Windows 10 Buggy Updates? Our Patching Is Simple, Regular, Consistent Says Microsoft

[Hagrid]

What changed is computing. The desktop paradigm that Windows 7 followed is no longer the dominant computing platform. A lot of the angst over Windows 10 isn't so much about Windows 10 but normal evolutionary forces. "A desktop only OS that you can control!" sounds good in an internet forum like this. Try using that to sell an OS the general public today and good luck.

Computing changed, people wanting freedom of choice, have not.

There are quite a few that do not want metro or the store or pretty much any of that crap. It takes up resources.

I use mine to game and browse. I don't need all the bloatware running in the background or anywhere. I like the old style of updates where it was a service pack like others have said. I want the OS to flow with my style and not be told my MS that this is the way it is. So people have to tweak and run 3rd party software.
I loved windows 7/vista 64. Load the OS and go. No problem.
I would pay for a windows like that. I guess the only way is to get enterprise.

 

[heatlesssun]

And its only taken us six years to get there from Win8's release with its tablet centric UI aka Metro. Well, to be fair 2 in 1's have been popular for a couple of years now. How hard is it for MS to make an adaptable system? Win10 is better than 8 on this front but then they go cheapo with QA and updates that many people don't want or need. For pete's sake heatlessun, you and I and many others on this forum have been debating this for years. Yes, yes, tablets/touchscreens are indeed now the present and the future. Microsoft has just levied their monopoly of desktop/business customers to push this hybrid OS full of ads, data tracking and candy effing crush updates. God forbid people make righteous complaints about an idiotic update system that isn't needed.

Some people have issues with Windows 10 and I'm guessing most like myself aren't having major problems. So there's the schism. I just bought a Surface Go three days ago. And yeah Candy Crush, Minecraft, etc. One of the first thing I did with this Go? Install Steam and load up even more games.

I get people not wanting things to get in their way or bloat up their systems. Since all of my mobile PCs are touch capable hell I just leave Candy Crush on there. Takes no time to uninstall that stuff. I just want my stuff to work and it does. If it didn't I don't see why I'd go out and buy yet another Windows 10 PC.

 

[nutzo]

Can't even begin to tell you how many times Windows 10 just randomly rebooted during the work day and decided to do an update that would take 1-2 hours, leaving my business basically shut down. Fuck windows, fuck microsoft.

1-2 hour update?
You need to switch to an SSD so the updates are install faster.

I won't install Windows 10 on a system in the office unless it has a SSD.

 

[heatlesssun]

Computing changed, people wanting freedom of choice, have not.

I'm perfectly free to chose the PC hardware and software I want for personal use since it's my money. If Windows 10 were restricting my freedom to pick and choose the hardware and software I want and need then I'd use whatever else gave me that freedom. Unfortunately nothing else provides that most basic level of freedom. How well those other options allow control of updates and god forbid Candy Crush is irrelevant if they don't even offer BASIC FREEDOM.

I would pay for a windows like that.

On the consumer side this might be one of the biggest changes in the mobile world. Consumers don't buy OSes, they buy devices. That's part of the reason why Apple is a trillion dollar company now.

 

[Hagrid]

I'm perfectly free to chose the PC hardware and software I want for personal use since it's my money. If Windows 10 were restricting my freedom to pick and choose the hardware and software I want and need then I'd use whatever else gave me that freedom. Unfortunately nothing else provides that most basic level of freedom. How well those other options allow control of updates and god forbid Candy Crush is irrelevant if they don't even offer BASIC FREEDOM.



On the consumer side this might be one of the biggest changes in the mobile world. Consumers don't buy OSes, they buy devices. That's part of the reason why Apple is a trillion dollar company now.

Picking hardware and software is easy. I want choices with the OS.

 

[heatlesssun]

Picking hardware and software is easy. I want choices with the OS.

Not at all unless you're buying a single cheap piece of hardware once every few years. If I didn't game or like 2 in 1s or have a job where everyone was using Windows and moving to Windows 10 I'd just probably use a Chromebook or my phone. Personally the cost and whatever pain some perceive of Windows 10 is ant piss compared to the hardware and 3rd party software costs. The choice of OS has jack shit to do with those costs, they are fixed regardless of the OS. Choosing an OS that can't use the stuff, should have bought it in the first place if that's the case.

The freedom problems you mention aren't because of Windows, they are because of the lack of support from other parties currently. Maybe one day someone will step up and give you that super freedom desktop OS with no spyware or bloat and it'll run all your games and VR HMD perfectly.

 

[Lakados]

I found the easiest fix for all our windows 10 woes was to replace all HDD's with SSD's, that solved 90% of our non user issues. The remaining 10% I can trace back to bad nic drivers for older Broadcoms on the Dell Vostro and Inspirons in the buildings. The are being replaced as they "die"

 

[Delicieuxz]

Tell that to the Android and iOS crowd that with every new release there's parties that surround said new releases.

My Android phone has been on 5.1.1 for years. AFAIK, carriers tend to offer updates for like a year or two and then there's no more. Also, Android is freeware (not bought and owned via licenses) and open source (at least a version of it is), and is mainly a consumer and browser platform, and not a full OS. It isn't fleshed-out like Windows 10 is, it's built for its purpose, which is to serve a very different concept than a desktop OS.

Android's update scheme isn't simply regular updates, either - it's mostly-smaller updates for a couple of years, and then nothing but security updates for a longer time, and then (seemingly, since I haven't gotten any security updates in ages), no more updates at all. And large Android version updates that are comparable to Windows 10's awful bi-annual updates release around just once a year (compared to Windows 10's twice a years), sometimes less often.

So, Android isn't comparable to Windows 10, and Android's own update and large version system isn't as aggressive as Windows 10's, anyway.

