1328: "Update"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
poxic
Eloquently Prismatic
Posts: 4751
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:28 am UTC
Location: Left coast of Canada

1328: "Update"

Postby poxic » Mon Feb 10, 2014 5:04 am UTC

Image

Title text: "I have a bunch of things open right now."

Install nosmoke.exe? Y/N
A man who is 'ill-adjusted' to the world is always on the verge of finding himself. One who is adjusted to the world never finds himself, but gets to be a cabinet minister.
- Hermann Hesse, novelist, poet, Nobel laureate (2 Jul 1877-1962)

User avatar
rhomboidal
Posts: 797
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:25 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby rhomboidal » Mon Feb 10, 2014 5:10 am UTC

Eventually, an electrical fire will trigger a crash or automatic reboot, so the issue will just kind of fix itself.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Djehutynakht » Mon Feb 10, 2014 5:27 am UTC

rhomboidal wrote:Eventually, an electrical fire will trigger a crash or automatic reboot, so the issue will just kind of fix itself.


At the cost of the computer, no doubt.

User avatar
Ken_g6
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:45 pm UTC
Location: in yer GPUz fakterin' primez in wardrobez

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Ken_g6 » Mon Feb 10, 2014 5:31 am UTC

Why does Windows require so many reboots, anyway? After all these years you'd think they could have fixed that.

This also reminds me, remember when Dell recalled all those laptop batteries that were causing fires? I had one of those, and got it replaced. But the new battery never worked nearly as well as the old one did. :( So I sometimes wish I'd done the equivalent of the above comic and just kept using the recalled battery.

User avatar
Envelope Generator
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 8:07 am UTC
Location: pareidolia

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Envelope Generator » Mon Feb 10, 2014 5:39 am UTC

The update breaks my workflow, I use the fires as a randomness source.
I'm going to step off the LEM now... here we are, Pismo Beach and all the clams we can eat

eSOANEM wrote:If Fonzie's on the order of 100 zeptokelvin, I think he has bigger problems than difracting through doors.

User avatar
Primis
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:07 am UTC
Location: New York
Contact:

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Primis » Mon Feb 10, 2014 7:04 am UTC

What's even more annoying is when an update does not require just a reboot, but a series of them (see: os x software updates)
I spent 30 minutes on thursday installing updates, which involved three reboots and broke my flow.

...And I still havent finished my original thursday workload!
Image
Key Fingerprint: 49A8 7E39 87C1 DFB2 B0EB F7F4 1235 F2BB 9442 E47F
PhoenixRising wrote:What is this sleep you speak of? There is only the castle. All must yield to the castle.

Alx_xlA
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:22 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Alx_xlA » Mon Feb 10, 2014 7:17 am UTC

Does anyone else think the wording in panel two doesn't sound right, or at least not in the right voice for an update description?
My signature contains forty-four characters.

Morgan Wick
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 9:21 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Morgan Wick » Mon Feb 10, 2014 7:34 am UTC

This would have been GOOMHR a year or two ago (with the added bonus of the computer eventually rebooting on its own at 3:15 AM PT if I haven't put it into hibernation first - and did I mention that it doesn't always give me any indication of an update when it installs something that results in an automatic reboot, it just goes ahead and installs it? So annoying). Now I have a Surface, and all the Metro apps pick up where they left off after a reboot, so I only have to worry about the desktop apps, and since I have an RT machine that pretty much just means Office which autosaves everything anyway.

...What? I swear I'm not a paid Microsoft shill!

User avatar
eviloatmeal
Posts: 570
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:39 am UTC
Location: Upside down in space!
Contact:

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby eviloatmeal » Mon Feb 10, 2014 7:37 am UTC

My old Toshiba laptop won't go into sleep mode properly. It tries to sleep, then somehow turns itself back on, before deciding that it wasn't told to turn on and tries to sleep again, over and over.

I think laptops are just better left to slowly die of bitrot. They're not worth the five minutes to update all those drivers.
*** FREE SHIPPING ENABLED ***
Image
Riddles are abound tonightImage

User avatar
Flumble
Yes Man
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:35 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Flumble » Mon Feb 10, 2014 7:50 am UTC

Morgan Wick wrote:and all the Metro apps pick up where they left off after a reboot,

Now that's a great advantage of win8 (over previous windows editions!) I hadn't heard before.

