How To Disable Windows 10 Spying

Crash dumps are sent only at the enhanced level or higher. ;)

I made a much longer set of posts on reddit, going into more depth. Either way, haters gonna hate.

Thanks, I just took a quick look at this thread. I love the "I'm going to use Linux response." If that's what a person so chooses then cool. But if the idea is that the typical PC user is going to move to Linux so that they can have total online privacy and control every update on their PC... I think such notions are far more out of touch than what Microsoft is often accused.

I'm not saying that Microsoft can't improve what they are doing, adding more options and information about all that's going on, but the I think the premise that most people fear or reject personal data leverage or are just being stupid is incorrect. This stuff is only going to grow and become more pervasive and I fear that as long as people overhype and misunderstand what's going, the easier it will be for companies to abuse this technology.

One thing I'd like to see if some kind of dashboard that allows a user to see exactly the same kind of information that Microsoft is getting about them, at least the information that's personally identifiable and is tied to a specific user. Perhaps such a thing would be too high value of a target. I think some way of seeing what data Microsoft and other companies get through their tech might be a good way to be transparent.
 
That's not Windows 7. ;)

True. But Windows 7 isn't exactly a universal fallback for many people these days. There is ever more hardware and eventually software that doesn't work with 7. 7 will be around for a long time but it's days on the latest and greatest in PC hardware are pretty much over.
 
True. But Windows 7 isn't exactly a universal fallback for many people these days. There is ever more hardware and eventually software that doesn't work with 7. 7 will be around for a long time but it's days on the latest and greatest in PC hardware are pretty much over.

Well, if you want to be mostly safe, go for an old DOS/Unix machine disconnected from any network. To be completely safe with a computer - unplug everything.

I can give more extreme examples. There are always alternatives, but you're giving up options by going with them. Even with other modern OS's, you're giving things up (might be gaining stuff, too). But, for modern conveniences and modern systems, you're eventually going to need to upgrade to an OS that supports it. If you choose not to, you're stuck with that old stuff. The world of technology isn't going to conform to the few. It's going to improve and sell to the masses. Which it's doing very well.

Windows 7 is still an excellent OS. Feels ancient in comparison to the newer ones, though. Very stable, fast, easy to use. It's usefulness is diminishing, though.
 
But not really. The guy really didn't understand much of what he was talking about.

Example: his contact access disable setting. He says he would rather choose what apps have access to contacts. But disabling contact access is not how you accomplish that choice.

If disabled, no apps will have access, period.
If enabled, you can then choose which apps can have access.

Disabling turns everything off, enabling gives you the granular control he was advocating.

And don't get me started on how he didn't even know what remote registry was, what it's used for, or that it has been in Windows since Windows 2000, and similar functionality has been in Windows since Windows 95.
He didn't say he wasn't aware of what the remote registry is, he said he wasn't sure if the reason it was already showing as disabled was due to the settings chosen during the initial OS setup.

Jerry worked for Microsoft on the Windows OS for 15 years as a programmer.
 
IMO - Even the basic info is none of your business, unless the owner wants to share it with you.

The basic info is, as far as I can tell, very similar to WGA and WAT before it. Almost all of that stuff is our business, because we sell software and services. It pays our bills, and measuring that ensures the continued health of our company.

Additionally, we're a bit of a "damned by some if we do, damned by many if we don't" situation, since it's impossible to test every single combination of hardware and software that runs Windows. Without the data about what pieces are installed from enough machines early enough, bad WU patches bring down systems, and we're criticized for not catching it. This article by Ed Bott gives a great overview of how information about a system reduces the impact of such cases.

That said, I wish we didn't get so aggressive with the notification area GWX/upgrade to win10 program. Overall, I know we try to provide customer choice and strike the right balance among the competing (and divergent) desires of customers, partners, and our own company, but I feel like we missed the mark there.
 
IMO - Even the basic info is none of your business, unless the owner wants to share it with you.

However if something goes wrong with a Windows device Microsoft is the one that's generally accountable. Microsoft as does any software developer, but particularly a big OS provider like Microsoft, has a duty to know something about what's going on in the field with their product. Botnet attacks, malware, bad updates, 3rd party software, etc.

All modern and robust software needs a certain amount of automated diagnostics and error reporting. If someone wants to opt out of that, while I understand there's still benefit to those users that would from others that don't.