 

[mufcfan]

Android's update scheme isn't simply regular updates, either - it's mostly-smaller updates for a couple of years, and then nothing but security updates for a longer time, and then (seemingly, since I haven't gotten any security updates in ages), no more updates at all. And large Android version updates that are comparable to Windows 10's awful bi-annual updates release around just once a year (compared to Windows 10's twice a years), sometimes less often.

So, Android isn't comparable to Windows 10, and Android's own update and large version system isn't as aggressive as Windows 10's, anyway.

The only thing incomparable is the lack of features in Android itself, but that is that same with the Linux vs. Windows comparison.

Android has a monthly security update scheme which most device manufactures and carriers don't care about. I have a Nokia 7 Plus which is included in AndroidOne and I do get the monthly security updates.
The feature updates would occur more than once a year, but ,again, device manufacturers and carriers either don't care or kind of merge them.

Also, it seems like it is a plus to you that there have been no updates at all, not even security updates for years. You would trust an Android device with openly known faults then a desktop getting updated regularly?

I loved windows 7/vista 64. Load the OS and go. No problem.

I used Vista 64 for a long time and only gave up Win7 a year ago, but 'Load the OS and go' was never the case with any of them, no matter the usage scenario.
You always have to install drivers, configure the settings and install the software you need. That's the same with every OS on this planet.

With Win10, you (would) probably do the same. Then, depending on your choice (freedom), you can uninstall any of the stuff you want, unlike with a smartphone for example.
Also, you can make the choice to forbid all the network communication except what you deem useful. I assume you have a router so you can see and log what gets sent block anything you want.

Since when did configuring an OS install and your network to your liking and uninstalling software become too much?
I thought that people using Linux would go much further to customize their experience.

Different people like different out-of-the-box experiences. Most people buy a desktop from an OEM and they get bloatware even with Ubuntu. No big company caters for the niche crowd of home/SB IT pros.
Since the era of the smartphones, UIs have changed a lot and, in my opinion, sometimes it is better to have a bit of crap you can remove/change in a part of an interface, otherwise you might not even know that that part of the interface even existed.
(That is my irk with all modern interfaces: how do you know the gestures/options if there is no tutorial/documentation?)

As for the broader Linux crowd:
I have used different mainstream distros: OpenSuse, Ubuntu, Gentoo, etc. These are the problems I had:
It took generally half an hour to set up local network with filesharing through a router, using a Realtek NIC. Only a few clicks in Windows since, let's say, XP SP2.
Only one of the distros had support for nVidia drivers at the time, couldn't get it to install on that one either. Benchmarks show to this day that most of the time framerates are considerably lower on Linux.
If you can get any software to work with your TV tuner card, you must've written it yourself. Even mainstream cards with the most popular ICs. With Windows there is support and even if a new Windows comes along, there are free, maybe even open source, software to use.
I had to spend a fair amount of time with LibreOffice on Windows, mainly this year, and it sucks. Saving an excel-created .xlsx with conditional formatting in .ods works, but creating the same rule in a new file in LO does not. The VBA part and its documentation sucks. Porting a macro is a nightmare.
The list goes on...

I very much like the security side of Linux and the fact that it is open source. I like looking into code and programming in general, but I'm not going to create my own kernel and drivers.
If some people do, good for them. But then don't go bashing Windows.
It would be like mocking someone's house which they bought, whilst you hand-built your own and claim that it was readily available and anyone can do it.

The only one version of Linux which can cater for a significant amount of users is Android. Even that is iffy, because only the very core of it is the same and most of the users are split between 5-6 main versions.
Let's create a single desktop Linux that works for at least a 100 million users, with QA and support of course, and then we will see, how it compares. I bet it would have a lot less things in common with today's distros then their users would think.

 

[Mazzspeed]

Everyone should stop shitting on Windows 10 because Heatlesssun likes the fact it supports everything he wants in a PC.

The opinions of everyone else is irrelevant and desktop Linux will never take off because apparently it's ecosystem isn't 'rich enough' to cater for the vast needs of Heatlesssun....

Does anyone beyond the other three members of the HOCP Windows 10 propaganda machine actually believe any of this tripe? I'm at the point where I literally just skip over his oddball rants.

 

[tetris42]

What changed is computing. The desktop paradigm that Windows 7 followed is no longer the dominant computing platform. A lot of the angst over Windows 10 isn't so much about Windows 10 but normal evolutionary forces. "A desktop only OS that you can control!" sounds good in an internet forum like this. Try using that to sell an OS the general public today and good luck.

Statements like this are why people call you a shill, not pointing out that a lot of stuff doesn't run on Linux. If Microsoft released Windows 11 today and had a TV ad saying "No more spying! No more reboots when you don't want them! Use Windows the way YOU want to!" people would flock to it and droves and you know it. If you're not a shill and don't believe it, you've drank the kool aid.

I mean how ludicrous a statement is it to say that you just can't sell the public an OS that does everything its predecessor did, but also removes annoyances they hated?

 

[mufcfan]

Everyone should stop shitting on Windows 10 because Heatlesssun likes the fact it supports everything he wants in a PC.

The opinions of everyone else is irrelevant and desktop Linux will never take off because apparently it's ecosystem isn't 'rich enough' to cater for the vast needs of Heatlesssun....

Does anyone beyond the other three members of the HOCP Windows 10 propaganda machine actually believe any of this tripe? I'm at the point where I literally just skip over his oddball rants.

Yes, the fact that you say that something is bad and someone else says that it is not that bad is blasphemy in itself. Anyone who is not agreeing completely with your view of the world is narcissistic, an oddball and talking tripe.
The only problem is that, based on usage rate and market share alone, your opinion makes you more of an oddball. Whether you, me or anyone else likes it or not. These are the current facts.

