Windows 10 upgrade notification
Discussion
TonyRPH said:
Even with a power off, the system state is still saved to a file (hence the fast boot from powered off state).
As I stated in my OP, it *will* boot faster than 7 *because* of the fast boot process.
Ah so it does boot faster, we're just not allowed to say so?As I stated in my OP, it *will* boot faster than 7 *because* of the fast boot process.
TonyRPH said:
As for exploits - how about this one that froze memory.
So actually, perhaps you should be sorry for spouting about stuff you apparently know little about.
That attack has nothing to do with any image on disk, it's saying that you could potentially grab an encryption key form RAM. If you could make this work you'd be able to read the entire drive, so this image file would be useless.So actually, perhaps you should be sorry for spouting about stuff you apparently know little about.
What else ya got?
TonyRPH said:
Even with a power off, the system state is still saved to a file (hence the fast boot from powered off state).
So what? It doesn't matter how it boots faster. It boots faster. So some system state is on the disk? The O/S is on the disk. That's state.
This is just tedious hair-splitting for no reason at all.
ETA - FWIW with Sleep and Hibernate disabled (this saves quite a bit of disk) a cold start for me takes 24secs.
Edited by grumbledoak on Tuesday 8th March 20:50
Wow... the zealots are out in full force tonight.
In my OP I pointed out that it was unfair comparing Boot time to previous versions of Windows.
I also said that booting it from a complete shutdown (rather than a fast shutdown) shows that (IME) it does boot slower than previous versions of Windows in this scenario.
I never said you weren't allowed to say it boots faster.
As for the attack I cited - I was trying to highlight that if something like that can be achieved, then if that can be done with RAM you can pretty much guarantee that an attack on the image will be found sooner or later. I was drawing a comparison - NOT saying it has happened - but that it will likely happen.
CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU NOW?
In summary - I stated that boot time comparisons with previous Windows versions were unfair for the reasons stated - I am not splitting hairs but stating facts.
In my OP I pointed out that it was unfair comparing Boot time to previous versions of Windows.
I also said that booting it from a complete shutdown (rather than a fast shutdown) shows that (IME) it does boot slower than previous versions of Windows in this scenario.
I never said you weren't allowed to say it boots faster.
As for the attack I cited - I was trying to highlight that if something like that can be achieved, then if that can be done with RAM you can pretty much guarantee that an attack on the image will be found sooner or later. I was drawing a comparison - NOT saying it has happened - but that it will likely happen.
CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU NOW?
In summary - I stated that boot time comparisons with previous Windows versions were unfair for the reasons stated - I am not splitting hairs but stating facts.
TonyRPH said:
Wow... the zealots are out in full force tonight.
In my OP I pointed out that it was unfair comparing Boot time to previous versions of Windows.
I also said that booting it from a complete shutdown (rather than a fast shutdown) shows that (IME) it does boot slower than previous versions of Windows in this scenario.
I never said you weren't allowed to say it boots faster.
As for the attack it cited - I was trying to highlight that if something like that can be achieved, then can be done with RAM you can pretty much guarantee that an attack on the image will be found sooner or later. I was drawing a comparison - NOT saying it has happened - but that it will likely happen.
CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU NOW?
In summary - I stated that boot time comparisons with previous Window versions were unfair for the reasons stated - I am not splitting hairs but stating facts.
Here's my summary.In my OP I pointed out that it was unfair comparing Boot time to previous versions of Windows.
I also said that booting it from a complete shutdown (rather than a fast shutdown) shows that (IME) it does boot slower than previous versions of Windows in this scenario.
I never said you weren't allowed to say it boots faster.
As for the attack it cited - I was trying to highlight that if something like that can be achieved, then can be done with RAM you can pretty much guarantee that an attack on the image will be found sooner or later. I was drawing a comparison - NOT saying it has happened - but that it will likely happen.
CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU NOW?
In summary - I stated that boot time comparisons with previous Window versions were unfair for the reasons stated - I am not splitting hairs but stating facts.
We can all now (thanks for the permission btw) say unequivocally that Win 10 boots faster, and that you, in fact, cannot produce a single coherent reason to back up your statement about it being a security risk.
glad we got that sorted.
zippy3x said:
Here's my summary.
We can all now (thanks for the permission btw) say unequivocally that Win 10 boots faster, and that you, in fact, cannot produce a single coherent reason to back up your statement about it being a security risk.
glad we got that sorted.
lol this is getting amusing now.We can all now (thanks for the permission btw) say unequivocally that Win 10 boots faster, and that you, in fact, cannot produce a single coherent reason to back up your statement about it being a security risk.
glad we got that sorted.
