i mean open services.msc
Windows update -> Stop -> set startup type to disabled

Yeah, i read about that one. I also read that it ends up re-enabled on restart or something like that.

never happened to me

or you could try regedit
Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\wuauserv
and set start to 4 from 2
just make sure you remember how to set it back

Unfortunately not. :) I am not sure what exactly caused it (or how to reproduce it, if possible), but I found the instructions to make updates work again.

On my work laptop I have Windows 10 Pro, where it is possible to completely disable forced automatical updates, I have done exactly that, so that I will receive updates only when I run the Windows update myself (but unfortunately it just automatically starts downloading and installing them then, instead of letting me first check, and select, what to update). But at least I apparently have the ability to indefinitely postpone Windows 10 updates on Pro.

I keep hearing it might be possible also in Windows 10 Home, but I am not fully certain of that. Even on Pro the instructions to fully disable updates were a bit complicated, IIRC. Not something you directly find on the Windows Update page as an option, but rather going elsewhere in Windows settings to completely disable the Windows update service etc.

Then again even Ubuntu Linux automatically downloads and installs some security fixes by default, have to remember to go disable those "helpful" automatic updates myself...

If that does what i think it does (manually setting to disabled startup), it won't work, either. There's some other service, process, or startup routine that tries to "fix" it.

Yeah, i heard about that new model of making customers pay to disable features they don't like. Because all these experts know what you want better than you do, no matter how educated you are. I just hope i can get the damn thing set up before windows 11 comes, because I can't imagine the system requirements coming down.

Linux desktop and server support worker tagging in. A lot of companies that use Linux for their desktop needs stick to Ubuntu or Fedora. The great majority of of clients under my team's caseload are Ubuntu driven. In the same fashion why many companies still use older versions of other operating systems, Ubuntu offer LTS support for corporate software and other frameworks so the use of older kernels is intentional.

Especially, in the education sector. Since the hardware is older and the software that staff are trained to use in working with youth is older Ubuntu handles without issue but may not be viable for newer hardware users especially in the gaming sector.

I'm in this situation on my laptop, that has Intel Xe graphics - unsupported by the 5.4 kernel unless you apply some patches (which I'd rather not). I'm using the 21.04 kernel (5.11) on 20.04 since it's backported as HWE (HardWare Enablement) and beside a bit of minor jank/missing firmare that luckily does not affect me, it's mostly fine... I would not do that on a system that needs stellar stability though.

Depends on what the company is doing really. I know a lot of people in the networking space that are running Debian (exclusively). And some on Red Hat, because of some software compatibility needs, where Fedora is deemed far too experimental.

Well, I've been using it daily since 2016, and it's been rock steady. Just might have to occasionally wait a day or two after the upgrade switch lands but otherwise it's good to go.
Okay, but why not just plain ole' Debian?

cause it is old?:O

Debian does not have a dedicated support package system or recognized training like Ubuntu does.

Really? Would have figured otherwise for how monolithic it appeared and how many servers it ran on.

Yeah, they're not in the business of providing official support, unlike other companies built around various Linux distros.

I have not felt the need for official support for Debian (using it as server OS). It is really stable out of the box.
But I would not use it as a desktop or gaming OS :-)

Servers are largely set it and forget it with a server admin at the ready.

Desktop support is a different animal and Canonical has a great reputation and hands on training for organizations along with documented trainings.

As an example, as charter schools or DOE public schools move into purchases for desktop usage and are considering Linux they look for training for their staff. Ubuntu/Canonical has that down. Remote, onsite, hybrid and custom services at the ready.

Debian has 45 "official" consultants listed in the US alone.

Ubuntu Advantage which is their official support is in the thousands. Not to mention affiliated services and support (my job and the company I work for). In my area alone we have 3,000+ consultants for Ubuntu and 2100+ for Fedora.

Also OFFICIALLY Debain is a 100% volunteer based. While Ubuntu it backed by a company. There is just no comparison.

Side note when looking and reviewing contract for myself or for my company, I've found a ton of Ubuntu contracts without hassle for the last 15+ years. I've never seen a Debian contract.

As a regular user, you would not. But I agree with Arcadius-8606 that some companies are not interested in large deployments unless they get a support package.

It is perhaps less user friendly out of the box, but actually outperforms Ubuntu in most gaming workloads (fun fact).

There are none. You adopt it, not buy it :P. If someone is using Debian on an enterprise level they probably have the required expertise to do in-house support.