back to article Microsoft's Windows 10 Torrent-U-Like updates GULP DOWN your precious bandwidth

Feel like your network bandwidth is slipping away? Windows 10 could be the culprit. Microsoft’s new desktop operating system has employed a torrent-style approach to sharing updates with your fellow Windows 10 users. The OS employs a system of sharing updates between users’ PCs and across their own networks rather than …

  1. John Robson Silver badge

    Tried to sell this to them nearly a decade ago...

    It makes sense for them - and for most customers actually, it would be nice if it limited it's upload, but since it can't see all the network traffic at the gateway I don't hold much hope for that...

    1. e^iπ+1=0

      Re: Tried to sell this to them nearly a decade ago...

      I think ms are just going with the flow ... I don't use windows myself but I've come across e.g. "torrented" versions of the stuff previously.

    2. P. Lee

      Re: Tried to sell this to them nearly a decade ago...

      I always thought that BITS updates looked a lot like hobbled torrents.

      Maybe I had the wrong end of the stick, I'm not of the Windows Persuasion.

  2. Efros

    I did think that

    they would do something like this. Makes an inordinate amount of sense when you think about it. They should, however, have been a bit more open about what they were doing. Turning it off is fairly trivial, I have enabled mine to share updates over my local network, we'll see how that works out.

    1. Paul Crawford Silver badge

      Re: I did think that

      Very much so if you have a few PCs on a LAN and are not using WSUS (like most homes and small businesses). In that case the overall benefit to you is probably much more than the penalty of it sending a copy out again.

      1. sqlrob

        Re: I did think that

        That's really going to depend on the network. My bandwidth is asymmetric, at a ratio of about 30:1. It's much better for me to download again rather than upload.

        ETA: That's for my internet. Doing that locally? Great idea. Sending over the internet? Bad.

    2. Arctic fox
      Windows

      @Efros Re: I did think that

      It is indeed rather easier to find than the article gives the impression of. Turning it off was one of the first things I did followed rapidly by switching off the setting for web search when you use the search icon. (Just go in to "*Cortana and Search" in settings). 'When I want to search the web I'll open my browser, when I want to search my pc that is what I want to do without some gigantic list of pointless web hits confusing the issue. If they activate Cortana here in Norway she'll get switched off on my machine - that I can promise you. If you go into "settings", "privacy" and finally "general" you will find a great deal you may wish to evaluate turning off. Final tip if you have Win 10 installed on a tablet (Thinkpad 8 HD in my case) and you do not want Win 10 booting to tablet mode by default just right click on the tablet mode button in the notification centre and the link you will see takes you straight to the page in "settings" where you can change the default.

  3. noboard

    And sharing malware in 5 4 3

    You know it will happen

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And sharing malware in 5 4 3

      Because it happens all the time with linux distros that do the same thing, right?

      Go away, troll.

      1. keithpeter
        Windows

        Re: And sharing malware in 5 4 3

        "Because it happens all the time with linux distros that do the same thing, right?"

        @AC whenever

        Which linux distros have peer to peer downloading/seeding of post installation updates set as default? I'd love to have a look at how they do that, could be handy.

        Agreed that poster you replied to was trolling. I'm assuming Microsoft will have all the usual checksum arrangements sorted.

        1. Someone

          +1 for Linux (Re: And sharing malware in 5 4 3)

          Which distros provide this? Anything for Debian? I'm sitting here looking at a lot of packages in /var/cache/apt/archives. There's apt-cacher and apt-cacher-ng for Debian and derivatives, but those involve explicitly setting up a server and clients. There are also various ways to mirror repositories.

          I'm wondering how easy it would be to get apt-cacher running on pfSense, but that seems like a lot of effort for a home LAN – not that many instances of Linux and a reasonably fast Internet connection. If there's a simple setting I can change, or a package I can install, to get peer-to-peer sharing that would be worth it.