Windows has been nagging me the past week to finally install those updates it wanted, but I was busy. Can't it see that I don't want to be disrupted for a moment? Geez. :x

Gunni
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 8:13 am UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Gunni » Mon Feb 10, 2014 8:19 am UTC

Why does windows lock files like it does?

The method linux uses is so far superior to what windows does!

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 834
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:24 am UTC

Flumble wrote:
Morgan Wick wrote:and all the Metro apps pick up where they left off after a reboot,

Now that's a great advantage of win8 (over previous windows editions!) I hadn't heard before.

Yes, although this is kind of tablet and smart-phone only, as the metro interface is known to be kind of unworkable on other (usually more powerful) machines.
Flumble wrote:Windows has been nagging me the past week to finally install those updates it wanted, but I was busy. Can't it see that I don't want to be disrupted for a moment? Geez. :x

If they insist on the rebooting thing I really think they should ask to update just when you're about to shut-down. Something like adding an update and shut-down option to the shut-down menu (and make it the default).
Gunni wrote:Why does windows lock files like it does?

The method linux uses is so far superior to what windows does!

Is this intentional flame-bait or just an observation? I mean, the usually no reboot needed is an advantage of linux, but I really don't know the specifics and fear there might be a trade-off somewhere.

dalcde
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:49 am UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby dalcde » Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:44 am UTC

Alx_xlA wrote:Does anyone else think the wording in panel two doesn't sound right, or at least not in the right voice for an update description?

Fixes an issue that causes random laptop electric fires?

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 2054
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby cellocgw » Mon Feb 10, 2014 12:20 pm UTC

TRWTF (oops, sorry, wrong forum :oops: ) is that Windows ever allows a forced reboot without properly shutting down all running apps. I bet I'm not the only cubefarm slave whose Corporate Overlord IT Dept pushes updates and instructs our machines to hard-kill all apps and restart. There's really no excuse for an OS to allow this behavior under any circumstances.

(Yes, I've tracked down some of those Registry settings which disallow hard-kill, and Oh me yarm they're locked down so far as us peons' rights go).

Then again, how impossibly stupid is it of Windows7 to go into its "shutdown screen" (the one which lists the remaining processes which have to quit) and only then realizes that there is an app or two waiting for user input to "Save Changes? yes no FileNotFound " . And of course you can't get to those dialogs except by cancelling the shutdown. Dumbasses.
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26518
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby SecondTalon » Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:42 pm UTC

Ken_g6 wrote:Why does Windows require so many reboots, anyway? After all these years you'd think they could have fixed that.
Because they got it wrong back in Windows 1.0

No, really, that's pretty much the answer. Any weird crap that Windows does that makes no sense whatsoever can be traced back to them not doing it in an earlier version and now, for compatibility, continuing to do it.

Because proprietary software writers are apparently the laziest bastards on the planet, and slam out fast code rather than correct code, so changing the legacy ways of doing things means the programs won't work anymore. And no one's going to update their Windows software if their $200,000 proprietary software that runs their entire business won't work with the new version.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3631
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby rmsgrey » Mon Feb 10, 2014 6:47 pm UTC

I can understand how even programs that are equally happy running using OS_Component_v1.0 or OS_Component_v1.1 can have problems when one gets in-place replaced by the other while they're using it - or, worse, half of it is replaced and the current call uses code from both sides of the divide...

On the other hand, while there may be awkward corner-cases, a side-by-side replacement with new processes getting the new version should work for most situations (the exceptions come when process A tests which version it's got, then leaves a note for process B rather than process B checking itself)...

As for the original comic: If my laptop hasn't caught fire over the last however many projects I've done, it's got a good chance of surviving until my next routine reboot anyway...

speising
Posts: 2353
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby speising » Mon Feb 10, 2014 6:57 pm UTC

cellocgw wrote:TRWTF (oops, sorry, wrong forum :oops: ) is that Windows ever allows a forced reboot without properly shutting down all running apps. I bet I'm not the only cubefarm slave whose Corporate Overlord IT Dept pushes updates and instructs our machines to hard-kill all apps and restart. There's really no excuse for an OS to allow this behavior under any circumstances.

