this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2024
1406 points (92.9% liked)
linuxmemes
20688 readers
1206 users here now
I use Arch btw
Sister communities:
- LemmyMemes: Memes
- LemmyShitpost: Anything and everything goes.
- RISA: Star Trek memes and shitposts
Community rules
- Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
- Be civil
- Post Linux-related content
- No recent reposts
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Interestingly, I like to keep my network connected devices up to date. Why would I disable that on any OS?
For me, candy crush et al was never installed on my Windows computers by default, both on home and pro versions. There were install shortcuts, but never the actual programs themselves.
I expect a modern computer to be able to do whatever updates it wants in the background, and apply any kernel changes when I restart it. Ubuntu has been able to do both for years.
Actually, Linux in general, not just Ubuntu. You could even update the app while running said app (like your browser). It won't crash, you just have to restart it in order to use the new version. You could literally be running every single app that the update updates and it won't crash. Once loaded in RAM, there is nothing tying it to the place where it resides on disk. You could even delete the binary if you'd like, it would still keep running... unless you close it, then you won't be able to run it again, lol 😂. There are a few exceptions though, like services (daemons), but that is only in systemd land, other init/service managers will allow you to just restart the service and load the new updated version of it.
Keeping a Pro or a Home install up to date is not always a good thing. From a security standpoint, yes, I do agree, but when half your personal files go missing after an update... you kinda start wondering why you let this thing update automatically in the first place.
LTSC editions though, yes. I leave them to autoupdate. They do it like once a month anyway, so it's not that big of a deal anyway, it's not really such a big problem. And the updates don't take that long, no new features are added, just security updates and that's it.
So, if you're worried about security and being up to date, I'd recommend the Windows LTSC editions. That is the only thing I ever install if I have to install Windows.
I haven't experienced the missing files issue on any of the machines I use, nor have the people I know. I guess the missing files thing is when some people set up their directories in a specific unusual way.
On a couple of machines my personal directories are in the default locations and on one machine there on a separate drive.
Home should never EVER be touched, period.
Apparently the files were never deleted. The issue was something failed with a temp profile during the update process for some users. I don't care enough to read on it further. That's good enough in my opinion and not a reason to avoid Windows.