          1. Dr. Mouse Silver badge

            Re: +1 for Linux (And sharing malware in 5 4 3)

            I'm pretty sure I remember a torrent-based apt, but it is not the default.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: +1 for Linux (And sharing malware in 5 4 3)

              I'm pretty sure I remember a torrent-based apt, but it is not the default.

              Well there was a thing for Debian called "jigdo" ("Jigsaw Downloader") but it's discontinued and doesn't seem to be a proper peer-to-peer system anyway (more like axel under the hood). IIRC, Warcraft uses an actual p2p system for downloading updates, but I'm not 100% sure on that.

              For Debian-based systems (with .deb files and all the server architecture that goes with it) it should actually be very easy to employ a p2p system (or plain local caching) within a LAN. Provided your DNS isn't being tampered with and you can download the list of packages and .deb file checksums (of which there are two per file) then you should be able to trust any .deb file you download provided it matches the checksums. I'm not sure if Windows has ever supported the idea of downloading an update once and serving it locally (unless you do it yourself using a transparent proxy, but not sure if that works) but it's always struck me as something that would be nearly essential in any decent-sized organisation.

              (anon due to this mostly being ignorant speculation)

              1. PNGuinn
                Linux

                Re: +1 for Linux (And sharing malware in 5 4 3) @AC

                Er - I just checked debian.org and jigdo appears alive and well for Jessie downloads.

                The main point at issue here is, from what I can tell from the documentation, that jigdo is not a peer to peer system - it's simply a more efficient way of getting an iso off debian or one of its mirrors. It enables you to update an iso without downloading the whole thing again.

                Have a look at https://www.debian.org/CD/jigdo-cd/ and http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Debian-Jigdo/index.html.

        2. e^iπ+1=0

          Re: And sharing malware in 5 4 3

          "I'm assuming Microsoft will have all the usual checksum arrangements sorted."

          Beautiful irony, I hope. In the meantime I gave a -1 to that comment.

    2. Adam 1 Silver badge

      Re: And sharing malware in 5 4 3

      Someone doesn't understand how hashes work. Put it this way, If that was possible, don't you think Hollywood would be corrupting the torrents left, right and centre? For sure you could send my computer malware instead of the patch. Problem for you is that it won't be signed with Microsoft's private signature so my computer will file it to the Windows equivalent of dev/null

  4. Awil Onmearse

    Bloatware now part of the OS itself.

    "Microsoft claimed “deliver optimisation” wouldn't be able to access your personal files or folders or be able to alter files on your PC."

    Oh for fuck's sake.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Security vulnerability waiting to happen

    How long will it be before the system gets compromised and used as a gateway for miscreants to gain access with system privileges

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: Security vulnerability waiting to happen

      Depends on how well the updates are signed and/or verified before applying. At least BitTorrent uses hash checking to verify segments as they're downloaded.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Security vulnerability waiting to happen

      We are talking about Microsoft here. Give it 5 minutes or so.

    3. Adam 1 Silver badge

      Re: Security vulnerability waiting to happen

      It's no more risky than https. The slithers would be validated with something like sha256 or 512. The hashes for all of the slithers would probably get downloaded over https or would maybe just rely on a digital signature to prove those hashes were decided by Microsoft.

  6. JeffyPoooh Silver badge
    Pint

    Sharing such files over the LAN should help...

    If you have several PCs on a fast LAN and a thin pipe to the Internet (this is very common), then it's almost certainly a good thing to share such files locally.

    The issue would be tying up other's HDDs while they're trying to do other things with their PC.

    1. The_Idiot

      Re: Sharing such files over the LAN should help...

      I might suggest that at least one aspect of 'the issue' is Microsoft deciding that, by default, an unknown amount of a user's potentially capped bandwidth be used for the convenience of other people, without those other people contributing to the potential cost of that user and without that user's consent in advance. Although I wouldn't be surprised if someone were to be able to find a line in the Licensing Agreement that says Microsoft can spend your money for you too.

