Slashdot Mirror


You Can't Turn Off Cortana In the Windows 10 Anniversary Update (pcworld.com)

Microsoft will release Windows 10 Anniversary Update next week. Earlier this week we listed some of its best features. PCWorld is now reporting about a major change that may annoy some users: once you've installed the update, Cortana can no longer be disabled. From the article: Cortana, the personal digital assistant that replaced Windows 10's search function and taps into Bing's servers to answer your queries with contextual awareness, no longer has an off switch. The impact on you at home: Similar to how Microsoft blocked Google compatibility with Cortana, the company is now cutting off the plain vanilla search option. That actually makes a certain of amount of sense. Unless you turned off all the various cloud-connected bits of Windows 10, there's not a ton of difference between Cortana and the operating system's basic search capabilities.

251 of 369 comments (clear)

  1. O RLY? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 5, Funny

    Challenge accepted!

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    1. Re: O RLY? by thaylin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      hmm job prospects for Linux admins are pretty darn good right now.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    2. Re:O RLY? by npslider · · Score: 2

      David did kill Goliath. Cortana must have a weak spot too. Just got to find it.

      ***A day later... KB6660666 is released, "fixing" a newly discovered security vulnerability - the dead giant grows a new head, and rises up again....

    3. Re:O RLY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Challenge accepted!

      Windows 10 is a strange game. The only winning move is not to play.

    4. Re: O RLY? by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 2

      Can confirm. I'm getting pinged by headhunters at least a couple times per week and it's been like that for the better part of the past two years, and I haven't even been looking!

    5. Re: O RLY? by Fragnet · · Score: 1

      "head hunters" lol. If you put your CV online, even for 5 minutes at a job site, you'll be forever after "pinged" by tech recruiters about 10 times a day.

    6. Re:O RLY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Gain 600 pounds and make graphic advances at Alexa and Siri. That'll be sure to turn Cortana off.

    7. Re:O RLY? by Cafe+Alpha · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yep. You can disable it in the group policy editor if you have pro, or in the registry editor if you don't.

    8. Re: O RLY? by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Informative

      As admin, run this command in one line:

      reg add "HKLM\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\Windows Search" /t REG_DWORD /v "AllowCortana" /d 0 /f

      There, no more cortana.

    9. Re: O RLY? by rudy_wayne · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As admin, run this command in one line:

      reg add "HKLM\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\Windows Search" /t REG_DWORD /v "AllowCortana" /d 0 /f

      There, no more cortana.

      Did you bring up Task Manager and verify that Cortana isn't running? Hiding Cortana is not the same as disabling it.

    10. Re: O RLY? by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 1

      For good jobs? Or for 6 month contracts in another state?

      Actually really decent direct-hire ones, local (Orlando-area, something of a hotbed for tech jobs I suppose recently) or in-state at least. Admittedly, I do get those I'd say about 30% of the time -- i.e. out-of-state/6-month contracts/not-even-close-to-qualified-for jobs where it looks like they simply searched my "buzzwords" and sent off the email.

    11. Re: O RLY? by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 1

      Yeah man, it's mostly from my LinkedIn account, which I don't have set to "looking for opportunities." And it's usually REALLY good ones, or something I might be interested in if I were actually looking. Admittedly, I do get those out-of-state/6-month contracts/not-even-close-to-qualified-for jobs where it looks like they simply searched my "buzzwords" and sent off the email.

    12. Re:O RLY? by macs4all · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Yep. You can disable it in the group policy editor if you have pro, or in the registry editor if you don't.

      Meanwhile, in MacOS, all you have to do to disable Siri is uncheck a simple GUI Checkbox.

    13. Re:O RLY? by npslider · · Score: 4, Funny

      Meanwhile, in Android, all you have to do to disable all Google Services, root the phone, install Windows, apply the reg fix, and turn off all updates!

    14. Re:O RLY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bonzi Buddy 2 says resistance is futile.

    15. Re:O RLY? by shione · · Score: 2

      Nuke it from the commandline, it's the only way to be sure.

      taskkill /IM Cortana.exe /F
      takeown /f "C:\Windows\SystemApps\Microsoft.Windows.Cortana*" /a /r /d y
      icacls "C:\Windows\SystemApps\Microsoft.Windows.Cortana*" /t /c /grant administrators:F System:F everyone:F
      rd /s /q "C:\Windows\SystemApps\Microsoft.Windows.Cortana*"

    16. Re: O RLY? by Otis_INF · · Score: 1

      Task manager hides certain processes so if it doesn't show up there it doesn't mean it's not running.

      --
      Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
    17. Re: O RLY? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That's like cheating.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    18. Re: O RLY? by nanoflower · · Score: 1

      So you are saying that only a System Administrator is capable of using Linux while anyone can use Linux? Interesting.

    19. Re: O RLY? by Jahta · · Score: 2

      Task manager hides certain processes so if it doesn't show up there it doesn't mean it's not running.

      In a Windows internals session at Microsoft Tech-Ed a few years ago David Solomon said that Task Manager should be really be renamed "Some of My Open Windows"!

    20. Re:O RLY? by kilodelta · · Score: 1

      Yep I'm gonna be pulling netstat and seeing what Cortana connects to. Then I'll block the hell out of it on my hardware firewall. Thank you for playing.

    21. Re:O RLY? by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      Since the Anniversary Update, not anymore.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  2. Can't disable? Then I will break it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There are quite a few articles out there already on how to cripple it by changing registry entries or modifying the exe name

    I don't want to do this Microsoft but you force my hand again and again

    1. Re:Can't disable? Then I will break it by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      I've done that to a few services in Linux distributions, third-party Windows utilities (FoolProof Security for Windows 98), and other stuff that just won't go away.

    2. Re:Can't disable? Then I will break it by sirber · · Score: 2

      or install Windows 10 Enterprise LTSB, which got none of this nonsense.

      --
      Be or ben't
    3. Re:Can't disable? Then I will break it by LichtSpektren · · Score: 5, Informative

      or install Windows 10 Enterprise LTSB, which got none of this nonsense.

      Easier said than done, Microsoft doesn't sell Windows Enterprise off the shelf. You have to negotiate a licensing plan with them.

    4. Re:Can't disable? Then I will break it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Can the average punter buy this? No! I thought not.
      They are stuck with fucking Cortana for good.
      If they disable it, the next set of updates will more than likely enable it again.
      Then Cortana will chirp

      "Now who's been a naughty boy. You know that Mother Microsoft owns you and your computer. You can't do anything without my permission.
      I didn't give you permission to turn me off. Now you will pay. Take this".

      The song 'Baby Love' starts playing (or whatever your pet hate song is) on a loop that won't stop. Everytime you turn the computer on, it starts again.

      Boy am I glad that I'm MS free.

    5. Re: Can't disable? Then I will break it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I always wondered what the inside of my head looked like and your comment made my eyes roll back into my head so well that I acomplished that dream.

    6. Re:Can't disable? Then I will break it by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Do you know a way to get that one? So far it is the only one I would even consider buying. Same for my employer (small business, but still).