(Yes, I've tracked down some of those Registry settings which disallow hard-kill, and Gee Willikers they're locked down so far as us peons' rights go).

Then again, how impossibly stupid is it of Windows7 to go into its "shutdown screen" (the one which lists the remaining processes which have to quit) and only then realizes that there is an app or two waiting for user input to "Save Changes? yes no FileNotFound " . And of course you can't get to those dialogs except by cancelling the shutdown. Dumbasses.

without a forced reboot option, we'd have to press the reset button more often, probably. and it's not windows' fault that your it department is stupid. ours is, too, in that they require us to log out for all updates.

the shutdown screen problem can be ameliorated, i believe, by proper message handling in the applications.

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 2054
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby cellocgw » Mon Feb 10, 2014 7:03 pm UTC

speising wrote:
cellocgw wrote:TRWTF (oops, sorry, wrong forum :oops: ) is that Windows ever allows a forced reboot without properly shutting down all running apps. I bet I'm not the only cubefarm slave whose Corporate Overlord IT Dept pushes updates and instructs our machines to hard-kill all apps and restart. There's really no excuse for an OS to allow this behavior under any circumstances.

(Yes, I've tracked down some of those Registry settings which disallow hard-kill, and Gee Willikers they're locked down so far as us peons' rights go).

Then again, how impossibly stupid is it of Windows7 to go into its "shutdown screen" (the one which lists the remaining processes which have to quit) and only then realizes that there is an app or two waiting for user input to "Save Changes? yes no FileNotFound " . And of course you can't get to those dialogs except by cancelling the shutdown. Dumbasses.

without a forced reboot option, we'd have to press the reset button more often, probably. and it's not windows' fault that your it department is stupid. ours is, too, in that they require us to log out for all updates.

the shutdown screen problem can be ameliorated, i believe, by proper message handling in the applications.

Well then Microsoft Office doesn't do proper message handling. Not that that would astonish me.
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
Coyoty
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:56 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Coyoty » Mon Feb 10, 2014 8:11 pm UTC

rmsgrey wrote:As for the original comic: If my laptop hasn't caught fire over the last however many projects I've done, it's got a good chance of surviving until my next routine reboot anyway...


So there's a burn-out burn-in?

ps.02
Posts: 378
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:02 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby ps.02 » Mon Feb 10, 2014 10:52 pm UTC

PinkShinyRose wrote:
Gunni wrote:Why does windows lock files like it does?

The method linux uses is so far superior to what windows does!

Is this intentional flame-bait or just an observation? I mean, the usually no reboot needed is an advantage of linux, but I really don't know the specifics and fear there might be a trade-off somewhere.

It sounds like bland fanboyism, doesn't it? But those two sentences really are related. One chief reason for so many reboots in Windows is file locking. As someone else said upthread, this is somewhat thanks to an interface invented in the 80s that will probably never go away.

Say you need to apply an update and it changes some libraries or executables or other super-important OS-level stuff. In Unix (he said Linux, but he meant anything in the Unix tradition, Linux being a johnny-come-lately here), you typically can't directly overwrite these system libraries if they're in use,
Spoiler:
You get the charmingly archaic error "Text file busy." You thought a text file was something human-readable, didn't you? In this context it means the text of your machine language executable code.
which some of them will be. But, you can delete or rename the original file, then write a new copy where it used to be! So that's what your software updates do. Your running OS and running software will continue to use the copy you renamed or deleted, and generally nothing breaks. (The fact that a file can be deleted but still exist - basically, it is invisible but still intact until anyone who had it open has closed it - is a related Unixism.)

In Windows, on the other hand, any file that is in use pretty much can't be touched - because of file locking, which affects everything on the system unless explicitly excepted. So there's a huge chunk of the system that simply cannot be updated in place. What you do instead is, there's a system to put your new file in a temporary location and schedule the system to copy it to the right place at the next reboot.

