Quote Originally Posted by the_importer_ View Post
As someone who spent over 4 weeks after August's cumulative update broke our software (every VB6 software in the world stopped working) and dealing with angry customers that were running Windows 7 or above, trust me, I can tell you that you are plain wrong on this.

Yes, Windows 10 1809's "pause updates for a week" allowed some updates through, however, 1903's new feature doesn't, hence why all of our customers in 1903 (the last build where MS fixed their previous fuck-up) kept calling us asking if they could reactivate their updates, implying that the broken update didn't reinstall unlike the other Windows 10 builds.
So I'm not wrong, it just got fixed in 1903. Then again, I wouldn't know, my only 1903 install runs offline.
And still, why remove the option to block updates entirely, when that option was already present in previous Windows versions? Why can't I NOT have a specific update? I lost count to how many times I had to uninstall the wrong sound card drivers, because every time it checked for any update, it would try to install the damn thing again, and it wouldn't let me block it. This feature was present in Windows 7 and previous. I could simply untick the update to not install it. Why can't we have both the easy automatic version, and the manual installation process?

I'll tell you why: because it's in their interest to make changes to your system to suit THEIR needs. They can shove whatever new app they want, add whatever telemetry they need, remove whatever blocking software/method we add. Nowadays, I don't even consider HOSTS to block anything.
I don't even care about whatever data they get from me, but it's intrusive as hell, and we lost a lot of control over the software we own.

Oh, I'm sorry, do we actually own it anymore? Wasn't it supposed to be a service now?