• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Info Something I just realised about Windows Update

It's generally understood that when Windows fails to install an update, an entry goes into Setting > Windows Update > Update History, giving the update name/KB number and error code.

However, what I only recently suspected and confirmed today is that if an update then is installed successfully, the record in that list of its failure to install is erased. Something that's also slightly perturbing is that during the session that the update successfully installs, the update history isn't updated to show the success, the update simply disappears from the pending list as if nothing has happened (no requirement to restart either in this update's case).

The failure entry is still in the main event log though.
 
It's a recent change. I notice it too maybe a year ago. Before then, it was forever a 'failed' remark in Windows Update history, at least from the UI.
 
Worked on a computer today that had a couple earlier failed update attempts remarked in the history before a later successful remark. Windows 10 22H2. So it seems it may be up to each individual update whether it is coded to replace the failed record entry when successful.
 
Worked on a computer today that had a couple earlier failed update attempts remarked in the history before a later successful remark. Windows 10 22H2. So it seems it may be up to each individual update whether it is coded to replace the failed record entry when successful.
One problem with the whole 'agile' approach is that the behaviour could easily have been altered and altered again. I've seen just about every combination of permissions-based behaviour when attempting to copy iDevice photos via USB for example; a software maker changes how something works and doesn't tell anyone.

I wonder if we'll ever return to a more service pack style model of commercial OS development, I guess not partly because the video game industry has monetarily thrived on a 'release now, fix/add stuff later' model.
 
Back
Top