We're talking about something that's not black and white. Anonymous data collection for any number of things like tracking disease to crime patterns has benefit but I do understand the risks that can be involved when individualized personal information is abused or stolen. But just because one doesn't participate in such processes doesn't mean there's no benefit from others doing so. That's the part of this debate that is as troubling as any.

Everyone of us benefits from things are routinely criticized. Much of what enjoy in IT today is funded by advertising. And even if you do block ads, the people that don't do help fund the content, apps and services.

This issue is just far more complicated than what normally gets discussed and the idea that everything gets fixed with off switches just isn't true.
 
The basic info is, as far as I can tell, very similar to WGA and WAT before it. Almost all of that stuff is our business, because we sell software and services. It pays our bills, and measuring that ensures the continued health of our company.

Additionally, we're a bit of a "damned by some if we do, damned by many if we don't" situation, since it's impossible to test every single combination of hardware and software that runs Windows. Without the data about what pieces are installed from enough machines early enough, bad WU patches bring down systems, and we're criticized for not catching it. This article by Ed Bott gives a great overview of how information about a system reduces the impact of such cases.

Not really sure why people gloss over this stuff because it's just not that simple with something as complex and widely deployed as Windows.

That said, I wish we didn't get so aggressive with the notification area GWX/upgrade to win10 program. Overall, I know we try to provide customer choice and strike the right balance among the competing (and divergent) desires of customers, partners, and our own company, but I feel like we missed the mark there.

The hilarious thing about this is that I've still have people wonder how to do this upgrade even with the nag. I agree that it's too aggressive and could be better done. But I bet that the number of people that are still confused about how to upgrade and wanting to is higher than we might imagine.
 
However if something goes wrong with a Windows device Microsoft is the one that's generally accountable. Microsoft as does any software developer, but particularly a big OS provider like Microsoft, has a duty to know something about what's going on in the field with their product. Botnet attacks, malware, bad updates, 3rd party software, etc.

Well, if something goes wrong, they bitch at Microsoft that they should know about it, etc.. How do they know about it? From the telemetry.

Going by just word of mouth in the forums isn't going to be enough.

MSFT can never win this battle. Some people will just have to deal with it.
 
Sounds like a lot of people here confuse using data for a service, spying and data mining.

One person even tried using tracking cookies as proof of a device spying on them.

Lets say you use Facebook. Everything you start to type, even if you delete it and never send it all gets transmitted to facebook. They can at any time see exactly what you started to type and never actually sent as the applet you are typing in sends ever key stroke to them no matter what. They use everything you type, everything you like, everything you do as data to sell to advertisers. Google, scans every gmail message and uses that to direct ads to you. They store the SSID and share keyphrase of every single wireless network you connect to with an Android phone.

These things are data mining and spying.

This is different from a website or app being able to pull a location from your device via a GPS location or best guess from your ISP information to get your location instead of asking you to type in a zip code. That is different than something like Waze, that tracks your phone uses that data to let your friends and family follow your every movement while its main feature being a navigation platform where using data of where every use is at this point in time and how fast they are moving can determine road conditions. My coworker used to use the data collected by Waze to track her son on his way to and from work. Now me allowing Pizza Hut to know when I visit their site that I live in this town to give me the local online ordering and menu isn't going to allow anyone to know exactly where I am every second of the day and watch me move around in my home. So different type of data collection or data usage can be very different.

Same goes for wanting your hardware configuration. Some of this is information is useful for Microsoft to have statistics on various hardware configurations. Which if done by not giving any information about you but just tells them a system is running windows 7 on X hardware that helps them know that this selected combination is tested and works or some certain combo is the most common. This is no different than antimalware or antivirus software wanting you to send them diagnostic data of your system and let them know what you find. This lets them know what malware is the most widely spread, it also lets them know if a sudden outbreak of something starts to happen. I want to say that one of the Linux distros that I installed a few times always wanted me to send a full hardware and software report to them after the install for them to collect data on how it was being installed. Also know that Ubuntu used to (might still) had a package installed on it that would phone home every day with the version installed, the hardware platform and a counter for them to keep track of how long it was running on various machines and track the actual number of running installs.

