked as 'recommended' and 1 was marked as 'Important'. But no, I did not take ant screenshots. But even though, those PUPs should not be there in the first place. They do nothing for the maintenance of my systems.

 

Fair enough ... you can still create a local account when you select "This PC belongs to me". I've corrected that in the original post -thanks Mystere.

Huh? I can sign in to my computer with a local account and use MS services by signining in to each service individually. You still need a MS account to use the services, but you don't need to sign in to your computer with it, doing so only makes it easier to use the services.

I will argue that it is not intuitive - Sign up? Sign up for what!
Doing it for a reason ... ya think *Wink

I don't need a local account in the same way I don't need a MS account.

They wouldn't have a ton of support calls if they made things clear in the first place (goes back to intuitive). We had many meetings on ease of use and screens/menus being intuitive to the end user. And then it all goes back to development - is the error message clear, can the user easily resolve the issue (click this, change that).

Most users will be coming from XP or Win7, so most users won't know what they're doing. This goes to your point of increased support calls - clarity is better and results in fewer support incidences.
No it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out, but people don't pay attention to screens, they just click OK, OK, OK. By the time Win10 is installed, they only have to figure out why they're PC login is Bart Fast and not Bill.

The typical end user doesn't want to be bothered 'figuring it out' - they want it to work they way they're used to it working. They tend to accept incremental changes (XP->Vista->Win7) and reject wholesale changes (ala Win8, you might throw Vista in there too since the security pendulum swung too far fixing the holes in XP).

Who's complaining? I've submitted feedback every release. That's what this is all about isn't it - to get early user feedback through the Insider Program.

That's exactly what I think it means. did you miss my wink? Maybe it should have been a sarcasm smiley.
*sarc
If you don't think for me, I won't think for you. *Wink
*sarc
Anyway ... MS isn't likely to change the Sign-in process until IT throws a fit. Even then, they might not ... they're so obsessed with the Start menu, they're missing a lot of other under currents.

Always good to parle with you Mystere

 

I also had 1 Important and 3 Recommended updates in W7.

There were some earlier updates that are some how related to W10.
I don't know what level they were.

 

There was only one update that was Windows 10 marketing related. If I were you, i'd check those updates. I am willing to bet the "important" one is actually a security update.

 

Nah, there were more than just one. But I don't recall the KBs. But it does not really matter. Even one is too many because it does not improve my Windows 7 system - and that's what KBs are for. The layman won't know the difference and will not realize that he actually got a PUP.

 

The update that initially appeared as Important was KB3035583.

 

Thanks for finding that. I just could not recall the KB number.

 

OK geeks, let's try again. That update only enables the notifications, doing nothing if the user does not install those other recommended but not important updates.

Nice try dear conspiracy theorists but a miss again. You have to try harder, or are you running out of ammo?

 

No. It initially appeared as Optional, then changed to Recommended. It has never been marked as Important. The people who claim it was marked important are confused because it installed automatically, which Recommended updates can also do on occasion. I looked in my Windows 8 history and it's listed as Recommended on April 4th. I looked in another machine that's Windows 7 and it's the same.

I haven't found a single shred of evidence of it being marked as Important, not one screen capture anywhere that proves this. Microsoft does not issue non-security updates as Important.

I believe I may now understand the "mystery" here. In Windows 7 and 8.1 there is a setting "Give me Recommended updates the same way I receive important updates", which causes Recommended updates to be selected by default, and they show up in the list under the category "Important" tab. All Recommended updates show up in this list. If you look at the details, it will say that the update is Recommended rather than Important.

This is not specific to this one update, all Recommended updates show up in that list categorized as "Important", it's just a quirk of the way that setting works. Notice in the image below if you click on the entry, on the right hand side it says "Recommended" even though it's in the list of Important.

 

It definitely wasn't Optional on my PC.

I never check the info on Important updates (regardless of their sub-category).
Since you need to install them, the description is irrelevant.

I do check for more info on Optional updates, because MS' generic descriptions are useless.
I didn't check the info on that update ,until several days after I had installed it and people had started complaining about it.

I didn't delete that update until a few days after that.
I was playing around with a VM and I disabled the NIC on my Host PC.
When I re-enabled my NIC, I noticed GWX started communicating with something on the Internet (I had Process Explorer open at the time).

That may well explain the mystery.

I have "Give me Recommended updates the same way I receive important updates" selected.

 

That explains it. Nice find

 

And how does KB3035583 improve my Windows 7 system.