This same principle also makes it annoying to copy or back up data files that are in use. The best part is, most application-level file locks prevent not only changing a file that is in use, but even reading or copying it. Backup software has to get around this with low-level system access. And once again, this issue pretty much doesn't exist in Unix. Mandatory file locks do exist in Unix - technically - but culturally they are very rarely used. And even when an application decides to take a mandatory write lock on a file, thus locking the whole rest of the system out, it's almost always just for the brief amount of time it takes to update it.

speising
Posts: 2353
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby speising » Mon Feb 10, 2014 11:02 pm UTC

ps.02 wrote:Say you need to apply an update and it changes some libraries or executables or other super-important OS-level stuff. In Unix (he said Linux, but he meant anything in the Unix tradition, Linux being a johnny-come-lately here), you typically can't directly overwrite these system libraries if they're in use,
Spoiler:
You get the charmingly archaic error "Text file busy." You thought a text file was something human-readable, didn't you? In this context it means the text of your machine language executable code.
which some of them will be. But, you can delete or rename the original file, then write a new copy where it used to be! So that's what your software updates do. Your running OS and running software will continue to use the copy you renamed or deleted, and generally nothing breaks. (The fact that a file can be deleted but still exist - basically, it is invisible but still intact until anyone who had it open has closed it - is a related Unixism.)

In Windows, on the other hand, any file that is in use pretty much can't be touched - because of file locking, which affects everything on the system unless explicitly excepted. So there's a huge chunk of the system that simply cannot be updated in place. What you do instead is, there's a system to put your new file in a temporary location and schedule the system to copy it to the right place at the next reboot.


this is not entirely correct. in fact, you can rename (but not delete) in-use executables on win, too. i often use this trick. but, of course, the running processes need to be restarted to use the new files, and the renamed files need to be deleted. so you don't get around rebooting, and the msi update mechanism opts for the maybe cleaner route to make all replacements only after the reboot.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3631
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby rmsgrey » Tue Feb 11, 2014 12:04 am UTC

speising wrote:
ps.02 wrote:Say you need to apply an update and it changes some libraries or executables or other super-important OS-level stuff. In Unix (he said Linux, but he meant anything in the Unix tradition, Linux being a johnny-come-lately here), you typically can't directly overwrite these system libraries if they're in use,
Spoiler:
You get the charmingly archaic error "Text file busy." You thought a text file was something human-readable, didn't you? In this context it means the text of your machine language executable code.
which some of them will be. But, you can delete or rename the original file, then write a new copy where it used to be! So that's what your software updates do. Your running OS and running software will continue to use the copy you renamed or deleted, and generally nothing breaks. (The fact that a file can be deleted but still exist - basically, it is invisible but still intact until anyone who had it open has closed it - is a related Unixism.)

In Windows, on the other hand, any file that is in use pretty much can't be touched - because of file locking, which affects everything on the system unless explicitly excepted. So there's a huge chunk of the system that simply cannot be updated in place. What you do instead is, there's a system to put your new file in a temporary location and schedule the system to copy it to the right place at the next reboot.


this is not entirely correct. in fact, you can rename (but not delete) in-use executables on win, too. i often use this trick. but, of course, the running processes need to be restarted to use the new files, and the renamed files need to be deleted. so you don't get around rebooting, and the msi update mechanism opts for the maybe cleaner route to make all replacements only after the reboot.


The Unix method relies on having a lot of dependency tracking in place, while Windows just assumes that if you ask for filename.dll, you mean the version that's there at the moment, rather than any other .dll with the same name...

hamjudo
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 6:56 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby hamjudo » Tue Feb 11, 2014 12:34 am UTC

ps.02 wrote:Say you need to apply an update and it changes some libraries or executables or other super-important OS-level stuff. In Unix (he said Linux, but he meant anything in the Unix tradition, Linux being a johnny-come-lately here), you typically can't directly overwrite these system libraries if they're in use, ...


My first Unix/Unix-like system was a VAX running BSD back in 1982 or so. Every few years, or at least once per decade, somebody figures out (again) how to do version numbers on libraries so that they can be updated on a live system, without breaking anything. A few years later, someone else will not understand the system, and choose version numbers, such that installing a new version of that library can not be done on a live system.

In most of the working systems, updating the minor version number signifies that the new build's ABI is upwardly compatible with the old version of the library, so existing binaries that worked with the old version will work with the new version. (Some systems have more numbers, for example a build number. I've seen as many as 4 layers.) A change in the major version number indicates that the new library is not binary compatible with the old library. When a binary program is launched, it chooses the library with the highest version that is on the library path that has a compatible major version number. This means, binaries can be running using old library versions, while new libraries are being installed. The next time the program is run, it will find the new library.

