Windows updates driving me crazy

[sandy stone]

TL;DR Summary

Incessant updates sucking up computing resources

Is anyone else experiencing this, or do I have some problem with my system? Almost every time I wake my computer from sleep mode, Windows springs into action downloading updates and hogging resources, locking out other programs (my browser, mail) for minutes at a time. I base this on the tasks "System", "Service host: Windows Update", "Windows Module Installer Worker", and "Service host: Unistack Service Group(4)" being the main culprits in Task Manager. Windows Defender keeps assuring me that everything is OK, that I don't have any viruses, but this is getting truly annoying. Does anyone have any insights?

 

[Baluncore]

Does anyone have any insights?

Windows 7 is stable and does not often receive updates.

 

[Wrichik Basu]

Windows 7 is stable and does not often receive updates.

Because it reached EOL four years back. So no security updates either; CVEs remain unpatched.

 

[FactChecker]

TL;DR Summary: Incessant updates sucking up computing resources

Is anyone else experiencing this, or do I have some problem with my system? Almost every time I wake my computer from sleep mode,

How long was it in sleep mode? Was it a long time? I have not noticed this on my computers except when I restart my laptop that has not been used for months.

Windows springs into action downloading updates and hogging resources, locking out other programs (my browser, mail) for minutes at a time.

I never try to use my computers when updates are in progress. I'm not sure what that might do. Many updates (especially bios updates) require a restart.

I base this on the tasks "System", "Service host: Windows Update", "Windows Module Installer Worker", and "Service host: Unistack Service Group(4)" being the main culprits in Task Manager. Windows Defender keeps assuring me that everything is OK, that I don't have any viruses, but this is getting truly annoying. Does anyone have any insights?

Do you know if the downloads and installs completed successfully? Maybe it keeps trying to install the same update and keeps failing.

 

[phinds]

I use Windows 10 and only rarely get updates ** because, like 7, it is no longer supported. If you are using 11, it's probably getting a lot of necessary updates. Windows is STUNNINGLY complicated under the hood and new issue come up all the time.

**EDIT: OOPS ! Just realized, I NEVER get Windows updates. I was thinking of browser updates.

 

[jack action]

That was one of the reasons I switched to Linux when I was using Windows 10. It was in 2018 and I never looked back. With Linux, you own the programs and do whatever you want with them; With Windows (or Apple), they own the programs and you have to use the services they offer according to their will.

Going back to my Linux installation first impressions, well, things have evolved a lot. I don't deal with most of the programs mentioned in that link and I favor using my own programs. Learning how to use Bash programs is so much fun and empowering.

Since then, I have been involved in the Tor and I2P networks and, up to this day, I have set up 17 servers around the world. The installation and monitoring processes are mostly automated in Bash programs I wrote, all done from my home computer, including automatic updates and backups.

Again, fun and empowering.

 

[Wrichik Basu]

Windows updates have always been intrusive. And they will continue to be so. The only way to get rid of this is to get rid of Windows itself and switch to Linux. It depends on what you do on the computer, though. If you use some software that has versions only for Windows, and you can't ditch them under any circumstances, and they don't work on VMs well, then bad luck. Some software, like ones used in crystallography, are closed source and do not have packages for Linux. That doesn't mean all closed-source software does that; MATLAB, for instance, has packages for Linux.

I, for instance, use Ubuntu, but have a VM on which I have a paid version of Adobe Acrobat Pro, which I need (once in a long while) to edit some PDF.

 

[sandy stone]

How long was it in sleep mode? Was it a long time? I have not noticed this on my computers except when I restart my laptop that has not been used for months.

I never try to use my computers when updates are in progress. I'm not sure what that might do. Many updates (especially bios updates) require a restart.

Do you know if the downloads and installs completed successfully? Maybe it keeps trying to install the same update and keeps failing.

Sleep mode was only overnight. How would you know if an update was successful or not?

 

[jack action]

How would you know if an update was successful or not?

