How to Stop Windows Update From Automatically Rebooting?

[Haorong Wu]

Even I turn the damn update off in service and group policy, it turned itself on last night! It rebooted my computer while my program is still running! It ruined my last three days!

 

[BillTre]

That is so windows!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Even I turn the damn update off in service and group policy, it turned itself on last night! It rebooted my computer while my program is still running! It ruined my last three days!

I've had it change my do not auto update option when I do an update.

 

[Tom.G]

Found with:
https://www.google.com/search?&q=block+windows+10+update

This site shows four different ways to turn Off the updates:
(I've used a few utilities from this site in the past without any problems.)
https://www.easeus.com/todo-backup-resource/how-to-stop-windows-10-from-automatically-update.html

At least one site mentioned to reboot the computer after making changes.

You may have to do this as an Administrator.

How do I permanently disable Windows 10 update?

To disable the Windows Update service in Services Manager, please follow the steps below:​

1 Press Windows key + R. ... then enter "Services.msc"

2 Search for Windows Update.

3 Right-click on Windows Update, then select Properties.

4 Under General tab, set the Startup type to Disabled.

5 Click Stop.

6 Click Apply, and then click OK.

7 Restart your compute

Cheers,
Tom

 

[Wrichik Basu]

Even I turn the damn update off in service and group policy, it turned itself on last night! It rebooted my computer while my program is still running! It ruined my last three days!

Before you start your program again, maybe it would be worth to consider switching to Linux, where these problems never occur.

 

[Haorong Wu]

Hi, @Tom.G . I have tried that method. However, it does not work. Some said there is another service called the windows update medic service, which will turn the update service on if it is off. This service can not be turned off by normal methods.

Well, I will try some apps to prevent it from being turned back on.

Currently, I may not turn to Linux. It will take me some time to learn it. Maybe later when I have the time, I will try it.

 

[MikeeMiracle]

You can't turn off updates completely in Windows 10, only defer them to a later date. Microsoft did this as virus and malware was so prevalent on users computers who users never updated. If you lost 3 days worth of work because you didn't save it then that's hardly Windows "fault."

 

[Wrichik Basu]

If you lost 3 days worth of work because you didn't save it then that's hardly Windows "fault."

Maybe it's not because of saving; probably it's because the program takes a number of days to complete the computation, and the OP would have to wait a long time again to finish the execution.

 

[MikeeMiracle]

To help avoid similar issues in future, for those who are unaware Windows updates are released monthly on the 2nd Tuesday of each month. They are generally released to computers in a staged manor over that 2nd Tuesday and are available to all computers by Wednesday. May I recommend that users update their computers at a convenient time on Wednesday or the following days to avoid similar issues in future, this is how I approach it. As I wrote in my previous post you can't turn them off so we just have to plan around them.

 

[Wrichik Basu]

Currently, I may not turn to Linux. It will take me some time to learn it. Maybe later when I have the time, I will try it.

When you get the time, do explore that possibility. Initially, I too was afraid of using Linux, but when one Windows upgrade broke my PC, I had no choice but to shift to Ubuntu. It has been a great experience since then.

While system updates are important, it is also important that they do not break your system. In most (maybe all?) Linux distros, you can turn off automatic updates indefinitely. Therefore, you can take your time and finish off your program execution, and once in a while, manually check for updates, and install them if available.

In my system, I have the following settings for updates:

As you can see, updates are checked for daily, and security updates are installed automatically. Other updates are displayed at an interval of two weeks. Generally, when I am doing some important task, like before my exams, I configure the system to never check for updates, and later revert to the old configuration.

 

[Borg]

I've gotten Windows 10 to completely stop updating by following the instructions here:
https://www.windowslatest.com/2020/06/29/windows-10-registry-trick-to-block-feature-updates/

 

[Vanadium 50]

Maybe it's not because of saving; probably it's because the program takes a number of days to complete the computation, and the OP would have to wait a long time again to finish the execution.

This problem is solved by checkpointing, which has been around for half a century at least and it is something all grownups do when running long jobs. I have seen applications for computer time rejected because of lack of checkpointing.