      DECLARATION OF INTEREST:

      Yes, i am a Microsoft user.

      No, I am not interested in bashing Microsoft 'just because'.

      Yes, I am a Unix user.

      No, I am not an Apple user.

      1. JeffyPoooh Silver badge
        Pint

        Re: Sharing such files over the LAN should help...

        In my post, the title included 'over the LAN', and the post included the word '...locally'. These are the good aspects to this concept.

        Your concern about files going back out to strangers is valid.

        1. Dr. Mouse Silver badge

          Re: Sharing such files over the LAN should help...

          You are right, the LAN side of this is a good idea. It will help in homes with multiple PCs, as long as their bandwidth between each other is greater than their internet bandwidth (e.g. not WiFi on the other side of a well-built house). If it's smart enough to check and select the most appropriate connection, I see no downside. They should make the setting obvious and easy to find, though.

          However, sharing back out on to the web is nothing more than MS trying to cut down on their bandwidth costs, pushing that cost on to their customers. It should be either off by default or asked for on installation/first use, with warnings about bandwidth charges and a per-network setting (for those who are happy to enable it at home, but not when out on the road using a limited mobile internet connection)

          EDIT: it seems that there is an option for this, although from what people say it's not obvious.

          1. e^iπ+1=0

            Re: Sharing such files over the LAN should help...

            "EDIT: it seems that there is an option for this, although from what people say it's not obvious."

            What is obvious is that those people who don't bother to check (average disinterested user) are sharing.

      2. Sebby

        @The_Idiot Re: Sharing such files over the LAN should help...

        +1000 this.

        Inconsiderate, arrogant fuckers. That's my metered bandwidth your sharing; ask me first.

        BitTorrent asks me first.

        OS X Caching Service asks me first.

        Linux caches and proxies ask me first.

        Even Flash asks me first IIRC, FFS!

        Yes, local network caching is a good idea. I think Macs should do that too, without you needing a server. But this M$ behaviour puts Apple's hubris to shame.

        Notice here that the peer-to-peer aspect means you can't really control any client once you've given it access. So, together with Wi-Fi Sense, you have even more good reasons to refuse Windows entry.

        UPnP IGD (or the nicer NAT-PMP/PCP) isn't evil. It's broken hosts and NAT that are. Fix and get rid of those so your apps can't open up backdoors or fail to function, respectively.

  7. Camilla Smythe

    Wuh!!?

    Perhaps I am being Tin Ingot/Chicken Little here but assuming I was going to be running Windows 10 what kind of stupid would I have to be to 'torrent' updates from someone else's likely to be unsecured install?

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: Wuh!!?

      Not even if the update files are signed?

      1. sqlrob

        Re: Wuh!!?

        No.

        http://www.computerworld.com/article/2503910/cybercrime-hacking/microsoft-throws--kill-switch--on-own-certificates-after-flame-hijack.html

      2. Camilla Smythe

        Re: Wuh!!?

        "Not even if the update files are signed?"

        Obviously I am well out of my depth in terms of such matters... MD5 hash or some-such? Being a noob on Linux I rely on the prescribed suppositories, cough. I have 'torrented' distributions in the past as directed by the maintainers websites but, guess what.... I did not check the checksums. OK I did once or twice.

        Granted.. similar concerns may well apply to 'torrenting' Linux.

        Of course being a dimbulb I have a level of trust driven in part by the belief that Linux does not represent much of an interest to your average miscreant. Given the popularity of Windows, coughs again, if I were to be an 'evil eyetalian bastard' then on finding out that they have implemented this I would be hammering it really hard to find the flaw that gives me 'an in'.

        So...

        "Not even if the update files are signed?"

        The answer is NO.

        1. Woodnag

          Being a noob on Linux....

          "Being a noob on Linux I rely on the prescribed suppositories".

          Er, updates are meant to be uploaded to your computer, not 'intimately' shall we say.

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Wuh!!?

