Everyone's threat models are different, mine simply doesn't care about most system-level vulnerabilities. I have had far more of my time and nerves wasted in the past by Windows Update compared to the supposed threats those updates protect against; the cure is worse than the disease.
Been working this way since Windows Update has been a thing, and I've never been let down. Judging by the many tales of people getting grief from Windows Update, I'm perfectly content to continue as I have. I will run system updates when it pleases me, and no sooner.
And you think this administrator is you rather than some botnet master taking advantage of your unpatched system? :-)
Potentially letting criminals control my machine in order to avoid giving slightly more control over my machine to Microsoft than they already have seems like the wrong choice to me.
If I was so concerned about Microsoft's updates that I would even consider this option, I would be urgently looking to replace Microsoft as my OS vendor. And if that wasn't an option (because lock-in) I would hold my nose and choose Microsoft over organised crime.
Citation? Running a Wineserver should use less resources than a complete Win32 runtime.
Maybe things have changed since my last test (Ubuntu on my ~2011 MBA installed ~12mo ago)
Yup. I use my computer to achieve things, whether extraordinary or mundane. I could run most of my software through WINE or some form of virtualization on Linux, but at the cost of jank. Why would I bother with inferior experience for sake of dogma? It's not even all my software either.
>Corporate compliance?
While compliance doesn't apply in my case, doing business dictates my computer be generally compatible with the other party's computer. So that means Windows and Office.
>Familiarity?
Yup. Windows is reliable, MacOS is limited and Linux just wastes my time.
That sound unhinged... “so I we handcuffed our manager in my dungeon last year, and since the team has been doing great work; frankly our boss is quite well-behaved if the scrum master actually wields their power”
Better to use a long term servicing channel (LTSC) than disable Windows Update entirely.
The LTSC versions of Windows only get security updates, not feature updates.
What is your plan here? Do you manually update after some time, or do you plan on running that version until you reinstall Windows 11? Do you reinstall with an updated ISO?
Generally I don't reinstall Windows as I don't mistreat my Windows installations. As we speak, I've got a 15-year old XP install and an 11-year old Windows 7 install running perfectly fine on their machines (a Pentium 4 and i7-2700K machine respectively).
Yes.
Running Windows 11, I use Chromium for my daily usage and Pale Moon for specific tasks, along with Edge for things I want to cordon in another browser altogether.
Windows 11 hasn't given me grief in my so far ~1.5 years of daily driving it, and I don't necessarily hold Edge's nagging against it since it's browsers catfighting each other. Chrome and Firefox also act likewise when given the chance.
I will note that I have Windows Update completely blocked and disabled via Group Policy, which means my system settings never get reset under the guise of "updates" every month unlike most people's setups. In fact, I'm still running 21H2, NT kernel version 10.0.22000.1281.
Windows 11 is quite well behaved if the administrator actually wields his administrative powers, as it turns out.