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    7. Re:Can't disable? Then I will break it by bhcompy · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure the average punter makes enough money to buy an enterprise license, though I'm not sure they'd want to. It's not like kicking a football requires Windows 10 without Cortana

    8. Re:Can't disable? Then I will break it by rudy_wayne · · Score: 3, Informative

      or install Windows 10 Enterprise LTSB, which got none of this nonsense.

      Easier said than done, Microsoft doesn't sell Windows Enterprise off the shelf. You have to negotiate a licensing plan with them.

      You can't just buy a copy of the Enterprise version of Windows. Running (legally) the Enterprise version of Windows 10 requires you to purchase at least 250 Windows licenses (public sector customers) or 500 licenses (commercial customers).

    9. Re:Can't disable? Then I will break it by sakono · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is going to start charging 7 dollars per user, per month for the windows 10 enterprise edition. http://www.computerworld.com/a...

    10. Re:Can't disable? Then I will break it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      or install Windows 10 Enterprise LTSB, which got none of this nonsense.

      Easier said than done, Microsoft doesn't sell Windows Enterprise off the shelf. You have to negotiate a licensing plan with them.

      I suspect Win 10 Enterprise is available through other sources...

    11. Re:Can't disable? Then I will break it by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Then the average, non-enterprise user should run Linux instead. These days Dell even sells their mainstream laptop line with Ubuntu as an option, even their workstation line has it.

      If the average, non-enterprise user doesn't want Windows then they don't need to have it, there are plenty of viable and accessible options available. Sure there are Macs but let's face it, with a free (of charge) operating system like the various Linux distros that you can get on LiveCDs and USBs to even try without installing it this has been the case for many years now. If your personal computing needs are even more simple then an Android tablet or iPad with a keyboard will probably suffice.

    12. Re:Can't disable? Then I will break it by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      And surprise, surprise, the typical Pro-Windows IT types who can never bad mouth anything Microsoft ever does, almost always run Enterprise. Shove them on Windows 10 Home for awhile and see how they like it.

      Oner person in a raid goes link dead and vanishes for an hour. Comes back and says "sorry Windows decided now was a good time to apply updates..." Also a supplier in a meeting was getting ready to project some slides, started cursing, then said slides weren't available until after Windows finished updating.

      But even with Enterprise, you can not skip upgrades. You can defer indefinitely, but if you want update number N then you need to have update N-1. (I've noticed that last week's Tuesday updates had a very large number of updates that said things like "all future updates will require this update to be applied".)

    13. Re:Can't disable? Then I will break it by mrprogrammerman · · Score: 1

      I would be surprised if there wasn't a group policy setting for it.

  3. It didn't have an off switch before by LichtSpektren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In some ways this is more honest, it's been demonstrated that the OS will talk to 107 domains whether or not some switches are toggled in the Control Panel to give the illusion of privacy.

    I wish Microsoft would've been more up front about this last year, and not two days before the "free" "upgrade" is scheduled to be concluded.

    1. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      That's for sure. As far as I'm concerned an operating system that can't operate without the Internet is useless.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    2. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by taustin · · Score: 2

      In some ways this is more honest, it's been demonstrated that the OS will talk to 107 domains whether or not some switches are toggled in the Control Panel to give the illusion of privacy.

      My proxy server laughs are your 107 domains.

    3. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by HexaByte · · Score: 1

      In some ways this is more honest, it's been demonstrated that the OS will talk to 107 domains whether or not some switches are toggled in the Control Panel to give the illusion of privacy.

      Any list of those so I can set them to 127.0.0.1 in my Hosts file?

      --
      HexaByte - he's a square and a half!
    4. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by LichtSpektren · · Score: 5, Informative

      In some ways this is more honest, it's been demonstrated that the OS will talk to 107 domains whether or not some switches are toggled in the Control Panel to give the illusion of privacy.

      Any list of those so I can set them to 127.0.0.1 in my Hosts file?

      Here you go: https://github.com/WindowsLies...

      However it won't work because Windows bypasses its own hosts file for its own purposes. You'll have to block it from your router or other external firewall.

    5. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by Holi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Host file won't help. Telemetry bypasses internal firewall and the hosts file. You need standalone firewall to block it.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    6. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by TroII · · Score: 5, Informative

      Any list of those so I can set them to 127.0.0.1 in my Hosts file?

      That won't help you any, the IP addresses are hard-coded into the OS via dnsapi.dll, which Windows 10 will consult prior to the rest of the resolver stack (hosts, WINS, name servers, etc). You're going to need another machine between you and your internet connection, one with a proper implementation like iptables/ipfw/nftables/etc to drop traffic destined for those IPs.

      Of course, the IPs of the telemetry servers are subject to change at Microsoft's whim, so you're going to end up stuck playing whack-a-mole. Me, I'm just not going to install Windows 10.

    7. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      Is the dll signed?

      Sounds like a job for a hex editor to me. Cripple the centralized dll, cripple the whole operation.

    8. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by LichtSpektren · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't surprise me if that wrecked the entire TCP/IP stack.

      Keep in mind that this is Microsoft. The company that wrote an OS where the only way to check for, download, and install updates is through the web browser, to avoid accusations of monopolistic abuse against Netscape.

    9. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      Only if you do something silly, like set the hard coded ip to 0.0.0.0 or so me thing similarly dumb.

      Instead, point it 192.168.0.1, or whatever your router is. That is a real network device, and the request will simply fail.

    10. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by kruug · · Score: 3

      it's been demonstrated that the OS will talk to 107 domains whether or not some switches are toggled in the Control Panel to give the illusion of privacy.

      That's also been proven false, assuming you're talking about the CheesusCrust post on Voat.

    11. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by TroII · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wouldn't blocking the ASNs associated with Microsoft be any more efficient?

      You'd be blocking every legitimate, non-Microsoft-affiliated service hosted on Azure, and there's no guarantee they're only using their own IP space for this to start with. In the end, I think blocking surveillance and spying that's baked into the operating system is a losing game.

      With Windows 10, the only winning move is not to play.

    12. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by kruug · · Score: 1

      Then, do you have a source on that? Sounds like a click-bait statement...

    13. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      However it won't work because Windows bypasses its own hosts file for its own purposes.

      That has been proven correct on only a select few domains related to windows update. Do you have a source proving the hosts file doesn't also block the listed ones above?

    14. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by kevmeister · · Score: 1

      If my router drops all packets to those IP addresses, it does not matter what is hard-coded or what Widows capabilities are short-cicuited. Almost everyone now has a router and all that I have used allow dropping packets to specified destinations. Cheap ones may not.

      The issue of Windows changing this is valid, though. I suspect someone (or several of them) will start serving the list of addresses being used. Someone may well already be doing this.

      If you use other Microsoft services, though, those will likely break if you do this.

      --
      Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
    15. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      With Windows 10, the only winning move is not to play.

      I believe that was true when XPs GWA (Genuine Windows Agent or whatever it was) came out around 2004? Since then it's been an umitigated downward slope with all things MS. W7 was a positive blip offering just enough to get people to upgrade so MS could inflict the rest of the nastiness they're currently engaged in.

