Seriously Microsoft!?

[Toby]

So, as I was in the middle of things come the end of the day at work, I simply locked my computer and switched the monitors off. Next morning, I'm confronted by a logon prompt rather than an unlock one. That's weird think I, there hasn't been a power outage or anything, so maybe it blue screened and rebooted or something.

I check the event logs and discover that, at 3am, it downloaded some updates and then, as one required a reboot, took it upon itself to do so! So despite the computer being logged in and with numerous applications open, so patently 'in use', Windows decided it would force a reboot.

Not only that, but it force-closed applications too! I had a query window open in SQL Management Studio and, when this app was asked to close, it had obviously asked whether to save the query. Windows had then force-closed the app as, when I restarted it, it went into recovery mode and asked if I wanted to try to recover the files.

Normally I change the Windows Update settings to just tell me about updates and leave me to download and install them when I want to but, following a recent reinstall, I'd forgotten to change this.

What I want to know is what utterly brain-dead moron at Microsoft thought this was a good idea? By default, Windows will take it upon itself to force a reboot when you're not there, even if the machine is logged on and applications are running and even if those apps don't respond to a 'polite' close request.

[Garp]

Drove one of the devs here utterly crazy after a rebuild :)

Microsoft are trying to walk a difficult tightrope in regards to security. Too many Windows boxes are out there being compromised because they're not patched up to date, and even ones with Auto Update on are being left connected to the internet 24x7 without being restarted, leaving them just as vulnerable.
If they don't do the forced restart, people get pissed because of the amount of malware, worms and spam. If they do the forced restart, people get pissed because they might lose work. MS are having to err on the side of caution or risk further reducing the reputation of the OS.

[Toby]

I understand the dilemma but endless nag screens about rebooting would be preferable to just doing it without the user's permission and quite possibly binning work in un-saved documents in the process.

[Mark]

Most of the time users just blindly click buttons on nag screens without reading them, so they don't work. And that goes for UAC too.

Microsoft have to do the updates some time and overnight when you're supposed to be logged off is the best time. Forcing a shutdown is rather naughty though - cancelling the shutdown rather than forcing it and then retrying the next night seems more friendly, and so on (up to a reasonable limit like a week).

That said, Microsoft did (and probably still do) have a drive to avoid reboots where possible. It was one of their key features for Server 2008, for example. Gone are the days where every update required a reboot.

[leowyatt]

Used to drive me up the wall too where I'd just come in and find my machine randomly asking me to login despite having locked it before going home.

Thankfully I no longer have this problem :D

[Mark]

Nope - you just get CUI (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/02/02/os-x-10-7-3-update-issues-fixable-in-many-cases-with-combo-version/) errors instead. :p

[Feek]

Not only that, but it force-closed applications too! I had a query window open in SQL Management Studio and, when this app was asked to close, it had obviously asked whether to save the query.
You left a machine locked overnight without saving your work?

*shakes head* users *sigh*

That said, Microsoft did (and probably still do) have a drive to avoid reboots where possible. It was one of their key features for Server 2008, for example. Gone are the days where every update required a reboot.
We still have to reboot every single Windows server and every PC on a monthly basis. It's very unusual for a set of monthly patches not to force a reboot, I can only think of one instance when it's happened and that was a welcome change.

[Garp]

We still have to reboot every single Windows server and every PC on a monthly basis. It's very unusual for a set of monthly patches not to force a reboot, I can only think of one instance when it's happened and that was a welcome change.

It's neat that *nix and *BSD based OSs like OSX can do updates without requiring a reboot. Unfortunately it seems we're more and more frequently seeing kernel upgrades, about the only thing that does require one. Even worse, the technology to do upgrades on the fly (ksplice) is now stitched up by Oracle.