      Do you really think that Microsoft would install a patch without bothering to do any integrity checking?

      1. PNGuinn
        FAIL

        Re: Wuh!!?

        "Do you really think that Microsoft would install a patch without bothering to do any integrity checking?"

        Given their past record(s) ........ Quite probably.

        BUT - does that really matter? What happens when the black hat community work out how to pervert this to their own interests? How long is that likely take?

        Haven't we got enough attack vectors already?

  8. Charles 9 Silver badge
    Unhappy

    There's another implication. Since the update files can come from practically anywhere, there's no practical way to block them at the firewall. So not only are home users required to accept updates but there's no practical way to block that feature upstream without collateral damage.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Facepalm

      I look forward to the next burglar who's been nicked for 'updating' someone's house without their permission using the 'Windows 10 update' defence in court. That'll fly.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Windows can detect metered connections!

    I was impressed when I read that on the Microsoft website. Then I read the bit further down, where it turns out it's an advanced setting the user sets for an individual network connection - if they understand it. At which point the stupidity of defaulting to uploading to other PCs outside your internal network became clear.

    1. jonathanb Silver badge

      Re: Windows can detect metered connections!

      On my laptop the network is a Parallels Virtual Network connection, and from there it might go out to the internet via a local cable or wifi connection, public wifi, or bluetooth/USB via my phone. The Mac side of things knows which one it is, the Windows side does not.

  10. JeffyPoooh Silver badge
    Pint

    How come...?

    It's 2015 already.

    How come there isn't a little 'Internet Connection Cost' dialog box where one could inform the OS about the nature of the connection? The type of connection, nominal speed, nominal latency, the monthly data cap, the cost per usage, etc. If one is using (for example) satellite access at several dollars per MB, then it would be nice if one could easily let the OS know to hold all updates by itself or other software until further notice. The OS might even take a guess based on available information, and act accordingly.

    How come when you pick up a gadget and wake it up, it's very common that it will choose that point in time to start checking for, downloading,and installing updates? Why not do all this when the human puts the gadget down? The OS could make explicit efforts to stay out of the human's way. Perhaps there should be a button for 'I'm going for supper, now is a good time to do some updates.' Presently, it's as if they're trying to be annoying.

    How come the managers at the coder drone companies haven't figure these things out already?

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: How come...?

      "How come when you pick up a gadget and wake it up, it's very common that it will choose that point in time to start checking for, downloading,and installing updates?"

      Because 9 times out of 10, when the human puts the thing down is also the time it goes to sleep, meaning most of the stuff needed to do updates is powered down. And most humans don't want their devices waking up on their own when they're not around. Not only are there privacy implications, but also power-related ones, especially if the device isn't plugged in often.

      1. JeffyPoooh Silver badge
        Pint

        Re: How come...?

        Where I sleep, there's electricity. Gadgets put down for the night are almost always plugged into power, and so that would be the perfect time to do updates. Gadgets have access to all the information they would need to make much better decisions about when to perform or allow updates.

        Your response is exactly the sort of 'can't do' attitude exhibited by the people running these organizations. It's a failure of imagination, and a failure to have a vision of an improved method. Perhaps there's a failure of attention to detail. Perhaps it's a lack of hands on experience in the circumstances where such improvements would be valuable.

        These failures are the root cause of gadgets still having such very annoying characteristics.

        1. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Re: How come...?

          "Your response is exactly the sort of 'can't do' attitude exhibited by the people running these organizations. It's a failure of imagination, and a failure to have a vision of an improved method. Perhaps there's a failure of attention to detail. Perhaps it's a lack of hands on experience in the circumstances where such improvements would be valuable."

          Or perhaps it's an overabundance of caution in a real world where great ideas can have unintended consequences. Such as lawsuits and Big Brother concerns...

      2. Richard 12 Silver badge

        Re: How come...?

        The podcast app on my phone has settings to say "only update on wifi while on charge"

        If it can do that, why can't others?