    16. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      It's possible that in the future, Ms will monitor the loop back for such a trick, and have a failsafe.

      Pointing it at the router however, has fringe benefits:
      You can redirect cortanna's search by having a daemon listening at the router, allowing you to point her anywhere you want. You can selectively log, reject, or falsify the telemetry data your worstation (s) are sending to the mothership. You can host your own, better controlled and sanitized windows update vault there, and thus better control what kinds of patches ms actually can get on your hardware.

      Ms has pushed this envelope far enough that there is now a real, legitimate need to man in the middle the update process, and to reclaim control over privacy. It would be a killer app for openwrt.

    17. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      I have, though my own testing, confirmed this fact.

      My working theory is that services running as 'system' are exempt from the firewall, but I might be wrong on that detail. What I do know is that even if you put in block-everything-no-exceptions rules and a default deny, the traffic still flows both ways.

      I can also confirm the hosts situation, though I believe this might be a security measure to stop malware from disabling the update mechanism.

      I have notes, though they are a bit dated: https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmREmfNtA...

    18. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1, Troll

      Back before I came to the conclusion that Windows 10 should actually be called a CTD (Computer-Transmitted Disease) I took two laptops with 10 Pro on them. One, with the install in an --alledgedly-- castrated state, local acct only, cortana disabled, and a bunch of other gpedit,msc tweaks,and one with a default (MS "recommended") install and then indivdually allowed them to "talk" on my network, which had a remote packet capture daemon running on the router, I used Wireshark to capture/examine the packet captures, and captures that ran for 8 hours each, showed BOTH systems spent the whole time yakking at the same urls... My conclusion is: you're getting fucked either way if you use Windows NSA Edition... Thankfully, I'm now Windows-Free to 100% Linux...

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    19. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by LVSlushdat · · Score: 2

      I'd mod you up if I hadn't already posted essentially the same thing... FUCK YOU, MICROSOFT!!! (had to be said)

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    20. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by mrbester · · Score: 2

      In my book, something that deliberately goes around a firewall is malware. I don't care what benefit it claims to give, as that has just given another attack vector for the "real" malware.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    21. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1

      Yeah, a logical, but underhanded way of forcing their spyware would be to make it work with servers that you would otherwise need to work with, such as a server that hosts Azure services or something. I imagine that they have US intelligence agencies have given them a "plato o plomo" proposition to harvest all this data. It sounds like it's been a disaster for them.

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    22. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I do not trust that list! Look at what's on it. "ui.skype.com"? Is that telemetry, or something necessary if you want to use Skype? The doubleclick.net, that's an advertising site, not telemetry from Microsoft. I get the feeling someone just went whole hog on this list and included every outgoing connection that was seen in a certain time period rather than actually filtering it down to only the Microsoft telemetry and spying.

    23. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

      Hey! The NSA has gotta have *something* to fill that giant datacenter they have in Utah.. I strongly suspect MS has been "recruited" to be part of the "data-collection" arm of the NSA.. Which is why I refer to Windows 10 as "Windows NSA Edition", while using my Linux system.....

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    24. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

      Yeah.. I can see it now.. Its gonna like playing "Whack-a-mole" bypassing all of the malware aspects of Windows NSA Edition.. Do you get the feeling that theres *some* government agency behind this, egging MS on to keep "tightening the screws" on Windows? If you think I'm a conspiracy nut, you are ASLEEP.....

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    25. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

      In my book, something that deliberately goes around a firewall is malware. I don't care what benefit it claims to give, as that has just given another attack vector for the "real" malware.

      I'd expect that to be in ANYbody's "book", somebody who is NOT a mindless MS "can_do_no_wrong" fanboi.. I used to use/support Windows during my working career, but now that I'm retired, its Linux 100% ... FUCK MS... (you *know* you're thinking it....)

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    26. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

      Unfortuantly you *KNOW* whoEVER was to produce such a tool would have the shit sued out of them by MS..

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    27. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by TechForensics · · Score: 1

      vote parent up

      --
      Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
    28. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by dbIII · · Score: 1

      That has been proven correct on only a select few domains related to windows update

      Isn't that enough of a pain?
      Proof is proof FFS anyway.

    29. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by dbIII · · Score: 1

      It's worse than that conspiracy theory. Instead of it being an arm of government ultimately responsible to the citizens if it goes too far it's a group only accountable to MS management (the shareholders don't get any say).

    30. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      I made a list too - but my list was made on a fresh-out-the-box, no-third-party Windows 10 device. This is the list I got from observation.
      https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmREmfNtA...

    31. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      If Microsoft is halfway competent in their security - which is questionable - they'll be using SSL, so you can't impersonate one of their servers. Almost everything I monitored was SSL. Except for the start menu tile updates, which were plain http. From a bing subdomain.

    32. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      the Windows Firewall isn't a real firewall... a real firewall would be able to block everything and let YOU enable the traffic YOU want...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    33. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Do I care why I don't want it to make the connection?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    34. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      On what grounds, I'd have to wonder?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    35. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      But yanking the tiger's tail is exciting!

      Of course it's silly and of course you don't get anything out of it but a cheap thrill, but if we don't keep them busy propping up their attempt at data mining, they might have time to come up with something that actually works!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    36. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So give them something to harvest?

      Like my statistics professor always said, there is something that is far, far worse than getting no data: Poisoned data. Data someone deliberately messed with so you cannot tell real data from fake data anymore, because then, all you can really do is throw it all out.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    37. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You may rest assured that this service will be automated in no time by someone. Maybe for a price, but I have full faith in the capitalist system to solve this problem.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    38. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Yes. Proof of me one day not paying my parking ticket is proof that I will never pay any debts and break all the laws I see.

      Do you realise how silly your proof is proof argument sounds? Especially considering the domains which have been proven to ignore the hosts file and firewall rules were done so specifically to close a security hole that would see malware preventing Microsoft patches from preventing further problems or issuing defender updates to fix them.

    39. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by jarlsberg71 · · Score: 1

      If only a select few bullets get through my body armor, I don't think it's very good armor. As long as one ignores the host file, I wouldn't put stock in the rest.

      --
      E8B8B
    40. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Proof of me one day not paying my parking ticket

      Is proof about that one parking ticket.

      My point is obviously that they have gone too far once. For some purposes that's considered enough, and anything on top of that is just adding insult to injury.

    41. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      This has been known about since the Windows 98 days at least. Certain Windows services, like Windows Update, bypass the hosts file and firewall. It's a security feature, it prevents malware blocking those services. Remember this was back in the FAT32 days when there wasn't even access control on critical systems files like hosts.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    42. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by jon3k · · Score: 1

      Or run your own name server, which a lot of us already do. Has anyone written fake bind zone files for these domains?

    43. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Let's take that example further then. You just got shot point blank by a tank, does that mean your body armour is worthless when someone approaches you with a handgun?

      I have a better one for you that's more on topic. If you're scared about the potential for something to be amiss because a hosts file is bypassed for one address by a company, then your issue isn't that host file. It's any kind of trust in that company and by extension who cares what happens to the host file, they are running their code in Ring0. You're most rooted.