Some of this stuff is data being used as part of a service. You say or type something and it gets sent back to a server to do a search. You use a tablet and it learns to understand your writing. Location is used to prevent you from typing in a zip code. Every time you log in and from where is tracked so that you can know did you just log into your account from Russia or China or was your account hijacked. Some of these things do require data, but can also record / use just the right amount of data that can not be used to track a person or could be used for a specific reason that doesn't "hurt" a person. This is different from collecting excess unneeded data about a person and storing it for no reason other than somebody wants as much data about you as possible. Like with my facebook example above. And all of that is different than software or a company spying on your ever move, keeping records or everything you do, everything you type, every where you go.

The real question for any company that you are dealing with at the end of the day is, what are they collection, why are they collecting that, what are they doing with that data, can others access this data and is this data sold, and can I opt out of having certain data used / collected.

Agreeing that using the reasoning that everyone else does it doesn't make it right. The problem here is that people are fine with or accepting of most companies collecting data even if they are selling said data about you. However people are up in arms that Microsoft has features that use even a single piece of data about you for anything or allows you to use certain data. How dare they know what my product key is. How dare they search my computer to see what updates I need.
 
MSFT can never win this battle. Some people will just have to deal with it.

Not when some will mischaracterize everything as data mining "make you the product." Some of it's done because "you are the customer" and want as few issues as possible. The idea that all error reporting and diagnostic activity for something that's as complex and widely deployed as Windows should be done manually is absurd. And as many point out, people never change defaults and if all of telemetry were opt in you probably would have few people turn it one, especially with an issue that gets so badly twisted up as this one.
 
I wonder how many people realize what other devices and/or software are collecting...

More spying isn't better than less spying. Not so sure why that's so hard to grasp for people defending it in 10, as "oh well your phone is probably spying so just shut up and let it happen on your PC too".
 
More spying isn't better than less spying. Not so sure why that's so hard to grasp for people defending it in 10, as "oh well your phone is probably spying so just shut up and let it happen on your PC too".

And this is the point. It's not all about spying. It's absurd to think that Microsoft shouldn't collect some real time diagnostics on at least some of countless millions of machines because "spying bad."
 
The basic info is, as far as I can tell, very similar to WGA and WAT before it. Almost all of that stuff is our business, because we sell software and services. It pays our bills, and measuring that ensures the continued health of our company.

Additionally, we're a bit of a "damned by some if we do, damned by many if we don't" situation, since it's impossible to test every single combination of hardware and software that runs Windows. Without the data about what pieces are installed from enough machines early enough, bad WU patches bring down systems, and we're criticized for not catching it. This article by Ed Bott gives a great overview of how information about a system reduces the impact of such cases.

That said, I wish we didn't get so aggressive with the notification area GWX/upgrade to win10 program. Overall, I know we try to provide customer choice and strike the right balance among the competing (and divergent) desires of customers, partners, and our own company, but I feel like we missed the mark there.
I may have said this elsewhere, but being a company that sells software, it is much harder for Microsoft to say things like use at your own risk, we are not responsible for damage to hardware/data, as-is and without warranty, or disclaim responsibility for bugs an vulnerabilities like free software might be able to. From that perspective, I understand.

As per usual with Microsoft, they've done a bad job of PR and Marketing. If gathering data on this scale is truly useful and necessary, they set up demand and a market to prevent them from getting the data they claim to need. When I can point to sites like this (http://www.ghacks.net/2015/08/14/comparison-of-windows-10-privacy-tools/) listing "Windows 10 Privacy Tools", does the evidence not point to that Microsoft did themselves no favors? These tools weren't around before Windows 10, but a lot of the techniques being used existed in degrees in past versions of Windows.

It has been mentioned before that many companies out there are able to collect more data that is more akin to spying than what Microsoft is doing and haven't gotten nearly the attention or backlash. It's not just because they're Microsoft (Microsoft Delusions of Persecution 10 build 10240?). In my opinion, it's the ham-handed approach taken. It wasn't done elegantly. Apple could probably spin it in a way that people would be lining up at an Apple Store to buy their latest version of the Apple iTelemetry.

Apple has Settings - Privacy - Diagnostics & Usage - Automatically Send checked by default but there is a Don't Send option. Microsoft planted their flag in at no lower than "Basic." If they hadn't, I wonder the "spying" would have gotten the same attention. I believe most people wouldn't have changed their defaults and the concerns wouldn't have been back-ported to Windows 7 and 8.1. I wouldn't have noticed DiagTrack in Windows 7/8.1 were it not for the Windows 10 controversy.
 
As per usual with Microsoft, they've done a bad job of PR and Marketing.