    2. janimal
      Boffin

      Re: How come...?

      well if you read the posts above you'll see that you can apparently define a network connection as metered & W10 won't use it.

      I'm not defending the design or MS' decision to hide away the settings & info. I think it's a dodgy idea.

      1. JeffyPoooh Silver badge
        Pint

        Re: How come...?

        Credes 'metered' post was three minutes before my 'How come' post, but mine took about ten minutes to compose, so I had no opportunity to see it before I posted. But thank you for pointing it out.

        As the network connection for portable devices will be ever changing, these settings (of the sort I described) need to be at the fore.

        As I mentioned, the OS could probably guess. So the airport wifi would allow certain OS activities, the Inmarsat wifi on the aircraft would allow nothing but human access. A simple dialog box to confirm and adjust. This should have been built into the OS at least five years ago, if not ten.

        1. Sandtitz Silver badge

          Re: How come...? @Jeffy

          "This [metered connection]should have been built into the OS at least five years ago, if not ten."

          The metered connection option was introduced 3 years ago in Windows 8, and it is easy to set: right clicking you wireless/3g network connection and just select "set as metered connection".

          Windows Update and some other OS features like Onedrive can be instructed to not download/sync when you're using a metered connection. Similarly 3rd party software can use the API and restrict network usage.

          I think this option would have been built into the OS 10 years ago if someone had come up with the idea! Where were you 10 years ago? ;-)

          That the feature is not (yet?) in any other OS is likely not due to coding challenges.

          1. JeffyPoooh Silver badge
            Pint

            Re: How come...? @Jeffy

            @Sandtitz

            I'm proposing a more unified, more detailed, more automated, more up-front user interface. The single interface should impose control on as many applications as possible under a unified 'update control' framework. You don't seem to be comprehending what I'm proposing, or perhaps you're just being difficult.

            That they finally introduced the smallest quanta of common sense just with Win 8 shows how pathetically out of touch the OS decision makers really are. But that's insufficient, and fails to address the entire picture.

            That anyone could possibly take exception to this sort of obvious improvement reveals how out of touch people in the IT industry are. Which is why so many people despise the details of the implementations. Which is why there are legions of help desks trying to compensate for the continuing failures.

            It's a managerial failure. The senior staff live in a bubble, and don't comprehend the real world.

            If they did, they'd be ahead of me on such things.

            This is just one example.

  11. lorisarvendu

    Torrent is as Torrent Does...

    It'll be interesting to see how this pans out as time goes on. As already mentioned on here, it's a great idea if you have several PCs behind a gateway. I guess it would be like having your own personal WSUS server. In fact the more workstations you have on your LAN the better off you'll be. In such cases the obvious thing is to somehow allow all your PCs to share updates on the LAN but prevent them being shared through the Gateway (thus keeping your upload bandwidth for yourself).

    Which means that the fewer you have, the less better off you'll be bandwidth wise. There must be some kind of throttling built in, so that you only upload a maximum percentage of what you download, otherwise 1GB worth of download could see you using up your monthly internet quota in upload. 1GB may seem a lot, but if you have to reinstall Windows a year down the line, a year's worth of cumulative updates could easily amount to that, and I don't think the number of UK broadband customers on limited quota deals is trivial.

    I'm sure the IT-savvy (and those who can read the How-To's that will soon be posted online) will quickly find out how to disable upload while enabling download, eventually producing a situation where they all get their updates at the expense of some unknowing sod's monthly quota. Expect ISP forums to fill up with unhappy customers whose connections are now traffic-managed because they used up their allowance and don't know why.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: Torrent is as Torrent Does...

      I don't know if it realistically can be regulated. At least BitTorrent clients let you pick the ports, but some also let you randomize it and use UPnP to open the port on the router. If Microsoft uses this technique and also ties it to the download port, I don't see how you can block one without blocking the other. And given the peer-to-peer nature of torrents, trying to figure which address(es) the torrent is using would be like a game of Whac-A-Mole.