    44. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      My point is obviously that they have gone too far once.

      My point too. Clearly I would never pay for a parking ticket ever again because of one incident.

    45. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by jarlsberg71 · · Score: 1

      I don't want to compare analogies back and forth. but your reasoning seems to be comparing bullets with tank artillery. where one is more powerful than the others. I'm taking a list of 100+ items and some of them skip it, some don't. I'm not weighting the values as more lethal than the others. Your second point is dead on topic. they are making it so consumers require professional working knowledge of computers and networks to keep any part of their data under their own control. I'm a mac user at home but a Windows user at work. and I can't stand having to jump around this minefield to make sure it's not sending everything out to MS and its partners every time I boot up.

      --
      E8B8B
    46. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "You'd be blocking every legitimate, non-Microsoft-affiliated service hosted on Azure"

      Cloud services are shit anyways, just another method of wrestling full control away from you.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    47. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by TroII · · Score: 2

      Cloud services are shit anyways, just another method of wrestling full control away from you.

      Eh, on one hand I don't disagree at all, on the other hand "the cloud" is a bullshit term that means "other peoples' servers." I'm just saying that nullrouting all Microsoft ASNs is going to block way more than one is bargaining for. Lots of people with no relation to Microsoft host their websites in Azure just like they might rent a server at Rackspace or Linode. If someone you hate decides to colo at Rackspace, you probably aren't going to firewall millions of IPs just to avoid his website. It's better to just not go there (i.e. don't install Windows 10) than to block the whole network and miss out on everything else that lives there.

    48. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by exomondo · · Score: 1

      In my book, something that deliberately goes around a firewall is malware.

      If something can just "go around" a firewall then it's not really a firewall. Obviously Microsoft's implementation is designed to allow traffic like Windows Update through so you don't accidently block security updates, if you trust that you won't do that then configure your own firewall and in fact you should configure that at the gateway, not on every individual system that way you don't have to replicate your firewall configuration onto all devices and indeed there are many internet-connected devices that don't even have the capability to configure a firewall.

    49. Re:It didn't have an off switch before by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Do I have to reference the "but it was only one goat" joke for you to get the point?
      Some people think what MS has been proved to be doing is as bad as doing a goat. They only had to be caught once for it to matter.

  4. Of course not by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "You Can't Turn Off Cortana In the Windows 10 Anniversary Update"

    Of course not- that might interfere with their advertising schemes and the ability to monitor whatever they like in order to better monetize your entire existence.

    Welcome to the Brave New World of surveillance, brought to you by the same forward-thinking folks that brought you Windows ME, the Zune, and PlaysForSure.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:Of course not by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      It's part of the operating system.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:Of course not by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      It's part of the operating system.

      Yes, and their operating system is designed around their advertising schemes and the ability to monitor whatever they like in order to better monetize your entire existence.

      It's part of the OS just like Internet Explorer was, until it turned out it wasn't.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    3. Re:Of course not by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Yes, and their operating system is designed around their advertising schemes

      What advertising schemes? I have seen literally ONE ad in Windows 10, it was in the start menu under heading "Suggestions" and I turned that off with a switch in Control Panel.

    4. Re:Of course not by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      What advertising schemes?

      The advertising scheme where they mine your data and monitor every keystroke you make and every website you visit, and then sell that information to advertisers.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    5. Re:Of course not by exomondo · · Score: 1

      The advertising scheme where they mine your data and monitor every keystroke you make and every website you visit, and then sell that information to advertisers.

      Are they actually doing that or are you just extrapolating from the language in the license agreement? And - as an advertiser - where exactly can I buy this information? I don't think you'll find they sell such information to advertisiers at all, happy to see proof though.

    6. Re:Of course not by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Are they actually doing that or are you just extrapolating from the language in the license agreement?

      Microsoft is not shy about admitting that they use the data they gather for advertising. You're either new here, or blissfully ignorant of Microsoft's practices.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    7. Re:Of course not by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is not shy about admitting that they use the data they gather for advertising. You're either new here, or blissfully ignorant of Microsoft's practices.

      There is a very big difference between "using the information they gather for advertising" and "mine your data and monitor every keystroke you make and every website you visit, and then sell that information to advertisers", you understand those two are not even remotely the same thing right?

    8. Re:Of course not by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      you understand those two are not even remotely the same thing right?

      They are to Microsoft.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    9. Re:Of course not by exomondo · · Score: 1

      you understand those two are not even remotely the same thing right?

      They are to Microsoft.

      Well no, that doesn't make sense. One is an unsubstantiated thing you made up all on your own for some reason and the other is the thing they have stated they are doing, the two things are completely different.

  5. Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by HBI · · Score: 2

    Why would anyone run this thing? "New, shiny" seems to be the only argument I have heard that has any relationship to reality.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    1. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

      I've already switched one of my computers from Windows to Linux because of Microsoft's Windows 10 disaster. The surprising part (for me, at least) is that I've not even looked back.

    2. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by HBI · · Score: 1

      It has a lower RAM utilization than a basic Win7/64 system (~2.25GB at idle)?

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    3. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by chipschap · · Score: 1

      With two days to go on the "free" upgrade, I had thought about "upgrading" my seldom-used Windows 8.1 partition but this latest antic has guaranteed that I won't. MS, you don't own my computer no matter how powerful you think you are.

    4. Re: Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by Traxton · · Score: 2

      Yes. Mine uses about 1.6GB.

    5. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by iampiti · · Score: 1

      If you depend on Windows-only software you will have to use Win10 sooner or later if anything because the newer hardware won't work with 7/8 anymore.
      And I say this as someone who really hates Win 10. I myself plan to move to Linux and only use Windows for games

    6. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by macxcool · · Score: 5, Informative

      I agree. We bought a little Acer E3-111 for my wife with Windows 8.1 awhile back. It worked just fine. We had some problems with the touchpad recently and I figured, why not upgrade to Windows 10. We've both regretted that decision. It run slowly, and every few days there's new reasons on Slashdot and elsewhere not to run Windows 10. A few days ago I booted Linux Mint 18, Mate edition from a USB stick. Firefox (my wife's preffered browser) started so quickly we were startled and everything was very smooth. I looked at the hits on my firewall/proxy server from her IP and they were down to almost nothing. I'll be upgrading her to Linux this weekend.

    7. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by LichtSpektren · · Score: 1

      Papers, Please.

      A riveting game where Microsoft plays an omnipotent checkpoint inspector that interrogates, strip searches, and anal probes the Player Character before he's allowed to continue.

    8. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by TroII · · Score: 1

      You might want to look at disabling unnecessary services or something. Windows 7 64bit on my primary desktop hovers around 1GB idle.

    9. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

      It is more resource efficient than Windows 7/8. Works better on low end systems.

      Not for me it doesn't. I have upgraded two of my computers to Windows 10, and in both cases it is perceptively slower. In the case of my test system - a real low-end computer - I have taken a substantial performance cut since upgrading. I had been using the starter edition of Windows 7, and I upgraded it to 10 to lose the artificial restriction to 2GB of RAM. Yay! Now I can access all 4GB. But, boo! Not only does it run slower, but my computer fan runs more often as the CPU seems to idle at a higher percentage. This was done on a fresh install too.