For this to work correctly, the minor version number has to be incremented each time a new version comes out. Marketing weenies must not be allowed to dictate the filenames. Likewise, if a new version is not compatible, it needs a new major version number. The program that installs the libraries has to install them with temporary names, so that no executables find a half written library. Once the libraries are completely written to the filesystem, they have to be renamed such that the programs can find them. This has to be done in the correct order. The libraries have to be designed such that a "correct order" actually exists.

There are many many ways to get it wrong.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3631
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby rmsgrey » Tue Feb 11, 2014 3:15 am UTC

hamjudo wrote:Marketing weenies must not be allowed to dictate the filenames.

What's needed is a "display name" that marketing can dictate while code deals with the filename.

User avatar
Karilyn
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 6:09 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Karilyn » Tue Feb 11, 2014 6:57 am UTC

Primis wrote:What's even more annoying is when an update does not require just a reboot, but a series of them (see: os x software updates) !

I don't remember OSX having nearly as many reboots as Windows does.

On the other hand, I once had a Macbook Pro's powerbrick light on fire, sooooooooooooooo... does this mean I finally get to say "GOOMHR"?

Those things run WAAAAAY too fucking hot.
Gelsamel wrote:If you punch him in the face repeatedly then it's science.

User avatar
da Doctah
Posts: 983
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:27 am UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby da Doctah » Tue Feb 11, 2014 7:05 am UTC

Gunni wrote:Why does windows lock files like it does?


I'd be happy if they'd just keep track of why they were locked. I'm getting so tired of this interaction:

Me: "Delete file xyzzy.abc"
Windows: "Unable to delete file xyzzy.abc because it's locked by another process. Stop the other process and retry."
Me: "Fine. What's the other process I have to stop?"
Windows: "Not gonna tell you. Nanny nanny boo boo!"

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3078
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby orthogon » Tue Feb 11, 2014 9:40 am UTC

da Doctah wrote:
Gunni wrote:Why does windows lock files like it does?


I'd be happy if they'd just keep track of why they were locked. I'm getting so tired of this interaction:

Me: "Delete file xyzzy.abc"
Windows: "Unable to delete file xyzzy.abc because it's locked by another process. Stop the other process and retry."
Me: "Fine. What's the other process I have to stop?"
Windows: "Not gonna tell you. Nanny nanny boo boo!"

I have had good experiences with Unlocker, which lets you right-click in an Explorer window and unlock the thing. I think it also tells you what locked the file, but I can't remember.

Now I just need a similar thing for ejecting USB storage devices. My Win7 box now whinges every single time that the device is still in use and "can't be stopped right now".
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
chalkie
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:03 am UTC
Location: River Trent, UK

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby chalkie » Tue Feb 11, 2014 11:08 am UTC

da Doctah wrote:
Gunni wrote:Why does windows lock files like it does?


I'd be happy if they'd just keep track of why they were locked. I'm getting so tired of this interaction:

Me: "Delete file xyzzy.abc"
Windows: "Unable to delete file xyzzy.abc because it's locked by another process. Stop the other process and retry."
Me: "Fine. What's the other process I have to stop?"
Windows: "Not gonna tell you. Nanny nanny boo boo!"



Process Explorer from sysinternals (now part of microsoft) will tell you what has which file. Hit the binoculars and type part (or all) of the filename.

speising
Posts: 2353
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby speising » Tue Feb 11, 2014 11:10 am UTC

chalkie wrote:
da Doctah wrote:
Gunni wrote:Why does windows lock files like it does?


I'd be happy if they'd just keep track of why they were locked. I'm getting so tired of this interaction:

Me: "Delete file xyzzy.abc"
Windows: "Unable to delete file xyzzy.abc because it's locked by another process. Stop the other process and retry."
Me: "Fine. What's the other process I have to stop?"
Windows: "Not gonna tell you. Nanny nanny boo boo!"



