Woody Leonhard's no-bull news, tips and help for Windows, Office and more… Please disable your ad blocker – our (polite!) ads help keep AskWoody going!
Home icon Home icon Home icon Email icon RSS icon
  • Schadenfreude: A Windows Update bricked Steven Sinofsky’s Surface RT

    Home Forums Outside the box Fun Stuff Schadenfreude: A Windows Update bricked Steven Sinofsky’s Surface RT

    This topic contains 28 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by  OscarCP 4 months, 1 week ago.

    • Author
      Posts
    • #209337 Reply

      gborn
      AskWoody MVP

      I need to confess – it caused here a kind of Schadenfreude …

      https://borncity.com/win/2018/08/08/a-windows-update-bricked-steven-sinofskys-surface-rt/

      10 users thanked author for this post.
    • #209457 Reply

      anonymous

      “It belongs in a museum!” – Indiana Jones

      That thing is a computing artifact, because of what happened to his machine and the company that caused the failure. Will Microsoft replace that Surface RT with new old stock?

    • #209532 Reply

      MrJimPhelps
      AskWoody MVP

      I have always had a lot of respect for Steve Sinofsky for the masterpiece he created in Windows 8.0. It ran exceptionally well on my old, lame eMachines computer. Using StartIsBack eliminated the one problem I had with Windows 8.0 – the tablet interface.

      Windows 8.1 ran terribly on that old computer, and so I was really ticked off when Microsoft so quickly cancelled support for Windows 8.0.

      Group "L" (Linux Mint)
      with Windows 8.1 running in a VM
      3 users thanked author for this post.
      • #209560 Reply

        OscarCP
        AskWoody Lounger

        MrJimPhelps: This is so very remarkable! You know that you are the only credible person I have ever heard say or write a good word about Windows 8.0 (or about S. S.)? Is such a praiseworthy result, perhaps, only possible when running it on an “old, lame” personal computer? Or does “StartlsBack” actually much improved Win 8.0? And which update actually bricked that Surface PC and started this thread?

        • #209654 Reply

          MrJimPhelps
          AskWoody MVP

          Actually, Woody had some very complimentary things to say about Steve Sinofsky as well:

          Sinofsky should’ve been expecting a large reward for his successes with Windows 8 — the new design that bridges the gap between tablet and PC, the coding core that’s been propagated from smartphones to ARM to massive server farms and everywhere in between, and the fact that he once again brought a mammoth, technically tricky, high-quality project in on time.

          …and…

          Sinofsky’s departure marks the end of an era. Sinofsky, Larson-Green, DeVaan, and Grant George have been building software together since the days of Office 95, and they’ve produced remarkable billion-dollar hits, one after another. It remains to be seen if Microsoft can pull it all together in a post-Sinfosky world.

          https://www.infoworld.com/article/2616213/microsoft-windows/the-real-reason-steve-sinofsky-left-microsoft.html

          Group "L" (Linux Mint)
          with Windows 8.1 running in a VM
          3 users thanked author for this post.
          • #209667 Reply

            OscarCP
            AskWoody Lounger

            Sinofsky should’ve been expecting a large reward for his successes with Windows 8 — the new design that bridges the gap between tablet and PC, the coding core that’s been propagated from smartphones to ARM to massive server farms and everywhere in between, and the fact that he once again brought a mammoth, technically tricky, high-quality project in on time.

            I can easily believe that there have been those that were impressed by the sheer technical ability that made it possible to create a new OS that could turn full-blown PCs into tablets and smartphones with touch screens, only bigger. But I also remember that many did not find that to their taste or particularly convenient. For whatever reason, some people really insisted on continuing to use their PCs as PCs and were not amused by the change when they moved from 7 to 8.0. Odd.

            ”  It remains to be seen if Microsoft can pull it all together in a post-Sinfosky world.

            Well… no.

            1 user thanked author for this post.
            • #209756 Reply

              MrJimPhelps
              AskWoody MVP

              For whatever reason, some people really insisted on continuing to use their PCs as PCs and were not amused by the change when they moved from 7 to 8.0.