      The other computer (my work system) was a more modern, faster system. While the performance drop is far less pronounced, it is still noticeable. I upgraded the rest of our office and quite a number of people have complained how slow it seems.

      I simply cannot understand why people claim that it is more efficient than previous versions of Windows - especially when compared to Windows 7. The most obvious slowness comes from the new don't-call-me-Metro user interface elements. It simply takes longer to display the new UI like menus and dialogs than the traditional ones. For example, it takes half the time for me to launch my old shareware spreadsheet Spread32 than it does to launch the new-look Windows calculator. The windows pop up in the same time, but it takes an extra second or so to display the buttons on the calc. And I no longer launch the calculator with a keyboard shortcut because 1) it is hard to set up as the tile no longer has the ability to set the shortcut (I had to create my own shortcut to calc.exe to make it work), and 2) it takes an extra two seconds to the launch time on my system when using the shortcut compared to clicking on a tile. This means it takes nearly 5.5 seconds to launch the calculator app via a keyboard shortcut. It is faster on my work computer, but it shows that Windows 10 does not run better on low-end systems.

      You might think that it's just my slow computer to blame, but it never had this problem when it ran Windows 7 using half the memory.

    10. Re: Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by operagost · · Score: 1

      I have it on a rather old laptop with 2 GB RAM. It uses all of it. No, it never stops paging. And it likes to grind whatever IO is available by updating Defender every time I boot up. And the audio only works if I disable the driver, then re-enable it.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    11. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by HBI · · Score: 1

      Do you have Office on it? Seems to increase the minimum a bit. I do. There are some services I could disable (I haven't given the system aggressive optimization) but I don't think i'm going to get back 1.25GB.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    12. Re: Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by HBI · · Score: 1

      That sounds very much like the Windows 95 experience with most old 3.1 hardware. Meaning - probably generally true.

      I have undone some inadvertent Windows 10 upgrades and that's generally what condition those systems were in while running under 10.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    13. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by Dins · · Score: 1

      Many/most of the major AAA titles, unless they run under Wine. Steam has helped a lot with Linux gaming, but there are still a ton of games that won't run native on Linux. That is the only thing that has kept me from switching on my gaming machine at home. I "upgraded" to Win10 a while back and now wish I hadn't. I've turned off/blocked as much as MS allows me to turn off/block, but that's not all that much really. And now Cortana is coming back. Wonderful.

    14. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I use Win7 it as game-launcher and for MS-Office. For the first I will not consider Win10 before 2020 when Wion7 security patches will end. For the second, I can confine it into a VM (with Win7 or Win10) after 2020 or run Office in Wine, probably in a VM as well, this trash is insecure as hell...

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    15. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by TroII · · Score: 1

      Nope, no Office. I have the interface as classic as possible (no translucent stuff or animations) and I'm serious about having a ton of default services turned off. I agree those probably aren't a gig's worth, though.

    16. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Image the partition, take the upgrade and confirm it certifies, then blast W10 and put your old one back. Now you can always install it once the workarounds for all this are figured out.

    17. Re: Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by ZeroWaiteState · · Score: 1

      What we found was that the upgrade process left a system that mostly worked but did not perform well and had occasional driver issues. A clean reinstall of Win10 resolved it. I think people who are saying how wonderful 10 is have probably been using a clean install.

    18. Re: Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by ZeroWaiteState · · Score: 1

      Same here. For me Windows is mostly a toy now. All my work stuff is now Linux.

    19. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Windows 8.1 is definitely an improvment over Windows 7 here. However I've heard no one mention how much better Windows 10 is vers Windows 8.1 in this regard. Or ANY regard for that matter. The most popular reason I've been given is "you're going to have to upgrade eventually anyway so you may as well upgrade now." Which is silly since I've got another 8 years left of support on the current OS.

    20. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      That game runs on Windows, OS X, Linux, iOS, and PlayStation Vita. It was also released in 2013, which was before Windows 10 was available.

    21. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The question is games that only run under Windows *10*, rather than just on Windows. There are no major games of any value that required DX12, because a game maker would be stupid to eliminate the huge market for DX10/11 customers and focus only on the least used version of DirectX.

    22. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      Not yet, but remember MS owns a lot of game studios - they might apply pressure to develop Windows 10 exclusives in future. When the transition is far enough along that they can afford to lose the 7/8 holdouts.

    23. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      It's less the games, it's more the gaming periphery we came to use and now expect to work. You'd be surprised how many "gaming mice" have trouble running well under XWindow. TrackIR still has its issues. Flight sticks and pedals, while sometimes working, still lack sensible configuration software in Linux. And some audio cards and other tidbits could still do with a bit more love from developers and companies.

      It's less the games themselves that lack, it's more our hardware that lacks the support.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    24. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      My hope is still that by that time either game studios (and periphery makers, even more so) will catch on and playing games on Linux becomes a real alternative. It may be rough the first few years, but we've survived worse. If everything fails, I'll have to do with Indie games 'til the big studios realize where their player base went.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    25. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      On the test system I set up, my problem with Win10 is not that it runs slowly, per-se, but that it runs inconsistently.

      I've heard a lot of stories about the spinning beachball on OSX, but haven't seen that on my main Win7 system. Win10, on the other hand, seems to lock up every few minutes thrashing the storage device in bursts that last from a few seconds to minutes at a time, making the system unresponsive. "Only uses idle time" my ass. It be doing scary stuff in the background.

    26. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      I just did the upgrade. I have 30 days to roll it back and I might do that but at least I have the license now.

    27. Re: Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by HBI · · Score: 1

      Data aggregation appears to not be a concept you know about. Luckily, I do.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    28. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by toddestan · · Score: 1

      I'd suggest Windows Update, which will bring any Windows 7 system with less than 4GB to its knees whenever it decides to run an update check.

    29. Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

      Just out of curiosity, did you wait for Windows to finish off all its housekeeping crap that it does after installing before comparing the performance to a well worn install of Windows 7?

      Yes. I installed Windows 10 back in January and did some definitive timing tests by filming the screen and using that to time everything in June.

  6. Easy enough ... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    Just don't connect to the Internet. Computers can be used for more than surfing the web and twittering.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re:Easy enough ... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Brilliant idea. You should get off the Internet and move far away from civilized human beings.

    2. Re:Easy enough ... by jandrese · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be easier to remove the microphone? Granted, this is tricky on a laptop, but for desktops it's fairly straightforward.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    3. Re: Easy enough ... by ZeroWaiteState · · Score: 1

      Because the microphone is used for lots of legitimate stuff, and you shouldn't have to use a microphone switch to make the computer respect your boundaries.