Believe me, I don't like it any better than you. Choosing Android over iOS is a no-brainer for me for example. With iOS there is no way of changing how it works, only how it looks basically. But that is far from the truth with any other (non-cloud based) OS.
I have no doubt that the same stuff that is in Windows can be put together better, in an open source and user friendly way, if professionals would really have a go at it. Some parts have been done far better already, but there is no complete solution, there is a lot left to be desired. Even corporations failed at it as of yet.

I have a long list of bugs which have been in Microsoft products for years. Most of them do not concern even .1% of the users, but makes work/life harder for me. Yet, I don't go around writing articles and posting videos about them, because there is no point. Some people would blow them out of proportion and others would just shrug, whilst arguing with each other about nothing.
The bugs will be fixed, if and when they get fixed. 'If', because some bugs are features for others or the things that facilitate the normal/usual results for others. Same for the past 35 years, with Dos, Windows, Linux or whatever else.​

For calling people shills: If you get wrong reception then it is not fair to assume that everyone does, that the carrier should burn in hell for all eternity and anyone who says different is a shill.
I could label you a shill just the same, for saying that no user can have needs which can surpass the capabilities of desktop Linux. That would be wrong just the same and I don't think that you actually believe that.

Some people just like to help others by pointing out the flaw in their logic and help solve their problem. Others might have evidence that contradict loudmouthed people and just want those people to backup what they are saying with facts, instead of providing dramatic episodes of how they feel about things. Because the only software more dangerous than people who say they do care about those episodes would be Skynet.

 

[Mazzspeed]

Yes, the fact that you say that something is bad and someone else says that it is not that bad is blasphemy in itself. Anyone who is not agreeing completely with your view of the world is narcissistic, an oddball and talking tripe.
The only problem is that, based on usage rate and market share alone, your opinion makes you more of an oddball. Whether you, me or anyone else likes it or not. These are the current facts.

Believe me, I don't like it any better than you. Choosing Android over iOS is a no-brainer for me for example. With iOS there is no way of changing how it works, only how it looks basically. But that is far from the truth with any other (non-cloud based) OS.
I have no doubt that the same stuff that is in Windows can be put together better, in an open source and user friendly way, if professionals would really have a go at it. Some parts have been done far better already, but there is no complete solution, there is a lot left to be desired. Even corporations failed at it as of yet.

I have a long list of bugs which have been in Microsoft products for years. Most of them do not concern even .1% of the users, but makes work/life harder for me. Yet, I don't go around writing articles and posting videos about them, because there is no point. Some people would blow them out of proportion and others would just shrug, whilst arguing with each other about nothing.
The bugs will be fixed, if and when they get fixed. 'If', because some bugs are features for others or the things that facilitate the normal/usual results for others. Same for the past 35 years, with Dos, Windows, Linux or whatever else.​

For calling people shills: If you get wrong reception then it is not fair to assume that everyone does, that the carrier should burn in hell for all eternity and anyone who says different is a shill.
I could label you a shill just the same, for saying that no user can have needs which can surpass the capabilities of desktop Linux. That would be wrong just the same and I don't think that you actually believe that.

Some people just like to help others by pointing out the flaw in their logic and help solve their problem. Others might have evidence that contradict loudmouthed people and just want those people to backup what they are saying with facts, instead of providing dramatic episodes of how they feel about things. Because the only software more dangerous than people who say they do care about those episodes would be Skynet.

Such a long winded post and yet I never even made any mention of my prefered operating system. I also fail to see how another members point of view holds precidence over my own simply because he believes Windows to be such a wonderful operating system.

 

[mufcfan]

Statements like this are why people call you a shill, not pointing out that a lot of stuff doesn't run on Linux. If Microsoft released Windows 11 today and had a TV ad saying "No more spying! No more reboots when you don't want them! Use Windows the way YOU want to!" people would flock to it and droves and you know it. If you're not a shill and don't believe it, you've drank the kool aid.

I mean how ludicrous a statement is it to say that you just can't sell the public an OS that does everything its predecessor did, but also removes annoyances they hated?

Yeah, based on what you write, you would surely believe that ad and would be first in line to get Win11, I'm sure. /s

It is not ludicrous, but people kept bashing MS during Vista and 7 for not implementing features, even Ubuntu has this and that now, etc. For features to get in, you need to make changes.
But just 'removing the annoyances' has never been enough with any popular software or hardware.

Who is spying on you? I mean factually, not how you feel that someone is or would be spying on you.
Would MS make a record in a database that there are 437,598,126 people who hit the 'e' key today, because they aggregated the data sent from your PC and 437,598,125 others count as spying on you? Then you probably shouldn't even be in any civilized part of the world. A grocery store has more personal data on you without your consent and that data is actually legally personal data.

Why would your PC reboot when you don't want it to? Have you forgot to configure it to do what you want and you just expect it to work they way you think it should?

No OS did or can do more than it says/said on the literal or figurative box. If that doesn't suite you don't buy/download it. That won't make it better or worse.

 

[mufcfan]

Such a long winded post and yet I never even made any mention of my prefered operating system.

I believe that you are a capable person, who can get the logic regardless. If not and/or you don't care then you are just trolling.

 

[Mazzspeed]

I believe that you are a capable person, who can get the logic regardless. If not and/or you don't care then you are just trolling.

You know what logic I understand?

I understand that there is nothing wrong with calling Windows 10 out for what it is - And what it is in comparison to past versions of Windows is a bloated mess with a clumsy UI and a shocking updating system.

I understand that the importance of an operating system's 'ecosystem' is something best determined by individual users and not simply what one outwardly biased user believes to be important to himself.

And lastly, I understand that Microsoft do not care what their users think and they are not going to stop pushing 'Windows as a service' just because the fans demand it, as I know that Windows is no longer Microsoft's most profitable product by a long shot - That would be their cloud division, a division that could really do with Windows as a service and perhaps even a little bit of a subscription model thrown in for a nice boost to Microsoft's bottom line.

The only people Microsoft care about are the shareholders.

