Windows 10: New KB3025380 Update for Windows 10 FBL_AWESOME branch

No doubt if Microsoft wants to allow/ offer an upgrade then let people use a prior activation key with the current 10iso,
Much more straight forward than covering an existing install for those who don't give a hoot for the prior windows version *Smile

 

MS is testing their update procedure as that is the future. Major changes to W10 will be through updates and not new releases of the OS. Also they stated that W10 testers running the leaked versions will not be able to update to the Jan release so there will be an ISO.

Jim *Cool

 

You must enjoy installing software or have next to nothing installed? I for one didn't like installing software over and over again because of other problems I had. Not really.
I just spent 5 days reorganising my PC setup (It should have taken a few hours). *Sad

Also, I only have a few programs installed in W10 TP, because I expect that I will have to do clean installs anyway every few weeks.

However if the in-place upgrade fails, you probably won't be able to use any software, so you'll have to reinstall the lot anyway.

Anecdotally, a clean OS with all of the same programs installed, seems to run better.

MS had better be prepared for a lot of bad press and whining on forums if anything goes wrong (like with W8).

 

I will have a third party app backup of my current W10TP build handy before I do an upgrade. I actually tried a clean install of 9879 and it didn't go well, ending up with wanting to install some software from an unknown source. I couldn't find anything by its file name. So I restored my backup of my in-place upgrade.

Now, the in-place upgrade from 9860 to 9879 didn't happen by me wanting it either. I think I installed 9841 three times and twice upgraded to 9860 but I had thought that I found the problem but wanted to stay on 9860 for a bit to make sure. No doubt about this but I had one of those daily Defender updates but this one took forever ending with a needed reboot, for what? I wondered, what the heck?? After the reboot, I was back on 9879 again where I stayed ever since with no more blue screen reboot loops.

 

Actually, Microsoft would have to do an iso for January release. It is called the consumer preview. It is now time for the end user to test if they want to. You should still be able to upgraded using the iso instead of doing a clean install. Microsoft claimed you can do a upgrade as far back as windows 7.

 

Yep possibly the consumer preview will be less buggy and stuck in personal preferences *Smile

 

It should be about choice. Pick either the in place or clean install. Personally, after many successful in place installs, that is the route I will continue to follow if it is available.

 

You're forgetting that the only way they can fix the problems with this process is by actually getting beta testers to use it...

 

You're forgetting that the only way they can fix the problems with this process is by actually getting beta testers to use it... Good point. . .never been able to figure out the big deal behind the need for a clean install. . .probably just me. . .*Huh

 

The majority of testers are using vm's so it's a little different animal *Wink

 

Where, exactly did you make up that statistic from?

In fact, according to Microsoft, only 36% of users are using a VM.

Checking in on the Windows Insider Program

 

You're forgetting that the only way they can fix the problems with this process is by actually getting beta testers to use it... They've been testing this dodgy update system since W8 was released.

They've had a claimed 200M beta testers (oops ... users) working on it and they still can't make it work properly.

Even ordinary unfashionable updates are hit-and-miss and they've been using the same system for years.
Microsoft update blunders going out of control

Sending out an entire OS every few months is going to cause havoc.
What about people who have:

• Crappy Internet connections?
• Mobile devices with ridiculously small download limits?

What about business users?
How will they test updates before deployment?

Apple might be able to make such a system work, but only because every Mac is identical (i.e. won't run if the hardware is modified in any way).
For example:
Yosemite kills third-party SSD support | ZDNet


I have no confidence that MS will be able to fix this new system.
Forcing people to use fashionable new systems with a proven track record of failure is not going to win MS any plaudits.

To undo the damage the W8 series caused, MS needs to use proven rock-solid code.

MS would probably be better off releasing a separate Windows Testing distro with the bleeding edge technology and useless fashionista stuff in it (like Red Hat does with Fedora).

 

No, they haven't. The new system is very different, and is called "flighting".

It's still a very early alpha stage dude...

You're conflating bugs in the updated binaries with issues with the update process. They are two different things, and I suspect you know that. So why try and pretend they are at all similar?

As opposed to now, where we get Cumulative updates that are 500MB+ in size?

The same way they do now... they use WSUS to block updates until they are tested, then allow them.

Wait, so you understand that it's a new system? Yet you pretended it wasn't?

 

Where, exactly did you make up that statistic from?

In fact, according to Microsoft, only 36% of users are using a VM.

Checking in on the Windows Insider Program Why would you say I made that up for ?
I can't open the News story posted by @Brink but it's now on page 8 in this section
Windows 10: 41% of testers installed the build on their...

 

It's still a very early alpha stage dude... That was a reference to the W8 series (the OS that was released a couple of years ago).

What you are suggesting is that MS is planning to include a system, that will only have received a few months worth of testing, in a product that needs to work perfectly out-of-the-box (or at least as well as W7 did). *Eek

W10 needs to replace the W8 series, the way W7 replaced Vista (in market performance terms).

You're conflating bugs in the updated binaries with issues with the update process. They are two different things, and I suspect you know that. So why try and pretend they are at all similar? Why are you pretending that buggy code isn't a separate issue to corrupted downloads?

The bigger the download, the more chance it will be corrupted.

Apparently you are unaware of the large number of posts on SevenForums, EightForums and TenForums from people whose problems were caused by corrupted downloads (i.e. their problem was solved by a new download).

As opposed to now, where we get Cumulative updates that are 500MB+ in size? Where is Service Pack 2 for W7 (SP1 was in 2011)?

As far as I'm aware, W8 had no Service Packs (or at least they weren't designated as such).

In my books, a 3 GB download is bigger than a 500 MB download.

The same way they do now... they use WSUS to block updates until they are tested, then allow them. Under the current system, each individual update can be tested and any individual update that causes issues can be avoided.

If each update is an entire OS, how do you block the broken bits?

Wait, so you understand that it's a new system? Yet you pretended it wasn't? "New" compared to the "Old" system (i.e. one update at a time).

As far as I can tell, Service Packs didn't replace the entire OS (even though it felt like it).

Where, exactly did you make up that statistic from?

In fact, according to Microsoft, only 36% of users are using a VM.

Checking in on the Windows Insider Program Why would you say I made that up for ?
I can't open the News story posted by @Brink but it's now on page 8 in this section
Windows 10: 41% of testers installed the build on their... Here is the Windows Blog link, "Checking in on the Windows Insider Program (2014-10-13)":
Checking in on the Windows Insider Program