Process Explorer from sysinternals (now part of microsoft) will tell you what has which file. Hit the binoculars and type part (or all) of the filename.


and the useful answer in many cases : "system"

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3078
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby orthogon » Tue Feb 11, 2014 11:29 am UTC

chalkie wrote:Process Explorer from sysinternals (now part of microsoft) will tell you what has which file. Hit the binoculars and type part (or all) of the filename.

I dind't know that. Those sysinternals tools are quite good, when I can remember which is which. They'd be really useful if it weren't for the feature where Windows assigns a priority of -inf to them, and Ctrl-Alt-Delete is designed to wait until the process that's slowed the machine to a halt finally finishes before offering to launch the Task Manager (or replacement). Why oh why can't Ctrl-Alt-Delete make it stop everything instantly and let you see what it's doing? Also, I/O deltas: what's with that? I just want to know if it's stalling on I/O, why would I want it divided into read, write and other?
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

MrT2
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 12:02 am UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby MrT2 » Tue Feb 11, 2014 1:55 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:They'd be really useful if it weren't for the feature where Windows assigns a priority of -inf to them, and Ctrl-Alt-Delete is designed to wait until the process that's slowed the machine to a halt finally finishes before offering to launch the Task Manager (or replacement). Why oh why can't Ctrl-Alt-Delete make it stop everything instantly and let you see what it's doing?

I have Task Manager pinned to the task bar in Win7 as a timesaver... always assuming its not explorer.exe that's gone pear-shaped anyway.

I do leave windows updates lying around for a while at times, as although it offers to install them on shutdown, I often don't have the time to hang around while it installs them and then turn it off, so I go via log-off to get to a normal shutdown without installing updates option (my ageing motherboard doesn't shut down properly, so I have to flick the PSU switch off when it's ready, all very 1990s).

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3078
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby orthogon » Tue Feb 11, 2014 2:34 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:dind't

I just want to point out that my PC was on a go-slow even as I typed that typo: it was buffering up my keystrokes and they were appearing at around one character per second.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
cjmcjmcjmcjm
Posts: 1158
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:15 am UTC
Location: Anywhere the internet is strong

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby cjmcjmcjmcjm » Tue Feb 11, 2014 4:52 pm UTC

Karilyn wrote:
Primis wrote:What's even more annoying is when an update does not require just a reboot, but a series of them (see: os x software updates) !

I don't remember OSX having nearly as many reboots as Windows does.

On the other hand, I once had a Macbook Pro's powerbrick light on fire, sooooooooooooooo... does this mean I finally get to say "GOOMHR"?

Those things run WAAAAAY too fucking hot.

Seriously. iStat Menu regularly gives hair-raising readings for processor temp on mine. Somehow it's lasted 4.5 years.
orthogon wrote:
orthogon wrote:dind't

I just want to point out that my PC was on a go-slow even as I typed that typo: it was buffering up my keystrokes and they were appearing at around one character per second.

That is the worst.
frezik wrote:Anti-photons move at the speed of dark

DemonDeluxe wrote:Paying to have laws written that allow you to do what you want, is a lot cheaper than paying off the judge every time you want to get away with something shady.

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 834
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Tue Feb 11, 2014 5:18 pm UTC

rmsgrey wrote:
hamjudo wrote:Marketing weenies must not be allowed to dictate the filenames.

What's needed is a "display name" that marketing can dictate while code deals with the filename.

That sounds like those creepy "let's remove the protocol, TLD and file extension from the URL bar or you know what: we should only keep the second level domain" ideas that keep forcing me to enable legacy settings after a browser update.

EDIT: forgot most of my post:

I really like GUIs to be somewhat functional while caring much less about the aesthetics, as long as everything is in different shades of pink and preferably somewhat but not too rounded (which leads me to the question of why windows, gnome 3 and cinnamon make it so difficult to change the skin).

SecondTalon wrote:
Ken_g6 wrote:Why does Windows require so many reboots, anyway? After all these years you'd think they could have fixed that.
Because they got it wrong back in Windows 1.0

Couldn't they have fixed this when switching from DOS to NT?
da Doctah wrote:
Gunni wrote:Why does windows lock files like it does?