That's my opinion and I'm every bit as entitled to it as you are to your own. Some could even call it 'realistic.'

 

[mufcfan]

You know what logic I understand?

I understand that there is nothing wrong with calling Windows 10 out for what it is - And what it is in comparison to past versions of Windows is a bloated mess with a clumsy UI and a shocking updating system.

I understand that the importance of an operating system's 'ecosystem' is something best determined by individual users and not simply what one outwardly biased user believes to be important to himself.

And lastly, I understand that Microsoft do not care what their users think and they are not going to stop pushing 'Windows as a service' just because the fans demand it, as I know that Windows is no longer Microsoft's most profitable product by a long shot - That would be their cloud division, a division that could really do with Windows as a service and perhaps even a little bit of a subscription model thrown in for a nice boost to Microsoft's bottom line.

The only people Microsoft care about are the shareholders.

That's my opinion and I'm every bit as entitled to it as you are to your own. Some could even call it 'realistic.'

I see, just as the people you are trying to discredit as shills.

I can't really blame MS for caring about shareholders. Look what happened with Dell. Although I think the problem lies more with the financial system than with Dell itself. Even though I know some stuff first hand about them which "would turn you white".
The reason why I post in these topics is, because I would really like to understand what is "shocking" about the updating system, because I have not yet experienced that and software + shock is usually not what I want.
I held off Win10 for a long time, but I could customize it and monitor it as much as I need to.

I have set Win10 for the slow ring, so I have about 3 months + the 1 month of deferring. I never felt the need to defer an update and I have averted any shocks. Same with family. Where I work, global IT lets through updates and not one system went kaboom. This is my point of view, my 'reality'.

What is it that you have experienced that makes you say that the system is 'shocking'?

 

[ManofGod]

Sounds like m$ needs to hire back its quality control rather than paying for articles and hiring forum shills to gaslight people into believing everything is unicorns and rainbows.

If someone does not bash Microsoft and speaks well of them, at least of the things that are well, they are forum shills gaslighting people into believing everything is unicorns and rainbows. Got it.

 

[ManofGod]

Yes, we know, it runs awesome for you. Same as 8, same as 7, etc so forth. So will 11 if it comes out. Yes, you are biased to windows and it is the best thing since sliced bread.

Now onto reality. It has massive bloatware/virus's/spyware. I do not want any of it. I want to play games and browse. Does it work? Yes. But I had to modify the crap out of it like others.
Then they go and update and things get messed up. Some of it is due to them resetting what we did to make the OS the way we want it.
In America, we like freedom. This carries over to even software. I just want the OS the way I like it. Is that too much to ask?

LOL! Reality is in you mind, it is all an illusion. If you truly believe that the things you claim are problems and they can stand on their own, you must attack those who do not entirely agree with you and is not willing to bash unceasingly why?

 

[ManofGod]

Well, then the whole world should be fine since your wifes dell is good at running 10 with no problems. She loves all the bloat and spyware. I am so happy for her!

You deflected and did not answer his question, how do you manage to use a computer?

 

[ManofGod]

Are you complaining about lack of sufficient control over an OS you only run so you can play games?
If so, please forgive me if I leave my violin in it's case.

Tiny, invisible violin.

 

[Nanan]

My work computer was updated this week, the USBC dock was updated and my god the damn thing actually works right now, no screen flickering after sleep, monitors come back up at the right resolution even!

 

[trparky]

There is OpenOffice. Supposed to be file compatible.

Yeah, and I've seen OpenOffice mangle a Microsoft Word document and all of it's special formatting. There's no way I'd use OpenOffice after I saw that happen.

Also, it seems like it is a plus to you that there have been no updates at all, not even security updates for years. You would trust an Android device with openly known faults then a desktop getting updated regularly?

Nope, that's why I run an iPhone instead of an Android. With iOS I know that I'll get regular and on time updates to software on the same day that everyone else across the world gets it.

If Microsoft released Windows 11 today and had a TV ad saying "No more spying! No more reboots when you don't want them! Use Windows the way YOU want to!" people would flock to it and droves and you know it. If you're not a shill and don't believe it, you've drank the kool aid.

I mean how ludicrous a statement is it to say that you just can't sell the public an OS that does everything its predecessor did, but also removes annoyances they hated?

The problem with you and a lot of others on this site is that you're thinking too much from a geek's point of view. Most people are completely computer and technology stupid. If you ask them the last time they updated their software you'd more than likely get a look that's not unlike a deer in the headlights. We as the people in the know may not like forced updates but for the majority of people who don't understand a damn thing about how to keep their systems safe, secure, and patched need all the damn forced updates that they can get and a hell of a lot more. Oh yeah... let's go back to the days of Windows XP with CodeRed, Slammer, and God knows what other viruses and worms that are still to this day slithering around the Internet? NO THANK YOU!

Who is spying on you? I mean factually, not how you feel that someone is or would be spying on you.
Would MS make a record in a database that there are 437,598,126 people who hit the 'e' key today, because they aggregated the data sent from your PC and 437,598,125 others count as spying on you? Then you probably shouldn't even be in any civilized part of the world. A grocery store has more personal data on you without your consent and that data is actually legally personal data.

Exactly. The same very people who complain about Microsoft spying are more than likely using an Android as well. They probably have a card at the grocery store, a credit card, a bank account, an Amazon account, etc. Did you know your bank collects data based upon how you use your credit card? Oh, and before you say that that's bad, in fact that's how they protect you from fraudulent charges. They know how you use your credit card based upon what you buy and where you buy things to know if that purchase was actually made by you. Oh but you're going to say signature, right? Nope. Useless! Anybody can forge your signature. Hell, most people don't even sign their names; most just draw a line and that's it. I've been tempted to draw a house on the screen as a joke the next time I'm asked to sign for my credit card. Oh, and if you think that your bank won't sell this information I've got news for you... THEY DO!!! Amazon does the same thing, they've probably sold more data based upon what you buy there than you have any want to know about.