Check the update history:

​

 

[hutchphd]

I too am very annoyed by Windows intrusiveness as well as it "mother knows best" attitude and lack of transparency. That being said have you explored start/settings/ windows update? You can see the update history and choose "axtive hours" where updates are (ostensibly) forbidden among other things. Give it a little bit of a look...
I would be (would have been) happy with XP forever, but there is no money to be made there.......so I like Win10 OK but soon that will be unsupported. I am too old for this agita......arghhh

 

[Tom.G]

Back in "The Good Old Days," Win XP and earlier, there were patches available from 3rd party on-line sites that blocked updates --- and they worked! (People were getting Pissed about Microsoft disabling features that they were using.)

I would not be surprised if patches exist for current Win versions. You just have to be rather cavalier to risk them. Make backups before using! YMMV.

 

[Hornbein]

TL;DR Summary: Incessant updates sucking up computing resources

Is anyone else experiencing this, or do I have some problem with my system? Almost every time I wake my computer from sleep mode, Windows springs into action downloading updates and hogging resources, locking out other programs (my browser, mail) for minutes at a time. I base this on the tasks "System", "Service host: Windows Update", "Windows Module Installer Worker", and "Service host: Unistack Service Group(4)" being the main culprits in Task Manager. Windows Defender keeps assuring me that everything is OK, that I don't have any viruses, but this is getting truly annoying. Does anyone have any insights?

I had that about fifteen years ago. It rendered my computer unusable. I disabled all updates.

I get updates nowadays. They don't bother me at all. It depends on how efficient your downloads.

 

[Rive]

Does anyone have any insights?

Based on the description, you have a PC (Likely: tablet? Laptop?) at the lower end of the performance scale.
You are just pressured to get a beefier one.
Though these days most tablets can handle a Linux. Might worth a look.
Mine (old Intel I3) will get that in a year or so, I think. Win10 was convenient for some time, but now it is not convenient much longer.

 

[Nik_2213]

A few days ago, so probably the same Win#10 update cycle, I got usual prompt for the 'needs re-start to complete'.
Took a while to install, suddenly jumped from 0% to 100 %. Then took about an hour to 'Clean Up'.

Not sure how long, because I went for leisurely mug of caffeine then tackled list of domestic 'ToDos'.

Another exasperation is Win'10 keeps nagging me to upgrade to #11 but, each time I run compatibility check it says 'UNSUITABLE'. Partly because my CAD_PC's big Gigabyte mobo needs a plug-in security chip. Similarly, my #10 'Network Render' Box needs related, but different leg-count chip to support #11...

Sadly, I fear that, should I fit such, I'll return to my updated #10 PCs to find #11 grinning back at me. Minus familiar Notepad, minus Wordpad. Loss of either would hurt, not least because latter is excellent for editing links / calls within sprawling OBJ 3D model files...

Oh, and the 'Win Knows Best' OS attitude spills over to their procrustean browser, too. I loathe 'Edge' or whatever its current incarnation. I keep it installed, garaged like an old 'beater' car for when I need to check if a site's problems are but a Chrome cookie throwing hissy fit...

And, given Microsoft's scary history of taking up to a year to patch zero-day exploit loopholes, I trust their security about as far as I could throw my floor-stood CAD_PC's tower case and its kilowatt PSU: Despite Norton's up-selling efforts, that product's still my preferred gate-guard...

 

[sandy stone]

I too am very annoyed by Windows intrusiveness as well as it "mother knows best" attitude and lack of transparency. That being said have you explored start/settings/ windows update? You can see the update history and choose "axtive hours" where updates are (ostensibly) forbidden among other things. Give it a little bit of a look...
I would be (would have been) happy with XP forever, but there is no money to be made there.......so I like Win10 OK but soon that will be unsupported. I am too old for this agita......arghhh

That sounds promising. I'll give it a look, thanks.

 

[russ_watters]

FYI, July 9th was Patch Tuesday. MS typically bundles together updates and pushes them out on the second Tuesday of every month. So you should expect it then, but be mostly free of updates otherwise.

 

[pbuk]

Windows 7 is stable and does not often receive updates.

But this:

Because it reached EOL four years back. So no security updates either; CVEs remain unpatched.

Windows 7 is only 'stable' in the sense that its vulnerability to attack is permanent.

I use Windows 10 and only rarely get updates ** because, like 7, it is no longer supported.

This is not true - in fact the latest Windows 10 update was rolled out the day before yesterday.

**EDIT: OOPS ! Just realized, I NEVER get Windows updates.

Sounds like you have turned them off: this is probably a bad idea.