If you don't checkpoint, how is it Microsoft's fault? (Or Linus', for that matter)

 

[Haorong Wu]

This problem is solved by checkpointing, which has been around for half a century at least and it is something all grownups do when running long jobs. I have seen applications for computer time rejected because of lack of checkpointing.

If you don't checkpoint, how is it Microsoft's fault? (Or Linus', for that matter)

However, I am using others' packages. It is really hard to read programs not written by me. Let alone modify it.

 

[Vanadium 50]

No sympathy from me. Checkpointing has been around since forever (anyone know when it was invented). If you pick a program that doesn't do it, it's on you. If you switch operating systems because you don't want to do that or learn how to do that it seems kind of misdirected. It's not the OS's fault.

 

[BillTre]

It is the OS's fault to have such stupid and poorly thought out defaults for how it works.
Very inconsiderate.
If you put up with such poor quality, its on you.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Even I turn the damn update off in service and group policy, it turned itself on last night! It rebooted my computer while my program is still running! It ruined my last three days!

This happens to me work computer every few weeks. Pretty annoying indeed.

 

[StevieTNZ]

This laptop feels like it is doing Microsoft Updates all day, every day...

 

[FactChecker]

If at all possible, a program that will run for several days should store some intermediate results and have an option to restart near the step that it stopped at. By "near" I mean near enough that it is a lot better than starting over. It might also be wise to force an OS update before starting the run.

PS. This is the life I led for decades. Stopping in at work several times over the weekend to see if a program needs to be resumed is a drag.

 

[MikeeMiracle]

Another tip is to look for the Active Hours setting in Windows. This tells Windows the times you are usually using your computer (say 9-5 but totally configurable) and it prevent Windows from automatically restarting your computer during these Active Hours to prevent you loosing any unsaved work.

As you can imagine this feature was added in response to those countless people who were annoyed at their computer restarting at a bad time.

 

[FactChecker]

In addition to forcing a Windows update before you start the run, can you detach it from the internet during the run?

 

[anorlunda]

It should be mentioned here that unpatched computers figure prominently in many of the security/data breaches that happen in the world.

Those who would rather update manually rather than suffer the annoyance of having autonomous updates take on a responsibility. But there is no way to enforce that the responsibility is fulfilled. It is not criminal to neglect updating your software. Thank goodness. But I fear that could change in the future.

The ones that worry me most are the billions of IOT devices that have no means of updating. They are a ticking time bomb.

I would love to see video of the meetings at Microsoft when it was first discussed the proposal to push updates rather than wait for users to pull updates. For every technically savvy PC owner, there must be 100 Aunt Millies.

 

[MikeeMiracle]

In addition to forcing a Windows update before you start the run, can you detach it from the internet during the run?

You can, but if the updates have already been downloaded that won't help, it will still restart to install the already downloaded updates. This is easy to check by going to the Windows Update section and seeing if there are any updates downloaded and waiting for install.

 

[Vanadium 50]

If at all possible, a program that will run for several days should store some intermediate results and have an option to restart near the step that it stopped at. By "near" I mean near enough that it is a lot better than starting over.

This is called "checkpointing".

I looked it up. Windows will let you postpone updates for 35 days.

1. If 35 days are not enough for you, Windows is probably not the right choice. But neither are most flavors of Linux. (My most stable and locked-down Linux machine has reboots at 12, 39, 15, 1, 41, 1, and 57 days.)
2. If you run a 3 day job without disabling updates, it's on you. If your reply is "but I didn't know I could do this", I would argue that reading the documentation is even more important for Linux than Windows.
3. As @anorlunda discussed, the reason for these updates is to plug security holes. If you don't plug these holes, your machine could be used to attack others. Like mine. Not very good citizen-y.

 

[BillTre]

It should be mentioned here that unpatched computers figure prominently in many of the security/data breaches that happen in the world.

Those who would rather update manually rather than suffer the annoyance of having autonomous updates take on a responsibility.