      1. John Robson Silver badge

        Re: Torrent is as Torrent Does...

        @Charles 9

        UPnP

        That's still a thing?

        Never had it enabled on anything of mine for any longer than it took to give a device an IP address...

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @Charles 9 - Re: Torrent is as Torrent Does...

        That's a relief for me because I always disable UPnP on my gateway/router and on any device that offers the bloody damn thing.

        Thanks for the tip, mate!

        1. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Re: @Charles 9 - Torrent is as Torrent Does...

          "That's a relief for me because I always disable UPnP on my gateway/router and on any device that offers the bloody damn thing."

          I just used it as an example, since it's a common setting on P2P programs to allow for ease of use. If Microsoft was hell-bent on this, they'll probably employ a middleman system like Skype and Live use to get around a double-NAT situation. And credits to milos it uses the same address(es) as legitimate web connections to known Microsoft and/or partner sites, meaning you can't block the middleman connections without blocking legitimate sites: again, collateral damage.

    2. Mayhem

      Re: Torrent is as Torrent Does...

      Yep, it'll certainly be interesting in Australasia, where the vast majority of connections are still data capped. Usually with $2/GB for bandwidth beyond that.

      Microsoft really doesn't understand that not everywhere is permanently online yet.

      Still, the p2p distribution could be good for small businesses, that tend to have half a dozen machines in a workgroup. Only one would need to physically download each update.

    3. SImon Hobson Silver badge

      Re: Torrent is as Torrent Does...

      > ... the obvious thing is to somehow allow all your PCs to share updates on the LAN but prevent them being shared through the Gateway

      I'm as ardent an MS basher as most, but in the "might as well know thine enemy" spirit I've already upgraded one of my VMs to Win 10.

      There is an option to configure where you get your updates from - Microsoft, PC on your own network, PCs on the internet as a whole. Where you share to seems to follow this setting.

      Boss asked me what I thought. After a short pause I replied that it didn't seem as bad as Windows 8 ! That's glowing praise isn't it :-)

  12. Trollslayer Silver badge
    Thumb Down

    Windows 10 means losing control of your PC

    This is yet another example.

    1. Esme

      Re: Windows 10 means losing control of your PC

      Well, aye, but to be fair, they're just copying the situation that is the norm with most portable computers on the planet - 'smart phones'. Which objects I find terribly frustrating as they tend to do no more than a mediocre job of being an effective means of voice communication, and an utterly lousy one of being a personal computer. I'd rather they either just be phones, or just be phones that can send SMS messages, or actually be proper handheld computers (which means I am root and have full control over what goes into the thing, thank you!) that can douible up as phones. But that's just me.

      Most of the world seems utterly happy signing away their privacy and security to strangers on their handheld computing device, so it's a logical notion to expect they may be Ok with it on their desktop and laptop devices too. I can't fault MS for spotting the business opportunity there. I do criticse them (and all the other companies with the same attitude towards their products, erm, I mean customers - Looking at you especially, Google!) for being unethical offspring of dubious parentage.

  13. JeffyPoooh Silver badge
    Pint

    Left Hand, Right Hand

    Prediction...

    Letter from ISP: "Our monitoring of your Internet usage has detected that you are sharing files owned by Microsoft over a Torrent-like file sharing network. As you know, sharing of files without explicit permission of the rights holder has been made into a criminal offense. We have alerted the authorities and they're very angry at you. They're on the way to your house now. They are experts in such technology matters and you can expect harsh treatment."

    1. Someonehasusedthathandle

      Re: Left Hand, Right Hand

      The company paying them are very indifferent at you. They're on their way to deliver a harshly worded letter. They are incompetent in technology matters and you can expect to barely even notice they were there....

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Left Hand, Right Hand

        @Someonehasusedthathandle

        I don't understand what you've written.