I think this is a case where the most vocal critics have simply gotten a lot of it wrong. There's no way in a world that's got billions of smartphones and countless services collecting, sharing and leveraging data that the average person is nearly as concerned as some of more harsh pundits.

And it's not because people are stupid or that "everyone else is doing it." It's because people tend to like the features and capabilities that leveraging personal data brings. And my tend to like I mean it's revolutionized computing to the point that smartphones are the new PCs.
 
When he added bing.com to his host file, he neglected to flush the DNS. Thus, Windows was accessing the cached data to resolve bing.com instead of using the host file. Just saying...
 
When he added bing.com to his host file, he neglected to flush the DNS. Thus, Windows was accessing the cached data to resolve bing.com instead of using the host file. Just saying...

Glad you mentioned that. I've heard people make this same claim a long time about Edge and just for grins tried it on three different machines a while back, redirecting Bing to Google. Worked perfectly each and every time in Edge and I didn't have to do anything but save the hosts file. Deleting the entry and resaving returned it back to normal.

Even when stuff works people flip out. There's just so munch FUD and bad info out there on this subject that apparently people are perfectly willing to accept at face value because why trust Microsoft? What could a guy drumming up views on YouTube possibly hope to gain... Oh wait.
 
When he added bing.com to his host file, he neglected to flush the DNS. Thus, Windows was accessing the cached data to resolve bing.com instead of using the host file. Just saying...

Windows has in the past whitelisted items via the host kernel so it would bypass any host file setting, they can easily do this as they see fit, so the host file really is not a safe way to block anything.

My question is how many companies won't be able to use Windows 10 because there data has to stay with in X countries borders...

With MS opening data centers in Canada soon this may not be an issue, but other issues with data potentially leaving a companies network all so MS can provided an end user experience above and beyond....
 
The basic info is, as far as I can tell, very similar to WGA and WAT before it. Almost all of that stuff is our business, because we sell software and services. It pays our bills, and measuring that ensures the continued health of our company.

Additionally, we're a bit of a "damned by some if we do, damned by many if we don't" situation, since it's impossible to test every single combination of hardware and software that runs Windows. Without the data about what pieces are installed from enough machines early enough, bad WU patches bring down systems, and we're criticized for not catching it. This article by Ed Bott gives a great overview of how information about a system reduces the impact of such cases.

That said, I wish we didn't get so aggressive with the notification area GWX/upgrade to win10 program. Overall, I know we try to provide customer choice and strike the right balance among the competing (and divergent) desires of customers, partners, and our own company, but I feel like we missed the mark there.

I just do not agree. The items listed in the Basic Telemetry section are quite different from that listed for WGA. You do not need to know what webcam, battery capacity, or mobile IMEI number. You can go to your channel partners for the same sales and mfg information you always have.

The issue & resolution mentioned in Ed's article is a good read and supports your position. However, I just do not agree with where your company is taking personal computing. The perspective where it all works is when you think of it as a Microsoft appliance, and that's fine, but it's not what I want and not what I built.
 
I just do not agree. The items listed in the Basic Telemetry section are quite different from that listed for WGA. You do not need to know what webcam, battery capacity, or mobile IMEI number. You can go to your channel partners for the same sales and mfg information you always have.

But, and this is important even if you don't think this data should be collected, none of this data has any privacy value, poses virtually no security risks even if it were dumped online and has almost no worth in ad targeting or reselling to 3rd parties.

Indeed you didn't invalidate the entire list. If the things you mentioned shouldn't be collected why not the whole list? Why should Microsoft know what version of Windows someone is running anymore than what web cam they have?
 
If only it were so easy to get Google off your back.

One can choose to not use Google products. You really don't have a choice with Windows on the desktop. There are various desktop OS alternatives, of course, but they don't currently have the hardware support and galaxy of software options that Windows does.

Microsoft should offer a subscription desktop Windows product based on Windows 7. The desktop OS is 'done' for the time being, they just need to provide security updates and add support for new hardware features as they emerge. Microsoft really needs to focus on a new OS and hardware for the mobile/tablet market they want so badly rather than trying to turn Windows into something it isn't.
 
Tawnos made a really nice post on the forum about what MS actually collects for data if you simply opt out of everything. It isn't that bad, and certainly isn't a sign that MS's prime mission with Windows 10 is to spy on people:

http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1042012527&postcount=32

What is it that people still have an issue with? That your crash dumps get sent to MS?