 

[pbuk]

With Linux, you own the programs

This is not true.

With Windows (or Apple) ... you have to use the services they offer according to their will.

And the update service for most Linux distros is the same, except that with Linux 'they' are generally a couple of dozen people scattered around the world doing whatever they want to whereas with Windows 'they' are a few thousand people in Redmond who are paid to keep Windows on track.

 

[gleem]

I haven't been counting but I must have had at least three updates this year, one a few days ago. I've had my computer spontaneously shut down after the previous update. Chrome is my default browser so I wonder if MSFT hasn't finagled a way to get me to switch to Edge. When I download a PDF file in Chrome it is stored on my HD as a MS PDF file and opened in Edge.

 

[FactChecker]

And the update service for most Linux distros is the same, except that with Linux 'they' are generally a couple of dozen people scattered around the world doing whatever they want to

There are highly respected Linux distros that allow the user to have great control over the appearance and behavior of the OS. You just need to pick a distro and options that suits your preferences. IMO, Windows is not nearly the same -- you just get what they tell you you need.

 

[gleem]

MO, Windows is not nearly the same -- you just get what they say you need.

Or what they want you to have.

 

[phinds]

I haven't been counting but I must have had at least three updates this year, one a few days ago. I've had my computer spontaneously shut down after the previous update. Chrome is my default browser so I wonder if MSFT hasn't finagled a way to get me to switch to Edge. When I download a PDF file in Chrome it is stored on my HD as a MS PDF file and opened in Edge.

MS probably sets the default program for opening a PDF file to EDGE. Just change the default program to whatever you want.

 

[jack action]

With Linux, you own the programs

This is not true.

Maybe not the appropriate term. I meant it in the way that it is free and open-source, as you can do pretty much whatever you want with it:

Free and open-source software (FOSS) is software that is available under a license that grants the right to use, modify, and distribute the software, modified or not, to everyone free of charge.

With Windows (or Apple), ... you have to use the services they offer according to their will.

And the update service for most Linux distros is the same, except that with Linux 'they' are generally a couple of dozen people scattered around the world doing whatever they want to whereas with Windows 'they' are a few thousand people in Redmond who are paid to keep Windows on track.

I did mean "service" in general and not just "update service". The GAFAM guarantees you a program (and sometimes even a device) that will do a certain task, period. How it does it is not of your concern. You cannot share with others; the GAFAM wants to deal directly with every client. They usually want the update process under their full control as it may affect their reputation if you don't do it correctly.

Even though there are update services for Linux, the developers don't care how you choose to do them or if you don't do them at all. It is your machine, your programs, your responsibility. Why would they? Since you can modify how the programs work to suit your needs anyway. The developers don't even have to feel obligated to offer an updating service.

With GAFAM, you hire a contractor to get a turnkey solution to rebuild your kitchen; with Linux, you get the tools and material to do it yourself. Of course, the "tool" vendors are often trying to ease your load a lot if they want their product to be chosen.

 

[DrJohn]

I regularly close by putting the computer into sleep mode. But every month or six weeks, I tell it to do the download and update.
If the gap between updates that you run is very long, then the download and update takes ages. I used to do the updates every three or four months and had similar problems, which seemed to be due to only some of the updates completing themselves due to depending on earlier updates being completed, hence there would be a series of updates.
Try doing a monthly update, rather than once every three or four months.

 

[sandy stone]

Revisiting this issue, I backed up my system and with some trepidation allowed Windows to defrag my hard drive. I am mildly encouraged by the results; I'm still getting the updates, but they at least run faster. My update history shows successful updates at the rate of roughly twice a month; I'm not sure why these downloads are coming in seemingly every morning. Expanding the "active hours" on my system only seems to disable forced restarts, not the downloading of updates.

So, maybe I can just try speed up my system and live with Microsoft bombarding me. I have 12 Gb of RAM, with about 4 dedicated to a swap file. I can expand to 16 Gb pretty economically. Would it be worthwhile to do that, and expand the swap file at the same time, or should I just bite the bullet and go to 32 Gb?

 

[hutchphd]

Expanding the "active hours" on my system only seems to disable forced restarts, not the downloading of updates.

Yes I think you are correct.