              This was the one major problem (in my opinion) with Windows 8.0. But it was easily fixed by installing StartIsBack, Start8, Classic Shell, or one of the other add-ons which would give you the Windows 7 style start button and start menu.

              Microsoft could have given the user the choice of which interface they wanted to use. At least they included the functionality to allow third party developers to write apps which would give the user that choice.

              Group "L" (Linux Mint)
              with Windows 8.1 running in a VM
        • #209663 Reply

          Ascaris
          AskWoody MVP

          Edit: 8.0, gotcha.  I missed that you were talking about the original 8 rather than 8.x.

          I never used 8.0, but I do know that the problems it has were all supposed to have been fixed by Classic Shell.  Classic Shell could bring back the Start button, and it has the option to make 8 boot to the desktop instead of Metro, things that MS themselves added in 8.1.

          As far as the can’t close ’em “apps,” which were improved in 8.1, my solution was to not use anything Metro– I have been using Metro Blocker on 8.1 for a while, and it definitively prevents anything Metro from running.  This required a few workarounds, like using Intel Proset to select WiFi access points instead of Windows (the dialog in 8.x is Metro).  The MS indexer missing things would not bother me as I use Everything for search, and it simply blows any MS search tool I’ve seen out of the water anyway.  It’s a hundred times faster and it misses nothing!

          I never used 8.0, but in retrospect, all of its flaws with regard to 8.1 were things that Classic Shell is able to fix.  Whether there would have been other things I don’t know about, I can’t say.

          And now the message that missed the point…

          Noel Carboni and I have also said good things about Windows 8.1, once it’s suitably modified.  It has kind of become the techie/power user’s Windows.  The ridiculous interface is relatively easily bypassed by people who know how to install and configure Classic Shell (or similar) and some other such things, and when that’s done, what’s left is a credible desktop OS that is stable, fast, and has quite a few more years of support than 7.  It’s also the version of Windows that has had by far the fewest defects fixed in the last few patch Tuesdays, and that has had the least number of issues introduced by Windows patches.

          I would not call 8 a masterpiece as it was out of the box, but I would also not suggest that Windows 8 was so bad that its users have no reason not to immediately upgrade to 10 (which in my book is was an unmitigated disaster) as so many have, Woody included.  I upgraded from 7 to 8.1 about a year and a half after Windows 10 was released… Windows 8.1 is quite decent even for a UI purist like myself if suitably modified, but 10… no, just… no.

          Group L (Linux): KDE Neon User Edition 5.14.4 (based on Ubuntu 18.04) + Windows 7 in Virtualbox VM

          • This reply was modified 4 months, 1 week ago by  Ascaris.
          3 users thanked author for this post.
          • #209758 Reply

            MrJimPhelps
            AskWoody MVP

            I have often heard that 8.1 fixed the problems that 8.0 had. But I’ve never been able to figure out what those problems were. For me, 8.1 caused problems – lots of them – when I upgraded from 8.0 to 8.1 on my old eMachines computer.

            In fact, as I recall, the only thing that runs better on that computer than Windows 8.0 is Elementary OS (Linux). Not any version of Mint, Ubuntu, or anything else. If Windows 8.0 was still being supported by Microsoft, that is what I would be running on that machine.

            Group "L" (Linux Mint)
            with Windows 8.1 running in a VM
            1 user thanked author for this post.
          • #209856 Reply

            OscarCP
            AskWoody Lounger

            Ascaris: Please notice that the modifications to the system by installing third-party add-ons to undo some of the main features of the user/machine interface are, for ordinary users, more akin to quadruple coronary bypasses than to the ordinary and inevitable tweaks to any new operating system one always fully expects to have to do anyways. Staying on with the medical metaphor, the latter inconveniences are more like yearly check ups and keeping track of the medicines one has to take regularly, as well as keeping up with the periodic tests needed to monitor their effect and, when necessary, adjust their dosage.

            But for those who delight in tweaking their PCs’ operating systems, Win 8.0 and, to some extent, 8.1 must have been a veritable godsend. Not, for example, for someone like me, who mainly uses the PC to develop software for scientific data analysis because such software does not exist elsewhere and one needs to make it oneself if one wants to do one’s job. Which is why I have skipped, first 8.0, then 8.1 and now, and it seems terminally, 10 in its various mutations and forthcoming final ascension to the Cloud as a service for hire.

            • #209971 Reply

              Ascaris
              AskWoody MVP

              Oscar,

              I know not everyone is ready to go to some of the lengths that advanced users are to customize Windows, but the heavy lifting is really done by one or two programs, and these are not really hard to figure out.  Classic Shell is just a program, like any other, and if installing it and configuring the options is beyond ordinary users, what are they going to be doing with Windows anyway?  I presume people buy a PC to use with programs of their choosing, not just to use what came with it.

              Some of the most computer illiterate people I know have still managed to install and set up a lot of things that are no less complex than Classic Shell.  The hard part is in learning that it exists in the first place… once you’ve got the name, Google will do the rest for you.  Downloading is easy, and so is running the installer.

              I find installing Classic Shell to be considerably easier than trying to figure out how to use the start screen in 8.1 or the smaller but still lacking version in 10 (both of which lack the drag and drop simplicity of the older Start Menus– which Classic Shell gets you back).

              Group L (Linux): KDE Neon User Edition 5.14.4 (based on Ubuntu 18.04) + Windows 7 in Virtualbox VM

              1 user thanked author for this post.
            • #210054 Reply

              OscarCP
              AskWoody Lounger

              Ascaris,

              I am lucky for having this deeply ingrained personal trait of being cautious with adopting new things that, when it comes to PCs, translates as follows: that I never, ever would use anything critical to my work on them, such as a new OS, until I have heard and read about it enough, for long enough to be satisfied that doing so is a good move. So I bought the PC I still use more than seven years ago, with Windows 7 pre-installed, after waiting for one year to see the SP1 version come out (and for my old, old PC running xp to be ripe for retirement.) Then I waited to see how it went with: Vista, but that never got my unreserved approval, so I waited for 8.0, which got my two thumbs down as soon as enough about its work-inappropriate user/machine interface was heard to be said and often repeated. I waited for that to be fixed, but 8.1 did not get to be around long enough for me to be convinced by it when Wham! Windows 10 showed up and MS attempted to shove it down my throat, with all the nagging plus that devious forced “upgrading” when clicking off a nagging pop-up, all of which told me to stay well away from it. And that is where things still stand around here.

              All this to preface my reasons (and those of many like me) for not being interested in getting something that, right out of the box, was guaranteed to need a lot of tinkering under the hood before it would be fit to take us from A to B, which is what we really wanted to do in the first place and why we bought the new machine with the thing pre-installed (if such was our misfortune), or decided (most unwisely), or found ourselves dragooned into “upgrading” from the mediocre but still useful OS we had been working with until that fatal day.

              And by a lot of tinkering under the hood I mean: looking around, while battling that user-disdainful interface just to surf the Web through it, for some cure for at least its most obvious ills. Then, finally, after weeks, or months, coming up with a short list of potentially safe moves, including the installation of some third party software that *might* make things better in spite of its possible shortcomings and obnoxious side effects, then learning how to set up all that “curative” software. For finally, assuming all that worked out as more or less hoped, being left looking forward to just the many mundane annoyances caused by discovering and learning how to deal with all the glitches and bugs any new OS comes most assuredly plagued with.

              So, most respectfully, I disagree with Woody’s glowing appraisal of S.S.’s technical achievement in orchestrating the creation Windows 8.0, and while respecting here your opinion and MrJimPhelps’, I can only offer a Hmm! as a comment on them.

            • #210082 Reply

              Ascaris
              AskWoody MVP

              I disliked Windows 8.x a lot more before Windows 10 arrived on the scene.  I was happily using XP more than a decade after it first appeared, but I was outgrowing 32-bit operating systems in general.  XP 64-bit had never really caught on, and by some reports was inferior to its 32-bit version, and the time was ticking on XP the way it is now with 7.

              That’s when I first moved to 7.  It was already well into the 8.1 era, but 8.x was a disaster, as far as I was concerned.  It was an entire OS that was built around a faulty premise: that it was possible to have one UI that would work on touch-oriented mobiles and on desktops.  It was, and is, a foolish endeavor that “looks good on paper,” but that can’t work in the real world.

              And then Windows 10 came along.  It was going to be the “fix” for Windows 8.x, with everything wrong made right.  Look how that turned out!

              It took Windows 10 for me to learn what a truly bad Windows version would look like.  After a while of watching as everyone valiantly fought against their own PCs for control, I began to wonder what in Windows 8 had stirred so much disdain in my own mind.  Yes, it had a ridiculous interface that had no reason to exist other than to try to help Microsoft catch up in mobile (which failed, obviously), but it still didn’t monetize you.  It didn’t force updates.  It wasn’t getting service-pack level releases every 6 months.  It didn’t have the telemetry (at least at first).

              At the same time, it didn’t appear much better than 8.1 to me either.  Win 8.1 has a terrible, flat theme; Windows 10 has an even worse flat, nearly borderless, white on white with a side of white theme.  Win 8.1 had a ridiculous tiled start screen; Windows 10 had a ridiculous tiled start menu that was basically the same thing, but didn’t take up the whole screen.  Win 8.1 had the ribbon in Explorer, and so did 10.  Where was this return to the desktop UI that I’d heard so much about?  Making start take up half the screen instead of all of it?  That’s your big return to the desktop, Microsoft?

              Windows 7 had a better UI out of the box than 8.1 did by far, but even with 7 I’d installed Classic Shell and bunches of other stuff.  I’d developed my custom theme so I could get rid of the terrible tearing in the Classic theme.  I’d installed tweaking programs like WinAero Tweaker, and I’d made dozens of registry changes to nip and tuck Windows into shape.  I’d installed 7+ Taskbar Tweaker to finally put an end to those blasted mouseover thumbnails and put seconds on the tray clock.  I was already using nearly everything that it would take to make 8.1 just as good as 7, and I was in 7!

              The last Windows that I used with a UI that only featured Microsoft modifications (registry edits, official options, etc.) was XP, in “Classic” mode, which is to say that it had the Win2k UI.  After that, it took more and more aftermarket tools to make Windows work for me. Even the beloved Windows 7 would not have made me happy if I was restricted to MS-approved changes.  At that point, the move to 8.1 didn’t seem bad at all.

              We’re now at the point that the current version of Windows cannot, in any way that I can tell, be modified enough to work for me.  No matter what I do, it still is going to try to take control of my PC and press it into service to Microsoft.  At its core, beneath the insane UI, 8.x was still a classic Windows OS that does what the user wants, but 10 isn’t.  I could begrudgingly adapt to the unchangeable bits of the still-ridiculous Windows 10 UI, but I can’t adapt to WaaS, forced updates, monetization, or the notion that I am going to have to fight MS over control of my own property.

               

              Group L (Linux): KDE Neon User Edition 5.14.4 (based on Ubuntu 18.04) + Windows 7 in Virtualbox VM

              2 users thanked author for this post.
            • #210092 Reply

              OscarCP
              AskWoody Lounger

              Ascaris, OK, you think better than I do of Windows 8.x, because it was not as bad as what followed. I  can certainly sympathize with, as well as understand better, your previous comments.

              But here is the thing: with Windows 7, yes, I also had to jump through several annoying hoops to get it to work anywhere close to 100% for me the way I needed it to (and, very occasionally, I still have to — it never really ends!), but for that I had to jump through one hoop now, the next one some considerable time later… With Win 8.x, and probably with 8.0 in particular, it looked like one had to jump through a whole many of them just to get going. Which was my point: not a very attractive proposition, at least for someone like me, who was lucky not to be stuck with that system in a new PC, preinstalled there by the OEM, so still had an easy choice left on the matter of which system to use.

              • This reply was modified 4 months, 1 week ago by  OscarCP.
              2 users thanked author for this post.
            • #210097 Reply

              Ascaris
              AskWoody MVP

              With Win 8.x, and probably with 8.0 in particular, it looked like one had to jump through a whole many of them just to get going.