  7. How to disable Cortana by bagofbeans · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Re:How to disable Cortana by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Only works on Win10 Pro/Enterprise via group policy. That's not really an option for most people.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:How to disable Cortana by GameboyRMH · · Score: 3, Informative

      A method to do it with a registry modification is also in that article. It's not clear if it works for the Home edition though.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    3. Re:How to disable Cortana by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

      Addendum: D'oh! Yes the registry mod will work on the Home edition.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    4. Re:How to disable Cortana by kulaga · · Score: 3, Informative

      Also check out Spybot Anti-Beacon. It disables all (hopefully at least most) of the services Microsoft uses for data collection... I'm sure it can all be done manually, but this was a simple solution for me. Not a shill, but I keep posting this after learning about from a previous Slashdot comment months ago.

    5. Re:How to disable Cortana by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Seems like transiting to Slackware is the safest way right now.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    6. Re:How to disable Cortana by LichtSpektren · · Score: 2

      Has anyone verified if that actually works? i.e. open up Wireshark and those domains are no longer being contacted?

    7. Re:How to disable Cortana by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      But nobody stops you from adding them to a Home-edition manually :-)

      Give it a Windows patch or two.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  8. What? by sims+2 · · Score: 2

    Does this mean I can finally try out cortana?
    Or does it still require login?

    --
    Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
  9. Linux Gaming Support by iCEBaLM · · Score: 3, Informative

    That's it. That's all that we need. If we could somehow figure out a way to get a good gaming experience on Linux then the fabled Year of the Linux Desktop(tm) would manifest in reality.

    Windows would be relegated to the office (and even that can change since more and more apps are web based) and we would finally be free.

    1. Re:Linux Gaming Support by geek · · Score: 1

      That's it. That's all that we need. If we could somehow figure out a way to get a good gaming experience on Linux then the fabled Year of the Linux Desktop(tm) would manifest in reality.

      Windows would be relegated to the office (and even that can change since more and more apps are web based) and we would finally be free.

      Easy. Tell the kernel developers to take their heads out of their asses and accept that graphics card makers have proprietary shit to protect. Until the FOSS people learn to play nice with others gaming on Linux will be complete shit.

    2. Re:Linux Gaming Support by LichtSpektren · · Score: 1

      When you download the Linux binary, it comes with lots of proprietary drivers with no source available. You have to use Linux-libre to have a fully FOSS kernel.

      Anyway, the problem isn't bad hardware support. The main problem is video game companies foregoing Linux support, or making it really shoddy as an afterthought.

    3. Re:Linux Gaming Support by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Well it is a lot of chicken and the egg problem.
      1. the GNU/Linux distributions were made off of the Unix (server) framework design. While this give us a lot of great things. However Human User Interface has always been an afterthought. Audio/Video/Input Devices have always been a last ditch add on to the system.

      2. The GNU/RMS fanbois are so zealot about keeping it open that there are not enough popular distributions that include 3rd party drivers because such companies are unwilling or unable to make such tools GNU

      3. Because of 1 and 2 Linux is mostly for a lot of server and workstation jobs. Not a game system.

      4. Because it isn't made as a game system there are not so many gamers to make it the companies worthwhile to invest a lot into it.

      5. Those who do invest don't have massive resources to report their game to take advantage of Linux so the port is usually rather poor.

      6. The poor ports and limited quality games keeps gamers from using Linux.

      7. The low number of gamers in demand means there isn't a lot of development towards making Linux a better gaming OS

      8. Because it isn't a gaming OS there is little need to focus on optimising the Audio/Video/Human User Interface options.

      9. Because of this lack of attention people feel they can keep their moral high ground against using 3rd party add ins as it isn't much of a personal sacrifice to them. ..

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:Linux Gaming Support by LichtSpektren · · Score: 1

      2. The GNU/RMS fanbois are so zealot about keeping it open that there are not enough popular distributions that include 3rd party drivers because such companies are unwilling or unable to make such tools GNU

      You're talking out of your ass. Most distros use the regular Linux kernel, only a handful use Linux-libre (i.e. with all of the closed source drivers stripped out).

    5. Re:Linux Gaming Support by Bowlich · · Score: 1

      I haven't booted my Windows PC to game in probably two years now. Been gaming just fine off an Ubuntu mini-itx box just using the onboard graphics card.

      Granted, I've been finding myself less and less interested in big blockbusters and spending more time on a lot of the lighter indie games --- Undertale, Firewatch, Terraria, Bastion, FEZ and Torchlight II are all games I've gone through in the last couple years on this box.

      Older triple AAA titles work fine as well, my friends and I are just now playing through Borderlands 2.

    6. Re:Linux Gaming Support by gweihir · · Score: 1

      We will see. Things do no look so bad for Linux gaming with Vulcan. All it needs is for some major engines to support Vulcan instead or alongside off DirectX. I will probably have to keep a Win7 or Win10 VM around for Office though (customers demand it), or confine it in Wine.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    7. Re:Linux Gaming Support by unrtst · · Score: 1

      Tell the kernel developers to take their heads out of their asses and accept that graphics card makers have proprietary shit to protect. Until the FOSS people learn to play nice with others gaming on Linux will be complete shit.

      Only replying cause you have low uid, or I'd think you were just trolling (and you probably are).

      How has the way the Linux kernel is managed negatively affected proprietary graphics card drivers?
      On windows, you have to install proprietary drivers as admin. Same thing on Linux. Both ship with some level of built in support that usually isn't the latest and greatest, but works well enough.

      The proprietary binary blob on Linux has performed on par with the Windows drivers for over a decade, and has even outperformed it at times. That part of the equation is not the problem.

    8. Re:Linux Gaming Support by macs4all · · Score: 1

      That's it. That's all that we need. If we could somehow figure out a way to get a good gaming experience on Linux then the fabled Year of the Linux Desktop(tm) would manifest in reality.

      Windows would be relegated to the office (and even that can change since more and more apps are web based) and we would finally be free.

      I already am. At home, at least...

    9. Re:Linux Gaming Support by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      6. has changed a lot in recent years, thanks to Valve - they pushed a lot of studios into supporting linux, with the promise that doing so would mean an easy port to their Steam console. It's worked - even a lot of major titles are linux-native now. Go play Half Life 2, or Left 4 Dead 2.

    10. Re:Linux Gaming Support by Threni · · Score: 1

      "the Linux binary"

      What's that?

      "it comes with lots of proprietary drivers with no source available"

      Which distro?

    11. Re:Linux Gaming Support by rsmith-mac · · Score: 1

      How has the way the Linux kernel is managed negatively affected proprietary graphics card drivers?

      By not supporting a stable ABI and API for binary drivers. You can take a WinVista driver written in 2006 and still install it and use it today on a fully updated and supported OS. Linux doesn't offer any kind of binary compatibility remotely comparable.

      Users appreciate minor OS updates not breaking their drivers. Hardware vendors appreciate not having to chase whatever direction the kernel devs are going to keep their drivers working.

    12. Re:Linux Gaming Support by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Most of the major ones, I think. I use Debian myself, and it includes an entire repository for non-free, proprietary drivers.

    13. Re:Linux Gaming Support by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Mint does just that out of the box, Gentoo has the option to do that (not even well hidden but rather as part of the installation routine), so yes, there are Linux distributions that don't go on some religious crusade that everything must be FOSS.

      And bluntly, yes, the free "nouveau" (or whatever the junk is called) drivers for nVidia cards just don't cut it. Commendable effort, yes, but ultimately futile.