 

[Vanadium 50]

It's not just Windows. I have a program from...um...another vendor (cough, Autodesk, cough) It would download the update, try and install it, run out of TEMP space and try again and again on the next boots. Drove me nuts - my network was slow and I kept running out of space on TEMP.

 

[pbuk]

So, maybe I can just try speed up my system
...
allowed Windows to defrag my hard drive

If you still have a spinning platter, good idea - get a decent SSD*.

I have 12 Gb of RAM, with about 4 dedicated to a swap file.

This does not make sense - swap files live on a disk, not in memory.

Would it be worthwhile to do that, and expand the swap file at the same time, or should I just bite the bullet and go to 32 Gb?

Unless you are running a number of virtual machines, really large spreadsheets or some special code running big computations more RAM is likely to be a waste of time. Does Performance Monitor say you are running low?

* Edit: this will also force you to do a full 'bare metal' installation of Windows which is likely to solve a LOT of problems, assuming you don't reinstall all the junk you have there at the moment that you probably don't even know about.

 

[sandy stone]

If you still have a spinning platter, good idea - get a decent SSD*.


This does not make sense - swap files live on a disk, not in memory.


Unless you are running a number of virtual machines, really large spreadsheets or some special code running big computations more RAM is likely to be a waste of time. Does Performance Monitor say you are running low?

* Edit: this will also force you to do a full 'bare metal' installation of Windows which is likely to solve a LOT of problems, assuming you don't reinstall all the junk you have there at the moment that you probably don't even know about.

My mistake on the swap file - what I meant to say, was that if I add RAM then the swap file on disk wouldn't be accessed as often.

Thanks all for your comments.

 

[DrJohn]

Have I missed something - I can't see any mention of which version of Windows you have.
And no mention of the size of your hard disk and how much free space is available on it.

As for a swap file - can't remember when I last used one of those.

Because your experience of updates is unlike anything I've experienced except on a 13 year old computer I am occasional required to work with for a particular client.

 

[Tom.G]

As for a swap file - can't remember when I last used one of those.

Windows creates one and uses it automagically. By default, it resides on the C: drive. Which, even if you have several drives, is the one most heavily used.

At least on the older versions of Windows, it was possible to relocate the Swap File to other drives. Then the heaviest usage is still often the C: drive with around 50% - 60% usage, followed by the swap drive.

Also, older versions defaulted to a relatively small swap file which really slowed down the system. This is where I got the most speed-up. IIRC, I had to edit the Registry to increase the file size.

PhotoShop for instance creates its own swap files, but at least gives you the option to specify their locations.

So yeah, moving the swap files to an SSD can speed things up if your disk is slow or fragmented and the memory usage is tight.

Cheers,
Tom

 

[sandy stone]

My system is about 4 years old, so Windows 10 version 22H2. 12 Gb RAM, right now about 60% used. 917 Gb hard drive, 146 Gb used, 770 Gb free. The bottleneck appears to be the hard drive, since the usage goes to 100% when the system bogs down; there has been some improvement since I defragged it.

I think my original post was triggered by the monthly update russ_watters mentioned, but even this morning I saw "Service Host: Windows Update" run for 10 seconds or so when I woke up the system, backing out my browser. I'm still considering adding RAM to see if that helps, since it's pretty inexpensive.

 

[DrJohn]

I don't think it is due to RAM. Windows 10 ran quite happily on 8Gb on my last Win 10 machine, while my partner also has only 8Gb on her machine. She also has just a 237 Gb disk, with about 130 Gb free. On her 8 year old laptop. With the same windows version as you quote above.

Her updates take 10 - 15 minutes - she hardly uses the PC at all and we are at the 15 minute mark in an update just now (I decided to test how long it took).
Edit: Then 10 minutes more to complete the restart and installation. I think it is almost 3 months since she last did an update.

So don't waste money on RAM, that is not your problem. She doesn't put her computer to sleep, she switches it off. So either you have too many things open at once coming out of sleep mode, or a dodgy hard disk. Try closing it down completely, then starting up and letting it run the updates with nothing else going on. For example, start it before going to bed or just after you get up.