I use (mostly) Macs and I find their updating mechanisms to be useful, make sense, and are easy to control.
You are clearly given several, easy to find options, for how updating occurs.
I use the: alert me when its available, but wait for my to OK to install it approach.
If I put it the installation off for some reason, it reminds me periodically, until I do it, or until I change the update alerting process.This works fine and I don't see why its so difficult for others to do it that way.
Its hard to imagine that Apple has patented it.

 

[Wrichik Basu]

This works fine and I don't see why its so difficult for others to do it that way.

I believe Microsoft has another reason to force people to install the updates.

Windows is probably the most pirated OS. For instance, in numerous computer stores in our city, if you ask for a copy of Windows, they will not provide you with one, and will insist that they themselves install it on your PC. The reason is that after installing Windows, they will turn off the antivirus and run some program that will provide an illegal installation key to the OS. And it is required that you keep system updates turned off forever. I have seen this in action in some old Windows 7 systems (which allows you to turn off updates indefinitely). If you turn on the updates, then Microsoft identifies that the system has a counterfeit copy of their software, and will keep popping up messages forever unless you buy an installation key, or re-run that program.

Maybe this is a major reason why Windows 10 never allows people to turn off system updates.

 

[FactChecker]

You can, but if the updates have already been downloaded that won't help, it will still restart to install the already downloaded updates. This is easy to check by going to the Windows Update section and seeing if there are any updates downloaded and waiting for install.

I guess I should have said you can force an update and install before starting a long run.

 

[MikeeMiracle]

I use (mostly) Macs and I find their updating mechanisms to be useful, make sense, and are easy to control.
You are clearly given several, easy to find options, for how updating occurs.
I use the: alert me when its available, but wait for my to OK to install it approach.
If I put it the installation for some reason, it reminds me periodically, until I do it, or until I change the update alerting process.This works fine and I don't see why its so difficult for others to do it that way.
Its hard to imagine that Apple has patented it.

Two things to note here...

1) In terms of total computers out there, only a fraction are Apple based. It may seem like Apple is just as common but that's mainly around middle class people who can afford their hardware. If you were a bad actor, do you program to exploit a small user base or a big user base. Common sense dictates you will be more successful going after the bigger user base.

2) Apple traditionally have promoted the false concept that their computers are somehow superior and cannot be infected by malware so they place less emphasis on it, most Apple users I have met believe this where as this is not true.

In light of the above, Apple do not see the need to force updates on it's users.

 

[Nik_2213]

I had a near-miss when, returning from wash-room around dawn, I checked my network render 'Box' progress, found it counting down to an up-date's re-boot. And never mind I'd turned off updates against this eventuality...

'Only' an artisanal PoserPro render, albeit wide-screen and using that RM-ported SCG freebie RE2's scene lights masked and dialled to 'super-ambient', so needing lots and lots of Firefly (progressive) pixel-samples, vol-bounces, buckets etc etc, so slow, slow, slow...

Would have cost me that over-night render, then use of 'Box' all next day.
Was not amused...

So, now, every time this PC wants to up-date, I make sure to force one on 'Box', too...

 

[rude man]

If I had to run a multi-day program (hopefully off-line) then I would disable the Internet into my PC altogether.

 

[jack action]

If you don't plug these holes, your machine could be used to attack others. Like mine. Not very good citizen-y.

I love it when someone says that I am to blame if I don't protect myself correctly, but if others get hurt because I didn't protect myself, apparently others don't have that responsibility to protect themselves as I do.

If you suffer damages by being attacked by some other computer, that is on you; you should have protected yourself. See, "doing the right thing" works for everybody, even you!

This works fine and I don't see why its so difficult for others to do it that way.

You can do that with Linux too. That is the major reason I switch from Windows to an Ubuntu flavor.

 

[sysprog]

I prefer an approach along the lines of 'your machine does what you (or your experts) decide that it should do' -- https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=concepts-what-is-smpe

 

[GTrax]

Even I turn the damn update off in service and group policy, it turned itself on last night! It rebooted my computer while my program is still running! It ruined my last three days!

