The message is designed to scare people, and it worked in your case. You don't have a whole lot to worry about, but it definitely won't hurt to turn those on, as Mike suggested. It's just another layer of protection and won't affect anything from the user side that you'd notice.

Yeah, the Fortran punch cards? Hehe, I sure do.

And that's generally a good thing. Example: the currently ongoing WannaCry ransomware attack would not have been nearly as effective, had people running Windows 7 installed a security update released two months ago (the attack started just a few days ago). Windows 10, thankfully, is not susceptible to that one, but also Windows 8, Vista, and even XP got patches despite the latter two being out of extended support - due to the severity of the attack.

Slight hiccup with the attempting to disable updates. You can't, not properly.
And even if you manage to find a way to do so, misro$oft has it set up so that you've already agreed (in T&C etc) that they hold the right to turn it back on whenever they want to.

Windows 10's updates are mandatory. The best you could do about halting them is turning your connection to a metered connection and even then you'll receive some really critical updates according to what I heard. But it looks like you went through a 'feature upgrade' (that is, an update to the entire system) rather than just any ordinary update.

That said, first off, you can enter Settings > Update & security > Restart options in order to 'schedule' the restart for a time you are comfortable with, say next week. I believe you can keep postponing it this way, for every update that comes up. Secondly, you could also enable Active Hours in order to prevent Windows from updating during these times. You can cover up to 18 hours this way and the other 6 will be suitable for updating. Speaking of metered connection, left click your network icon in the taskbar, click Network & Internet settings, then click Change connection properties and turn on the "Set as metered connection" toggle to prevent most updates from being downloaded.

Finally, the system won't restart while you are still using it. If you didn't schedule it, it'll restart at a time when you leave it alone. I dunno if any operations would halt a restart but at one point my system had a download ongoing and it didn't restart, so generally you should keep the system's updates scheduled.

Microsoft should have the installs done upon shutdown or restart as opposed to scheduling a time automatically for you. If we lost the feature to control updates, at least decrease the chances that your work could be lost.

In other words you don't have to worry about this update shutting down your system if you're still using it, but if you plan to leave it for a while, do schedule your restarts for later. Also, use active hours and turn your connection to a metered one.

Yes, if we're talking just "updates." But that's not what Microsoft is doing with these "named" "updates." They include new features, different ways of doing things and layouts to find stuff. THAT should be MY DECISION, not forced. It's like buying a blue car, and the manufacturer deciding you know what, red cars are really better we'll force everyone to have a red one.

Microsoft wants to force security updates on me, I won't complain. They force me to go with every "change" and "new feature" they dream of.... that's not right. I paid for an operating system in one state of mind, spent over a year learning it, it's layout, it's tricks, and then every year they want to make major changes to them. Fine, but it should be OPTIONAL.

Quite the reverse. They try to ensure people are as captive as possible, and probably aim at reducing costs / raising revenue by gradually turning Windows into a semi-closed system.

Imagine computers on which only windows can be installed without problems, and setups on which you would not be allowed to install any application if it did not come through an authorized MS seller. We're almost there.... Priority settings. What serves the needs of MS and its stakeholders is single digit priority, whatever the user does is three digit priority at best, probably in the 9XX... Indee it's not. And aactuially the last big update makes it more difficult to even delay the update.
Actually the corporates are more and more pushing forward a narrative that says it is NOT your hardware. According to tjhis, If a piece of hardware needs a specific code/licence then you don't own it, you just get a licence to use it. Just a question of time before this becomes case law in the USA, imho. https://www.wired.com/2015/04/dmca-ownership-john-deere/

This is true. But if on the other hand MS hadn't stuffed so many updates with telemetry and other undesirable features, and if they hadn't gone for almsot forcing upgrade from 7 to 10, and if the mandatory update was just security , then it would probably not make so many people fed up with MS

Did it even hit any win7 systems?
From what I've heard, most (if not all) of NHS systems are still winxp.

Having said that, microsoft are they ones blocking updates on win7 (& 8?) & even stopping updates to basic drivers (latest intel/AMD stuff).

If they weren't pushing waaaay over much their attempts at updating on win10, I dare say they'd have more folk using it too.

P.S. All it took was some fool downloading or clicking on a dodgy file in an email. It's always only a matter of time until this happens again to any degree if you let them do this on any system.

According to Kaspersky, Windows XP numbers were pretty much insignificant compared to other systems, as XP machines crashed before they could spread the worm.

Also found a Microsoft article on how it works, which may be of interest.

Unfortunately, Microsoft doesn't give people that choice anymore. It's a blatantly anti-consumer policy, and Microsoft's attitude about it seems to be, "You people have no choice."