Microsoft Backtracks On 'Nasty Trick' Upgrade To Windows 10 (bbc.co.uk)
Reader Raging Bool writes: Days after angering many users with its so-called "nasty trick", Microsoft has reversed its crazy decision to infuriate users by upgrading them to Windows 10 automatically. Users were angry that clicking the cross to dismiss the box meant that they had agreed to the upgrade. Based on "customer feedback", Microsoft said it would add another notification that provided customers with "an additional opportunity for cancelling the upgrade". Microsoft told the BBC it had modified the pop-up as a result of criticism: "We've added another notification that confirms the time of the scheduled upgrade and provides the customer an additional opportunity for cancelling or rescheduling the upgrade. If the customer wishes to continue with their upgrade at the designated time, they can click 'OK' or close the notifications with no further action needed."
A typical malware trick, make the close button install the stuff.
Criminals.
Microsoft says they'll give "an additional opportunity for cancelling the upgrade" -- because respecting the user's choice the first (or second, or fifth, or 20th) time clearly isn't considered by those assholes to be an option!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
They're not the market leader anymore, they don't have the advantages of monopoly,
While i agree with your overall sentiment the above is not even close to true. Microsoft has a stranglehold on the PC market as it pertains to OS. https://www.netmarketshare.com... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Seriously, what kind of sadistic fucks come up with these idiotic schemes?
The marketing people, likely under the pressure of getting adoption rates up to the C-levels' expectations.
What happened here was they crossed a line into doing something that was directly comparable to malware, and I bet their legal department stepped in to say this was a bad idea.
People keep asking in the comments on these stories why no civil/criminal charges have been brought against Microsoft for these "forced upgrades" and here is an example of the company actually worrying about that.
something tells me that this additional option will be on "display", like in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
“But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months.”
“Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn’t exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything.”
“But the plans were on display ”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard’.”
A popup with an "Upgrade to Windows 10 now? [ ]Yes [ ]No" message.
Where the "[ ] No" checkbox is animated and keeps running away from the mouse.
Have gnu, will travel.
> Also, Apple gave away Mavericks for free. I don't see anyone complaining that Apple plans to move to a subscription based model for OS X. Why not?
Because Apple sells hardware.
Because Apple doesn't have a history of absolutely rampant customer abuse.
Because Apple has motivation to keep their ecosystem good.
Because Apple has legitimate ways to make money.
Because Apple doesn't hunt down and delete your old version of Solitaire, put a special flag that doesn't let it run in its most modern OS, offer a new version of Solitaire with ads, and then offer a subscription.
Seriously, if you don't think Microsoft's treatment of Solitaire and Minesweeper is a canary, you're being stubborn. If you want Windows 7 Solitaire- which you payed for and own- to work on Windows 10, you must first back it up, and then you must patch the binary to not demand it only run on Windows 7. At which point it runs fine. But this is absolutely a template for how to force people into a subscription model. At the very least, you can see that disabling ads will become a pay service at some point, right? Given that they JUST DID THAT?
Isn't that exactly what they were doing already in the criticized "nasty trick" dialog?
Let me quote from the slashdot submission on that thing:
"This means dismissing the box does not dismiss the update."
And now it reads:
"If the customer wishes to continue with their upgrade [...] they can [...] close the notifications with no further action needed"
So they are "listening to user feedback" by doing the exact same thing a second time?
Let's call it what it is: FRAUD. The "X" symbol in the top right corner of a window has been used to close a window since windows has existed. Therefore there's a pretty clear precedent established that when a user clicks there, he means to close the window. Changing the meaning of this symbol and causing it to do something completely opposite to what is intended without prior notice is a completely deceptive practice. Microsoft should be ashamed. Microsoft might also be liable. After all, any EULA for the current OS cannot cover or hide DECEPTIVE PRACTICES BY MICROSOFT. And of course you can't be held under any Windows 10 EULA since you quite obviously chose the "X" to not install it. So I hope these fraudulent installs trashed or tied up some important machines and lawyers are getting ready to take them to court. It's no less than they deserve for stooping to the level of scam internet pop-up ads.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
And yet, I still hear people saying things like "Microsoft has changed", "Microsoft isn't evil anymore", or even "Microsoft is a good guy now".