In my OP I stated (complete with typo) "This hybrid boot could also prevent a security risk in the future,as no doubt somebody will find an exploit to load the saved image on another PC."
Of course I meant "could present a security risk"
Note I said could - I didn't say does - did I?
Just in the same way that the windows swap file can present a security risk (which is why there is a registry setting to delete it at shutdown).
But carry on with your misguided beliefs - I'm out.
TonyRPH said:
lol this is getting amusing now.
In my OP I stated (complete with typo) "This hybrid boot could also prevent a security risk in the future,as no doubt somebody will find an exploit to load the saved image on another PC."
Of course I meant "could present a security risk"
Note I said could - I didn't say does - did I?
Just in the same way that the windows swap file can present a security risk (which is why there is a registry setting to delete it at shutdown).
But carry on with your misguided beliefs - I'm out.
All I hear is BEEP, BEEP, BEEP as you back out of this threadIn my OP I stated (complete with typo) "This hybrid boot could also prevent a security risk in the future,as no doubt somebody will find an exploit to load the saved image on another PC."
Of course I meant "could present a security risk"
Note I said could - I didn't say does - did I?
Just in the same way that the windows swap file can present a security risk (which is why there is a registry setting to delete it at shutdown).
But carry on with your misguided beliefs - I'm out.
If this hasn't been posted before, here's an update history:
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-10/upda...
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-10/upda...
In the news again. This time they've shuffled the popup around so that just closing the window doesn't cancel the upgrade. Previously this was the only way to cancel the upgrade!
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/229040-microsof...
It made the BBC, too:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36367221
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/229040-microsof...
It made the BBC, too:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36367221
Work have been going on for ages about doing the 10 upgrade so when I had a spare laptop to use I did it. It didn't go well. After the upgrade I couldn't use the file explorer or whatever it's called or launch any files from my desktop. Rolled back to 7 and I'd lost office and they couldn't install it again.
It's been sent off for a full format and clean install.
It's been sent off for a full format and clean install.
Bungleaio said:
Work have been going on for ages about doing the 10 upgrade so when I had a spare laptop to use I did it. It didn't go well. After the upgrade I couldn't use the file explorer or whatever it's called or launch any files from my desktop. Rolled back to 7 and I'd lost office and they couldn't install it again.
It's been sent off for a full format and clean install.
Are you sure you were the right man for the job?It's been sent off for a full format and clean install.
Cobnapint said:
Surely this is 'clean' tricks. Win 10 is an improvement to anybody with a brain.
Just not any one who uses it in a work environment, with a mix of applications and drivers some of which work with w10 and some which fail spectacularly..its ok you can roll it back, erm yes but then half the time it screws the w7 network drivers on return...
Ive also seen a fair few hard disk crashes after upgrade to w10 which is nice!!! by all means stick w10 on at home or with a new pc, it is much better under the bonnet but dont force an upgrade
Microsofts Dirty tricks to get people to accidentally install it finally reveal to the world that micro$oft is one of the worst viruses out there....
Bungleaio said:
It's been renamed in 10 hasn't it? I looked at it, our internal IT bod looked at it and finally our external IT people looked at it and they all said it was goosed.
No. File Explorer is still File Explorer. It's got some horrible new icons for folders and stuff, but it still works exactly as before.You should definitely test it - businesses do often rely on ancient software that no-one supports any more. Generally if you cannot find things, hit the Windows key and start typing to search, then right click and Pin to Start. But File Explorer is definitely still there.
Cobnapint said:
Surely this is 'clean' tricks. Win 10 is an improvement to anybody with a brain.
Except that the upgrade process breaks a lot of software - it reloads drivers, which can mess with com port assignments; it mis-recognises connected serial devices as mice, which makes the computer unusable until you unplug them and reconfigure the port; it can report a different hard disk id, which causes software to de-license itself...Those are all things I have seen on customers' computers.
AW111 said:
Cobnapint said:
Surely this is 'clean' tricks. Win 10 is an improvement to anybody with a brain.
Except that the upgrade process breaks a lot of software - it reloads drivers, which can mess with com port assignments; it mis-recognises connected serial devices as mice, which makes the computer unusable until you unplug them and reconfigure the port; it can report a different hard disk id, which causes software to de-license itself...Those are all things I have seen on customers' computers.
...I'll get my coat.
AW111 said:
Except that the upgrade process breaks a lot of software - it reloads drivers, which can mess with com port assignments; it mis-recognises connected serial devices as mice, which makes the computer unusable until you unplug them and reconfigure the port; it can report a different hard disk id, which causes software to de-license itself...
Those are all things I have seen on customers' computers.
and trashes default programs, memory leaks in IE, "wonky" Wifi drivers, printers screwedThose are all things I have seen on customers' computers.
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff