Replies

Does anyone know if Microsoft has been taken to court over forced updates which fail, and result in lost productivity?

Microsoft’s heavy handed update mistakes are certainly actionable.  Given that I live in Canada instead of the USA, that type of error is actionable, and I wonder whether such practices might be an act of war?

It certainly appears to me that with forethought and malice, Microsoft sought to install software across international borders which I did not want, which I had taken active measures to prevent being installed, and which, never-the-less attempted to install. When the installation failed, it deprived me of the lawful use of hardware I own, and applications I own the right to use.  I ended up paying a consultant to rebuild a PC, and lost days of time.

Chatter about Linux is fun, but a lot of people use applications which only operate in a Windows environment.  It is totally unacceptable for M$ to blow-up a time consuming 3D print run, and even worse when the target PC is rendered unbootable – all in the name of patching an OS.

Once upon a time, the M$ defence rested on it being our choice to accept their patches. We no longer have that choice.  Our businesses and, for some, their livelihoods, now depend on Microsoft upgrades being applied successfully on Microsoft’s schedule.

So, back to my original question: Does anybody know whether Microsoft is being taken to court over their patch installation policy or, patch installation failures?

McLachT

2 users thanked author for this post.

Rick Corbett, Cascadian