1) Yes. If I don't want that data sent, I should be able to stop it.
2) I want to decide what updates are allowed on my machine (also when).
3) When I disable something, DISABLE it!!

Anyways, all the crap has caused me to put Mint Linux on my laptop (after trying Win 10 for a few weeks). It was a painless change since I run 99% open source applications.
 
More spying isn't better than less spying. Not so sure why that's so hard to grasp for people defending it in 10, as "oh well your phone is probably spying so just shut up and let it happen on your PC too".

No, but turn all that off. Your smartphone becomes a ...phone. Your connected Windows as a Service PC becomes a simple PC with a simple Windows (which is what some people want). It's not the "everyone else is doing it, let's do it, too". It's the way technology is moving - everything is connected. If Microsoft DIDN'T do it, they'd be behind the times, and people would complain (they always do). "Mac had this feature 2 releases ago..."

10 years ago, when people proposed stuff like this (alerts on your watch, seamless data access on multiple devices, etc.), geeks were all for it. It sounded futuristic and awesome. Now that it's actually here, people are scared of it.

Shit, I want them to go a step further. I'd like to control my home automation with Cortana and Windows. Do I put too much trust into Microsoft and their alliances? Maybe. But, if that trust is misguided and it is ever proven to be a sham, Microsoft would have a HUGE problem, as would anyone they were in cahoots with. Do you think the people, governments, companies would give MS that much control over their data and systems if there was that much of a lack of trust?

If it's as huge of a problem as people say it is, why haven't the experts found anything substantial? There are some extremely talented people out there that try and break this stuff and find the flaws and/or actual spying and PII transfer. They WANT to make Microsoft look bad. There are people that WANT to find that problem. Where are they? Where are their results? I'm just not seeing the huge deal that some make it out to be. Yet. Maybe in a few months, I may be proven wrong.
 
And this is the point. It's not all about spying. It's absurd to think that Microsoft shouldn't collect some real time diagnostics on at least some of countless millions of machines because "spying bad."

And they will still get "some" of those millions of machines in their spying net if they gave users a real OFF switch. In fact they will get MOST + all the Insider builds that have it full telemetry forced on. Why? Because most people never change defaults. You can't tell me that a majority of 110+ mil Windows 10 PC's providing telemetry wouldn't be ENOUGH data to "make Windows better". No reason it needs to be everyone if the data is as benign as apologists claim.
 
1) Yes. If I don't want that data sent, I should be able to stop it.
2) I want to decide what updates are allowed on my machine (also when).
3) When I disable something, DISABLE it!!

^ It really should be that simple. But some people want to dance around and around arguing against it, or that FB & Google do it so therefore a $200 retail PC operating system should do it too.
 
No reason it needs to be everyone if the data is as benign as apologists claim.

While it could be the "We'll show you what we want you to see and hide the bad stuff", we were shown some of the telemetry data and reports recently (details are NDA, of course). Nothing nefarious, but it is extremely detailed. They are working to make Windows better in every way possible. Refining every detail to make it work perfect, not just good.

Talking with the Insiders team and Windows product team, the privacy and "spying" issues were brought up numerous times. They can't release a lot of the details of what's there due to IP and industry proprietary information, but it's nothing with PII (it can slip through) or anything. They said that's a good thing and a bad thing. There are times when there is a problem and they really wish they could identify the PC or the user to contact them to help them with a fix (need a PC that's having the problem, and can't replicate it in the lab).

Like I said, though - could have been just them showing us the good stuff and leaving out the rest.
 
^ It really should be that simple. But some people want to dance around and around arguing against it, or that FB & Google do it so therefore a $200 retail PC operating system should do it too.

That's the point that most people, even those (like myself) that aren't against the telemetry or anything, are making. If it's disabled, it needs to be fully disabled and stay that way. If they want that simple 'dumb' OS, then they should have that ability.

Of course, spending $200 for the OS? If you're doing that, go for the LTSB. Most of the problems are solved if you're spending the money for it.
 
^ It really should be that simple. But some people want to dance around and around arguing against it, or that FB & Google do it so therefore a $200 retail PC operating system should do it too.