      The problem isn't graphics. It's sound. It's periphery. Sound drivers are still stuck at stereo (if you're lucky), gaming mice still don't work reliably in XWindow and various gaming gadgets, from steering wheels and flight sticks to things like TrackIR, either have lackluster support or lack support altogether. And you better don't even think about VR.

      So if your idea of "gaming" is something along the lines of Minecraft or Civilization, you won't have a problem playing in Linux. If FPS or sims are more your thing, you're SOL.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    14. Re:Linux Gaming Support by unrtst · · Score: 1

      Whether or not it graphics card makers have to do more or less work to keep their binary drivers working on linux (which is arguable anyway) makes no difference at all to game developers offering their games on linux. You can babble on and on about that, but the fact is that the binary drivers for both Nvidia and ATI/AMD cards has been kept well up to date and working on a variety of popular linux distros, and the majority of distros provide very easy to use utilities to get those drivers installed with very very little effort (arguably easier than on Windows).

      That issue hasn't been holding up gaming on Linux for ages.

  10. Mint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    Switched to Mint, won't upgrade past Win7.

    Fuck you, Microsoft.

    1. Re:Mint by chipschap · · Score: 1

      Mint still runs well enough to be useful on my 7 year old Acer Netbook with 2 GB of RAM. Not stellar, but usable enough to do real work. I don't think Windows 10 would cut it on that old hardware :)

    2. Re:Mint by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Heck, Mint XFCE runs adequately even on old 32 bit XP era computers with only 512MB of RAM. Really seems to prefer 1GB though. (I donate time to perform quick secure-wipes and Linux installs on old PCs for a thrift store that funds the local homeless shelter.)

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    3. Re:Mint by chipschap · · Score: 1

      I've run Mint on a desktop with 512MB and it works, although it doesn't do things like YouTube streaming very well (and that's with a separate video card, not the stuff integrated in the motherboard). But otherwise it worked well enough, as you have found. Certainly good for stuff that's not graphics intensive.

  11. As a UNIX head and former MS-hater . . . by mmell · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Y'know, Microsoft has never made any bones about their OS being a proprietary system. Whether you agree with their choices or not, you're bound by them when you use their OS. Problem is, there is a lot of appeal to their OS - nearly universal familiarity among the user base (which is large), nearly ubiquitous applications (especially in the office/business space), pre-installation (something like $50.00 a shot, as opposed to ~$175, so I guess that hurts less) . . .

    You want an OS that works your way? Tell ya what - get a bunch of your fellow technically-oriented geek friends together and make your own! (Actually, I'm sure this has been done. I think such systems are called "GNU Linux"?) Otherwise, as long as they don't outright break what they sold you, you can deal with MS's heavy-handed management of your systems. Frankly, with all the moaning about MS security and unpatched MS OS's in the wild, how did everyone expect them to respond? They're still the de facto business OS of choice and their primary customer is extremely security conscious. MS is listening to the bucks, not the users. Since their software is proprietary, that is as it should be. Unless you actively find a way to prevent it, Microsoft pretty much insists on their right to make every licensed MS OS instance reasonably uniform. That way, both security and reliability can theoretically be maximized for the entire user base.

    In short - deal with it or run something else. Just don't expect Microsoft to waste any time or money trying to do things your way unless you're big business with big bucks.

    1. Re:As a UNIX head and former MS-hater . . . by RandomSurfer314 · · Score: 1

      No, I think it's better to influence your local lawmakers to impose billions of dollars of fines on Microsoft until they give their users a minimum of control over their personal information back. That's not unreasonable, at least not if you're living in Europe. In the US it maybe best to wait until Microsoft makes some mistake when they control your machine, and then file some nasty class action suit against them. Both strategies can be surprisingly effective and are better than just giving up, as you seem to suggest.

    2. Re:As a UNIX head and former MS-hater . . . by chipschap · · Score: 1

      In short - deal with it or run something else.

      This and the rest of your post is quite accurate, whether we like it or not.

      So I do run something else and am quite happy--- and productive--- doing so.

    3. Re:As a UNIX head and former MS-hater . . . by Thanatiel · · Score: 1

      That's exacly the plan.

      --
      Irrelevant news and morons using moderation to mod down what they disagree on. 2018 resolution: so long.
    4. Re:As a UNIX head and former MS-hater . . . by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Y'know, Microsoft has never made any bones about their OS being a proprietary system.

      Windows made money selling copies. Apple makes money taking a cut of every sale in their walled garden. Google makes money data mining the shit out of everything. The new Microsoft seems to want to be the old Microsoft + Apple + Google. It used to be pick your poison, now it's all of the above. I hope they choke on it.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    5. Re:As a UNIX head and former MS-hater . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Y'know, Microsoft has never made any bones about their OS being a proprietary system. Whether you agree with their choices or not, you're bound by them when you use their OS.

      "Proprietary" does not have to automatically mean "all your choice are belong to us".

      Problem is, there is a lot of appeal to their OS - nearly universal familiarity among the user base (which is large), nearly ubiquitous applications (especially in the office/business space), pre-installation (something like $50.00 a shot, as opposed to ~$175, so I guess that hurts less) . . .

      What you call "appeal", others have calles "monopoly", "racketeering", and other less savoury words.

      They're still the de facto business OS of choice and their primary customer is extremely security conscious.

      That's not true. The conciousness is about covering their arses, so there has to be a semblance of security, but actual security? They can't tell. redmond knows this very well.

      MS is listening to the bucks, not the users.

      This is true.

      Since their software is proprietary, that is as it should be.

      Nope. But for a full discussion we'd have to talk about just how "free" the market is they operate in, what that means, just when government intervention is needed, and we get into very fuzzy territory, full of supposedly educated bickering but really lots of stinky ideological bullshit. It does mean that I'm calling bullshit on you, here, though. The easy way is that "proprietary" does not imply "commercial" (even though that company happens to be) and that them having spawned a complete secondary "computer security" imperial duds cottage industry indicates they are in fact doing something fundamentally wrong. That they happen to make money off their failings does indeed imply the market itself has failed.

      Unless you actively find a way to prevent it, Microsoft pretty much insists on their right to make every licensed MS OS instance reasonably uniform. That way, both security and reliability can theoretically be maximized for the entire user base.

      You are essentially saying "might makes right" here. You can only get away with that for so long before you get taken down a peg. As, eg, the USoA is currently experiencing.

    6. Re:As a UNIX head and former MS-hater . . . by RandomSurfer314 · · Score: 1

      You're a fascist ass hole.

      Well, at least I'm not an idiot.

    7. Re:As a UNIX head and former MS-hater . . . by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Windows made money selling copies because every few years a new version came out, and thanks to the rapid pace of technological advancement everyone had to upgrade.

      Then advancement slowed, and it took MS the better part of a decade to abandon XP. How can you continue to sell people new operating systems when your last product was 'good enough' that no-one wants to stop using it?

      So MS has applied the obvious business solution: Transition from selling an OS to selling the OS and then profiting off of the ancillary services that support it, like an app store.