It is for this reason that our satellite tracking control software and data haul servers use Linux. When some tons of dish hardware is moving, with servo-motor and positional encoder technology required to be pointing correctly at a particular celestial time, there is no room for an OS to be going off doing update housekeeping, not even in a background interrupt manner.

There are several "levels" of software platform access in Windows, none available to users. Software that needs to have the highest priority for it's own critical routines can get scrambled when Windows does it's updates or runs internal programs. Moreover, the "update" seems to require upload of large amounts of data, which we cannot permit. I have once, in the past, had an entire night run of logging data stopped because a program was aborted after being denied access by Windows doing an update. It was in control of a vacuum furnace, and the whole episode was very costly!

Unless you are very locked to a particular application set or vendor product, there is no great pain in trying out Linux. Probably a very easy install like Linux Mint might suit you. Once you try it, you see that all computing you could desire can be done in normal fashion.

 

[pbuk]

I love it when someone says that I am to blame if I don't protect myself correctly, but if others get hurt because I didn't protect myself, apparently others don't have that responsibility to protect themselves as I do.

I think you are missing @Vanadium 50's point: if you don't protect your devices correctly and they become a bot participating in e.g. DDoS attacks then you are doing damage regardless of whether the DDoS target is protected.

Protecting against distributed malware costs businesses, governments and academia billions. I'm all for Microsoft forcing system updates on ignorant users if it saves some of that. I'm also willing to live with any consequences for my systems: Windows Home and Pro editions are not designed for use in time-critical or process-critical environments, that is what Windows Server and Enterprise editions are for.

 

[MikeeMiracle]

In the Windows Updates window there is an option to pause updates for 7 days, that should allow you to get any work done. if whatever you are running will take longer than 7 days then perhaps a personal computer is not the best way to be performing the calculation.

Microsoft are in a tough spot, either they get slated for having an insecure OS because people do not want to patch or they anger people for forcing updates. Between the ability to manually install updates at a convenient time, the setting of active hours, and the ability to delay updates, they have built in tools to help avoid unexpected restarts.

Utilize the tools provided to help you, switching to Linux just because of this seems like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut on top of all the relearning the OS you will have to do.

 

[jack action]

I think you are missing @Vanadium 50's point:

Not at all.

if you don't protect your devices correctly and they become a bot participating in e.g. DDoS attacks then you are doing damage regardless of whether the DDoS target is protected.

Protecting against distributed malware costs businesses, governments and academia billions.

Look at that, it happens anyway, even after years of auto-updating. There will always be bad things happening to you, whether one considers there is someone responsible for it or not.

You have to protect yourself against overload and have a proper backup protocol. That is how YOU protect YOURSELF. Not by forcing others to do - or not do - something. It never works (the proof is that it happens anyway), and it gives a false sense of security: "Others should have done something, therefore I don't need to worry." A great way of ridding people of any responsibility.

Even if there was a law stating that anyone who doesn't do regular updates is sentenced to a lifetime in prison, I wouldn't trust any unknown computer connecting to mine. It is all about what I do, not what others do.

I'm all for Microsoft forcing system updates on ignorant users if it saves some of that.

I'm against taking money from ignorant users. If you don't know how to use a computer and are not willing to learn, don't use it.

When I was young, I didn't use computers, they had no appeal to me. When I did get interested in them, I was more and more curious about how they work and I slowly learn about them.

As of today, I'm not interested in smartphones and I still don't use one. I can't seem to understand why most of us need one (especially me) and I don't trust how everything is done in the background, by I don't know who, often on some unknown server. I know how programming works and it's scary. But ignorant users love them. I deal with the consequences of not using one (+ve and -ve), they should deal with the consequences of using one.

I'm also willing to live with any consequences for my systems

I'm not, that's why I switched OS. But what I'm afraid of, is being forced to live my life according to other people's fears. It always begins as an option, and then someone proposes "Anyway, everyone should do it, right? Why not make a law about it? We've already done it before so it must be OK."

That's why I will never give an inch to anyone saying others have the responsibility to calm his fears or make his life easier.