              Yes, I agree (and it wasn’t just that it looked like that… it actually was that way), and that was how I perceived it when I moved to Windows 7 instead of 8.1, from the perspective of someone who had only used more conventional Windows versions, and who was looking for more of the same (as I still am).  Looking at it as a whole, 8.0 was an incomprehensible mess as it appears (8.1 was better, but still not good enough), and it’s also true that it shouldn’t be necessary to intervene so much to get to the same level of basic usability for desktops (not tablets) that we had always had before.  Such is the world we’re in, though, unfortunately.

              Win 8.x only started to look good once I realized that my existing OS already had all the stuff I would need to tame 8 installed, which is a very different perspective than what I had before. It looked more like the raw materials that could be turned into a decent OS rather than a strange and idiotic OS in and of itself.  By that point, I was already aware of all of the silly bits of 8.1 and I already had the fixes planned.  I was able to assemble a set of tools to fix what I knew was wrong with 8.1 before I even installed it.  Once I did all that, I liked it, but only to the extent that I had removed what MS thought was “special” about it.

               

              Group L (Linux): KDE Neon User Edition 5.14.4 (based on Ubuntu 18.04) + Windows 7 in Virtualbox VM

            • #210107 Reply

              AlexEiffel
              AskWoody MVP

              I don’t think 8.1 is much harder to tweak than 7 to make it usable for a normal user, although you can tweak it into an even more interesting proposition if you want. The worst thing about those two OSes is probably to get rid of all the bloatware that comes preinstalled on the consumers models and the manufacturer’s “drivers” that you don’t need and that slows down your machine or make it freeze or bsod or have a memory leak.

              I feel like Ascaris about the UI that generally degraded from Xp to 8 or maybe 2000 to 10. But under the hood it was getting better until 10 arrived, for the reasons Ascaris described and due to frequent changes and poor QA.

            • #210111 Reply

              OscarCP
              AskWoody Lounger

              Bloatware is truly a blight on us PC users, reducing unnecessarily our machines’ available storage capacity and speed and, occasionally, causing a variety of strange problems. It seems like a wanton shoveling of useless boilerplate code into one’s device for no understandable reason, or even real profit for the bloaters. But it is one thing I do not think we long-suffering bloatees can really blame on MS, except for the post-Vista bloating of either the whole or half the desktop with large, colorful tiles.

      • #209662 Reply

        AlexEiffel
        AskWoody MVP

        Interesting as always, MrJimPhelps.

        8.0 (not 8.1) is the only Windows version (except maybe Me) I had waited to try and still was completely unable to see how I would use it productively. There was so many things that didn’t work well for me as a user like the indexer not finding many things and some things that I don’t remember that really were very bad in terms of UI (no way to close a window for normal users that don’t use ALT-F4 except by pulling it down, maybe?). I don’t know if StartIsBack fixed that or only the obfuscating and distracting full screen start menu.

        Anyway, 8.1 was great for me and it seems to be for Noel, so I am quite surprised by your bad experience with it vs 8.0. Still, interesting to hear!

        • This reply was modified 4 months, 1 week ago by  AlexEiffel.
        1 user thanked author for this post.
      • #209693 Reply

        Noel Carboni
        AskWoody MVP

        Windows 8.1 ran terribly on that old computer

        I think I know what this is about…

        The FILE SYSTEM got a LOT slower in Win 8.1 vs. 8.0 when accessed in certain ways.

        Under many conditions, that could feel like the system is a lot more sluggish on the same hardware.

        Mostly the slowdown is felt in Explorer. There’s a test I used to like to perform that shows this issue off:

        1. Open an Explorer window.

        2. Navigate to C:\

        3. Select all files in the right pane.

        4. Right-click the selected files and choose Properties.

        5. Time how many seconds it takes them to finish.

        6. Do the whole thing again to get the cached vs. uncached result. The second result is more interesting in that it tends to measure OS efficiency.

