This seems like when Windows decides to shut down and apply patches in the middle of a work session. I’ve been in situations where Windows thought it essential and unavoidable to reboot and stay offline for 40 minutes starting at 125pm as I was screen sharing and presenting to 50 people. We all watched the countdown.
It was surreal and an example of such stupid, anti-user design.
I spoke with the “IT” person who set up this policy and they explained that I should have left my computer on to patch overnight. So basically it was ok that I, and my audience, suffered because I forgot to do something I didn’t even know was necessary.
In my case no one died, but I hope Tesla doesn’t apply the same logic to patching.
I’ve never had Windows do this, but my machine also isn’t managed by corporate IT. I think Windows downfall is really providing too many knobs for these people to control.
Corporate IT is inherently anti-user in my experience. They only care about their policies and not enabling you to get your job done.
My home gaming pc has done this and I frequently dust off old vms where windows requires patches just to start. I didn’t set any policy and wish I could turn off this option.
My cohabitants not being able to play games when they like isn’t a huge discomfort, but does make me wish more games would run on Linux or Mac (where this never happens).
> Corporate IT is inherently anti-user in my experience
As someone who did help-desk in the past, corporate IT is not anti-user, but pro-efficiency, though the outcomes may be indistinguishable.
IT is typically under-resourced[1], and has to deal with too many users with too many requests, and prima donna users - more of them than you'd imagine - demand personalized white-glove service (but don't want support to offer that to others because it ought to expedite service to them)
We’re all understaffed. But I’ve never designed such a stupid process and then blown off complaints.
Scripting patches to only run at off hours or prompting to patch at the end of the day is not rocket science. Perhaps they are overworked. Perhaps they are stupid. Perhaps they are just jerks.
Having non-idiotic patch policies isn’t asking for “white-glove service” and responding to user complaints when my process breaks a user process is something we get paid to do.
Comically stupid IT processes lead to more user requests. So “doing it right” is actually easier than doing it stupid and having people complain.
>Corporate IT is inherently anti-user in my experience.
This is a 2 way street, there is a reason they still always ask if it's been rebooted. They can tell it can't and they are being lied to.
>They only care about their policies and not enabling you to get your job done.
Simply not true, it's almost always the first concern. Judging by your tone you are not considering they have a job to do as well, and it's relies on your assistance, or you get a forced activity like that.
This “leave it on overnight “ is a minor point of contention with me and the IT department currently, because I work from home and electricity prices are insane.
Our Windows is set up to patch overnight, which means wake up at some random time then just sit there consuming power. That doesn’t fly with me so I unplug the power so it doesn’t do that…
Same complaint from me. They also require vpn access for that overnight. So I have to leave my laptop on every night with an active vpn session just in case they want to patch.
It seems smarter just to download the patch in a background process, then prompt to patch at the end of the day.
A “hey, please leave your laptop on instead of logging out and we’ll shut down when we’re done” would be well received.
I hate that. I leave my workspace open and go home, come next morning and am on a fresh desktop because windows decided its totaly fine to reboot in the middle of the night.
And then on top of that, they disable the "resume last session" setting in your browser, so you come back to find the dozen or so tabs you were using for your current task are gone, and you need to spend time going out and finding all those pages again.
It was surreal and an example of such stupid, anti-user design.
I spoke with the “IT” person who set up this policy and they explained that I should have left my computer on to patch overnight. So basically it was ok that I, and my audience, suffered because I forgot to do something I didn’t even know was necessary.
In my case no one died, but I hope Tesla doesn’t apply the same logic to patching.