        But you did use 'they're' and 'their' correctly, which is to be commended.

      2. Mark 85 Silver badge

        Re: Left Hand, Right Hand

        Oh.. they're sending lawyers then?

  14. Hellcat

    Still...

    a million times safer than 99.9% of the DOWNLOAD NOW buttons on most legit software sites.

    I've a few games that update using a small number of super nodes feeding into torrenting clients. I'm guessing they didn't just throw this feature in, and will have thought about getting the security in place. Certificates and checksums should make this a non-issue.

    If you don't want it - switch it off.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Still...

      Actually, I'd sooner it were if you do want it, switch it on.

    2. PNGuinn
      Stop

      Re: Still... @ Hellcat...

      "If you don't want it - switch it off"

      Frankly, I'm coming to the stage where I'd like to apply that to the whole internet. I really, really wish I could.

  15. Dan 55 Silver badge
    Happy

    Look on the bright side

    BT are going to be forced to up their monthly bandwidth limit because Mrs. Miggins has no idea what a metered connection is or how to turn off torrenting in Windows Update, but she does know how to ring Watchdog.

    1. Captain Queeg

      Re: Look on the bright side

      Or more likely, traffic shape the hell out of windows update...

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: Look on the bright side

        How do you traffic shape an encrypted connection that can come from anywhere?

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    OMG

    Does anyone see a security issue here?

  17. J J Carter Silver badge
    Boffin

    As you can see Officer, I was just sharing Windows 10 updates. What's that you say, there is pr0n embedded in the files? Who knew?

  18. DrXym Silver badge

    Sounds like a good idea

    I have 4 PCs which I suppose will all eventually end up with Windows 10. Having to download the same set of patches 4 times over the internet would be a waste of bandwidth if I could just grab it from one of the peers instead and save a lot of time.

    1. MD Rackham

      Re: Sounds like a good idea

      Or you could just download the .iso and share it across your local network or put it on a USB stick.

    2. Mpeler
      Unhappy

      Re: Sounds like a good idea

      "if I could just grab it from one of the peers instead and save a lot of time."

      That used to be called TechNet..... which was a great idea.

  19. Ken Moorhouse Silver badge

    Please Do Not Turn Off Your Computer

    Someone is downloading files from your hard drive...

  20. Epobirs

    Should be very effective.

    For a long time, one of my favorite ways to test a big data pipe is to torrent the latest version of a Linux distro. It's a much more visceral and real world experience than going to a speed test site. Seeing an ISO come across in chunks of ten megabytes or more (my current connection tops out at 13 MBps) is very engaging and so much faster than going to any one source. At the same time, watching the peer behavior shows that no one peer is expending a major chunk of bandwidth.

    Applying this approach to insuring critical patches get out there even if the original source is swamped seems like a natural.

    1. arctic_haze Silver badge

      Re: Should be very effective.

      Yes, making distribution of critical patches dependent on a large number of random Internet users is a great idea. What can go wrong?

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    ADSL + Windows 10

    Not a great mix.

    ADSL uploads will swamp download capacity.,.. Say goodbye to decent anything....

  22. bobgameon

    While i love everything about Windows 10 this is the one thing that pissed me off when it was announced SIX months ago(I guess the people acting surprised must have missed the announcement).

    Every time i did a clean install of a new windows 10 insider build this was the first thing i turned off. This followed by changing my default browser to Firefox all of which took 15 seconds BTW.

  23. Kevin 6

    so for the people in the US with a metered low data cap does Microsoft pay for their internet if they go over the cap?

    Like my old ISP was limited to 100 gigs which I was hitting easily per month with steam video games, people watching netflix, and playing MMO's with huge updates(one reason I quit them). I went over the data cap once they slammed me with a $10 fee for every 5 gigs over...

  24. theloon
    FAIL

    words fail really

    but seriously what else where we expecting. It's the same company which was developing the Zune when Apple was already finishing up on the iPhone designs....

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019