How many times does Microsoft have to demonstrate that they're still the same old Microsoft before people stop believing this nonsense?
Seriously two simple solutions, either A) Google Aegis Script Windows 7
How the hell do I know to google something that I have never heard of before? (Seriously .. I just had to google it to find out what you mentioned)
or B) Format and install Linux.
This trope has to die. There are many applications that are windows only and will never ever in a million years have a FOSS equivalent, and there just as many exceptions to "just run wine".
And running VM's instead means that you have to be a Linux admin as well as a windows admin.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
"Better to ask forgiveness than to ask for permission."
Lesson Number One is "Steal, rob, and lie at will."
There are no other lessons. Here's your MBA.
I think the problem is users are confusing the dialog for a typical multiple-choice decision dialog. It's common to click the close button when you're not sure since that typically selects the "safe" option. But the close button does not always do this, it depends on the type of window. If I close Outlook, I expect it to still have all my e-mails when I open it up again; if I find it cancelled my account I would be upset. In that case, clicking close is assumed to mean that the user does not want any changes to happen to their e-mail; they are done with it for now.
Microsoft was a bit overzealous in scheduling upgrades for users. The dialog that shows up is NOT a decision dialog; the decision was already made by Microsoft! It was an informational dialog to notify you of the decision (and gives you an apparently difficult-to-find control to change this decision). Informational dialogs, by definition, do nothing when you close them; the upgrade would have been kept and that was perfectly in line with the standard for Windows UX. Unfortunately it also proved to be confusing, but I don't think it was malicious. Clearly Microsoft needed to change it since it was confusing users, and they are doing so.
Windows Update works the same way. If you start an update and close the window, the update does not stop. Instead it continues running in the background, since it is an important (to Microsoft) process. So it's understandable a similar process, the upgrade, would be designed to work in a similar way. Like I said, actual user experience now shows it was confusing so it's good MS is changing it.
Seriously two simple solutions, either A) Google Aegis Script Windows 7 or B) Format and install Linux.
I picked option B, and installed Linux Mint (dual boot) on my laptop. Works like a charm .
Windows upgraded the Win 7 on the Windows partition to Win 10 without permission, and promptly locked me out by asking for anon-existent login and password. I was able to do the "make it fail 3 times when booting" trick and revert to Win 7 on that partition, but it was too little too late. I doubt I'll ever boot into Windows on the laptop again because Mint seems to be working just fine. The best part of doing system updates on Mint is that (so far, anyway) I've never had to reboot after the updates.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I don't mind windows, or any other brand, having a add supported version. My problem is that you walk into best buy, purchase windows 10 for $170, and you get the same experience as the guy who paid nothing.
You don't have the option of purchasing a non-douchy version of windows 10. So instead, I will be running windows 7 SP1, with updates turned OFF for the foreseeable future.
"Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
About as much as I want herpes.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
from TFA: Based on "customer feedback", Microsoft said it would add another notification that provided customers with "an additional opportunity for cancelling the upgrade".
How many friggin' times do I have to tell Microsoft that I DO NOT WANT WINDOWS 10 ON MY PCs?
.
If Microsoft is this tone deaf about my desires now, what would it be like when/if I ever decide to upgrade to Windows 10, what will I lose control of then?
Sure thing, remove the feature after all the damage has been already done. This was a calculated move, and everybody knows that. There were voices inside the company who said this was a bad idea, but execs took the Pinto route and calculated the PR damage to be less than the market share gains. Shows us just how crooked they are under all the sweet talk.
My wife was infuriated when her computer suddenly started installing Windows 10. That was the last straw for her, she decided to buy a Mac.
-SR
No, if you look closely there is no apology or backtracking. They are offering a second chance notification that will probably do exactly the same thing.
"If the customer wishes to continue with their upgrade at the designated time, they can click 'OK' or close the notifications with no further action needed."
In other words, if you close the notification then you'll be upgraded to Windows 10. No where have they said that they'll make it easier to opt out, and the statement above means that they will not go to an opt-in process and are still relying on the strategy of fooling the users.