[toast0]

> That's a lot of money and time to spend on supporting someone else's bug-riddled software. You can't test literally all software that exists before you release a security patch.

Microsoft has been pushing telemetry for how long? I would think they would have a good idea of what to test so that p99 their software works for their customers.

But it depends on the severity of the security issue fixed. If it's a big deal, you push it and let telemetry dictate your future hotfixes. If it's not a big deal, you do your internal testing, then push it through external testing, and see what telemetry picks up (hey!)

> Just imagine testing every single solitary Windows application that exists, or has every existed, just to see if one of them crashes due to intentionally doing the wrong thing. What are they supposed to do, fix the 3rd party software? Delay fixing the security hole?

Microsoft made its business on "where do you want to go today?" Not "you're holding it wrong"

If windows and the 3rd party software worked before a windows update and doesn't after the windows update, that's Microsoft's problem because it reduces acceptance of updates. One way forward is to fingerprint the broken application and not do the update if it's active, another way is to prevent it from running after the update. Either of those allow unaffected users to get the update and get on with their life. Once the application is identified, Microsoft can work with them to update their software to do things right, and then figure out how to get users updated.

I've been a user of desktops where the OS developer clearly doesn't care about continuity for users, and Windows feels more and more like that. It's not pleasant, and if I can't be assured what works today will work tomorrow, that leads to delaying updates which is bad for business.

[jfultz]

This can come up even with application software (which is my area). If it worked before and it's broken now, or if your application appears to be the only thing that is broken for the user, from most user perspectives, it doesn't matter that the problem may have been technically created by an OS bug, errant virus scanner, or whatever. As I tell colleagues, "It may not be our fault, but it's still our problem."

[JohnFen]

Correct. Customers are paying for a working solution. If what they get doesn't work, they couldn't care less (and shouldn't have to care) about who or what is to blame. They just want it to work.

[bombcar]

> If windows and the 3rd party software worked before a windows update and doesn't after the windows update, that's Microsoft's problem because it reduces acceptance of updates.

This is the critical key to the whole thing. Currently, I basically apply updates as soon as they're available (with a bit of delay for major ones like new macOS version updates) but if I get burned a few times I'll go back to waiting carefully.