So what are you going to do? Cut yourself off completely from the modern world just because you don't like your supposedly personal data being bought and sold? Sure, go right ahead and do that.

 

[tetris42]

Yeah, based on what you write, you would surely believe that ad and would be first in line to get Win11, I'm sure. /s

I would wait for tech reviewers to verify that telemetry could be fully disabled and I had total control over when, if, and which updates I accept. If it checked out, actually yes, I'd be happy to switch to that. I'm not sure why you're saying that sarcastically. Give me Windows 10 with no telemetry and total control over updates and I'll switch right now.

It is not ludicrous, but people kept bashing MS during Vista and 7 for not implementing features, even Ubuntu has this and that now, etc. For features to get in, you need to make changes.
But just 'removing the annoyances' has never been enough with any popular software or hardware.

This is a general statement that doesn't really apply to a monopoly situation. Windows users are largely a captive audience. If you have software that ONLY runs on Windows, your options now are basically 7,8, or 10, with Microsoft planning to axe 7 and 8. All Microsoft has to do to get people to switch is kill support their old OS and try to make the new one seem about as good. If the new version is relatively painless (like 7), it goes quickly. If it has serious problems for many users (ME, Vista, 8) users will hold out as long as possible or skip it altogether. You talk about implementing features, these WOULD be features compared to 10. Hell, Windows 7 gives users more control over updates than 10 can, it's a feature! That's why there are so many hold outs on it. We're honestly in weird territory here, since in this case "removing annoyances" also means "bringing back features many people knew I loves

Who is spying on you? I mean factually, not how you feel that someone is or would be spying on you.

First off, I was responding to the claim that you can't sell the concept of an OS you can control as heartlesssun claimed. Selling works on advertising. One of the biggest complaints of Windows 10 is all the spying it does. Whether that data tracking is benign or not is irrelevant if the public THINKS they're being spied on, and the reality is a lot of data is being tracked and uploaded either way. So hey, make that a selling point! Offering an edition of Windows that has NONE of that could certainly be marketed. Especially since it could make other OS's that DO use telemetry. You could have an ad like :

"Tired of being tracked on your phone? Your search engine? Getting spam mail and telemarketers, not knowing how they got your number? Well put an end to your computer tracking you with Windows 11. We don't track ANY of your data nor sell it to 3rd parties, your data is secure with us, because we respect your privacy. In a world of constant surveilance, rest easy with Windows 11."

Again, that would sell like hotcakes. Now of course MS would never actually DO something like that, but the point stands it's certainly a desired feature.

Would MS make a record in a database that there are 437,598,126 people who hit the 'e' key today, because they aggregated the data sent from your PC and 437,598,125 others count as spying on you? Then you probably shouldn't even be in any civilized part of the world.

Why? Someone wishing to not have their data catalogued is considered uncivilized now? I don't dispute that is the reality, but I see that more as a complete failure of society to restrain the whims of corporations

A grocery store has more personal data on you without your consent and that data is actually legally personal data.

And this is a good thing that we should accept because...? I think this is where other people would use that "whataboutism" term.

Why would your PC reboot when you don't want it to? Have you forgot to configure it to do what you want and you just expect it to work they way you think it should?

Again, this goes back to the claim that you couldn't sell an OS with user control being a feature. Windows 10 has become infamous among the general public for rebooting in at inopportune times. Whose "fault" that is is a different discussion. Being able to GUARANTEE it wouldn't reboot to update itself unless you specifically asked it to (not the same thing as hitting "ok" on a prompt) could certainly be made a selling point for the general public. People like computers to not do unpredictable things. Rebooting a system while they're using it, regardless of whether they realized it was scheduled or not is very unpredictable for them. Again, another selling point.

As for me personally? I want the ability to handle all updates manually. If one causes me problems, I want the ability to revert it and skip that update and / or cease updating until it gets resolved. Not tomorrow, not 30 days, but permanently. I wish for the ability to have COMPLETE CONTROL over which updates I receive. I depend on my computer for work. ANY update that interferes with software I use is unacceptable and I need a path of recourse if something goes wrong that doesn't get resolved by MS.

No OS did or can do more than it says/said on the literal or figurative box. If that doesn't suite you don't buy/download it. That won't make it better or worse.

Once again, monopolies sure are awesome.

 

[trparky]

Windows users are largely a captive audience.

They're also mostly the most stupid people on the planet. These are the same people who would click on "I'm a virus, don't click on me."

One of the biggest complaints of Windows 10 is all the spying it does.

And you would have to completely disconnect yourself from every single thing that makes the modern world... well, modern. Credit cards, bank accounts, grocery stores, etc. What do all of these things have in common? THEY SELL YOUR DATA!!! Privacy? HA! It doesn't exist and hasn't existed since the modern world began. It died a long time ago, we're just now seeing the results of privacy's death. And if you think you can get it back I can say "fat chance!" The only way you can do that these days is to disconnect from the Internet, throw your computer into a wood chipper, fake your own death complete with funeral and casket, find a nice cave in the woods with no bear in it, and live your life as a crazy old hermit with a long ass beard.

 

[tetris42]

The problem with you and a lot of others on this site is that you're thinking too much from a geek's point of view. Most people are completely computer and technology stupid. If you ask them the last time they updated their software you'd more than likely get a look that's not unlike a deer in the headlights. We as the people in the know may not like forced updates but for the majority of people who don't understand a damn thing about how to keep their systems safe, secure, and patched need all the damn forced updates that they can get and a hell of a lot more. Oh yeah... let's go back to the days of Windows XP with CodeRed, Slammer, and God knows what other viruses and worms that are still to this day slithering around the Internet? NO THANK YOU!