You can turn off the features, does the system still send some info? Probably. Don't disagree that off should be off. What I disagree with is that the reason Microsoft put features into the system is for spying. I disagree that you have no way to turn off any feature that people are complaining about. I have a problem with agreeing that Microsoft should not give the option to use a feature on the desktop / laptop that 99% of you guys are using on your phone. THAT is where it matters. If you are fine with how Siri works on your phone why is Siri 100% ok to do what it does but Microsoft needing to make Cortonia work the exact same way wrong? People will go on about how great a feature is on one platform, but then turn around and bash Microsoft for giving the same feature. People love that they can log into Google and have access to the same bookmarks in all installs of chrome they use, Microsoft does that and suddenly they are stealing your data and there is no reason for anyone to ever sync bookmarks. It isn't that the practice of giving up all rights should be allowed and ignored, it is that no other can do evil while people bitch and cry about anything Microsoft does and blows it WAY out of context.

You guys make it to be that windows 10 is doing nothing but recording everything from your computer, Microsoft is monitoring everything you do, and type, and say. All the while selling everything about you to 3rd parties. When in fact some of the data gathering has been there for a ling time. Others are mostly features that you can opt out of.
 
What a maroon.,
"I care about my privacy" /Uses Youtube (with Google account) /Installs and uses Chrome.

He's more than a little foolish.

You have a point, kind of. I KNOW and EXPECT my chrome browser to spy on me, so I work on things accordingly for that. I do NOT nor do I EXPECT my OS to spy on me.

I can limit what Chrome spies by either setting some things up, or simply not using it. You MUST use an OS. Sure, there is Linux, if you never want to get anything done, or use an Apple computer if you don't play games...so your only option should never spy on you, or at least have one simple on/off switch.
 
If you are fine with how Siri works on your phone why is Siri 100% ok to do what it does but Microsoft needing to make Cortonia work the exact same way wrong? People will go on about how great a feature is on one platform, but then turn around and bash Microsoft for giving the same feature. People love that they can log into Google and have access to the same bookmarks in all installs of chrome they use, Microsoft does that and suddenly they are stealing your data and there is no reason for anyone to ever sync bookmarks. It isn't that the practice of giving up all rights should be allowed and ignored, it is that no other can do evil while people bitch and cry about anything Microsoft does and blows it WAY out of context.

And this is why this issue is going to go no where for those that make it up on the fly. Data sharing and leverage are ingrained in more computer technology because people really, really like the features. Calling it spying just doesn't resonate with the average person. Yes, there are concerns here but the market has spoken.

Maybe in time the market will shift and people will demand disconnected products that don't understand their voice or sync their data and they won't accept advertising as a way to monetize products. But that's not today nor probably anytime in the near future.
 
You guys make it to be that windows 10 is doing nothing but recording everything from your computer, Microsoft is monitoring everything you do, and type, and say. All the while selling everything about you to 3rd parties. When in fact some of the data gathering has been there for a ling time. Others are mostly features that you can opt out of.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Nice try but all we're asking for is an off switch. Look no further than the EULA to see what all Microsoft is giving themselves a blank check to in terms of data collection. If telemetry was for purely rainbows and altruistic reasons and "let's all make windows better together!" kumbaya bullshit, they wouldn't need that scary of a EULA, now would they.
 
You have a point, kind of. I KNOW and EXPECT my chrome browser to spy on me, so I work on things accordingly for that. I do NOT nor do I EXPECT my OS to spy on me.

I can limit what Chrome spies by either setting some things up, or simply not using it. You MUST use an OS. Sure, there is Linux, if you never want to get anything done, or use an Apple computer if you don't play games...so your only option should never spy on you, or at least have one simple on/off switch.

Exactly. I can close FB or Google or Chrome and continue to work/play. I can't close Windows 10 and continue to work/play. This really shouldn't be so hard to understand.
 
And this is why this issue is going to go no where for those that make it up on the fly. Data sharing and leverage are ingrained in more computer technology because people really, really like the features. Calling it spying just doesn't resonate with the average person. Yes, there are concerns here but the market has spoken.

Maybe in time the market will shift and people will demand disconnected products that don't understand their voice or sync their data and they won't accept advertising as a way to monetize products. But that's not today nor probably anytime in the near future.

