When WSL2 first came out, some losers on /g/ were cheering that it would "make Linux obsolete". Four years later, I think it's safe to say they were kinda missing the point.
When WSL2 first came out, some losers on /g/ were cheering that it would "make Linux obsolete". Four years later, I think it's safe to say they were kinda missing the point.
You're viewing a single thread.
Ah, yes, the feature to update the operating system that is by default enabled but is able to be disabled completely.
If a *nix user can't figure out how to disable automatic updates, it's on them.
I have never touched this setting and never had unexpected updates occur. This 'Windows force update hur-dur' circlejerk is baffling and tiring.
AFAIK Windows will only "force" the update when you keep skipping them for long periods of time + I'm pretty sure Linux tards keep their OS updated, not sure why they can't do the same with Windows.
I mean, it's never an issue for a power user, which arguably most Linux advocates are. But the disable option available for the average user is known to be overridden by MS. And the way that is not susceptible to MS remote meddling requires a Pro license, technical knowledge, installation of advanced system administration tools. All things that most people either don't have, or are not allowed (restricted permissions in corporate equipment, etc.), or rightfully don't care to invest time into doing. So this is still a common occurrence.
"Dumb users have their system updated to protect them from themselves" is what I'm getting out of your comment, and frankly I think that's a good thing.
That's Microsoft's opinion of their users, yes.
Yeah this always baffled me; I love Linux and use it as a core for all my projects (containerized and VM), but disabling updates on windows takes about two minutes to open run > gpedit.msc > set auto updates to false
Are people really able to configure full Linux boxes to their liking but struggle to tick one box?