There's two different trains of thought on what you're saying:

1. Regardless of whether they cared about it, you could absolutely SELL the idea of geeky stuff to the general public. Again, if they THINK their computer is spying on them, that's enough to make them want to buy the one that DOESN'T. Same for update reboots, it's become so prolific almost everyone knows SOMEONE who had an unexpected reboot happen to them. Toting the OS as one that DOESN'T do that would make users want to buy that version. Point being, it's a selling point if MS was serious about the idea, which they're not.

2. Even if we stay the course, it's still a clusterfuck no matter how you look at it. Force security updates for the general public? Sure, but let's be sure to send them Candy Crush while we're at it, occasionally ignore metered internet settings, reset various system settings, and have reboots scheduled for times it wasn't obvious to the viewer. For every good update they push, they're training users to HATE updates because they're reliably causing more problems for the user than a lack of updates would. On top of that, the "agile development" means savvy users can't just single out updates that cause problems for them like they could with 7. They're turning things into an all-or-nothing scenario, with a lot of users wanting to choose "nothing." That's a bad precedent to be setting.

 

[trparky]

Again, if they THINK their computer is spying on them, that's enough to make them want to buy the one that DOESN'T.

Sure... and I have some bottom land to sell you. Just don't ask me what it's at the bottom of.

These are the same people who use Facebook even while knowing that Facebook does all the things they do. These are the same people who continue to use Facebook even after that Cambridge Analytica bullshit.

 

[tetris42]

And you would have to completely disconnect yourself from every single thing that makes the modern world... well, modern. Credit cards, bank accounts, grocery stores, etc. What do all of these things have in common? THEY SELL YOUR DATA!!! Privacy? HA! It doesn't exist and hasn't existed since the modern world began. It died a long time ago, we're just now seeing the results of privacy's death. And if you think you can get it back I can say "fat chance!" The only way you can do that these days is to disconnect from the Internet, throw your computer into a wood chipper, find a nice cave in the woods with no bear in it, and live your life as a crazy old hermit with a long ass beard.

I'm really beginning to like this "whataboutism" term I've heard in these forums. It's become so applicable here.

I see what you're saying as an argument that intrusion of privacy is out of control and we need laws to reign it back in to sane levels, not a justification for a desktop OS to increase the lack of control further. But you're right, we should just accept all this, in all things. We just can't do anything to prevent companies like Equifax from doing whatever they want, that would get in the way of progress.

If pollution laws had become so lax that EVERY company was dumping shit into the river, air, etc. and was just the way modern products were made, would it make sense to defend a leather company that had managed its pollution for decades, then decided to change its policy to dump toxic chemicals into the water because everyone else was doing it, despite this company not doing this sort of thing in the past? It seems like the same logic to me.

 

[trparky]

I see what you're saying as an argument that intrusion of privacy is out of control and we need laws to reign it back in to sane levels, not a justification for a desktop OS to increase the lack of control further.

Yes, we do need stronger privacy laws but I don't think that that's ever going to happen. There's too much money to be made in buying and selling consumer data. The amount of lobbying to stop that law would be beyond even that of the kind of lobbying we saw against Net Neutrality.

If pollution laws had become so lax that EVERY company was dumping shit into the river, air, etc. and was just the way modern products were made, would it make sense to defend a leather company that had managed its pollution for decades, then decided to change its policy to dump toxic chemicals into the water also make sense because everyone else was doing it, despite this company not doing this sort of thing in the past? It seems like the same logic to me.

You do have a point there, I'll give you that.

 

[tetris42]

Yes, we do need stronger privacy laws but I don't think that that's ever going to happen. There's too much money to be made in buying and selling consumer data. The amount of lobbying to stop that law would be beyond even that of the kind of lobbying we saw against Net Neutrality.

You do have a point there, I'll give you that.

In all honesty, the telemetry doesn't bother me much personally, but I can absolutely respect how it's a concern for others, since it can represent a slippery slope. Again, I was mainly referring to heartlesssun's claim that you can't sell an OS and NOT have all that (and other Win10 gripes).

What's an issue for me is not having complete control over changes made to my system. That's something I'm never going to accept, the end. If it means I have to disable windows update altogether, or eventually have a dual boot between 10 and Linux so be it. That's not my preferred option at all, but it's not like MS is giving me many.

 

[trparky]

What's an issue for me is not having complete control over changes made to my system.

I agree on that too, it annoys the shit out of me that twice a year I have to go back into the privacy settings and turn a bunch of shit off including turn the telemetry to Basic Mode.

If it means I have to disable windows update altogether

I won't go that far.

 

[trparky]

From an old European geezer, I thought that several US states are working on strengthening their privacy laws, as well as preserving net neutrality.

Yes, on a state-by-state level. On a Federal level? Fat chance!!!

 

[bigdogchris]

Microsoft makes long term servicing channel versions available that only get monthly security updates, just like Windows 7/8 did. People should be using that in businesses.

 

[heatlesssun]

I mean how ludicrous a statement is it to say that you just can't sell the public an OS that does everything its predecessor did, but also removes annoyances they hated?

Most everyone in economically developed nations now carry with them everywhere they go a smartphone that tracks god knows what. People are increasingly buying devices like Alexa speakers. Facebook still has over 2 billions users.

But hey, people are going to get all excited about a desktop OS with no spying and flock to it in droves? I'm not saying there's no market for such a version of Windows but for the average IT consumer, they're already well past in their daily lives dealing with massive amounts of data collection regardless of Windows 10. Smartphones are the new PCs, they are the devices that everyone takes everywhere and if spying was such a big deal to these people, well they would also then start buying smart speakers.

 

[tetris42]

Most everyone in economically developed nations now carry with them everywhere they go a smartphone that tracks god knows what. People are increasingly buying devices like Alexa speakers. Facebook still has over 2 billions users.