Edit: Of course it might be that you are just a bit impatient, as from start to finish we have just taken 25 minutes.
Trying to avoid the updates tends to result in it taking much longer to complete when you finally do it,

 

[jack action]

I agree that additional RAM should not change anything. When you say:

Windows springs into action downloading updates and hogging resources, locking out other programs (my browser, mail) for minutes at a time.

I think you have the same problem I did: It is your connection that is saturated by the files transferred for the update. And then you can't use your browser or email. I never had the fastest connection available. (I have a 30 Mbps now.)

 

[Wrichik Basu]

If changing OS is not an option, then I would recommend not putting the system to sleep at all. This statement holds irrespective of whether the system is a laptop or a desktop. For a laptop, just keep it connected to power, disable sleep when the lid is closed, and leave it there. Windows has an option to automatically do an update if the system is idle for some time. Afaik, this "some time" can be modified too.

 

[berkeman]

Mentor Note -- A related discussion of the Crowdstrike update debacle has been split off into its own thread: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/crowdstrike-debacle-for-microsoft-windows-update.1064562/

 

[sysprog1]

Sounds like you have turned them off: this is probably a bad idea.

Yes, on a not-adequately-isolated machine running Win 10, If you're not going to vet and install at least the important (remedial or prophylactic) updates, then you would probably do better to let the auto-updates run.

Having weighed the risks against the instability and nuisance, I usually disable the auto-updates -- an open-source software tool that can disable (or re-enable) Win 10 Auto Update is available here: https://github.com/WereDev/Wu10Man

 

[Wrichik Basu]

Honestly, the best way to disable updates on Windows is to take it off the internet. My Windows 10 VM on Linux is never connected to internet. It works pretty fast and is stable, without updates poking in their nose when I am doing something important.

The discussion in this thread basically boils down to this:

• It's not possible to entirely turn off updates on Windows. Updates can be delayed at the most by setting active hours, but that's the limit.
• Even if it was hypothetically possible to switch off updates, that would be pretty bad because your system will miss crucial security updates too.
• Why does Windows force updates on users rather than letting users choose a time they are comfortable with? We don't know, maybe ask Microsoft?
• Is there no solution to the problem mentioned in the title? Both yes and no. If you can migrate to Linux, then yes, you will no longer be forced to update. If you can't migrate, you have two options:
  1. Keep your system disconnected from the internet. A viable solution for a VM, but definitely not for a normal setup. Even if you keep it disconnected from the internet in the latter situation, viruses may be injected into your system by network computers or USB drives. Without updating the OS, your system remains vulnerable to such malicious code that exploits unpatched vulnerabilities.
  2. Don't turn your system off. Before you get off for the day, start the updates; hopefully they should be done by the next time you sit at your system. (Unless, of course, someone like CrowdStrike pushes an update to brick your system.)

 

[jack action]

Why does Windows force updates on users rather than letting users choose a time they are comfortable with?

Because too many don't do it. From the point of view of Microsoft, this makes their product more vulnerable and hurts their reputation. Because even if the users don't follow the recommended maintenance that doesn't make the company right in their mind.

 

[sysprog1]

Honestly, the best way to disable updates on Windows is to take it off the internet.

There are multiple ways to disable the auto-updates that more precisely fit the purpose than that, e.g. you could use your router's firewall to disallow downloads from Microsoft domains,.

• It's not possible to entirely turn off updates on Windows. Updates can be delayed at the most by setting active hours, but that's the limit.

That's not accurate -- you can turn off Windows 10 Update (and turn it back on), e.g. by use of methods and a software tool described and downloadable here: https://github.com/WereDev/Wu10Man

Even if it was hypothetically possible to switch off updates, that would be pretty bad because your system will miss crucial security updates too.

You can switch Windows Update off, and turn it back on to do updates when you decide to. That allows you to put in updates that you deem necessary or appropriate, without giving MS a blanket pass to make whatever changes it wants to make, whenever it wants to make them, on and to your system.

• Why does Windows force updates on users rather than letting users choose a time they are comfortable with? We don't know, maybe ask Microsoft?

I think it's pretty clear that MS doesn't want to allow opting out of forced updates -- with Win 7, they had a method for setting delays, but not 'until further notice' delays, and as of later Win 10 releases,, the option to delay is no longer presented.