        On my workstation, which runs from a RAID 0 array of big SSDs, in Windows 7 I used to see about 50,000 files per second enumerated in that Properties panel. It went down to about 45,000/sec with Windows 8.0, but dropped further to about 18,000/sec with Windows 8.1.

        Explorer, of course, is your desktop integrator. If you use it a lot and your disk performance isn’t insane (like more modern systems), you’d have felt that change.

        For me 8.1 brought so many other things I needed (not all of which were from Microsoft; 3rd party developers had finally come out with things that fixed basic shortcomings in 8), and my computer performance really was/is pretty insane, that 8.1 was/is a functional good fit.

        -Noel

        4 users thanked author for this post.
        • #209699 Reply

          Ascaris
          AskWoody MVP

          Very interesting!

          Were the results you gave of the raw performance (the first try), as I would presume from context (since you said it was the file system that was slower, not the caching)?

          I never noticed that 8.1 was slower than 7 in any way, and in some ways it felt quicker.  The time to first display of a useful file list of a directory that had a lot of files in it was still abysmally slow until I selected “optimize folder for viewing as files” or whatever it was (as opposed to audio, video, images, or whatever the content sniffer had determined).

          Of course, it’s not the same as the test you’ve outlined here.  Now I want to go test it with 7 and see how that goes…

          I got ~10,000 on my SATA 3 SSD desktop PC, FWIW, in Win 8.1.

          On my Swift 1 laptop (Intel N4200 “Pentium” CPU, SATA 3 SSD) running Linux Mint 19 Xfce, I got 22,800 files per second.

          Group L (Linux): KDE Neon User Edition 5.14.4 (based on Ubuntu 18.04) + Windows 7 in Virtualbox VM

          • This reply was modified 4 months, 1 week ago by  Ascaris.
          1 user thanked author for this post.
          • #209710 Reply

            Noel Carboni
            AskWoody MVP

            That was a good benchmark from back in the early days of comparing SSD-equipped systems, especially RAIDed ones, because it tended to indicate how quick a system “feels”.

            In my case the difference between the first pass and second was greatest with Win 7 and 8.0 vs. 8.1. For 8.1 the difference I see right now is about 12,000 files enumerated / second uncached vs. about 18,000 after the data is cached. This tells me the OS is doing much more work to derive the same results on Win 8.1.

            I just realized in doing these runs that I need to do a little disk cleanup… I have over 500 GB free on C: but over 2.3 million files have accumulated – usually I try to keep it under 2 million. I have a bunch of older product builds that need to be deleted.

            For what it’s worth, my Dell T5500 workstation, while still decent, is nowhere near cutting edge any more. I’d love to see how an M.2 (or maybe even RAIDed M.2) would perform. Theoretically M.2 brings a whole new level of performance via reduced I/O latency…

            -Noel

            1 user thanked author for this post.
            • #209851 Reply

              Ascaris
              AskWoody MVP

              Noel,

              Be aware that M.2 is a form factor, not an interface.  M.2 SSDs can use a logical SATA interface or a NVMe (PCIe) interface.  A “B” keyed M.2 drive can internally be SATA or PCIe with 2 lanes, while an “M” keyed M.2 can use up to 4 lanes of PCIe (but it can also be SATA).

              It can be very confusing, so you have to refer to the SSD’s specs and the specs of the slot in the board to really know what it can do… you can’t rely on the keying.  In general, “M” keyed SSDs are NMVe drives, and most of the “B” keyed drives are SATA, but it’s not universal… some of the slower NVMe drives are still “B” keyed, since they can’t saturate PCIe x2 anyway.

              Not only that, but most “B” keyed SATA SSDs are also “M” keyed, so they can be used in either kind of slot, since both “B” and “M” slots can also expose SATA interfaces (but not always– so you need to refer to the documentation of the OEM for the motherboard).  As far as I know, there are no slots that are B + M… it’s either one or the other on the host end.  It’s the devices that are keyed for the slot.