But hey, people are going to get all excited about a desktop OS with no spying and flock to it in droves? I'm not saying there's no market for such a version of Windows but for the average IT consumer, they're already well past in their daily lives dealing with massive amounts of data collection regardless of Windows 10. Smartphones are the new PCs, they are the devices that everyone takes everywhere and if spying was such a big deal to these people, well they would also then start buying smart speakers.

I'm not sure what you're arguing then. Now you seem to be making the argument that Windows itself is on the decline. That could be true, though it was up to half a billion from a year ago:

https://www.zdnet.com/article/windows-10-installed-base-hits-500-million/

Your statement was implying that you simply can't sell a version of Windows that DOESN'T have mandatory updating + loads of telemetry. That's the part I find blatantly false. Just because those are tolerated in smartphones, that doesn't make them DESIRED by the customer. I'm saying a lack of those elements wouldn't HURT Windows marketshare (whether that's declining or rising) and could certainly help cement its status in IT.

 

[heatlesssun]

I'm not sure what you're arguing then. Now you seem to be making the argument that Windows itself is on the decline. That could be true, though it was up to half a billion from a year ago:

Part of the changing landscape of computing involves new devices, i.e. post-PC. So technically not only Windows but desktop computing is in decline relative to all of the devices and services that did not exist when the desktop PC was all that was.

Your statement was implying that you simply can't sell a version of Windows that DOESN'T have mandatory updating + loads of telemetry. That's the part I find blatantly false. Just because those are tolerated in smartphones, that doesn't make them DESIRED by the customer. I'm saying a lack of those elements wouldn't HURT Windows marketshare (whether that's declining or rising) and could certainly help cement its status in IT.

I never said there was no market for such as thing, definitely there is in enterprise markets. But there's no way in hell the average consumer wants to read through release notes and go through picking and choosing which updates to install or not. They want simplicity and reliability, press a button and it just works. Where the current update system makes things hard or complicated or unreliable then sure, average people don't want that either.

 

[Hagrid]

The only thing incomparable is the lack of features in Android itself, but that is that same with the Linux vs. Windows comparison.

Android has a monthly security update scheme which most device manufactures and carriers don't care about. I have a Nokia 7 Plus which is included in AndroidOne and I do get the monthly security updates.
The feature updates would occur more than once a year, but ,again, device manufacturers and carriers either don't care or kind of merge them.

Also, it seems like it is a plus to you that there have been no updates at all, not even security updates for years. You would trust an Android device with openly known faults then a desktop getting updated regularly?


I used Vista 64 for a long time and only gave up Win7 a year ago, but 'Load the OS and go' was never the case with any of them, no matter the usage scenario.
You always have to install drivers, configure the settings and install the software you need. That's the same with every OS on this planet.

With Win10, you (would) probably do the same. Then, depending on your choice (freedom), you can uninstall any of the stuff you want, unlike with a smartphone for example.
Also, you can make the choice to forbid all the network communication except what you deem useful. I assume you have a router so you can see and log what gets sent block anything you want.

Since when did configuring an OS install and your network to your liking and uninstalling software become too much?
I thought that people using Linux would go much further to customize their experience.

Different people like different out-of-the-box experiences. Most people buy a desktop from an OEM and they get bloatware even with Ubuntu. No big company caters for the niche crowd of home/SB IT pros.
Since the era of the smartphones, UIs have changed a lot and, in my opinion, sometimes it is better to have a bit of crap you can remove/change in a part of an interface, otherwise you might not even know that that part of the interface even existed.
(That is my irk with all modern interfaces: how do you know the gestures/options if there is no tutorial/documentation?)

As for the broader Linux crowd:
I have used different mainstream distros: OpenSuse, Ubuntu, Gentoo, etc. These are the problems I had:
It took generally half an hour to set up local network with filesharing through a router, using a Realtek NIC. Only a few clicks in Windows since, let's say, XP SP2.
Only one of the distros had support for nVidia drivers at the time, couldn't get it to install on that one either. Benchmarks show to this day that most of the time framerates are considerably lower on Linux.
If you can get any software to work with your TV tuner card, you must've written it yourself. Even mainstream cards with the most popular ICs. With Windows there is support and even if a new Windows comes along, there are free, maybe even open source, software to use.
I had to spend a fair amount of time with LibreOffice on Windows, mainly this year, and it sucks. Saving an excel-created .xlsx with conditional formatting in .ods works, but creating the same rule in a new file in LO does not. The VBA part and its documentation sucks. Porting a macro is a nightmare.
The list goes on...

I very much like the security side of Linux and the fact that it is open source. I like looking into code and programming in general, but I'm not going to create my own kernel and drivers.
If some people do, good for them. But then don't go bashing Windows.
It would be like mocking someone's house which they bought, whilst you hand-built your own and claim that it was readily available and anyone can do it.

The only one version of Linux which can cater for a significant amount of users is Android. Even that is iffy, because only the very core of it is the same and most of the users are split between 5-6 main versions.
Let's create a single desktop Linux that works for at least a 100 million users, with QA and support of course, and then we will see, how it compares. I bet it would have a lot less things in common with today's distros then their users would think.

Loading drivers, software, etc is normal with any OS. Having to use 3rd party software and lots of tweaks to make the OS try and behave the way you want is not.
That is why I loved Vista 64 and 7.

 

[PeaKr]

If someone does not bash Microsoft and speaks well of them, at least of the things that are well, they are forum shills gaslighting people into believing everything is unicorns and rainbows. Got it.

You got part of it then inflated the rest in your head. It doesn't take a whole lot o brains to see the direction m$ is heading. Remember those connect the dot games? Most of us already see the picture that is forming. I imagine as time goes by it will get harder and harder to justify m$ bullshit, good luck!