There are very few people who are turned off by what Microsoft is doing that condone it being done by some other company, but here you are trying your hardest to use that argument as a talking point over and over again in any thread where Windows 10's purity is called into question. Keep trying though and I'm sure if you say it enough, you'll be able to convince yourself that it's true.
 
nice video...I saved it in my Favorites for if/when I need to 'upgrade' to Windows 10...that Spybot Anti Beacon program looks pretty sweet as well...the fact that MS tries to hide the opt-out settings in tiny text or confusing wording or worse resetting your customized options after a new update is proof that they're being shady...by not being forthright it only enables the theory that they are using it for less then altruistic reasons...I don't think the spying is as bad as people are saying but I also don't think it's as innocent as MS claims either
 
Crash dumps are sent only at the enhanced level or higher. ;)

I made a much longer set of posts on reddit, going into more depth. Either way, haters gonna hate.

The main issue I see is that an operating system should be significantly more transparent about what it sends and receives outside of user's actions compared to applications. I want to know exactly what it is doing and options to turn *all* of it off if I decide to. Not to mention the blatant hiding of data mining options in the setup process so that people choose the defaults of full data sharing and that turning all of them off doesn't turn everything off.

Windows update took a large step back as well in what it tells users it does and puts on my computer. I want to know what every single thing it installs is and have the option to not install features outside of OS specific necessities.

Microsoft can't have trust without earning it. Do everything that you can to make it transparent and more importantly optional (in a way that is easy and highly visible for users to make it optional).

If MS feels these things are important for some reason then they really really need to give me a detailed description why it would be worth giving you the information. I don't use Cortana because it isn't transparent in what it sends and saves. If I could see and drill into all of the saved data on me that MS servers have where I could delete as needed then I'd be a bit more likely to consider using it.

What's a Microsoft customer relations email address we can send feedback like this to? I've been using Windows 10 and like it a lot in general, but I strongly question the way MS has gone about privacy in 10 (and presumably in 7/8 where it wasn't talked about as much).
 
Well said Scottw. I had those same feelings on my first Windows 10 installations as well.
 
I just do not agree. The items listed in the Basic Telemetry section are quite different from that listed for WGA. You do not need to know what webcam, battery capacity, or mobile IMEI number. You can go to your channel partners for the same sales and mfg information you always have.

People ask for more transparency, then complain about the transparency or misinterpret it. For example, the basic telemetry is more explicit in the data that is being collected (still leaving the clause open for additional device info), but effectively says the same thing. Consider the following:

WGA/WAT: tools collect information such as, Computer make and model, Standard computer information, such as ...

Basic Telemetry: gathers a limited set of info that’s critical for understanding the device and its configuration ... including...

Both provide examples of the types of data and expected scope of the data, but neither purport to be the exhaustive list. Information like the computer make & model, standard computer information, and OEM identification could all include things like webcam resolution, battery capacity and manufacturer, and IMEI #.

I think that is partially because if it claimed to be exhaustive and something changed (e.g. a question comes up about a new class of devices, such as free sync monitors, and that information gets added to track if there's an association between those devices and crashes) without updating the docs, we would be lying in a public statement about privacy.

Channel partners can and do provide some of that info, I think (they're obviously somewhat tight-lipped due to the realities of a competitive marketplace, probably moreso now that we have hardware that directly competes with theirs), but that data is not nearly fast nor accurate enough to reflect what's needed to actually get actionable info to make the experience better. E.g. driver version used with the hardware, the revision of hardware components being used, mismatches between hardware's claimed specs and usage (consider the classic "bought a new monitor then turned down the resolution to make everything bigger"), etc.
 
Channel partners can and do provide some of that info, I think (they're obviously somewhat tight-lipped due to the realities of a competitive marketplace, probably moreso now that we have hardware that directly competes with theirs), but that data is not nearly fast nor accurate enough to reflect what's needed to actually get actionable info to make the experience better. E.g. driver version used with the hardware, the revision of hardware components being used, mismatches between hardware's claimed specs and usage (consider the classic "bought a new monitor then turned down the resolution to make everything bigger"), etc.

I appreciate your info. If you have an answer for a couple of questions. What would be the impact of having an off switch for all telemetry? And what would be the impact of having it turned off by default along with all other data sharing?

I would suspect that Microsoft is attempting to make it easier to use features like the Store and having all of that on by default. Are you aware of any usability testing with regards to the defaults with these things? And lastly, do you know what the general feeling was in Microsoft about the data sharing? Was it expected to be controversial? And is it really that controversial? I know these questions sort of contradict one another but when I've explained to people that Windows 10 deals with data sharing much like their smartphone, I've yet to see anyone give it a second thought. There does some to be a disconnect here with some people that see PCs more like devices from the 1990s and less like modern connected devices which most use without question.

Thanks!
 
Back
Top