              That Dell gaming laptop I had for a couple of weeks had a M.2 slot with a “M” key.  The SSD with which it came was an OEM Samsung SATA drive with B + M keyways.  The M.2 slot was evidently wired by Dell to support NVMe x4 or SATA, which means it would also automagically work with a NVMe x2 drive.  It’s as close to a universal slot as there is, though it would not work with a “B” only keyed drive (even though it would work with it electrically if not for the keyway incompatibility).

               

               

              Group L (Linux): KDE Neon User Edition 5.14.4 (based on Ubuntu 18.04) + Windows 7 in Virtualbox VM

              3 users thanked author for this post.
            • #209884 Reply

              Cybertooth
              AskWoody Lounger

              @ascaris, thank you for the discussion of M.2 technology and related subjects.

              This showed me that the topic is beyond my pay grade. It sounds almost like a shell game, where sat several points something that seems to be A could turn out to be B and you have to pay close (too close IMHO) attention to what’s going on.

              I’d been struggling with understanding the nuances of M.2, U.2, NVMe etc. etc. etc., and thought I finally had a little bit of a handle on it. Your discussion showed me that I still have only the foggiest idea of that whole aspect of high tech. And further, that I’m not sure I even care to understand it, it’s so d*mn complicated. There are just too many chances to trip up.

              “Simple Simon”

               

              1 user thanked author for this post.
            • #209987 Reply

              Noel Carboni
              AskWoody MVP

              Yes, thanks, I was being very terse there. I was speaking of the potential for performance through the best of the interfaces (e.g., a set of M.2 drives RAIDed together via NVMe and a sophisticated controller, yielding, I dunno, 10+ gigabytes/second I/O max sequential throughput with possibly upwards of a gigabyte/second capability with 4K I/O sizes).

              -Noel

              1 user thanked author for this post.
            • #209967 Reply

              AlexEiffel
              AskWoody MVP

              Interesting. I got 14k on the SSD C drive first or second time on 1703. Then, for the ReFS mirrored mechanical HDs, I got 10k first time and 14k second time. This is an i7-4770k generation desktop.

        • #209783 Reply

          MrJimPhelps
          AskWoody MVP

          I think if you have a stripped-down, barely-get-along machine, then Windows 8.1 will struggle because of the small amount of RAM.

          On my old eMachines computer, I have 2 GB of RAM. In my Windows 8.1 VM, I have allocated 2 GB of RAM. That would be what I would think of as a stripped-down, barely-get-along machine. And in both cases, Windows 8.1 runs slow. In the case of the VM, my Windows 7 VM runs faster than my Windows 8.1 VM; in the case of my old computer, Windows 8.0 runs faster than Windows 8.1.

          I think that the more RAM you have over 2 GB, the less you notice the additional memory requirements of 8.1 over either 7 or 8.0. But when all you have is 2 GB, the difference will be noticeable. And this is where Windows 8.0 shines — on a machine that has only 2 GB of RAM; in other words, a stripped-down, barely-get-along machine.

          Group "L" (Linux Mint)
          with Windows 8.1 running in a VM
    • #209561 Reply

      anonymous

      This is the peril that every Windows consumer are forced to face every Patch Tuesday as M$’s unpaid Beta-testers, ie computers bricked by Windows Update’s not-fully-tested updates.

      Update Windows at your own risk.

    • #209715 Reply

      Noel Carboni
      AskWoody MVP

      I wonder whether a coincidental hardware failure could be responsible for a “bricked” older Surface device. Maybe the CPU / I/O load heated it up (the SFC type check during an update can get pretty intensive). From what I gather they’re not built to be very reliable for the long-term.

      -Noel

    • #209832 Reply

      OscarCP
      AskWoody Lounger

      No Schade, just intense Freude about something so delightfully and wickedly appropriate!

      1 user thanked author for this post.

    Please follow the -Lounge Rules- no personal attacks, no swearing, and politics/religion are relegated to the Rants forum.

    Reply To: Schadenfreude: A Windows Update bricked Steven Sinofsky’s Surface RT

    You can use BBCodes to format your content.
    Your account can't use Advanced BBCodes, they will be stripped before saving.

    Your information:


    Comments are closed.