 

[mufcfan]

Spoiler

I would wait for tech reviewers to verify that telemetry could be fully disabled and I had total control over when, if, and which updates I accept. If it checked out, actually yes, I'd be happy to switch to that. I'm not sure why you're saying that sarcastically. Give me Windows 10 with no telemetry and total control over updates and I'll switch right now.

This is a general statement that doesn't really apply to a monopoly situation. Windows users are largely a captive audience. If you have software that ONLY runs on Windows, your options now are basically 7,8, or 10, with Microsoft planning to axe 7 and 8. All Microsoft has to do to get people to switch is kill support their old OS and try to make the new one seem about as good. If the new version is relatively painless (like 7), it goes quickly. If it has serious problems for many users (ME, Vista, 8) users will hold out as long as possible or skip it altogether. You talk about implementing features, these WOULD be features compared to 10. Hell, Windows 7 gives users more control over updates than 10 can, it's a feature! That's why there are so many hold outs on it. We're honestly in weird territory here, since in this case "removing annoyances" also means "bringing back features many people knew I loves

First off, I was responding to the claim that you can't sell the concept of an OS you can control as heartlesssun claimed. Selling works on advertising. One of the biggest complaints of Windows 10 is all the spying it does. Whether that data tracking is benign or not is irrelevant if the public THINKS they're being spied on, and the reality is a lot of data is being tracked and uploaded either way. So hey, make that a selling point! Offering an edition of Windows that has NONE of that could certainly be marketed. Especially since it could make other OS's that DO use telemetry. You could have an ad like :

"Tired of being tracked on your phone? Your search engine? Getting spam mail and telemarketers, not knowing how they got your number? Well put an end to your computer tracking you with Windows 11. We don't track ANY of your data nor sell it to 3rd parties, your data is secure with us, because we respect your privacy. In a world of constant surveilance, rest easy with Windows 11."

Again, that would sell like hotcakes. Now of course MS would never actually DO something like that, but the point stands it's certainly a desired feature.

Why? Someone wishing to not have their data catalogued is considered uncivilized now? I don't dispute that is the reality, but I see that more as a complete failure of society to restrain the whims of corporations

And this is a good thing that we should accept because...? I think this is where other people would use that "whataboutism" term.

Again, this goes back to the claim that you couldn't sell an OS with user control being a feature. Windows 10 has become infamous among the general public for rebooting in at inopportune times. Whose "fault" that is is a different discussion. Being able to GUARANTEE it wouldn't reboot to update itself unless you specifically asked it to (not the same thing as hitting "ok" on a prompt) could certainly be made a selling point for the general public. People like computers to not do unpredictable things. Rebooting a system while they're using it, regardless of whether they realized it was scheduled or not is very unpredictable for them. Again, another selling point.

As for me personally? I want the ability to handle all updates manually. If one causes me problems, I want the ability to revert it and skip that update and / or cease updating until it gets resolved. Not tomorrow, not 30 days, but permanently. I wish for the ability to have COMPLETE CONTROL over which updates I receive. I depend on my computer for work. ANY update that interferes with software I use is unacceptable and I need a path of recourse if something goes wrong that doesn't get resolved by MS.

Once again, monopolies sure are awesome.

I said that sarcastically, because you said that you would only need a TV ad to make you switch. You were more realistic in your reply.

Most software which you can use online gives you a period of grace until they cut you off if you are not using one of the latest 2-3 versions. With Windows 10 you can get support if you use the latest that is released in the slow ring or the one before that. So, you get about 1 year to upgrade.
As I said before, almost all known issues get resolved before an update gets to the slow ring which is about 3 months and you can defer it for 1 further month. If there's no issue, why would you want to defer permanently, knowing that this is a security liability?
At this point, don't you see why MS changed this? People didn't update Win7, because they were most computer illiterates, lazy or used a pirate version and could not care less. Same with XP before. For some obscure reasons during this period the news were full of 0-day vulnerabilities and zombie networks and whatnot. If I had to decide between 'letting people do what they want' or 'make them update', I would have made the same choice.
Still, there are ways to disable updating and manually doing it, so arguing this makes no difference. You have the choice, but it is not an apparent one for security reasons.

Also, if an update interferes with your software, do you know how much is it MS' fault or that software's programmers'?
I had Android updates which borked some of the stuff I created, because I didn't follow their rules. At the end of the day it's Microsoft's, Google's or Apple's software, not for the people, by the people, unfortunately. They make the rules and we vote with our wallets.

Most removed features were either a source of complaint for IT pros or other companies, or they were replaced like Paint. Although, I still have Paint too.
I heard about some group policies, but I have never used those at home and for a company an IT script kiddie can do more with scripts than some of the group policy settings ever could.

I don't want to get into the argument you have with heatlessun about that. I believe you misunderstood the reply.
I agree with you: it would have a market and no, it is not going to happen, unless Win10/11 will be a subscription service.

You are right about "whataboutism", but you please understand my argument well: I'm not saying it is better/acceptable if MS does it, but I just don't understand why you accept blatant involuntary use of your personal data and be upset by the use of your impersonal data. Because, if you can't pick out your own from 5-6-700 million, it is impersonal.
If your argument is that 'because this is a desktop OS', then let me ask, if you have an nVidia card? If you do, then their software uploads way more data than Win10 does for telemetry, literally megabytes. We have a saying: if you want to buy a horse, you have to buy the horseshit too. This is no different.

As I have implied, I don't like monopolies and I would use something else that is open source, but I see no equivalent choice. I have many open software on my home and on my work PCs as well.

 

[heatlesssun]

You got part of it then inflated the rest in your head. It doesn't take a whole lot o brains to see the direction m$ is heading. Remember those connect the dot games? Most of us already see the picture that is forming. I imagine as time goes by it will get harder and harder to justify m$ bullshit, good luck!

People have been making these kinds of predictions about Microsoft for decades. 20 years ago Microsoft was far more controversial than today with its anti-trust problems heating up.