Windows updates - estimated time
-
Rich Leyshon wrote:
I'd love to know how they come up with the estimated times to restart your PC for a Windows update
It's inversely proportional to your necessity of having a working machine. So, if you are just turning on your computer for grins then it will only take milliseconds. However, if you have an imminent Teams meeting with all 3 of your supervisors and you've just woken up for the day and your machine must be on, then it will take days. :laugh: Yes, this is based upon my own experience. :rolleyes:
Now, there's the correct answer! Though I've found it's usually then followed by a Zoom update, that is pretty quick but trashes settings and screen layouts so you can spend the first minutes of the meeting fumbling to get those reset; and that's always a meeting where someone has to ask you a question in the first 10 seconds!
-
I'd love to know how they come up with the estimated times to restart your PC for a Windows update. Do they just see how long it takes on the top-of-the-range development machine with a nuclear powered CPU and liquid nitrogen cooling and hard code that time, or is there some "cleverness" that theoretically looks at the actual PC concerned and makes an estimate? Today's update was estimated at 3 minutes. Actual time to get back to a "normal-looking" screen was 16 minutes. It was 22 mins before CPU and disc usage dropped enough to make it usable. Does anyone else receive more realistic estimates?
Sure, the estimates are realistic. They are based on the percent of completion that is on your screen. The percent of completion is based on the following: 1. The current moon phase 2. How close your dog is to you 3. The inverse of the day of the week number, i.e. they take longer on Mondays 4. As @raddevus said
Quote:
It's inversely proportional to your necessity of having a working machine.
5. How full your coffee cup is; also an inverse relation The formula has been very consistent for the past 25 years :-D
-
I always try to schedule it for overnight so I don't have to think about. Until I come back to the machine and ask why the heck none of my applications are open.
Hogan
Oh not me. I sit patiently watching whatever messages or counters are on the screen and listen for any unnatural clicks or whirring. Not so satisfying now that I’ve switched to SSDs. But habits are deep. And, I ride a Harley, so listening for odd noises is a very ingrained habit. :) :)
Time is the differentiation of eternity devised by man to measure the passage of human events. - Manly P. Hall Mark Just another cog in the wheel
-
I'd love to know how they come up with the estimated times to restart your PC for a Windows update. Do they just see how long it takes on the top-of-the-range development machine with a nuclear powered CPU and liquid nitrogen cooling and hard code that time, or is there some "cleverness" that theoretically looks at the actual PC concerned and makes an estimate? Today's update was estimated at 3 minutes. Actual time to get back to a "normal-looking" screen was 16 minutes. It was 22 mins before CPU and disc usage dropped enough to make it usable. Does anyone else receive more realistic estimates?
-
Sure, the estimates are realistic. They are based on the percent of completion that is on your screen. The percent of completion is based on the following: 1. The current moon phase 2. How close your dog is to you 3. The inverse of the day of the week number, i.e. they take longer on Mondays 4. As @raddevus said
Quote:
It's inversely proportional to your necessity of having a working machine.
5. How full your coffee cup is; also an inverse relation The formula has been very consistent for the past 25 years :-D
-
I'd love to know how they come up with the estimated times to restart your PC for a Windows update. Do they just see how long it takes on the top-of-the-range development machine with a nuclear powered CPU and liquid nitrogen cooling and hard code that time, or is there some "cleverness" that theoretically looks at the actual PC concerned and makes an estimate? Today's update was estimated at 3 minutes. Actual time to get back to a "normal-looking" screen was 16 minutes. It was 22 mins before CPU and disc usage dropped enough to make it usable. Does anyone else receive more realistic estimates?