I'd be happy if they'd just keep track of why they were locked. I'm getting so tired of this interaction:

Me: "Delete file xyzzy.abc"
Windows: "Unable to delete file xyzzy.abc because it's locked by another process. Stop the other process and retry."
Me: "Fine. What's the other process I have to stop?"
Windows: "Not gonna tell you. Nanny nanny boo boo!"

I switched to altering files on windows filesystems from an OS on another filesystem. It works great, apart from still having to reboot.
orthogon wrote:I just want to know if it's stalling on I/O, why would I want it divided into read, write and other?

I thought "read" meant: you can remove the filesystem without corrupting it but it may aversely affect your session. Am I doing something wrong?
Last edited by PinkShinyRose on Tue Feb 11, 2014 5:29 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3078
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby orthogon » Tue Feb 11, 2014 5:27 pm UTC

PinkShinyRose wrote:
rmsgrey wrote:
hamjudo wrote:Marketing weenies must not be allowed to dictate the filenames.

What's needed is a "display name" that marketing can dictate while code deals with the filename.

That sounds like those creepy "let's remove the protocol, TLD and file extension from the URL bar or you know what: we should only keep the second level domain" ideas that keep forcing me to enable legacy settings after a browser update.

This; as far as I can tell IE in Windows 8 doesn't let you enter a URL and go straight to the page, it just does a bing search on it instead. Then again Windows 8 generally makes me feel like a total n00b. Is this what I have to look forward to?
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

senor_cardgage
Posts: 51
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 2:28 pm UTC

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby senor_cardgage » Tue Feb 11, 2014 6:28 pm UTC

The complaint upthread about corporate IT pushing out updates reminds me of something really annoying from a previous employer of mine.

I forget the name of the program (Patchlink, maybe) they used to push out updates, but it would give you a pop-up window saying "suchandsuch needs to be updated" along with an "update now" button and a countdown timer. I think there was also a snooze button that allowed us to delay the install (but we couldn't delay it any later than the expiration of the timer).

Now, that would seem all fine, but for this combination of annoying facts. First, every time they would push an update, it wasn't just a single update, but more like 50 of them (so, if you wanted to install them, you had to click the update now button, have it do the update, then have another window pop up a few seconds later to do the whole thing all over again, and again, and again). Second, the update timer was set for (if I recall correctly) 12 hours...for each of the individual updates (now, it may have only been 10 hours, I don't recall specifically, but it was a two-digit number for hours). This defeated the purpose of you from doing something like leaving your computer running when you leave work, and have it all nice and refreshed when you came back. Nope, you'd only get a couple of files updated at most, and still have 48 or so left to do when you came in.

So, you'd waste several minutes just clicking update, then update, then update, because the timer was set way too long to just let them run overnight and install automatically. Then, to add insult to injury, when all was said and done, and you finally got that 50th update installed, you get a window saying "your computer must be restarted" with a countdown timer set to 15 minutes.

Talk about a total disruption to workflow, all because someone couldn't set the individual updates to install automatically on a short timer (i.e. when you're gone overnight).

To make things worse, our hard drives were all encrypted, which made the whole reboot process take several minutes.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Xeio » Tue Feb 11, 2014 7:04 pm UTC

MrT2 wrote:I have Task Manager pinned to the task bar in Win7 as a timesaver... always assuming its not explorer.exe that's gone pear-shaped anyway.
Shift+Alt+Escape, not really much point in pinning it...

User avatar
Dthen
Still hasn't told us what comes after D
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:35 pm UTC
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Dthen » Tue Feb 11, 2014 9:34 pm UTC

Isn't it Ctrl + Shift + Escape?
Dthen wrote:I AM NOT A CAT.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3078
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby orthogon » Tue Feb 11, 2014 11:04 pm UTC

Xeio wrote:
MrT2 wrote:I have Task Manager pinned to the task bar in Win7 as a timesaver... always assuming its not explorer.exe that's gone pear-shaped anyway.
Shift+Alt+Escape, not really much point in pinning it...

Mwahahaha...
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1328: "Update"

Postby Klear » Wed Feb 12, 2014 12:45 am UTC

Dthen wrote:Isn't it Ctrl + Shift + Escape?


I always go through ctrl + alt + delete, though I'm still always a bit surprised when it doesn't restart the computer immediately. Old habits.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: moody7277 and 38 guests