 

[Wrichik Basu]

That's not accurate -- you can turn off Windows 10 Update (and turn it back on), e.g. by use of methods and a software tool described and downloadable here: https://github.com/WereDev/Wu10Man

A software tool that has been archived and no longer supported. Will likely no longer work pretty soon.

 

[sysprog1]

A software tool that has been archived and no longer supported. Will likely no longer work pretty soon.

That assessment does not support your contention that "it's not possible to entirely turn off updates on Windows". The software tool is downloadable, it works today, and it likely will work on any version of Windows 10 Update for as long as Win 10 is supported -- and that software tool is only an example -- other methods are available that also work. MS has tried in Win 10 to make it difficult to prevent auto-reinstatement of its auto-updater, but the user community has found ways to successfully keep it switched off

 

[jack action]

That assessment does not support your contention that "it's not possible to entirely turn off updates on Windows".

I think he means it is not possible in a Microsoft-approved way. When you know nothing about computers, you don't install stuff found from who knows where.

But of course, there is always a way. Worst case scenario, I could imagine some firewall rule restricting access to the update URL would do the trick.

 

[sysprog1]

I think he means it is not possible in a Microsoft-approved way.

If there were a 100% MS-approved way, then presumably there would be no reason for the OP to have started this thread. The tool automates use of MS-approved interfaces to accomplish the disabling of auto-update functions.

When you know nothing about computers, you don't install stuff found from who knows where.

It's open source, and its workings are well explained in the accompanying documentation.

But of course, there is always a way. Worst case scenario, I could imagine some firewall rule restricting access to the update URL would do the trick.

Yes, this is from my prior post (#40) in this thread:

Honestly, the best way to disable updates on Windows is to take it off the internet.

There are multiple ways to disable the auto-updates that more precisely fit the purpose than that, e.g. you could use your router's firewall to disallow downloads from Microsoft domains,.

 

[James Demers]

How long was it in sleep mode? Was it a long time? I have not noticed this on my computers except when I restart my laptop that has not been used for months.

I never try to use my computers when updates are in progress. I'm not sure what that might do. Many updates (especially bios updates) require a restart.

Do you know if the downloads and installs completed successfully? Maybe it keeps trying to install the same update and keeps failing.

TL;DR Summary: Incessant updates sucking up computing resources

Is anyone else experiencing this, or do I have some problem with my system?

This drove me nuts when I used PCs. Literally, one of the reasons I now use Macs. (I can run Windows in a virtual machine on the rare occasions that I need to . . . but guess what? )
Your best defense might be to turn off your Wi-FI (or router) before booting up, and turn it back on only when you need to access the Internet. Reboot at bedtime, and by morning you should be good to go ... until next time.

 

[vela]

(I can run Windows in a virtual machine on the rare occasions that I need to . . . but guess what? )

I used to do this as well so I could test out assignments for one of my classes. I ran Windows so infrequently, most of the time was spent installing the updates.

 

[Rive]

From the point of view of Microsoft, this makes their product more vulnerable and hurts their reputation.

From my point of view messing my settings and limiting my control over my PC is hurting me.

By the way... Just now I was forced to switch to W11. I want back my detailed, long, nice looking context menu

 

[Nik_2213]

Win'11 ?? I keep getting M$'s increasingly insistent prompts to upgrade my '10'.

From time to time, I run the '11' compatibility checking tool. Every time, it reports 'No way...'
Seems this tool does not 'phone home', as their upgrade pleas continue unabated...
It's mostly the security chip thing: Both this CAD_Tower and the network render 'Box' have a mobo port for a plug-in dongle. But, if I did that, a Tuesday brunch would surely find the '10' update included an unwanted '11', disabling or deranging many of my warily coaxed 'legacy' tools and utilities...

FWIW, I have a reasonably fast ISP link, ~8 MBs (~100Mbs), but waiting for even 'minor' Win'10 upgrades that stall at 80~~90% to tediously unwind, retry day after day after day is a serious inconvenience.

 

[phinds]

From my point of view messing my settings and limiting my control over my PC is hurting me.

Sure, but do you seriously think that MS give a rat's patootie about you? Or me? Or ANY of its users?

 

[phinds]

I keep getting M$'s increasingly insistent prompts to upgrade my '10'

I was also inundated with the same thing for a while. I don't know what I did but it has to have been something because I haven't gotten a single one in many months.