    8. Re:As a UNIX head and former MS-hater . . . by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      I would never say that Microsoft doesn't have the right to make their OS as crappy as they possibly can.

      By the same token, I reserve the right to let them know what I think of their design choices.

    9. Re:As a UNIX head and former MS-hater . . . by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I just want an OS that's not made by a psychopathic mindset that treats the customers like dirt.

    10. Re:As a UNIX head and former MS-hater . . . by mrprogrammerman · · Score: 1

      It's a two edged sword. MS not being strict with their OS allowed the ecosystem to flourish but also allowed malware to spread. Now their trying to tighten the screws it's making it seems a little too late.

    11. Re:As a UNIX head and former MS-hater . . . by shione · · Score: 1

      Microsoft pretty much insists on their right to make every licensed MS OS instance reasonably uniform. That way, both security and reliability can theoretically be maximized for the entire user base.

      I don't think it makes my system any more secure or reliable with cortana on there. As far as I'm concerned cortana is bloatware and should be uninstallable in a similar fashion using powershell.

  12. Figures... by Kinwolf · · Score: 1

    That's the anniversary surprise!!

    1. Re:Figures... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I think Microsoft is treating this like a 50's era marriage. As in "Happy Anniversary dear, today is the one day a year you have to give me oral sex!"

    2. Re:Figures... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      It's more like "Remember how I beat you up in our wedding night? Let's make that our anniversary thing."

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  13. One trick pony by quax · · Score: 1

    Seems like yesterday that they tried to integrate IE into Windows.

  14. What if I don't want any of it?? by Lord_Rion · · Score: 1

    What if I don't want their connected/desktop search... what if I just want an operating system?

    --
    --Hired Net Grunt
    1. Re:What if I don't want any of it?? by Lord_Rion · · Score: 1

      It was rhetorical, but thanks.. :)

      --
      --Hired Net Grunt
    2. Re:What if I don't want any of it?? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      What makes you think MS gives a fuck about what you want?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  15. I Say Bullshit! by WheezyJoe · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you don't like Cortana, you can make it go away and never use it.

    From TFA: Microsoft told PCWorld. "If you like, you can also easily hide Cortana and the search box in the taskbar altogether."

    Cortana is simply a browser searchbar that uses Bing, re-located to the taskbar, and can talk. Siri reaches out to Apple servers when you use it, OK Google goes to Google servers. Microsoft is simply playing catch-up. The only news here is you can no longer give Cortana a lobotomy by cutting off its access to Bing.

    But to say "Cortana can't be disabled" is inaccurate, misleading FUD. There may be many reasons to shit on Microsoft, but this isn't one of them.
    Instructions:
    1. change default browser from Edge to anything else... except IE. Be sure your new Browser does not use Bing as its search engine.
    2. Right-click on the Taskbar, choose to Hide Cortana.
    3. (optional) Install ClassicShell, Start8, or equivalent to provide a convenient basic search functionality.
    4. (optional) Still paranoid? Try Spybot Anti-Beacon.
    5. Proceed as before. Run Steam or something.

    --
    Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
    1. Re:I Say Bullshit! by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In this brave new world, hiding an app is equivalent to turning it off.

      --
      "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
    2. Re:I Say Bullshit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you don't like Cortana, you can make it go away and never use it.

      From TFA: Microsoft told PCWorld. "If you like, you can also easily hide Cortana and the search box in the taskbar altogether."

      Cortana is simply a browser searchbar that uses Bing, re-located to the taskbar, and can talk.

      1. change default browser from Edge to anything else... except IE. Be sure your new Browser does not use Bing as its search engine.
      2. Right-click on the Taskbar, choose to Hide Cortana.
      3. (optional) Install ClassicShell, Start8, or equivalent to provide a convenient basic search functionality.
      4. (optional) Still paranoid? Try Spybot Anti-Beacon.
      5. Proceed as before. Run Steam or something.

      Unfortunately, you don't understand the difference between disabling Cortana and merely hiding it so you can't see it. And Microsoft is counting on that level of ignorance.

      After following those steps you listed, bring up Task manager and you will see that Cortana is still running. Kill the process and it immediately comes back. I did finally manage to successfully kill Cortana, but it's tricky and I experienced system instability afterward. So I just to Microsoft to fuck off and went back Windows 7.

    3. Re:I Say Bullshit! by operagost · · Score: 1

      The fact that you have to install a third-party hack to disable it is a pretty good reason to hate Microsoft.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    4. Re:I Say Bullshit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      surprise, it's still running... and scanning your files... communicating with microsoft servers.. chewing up cpu time and internet bandwidth.

      the only way you'll be able to cut off cortana's access to the internet is to block it with hardware (router/firewall).

      then microsoft will get smart and funnel cortana traffic through the same ip addresses as windows update catalog files.

      it is doubtful you'll truly be able to permanently shut off the service(s) it runs under, microsoft has proven it is willing to reset user-set settings in updates time and again.

      the only way to win is to not play the game.... as in, fuck microsoft and install linux.

    5. Re:I Say Bullshit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you don't like Cortana, you can make it go away and never use it.

      From TFA: Microsoft told PCWorld. "If you like, you can also easily hide Cortana and the search box in the taskbar altogether."

      Cortana is simply a browser searchbar that uses Bing, re-located to the taskbar, and can talk. Siri reaches out to Apple servers when you use it, OK Google goes to Google servers. Microsoft is simply playing catch-up. The only news here is you can no longer give Cortana a lobotomy by cutting off its access to Bing.

      But to say "Cortana can't be disabled" is inaccurate, misleading FUD. There may be many reasons to shit on Microsoft, but this isn't one of them.
      Instructions:
      1. change default browser from Edge to anything else... except IE. Be sure your new Browser does not use Bing as its search engine.
      2. Right-click on the Taskbar, choose to Hide Cortana.
      3. (optional) Install ClassicShell, Start8, or equivalent to provide a convenient basic search functionality.
      4. (optional) Still paranoid? Try Spybot Anti-Beacon.
      5. Proceed as before. Run Steam or something.

      Your insulting post has a very basic dictionary problem.
      "Hide Cortana" and "Disable Cortana" do not mean the same thing.

    6. Re:I Say Bullshit! by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      6. Watch in vain as every time you start something, run something, or even just don't touch your computer it constantly sends packets to cortana related domains.

    7. Re:I Say Bullshit! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of the 3 year old who closed his eyes and said "I can't see you, so you're gone!"

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:I Say Bullshit! by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      In this brave new world, hiding an app is equivalent to turning it off.

      Well, for an app that only activates when clicked or focused to, hiding it is turning it off.

  16. Bob lives by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

    Didn't they remove Bob a while back because virtually everyone hated it? I guess Redmond's take was that people would like it if only it was more intrusive.

    1. Re:Bob lives by clubby · · Score: 1

      No, they did not. Bob was never a part of Windows; you alway had to pay extra to get it.

    2. Re:Bob lives by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Bob came back as Clippy.

  17. Re:No Connectivity - No Work? by LichtSpektren · · Score: 1

    If I understand correctly, your question is if Windows 10 has some self-destruct sequence if it's gone a certain amount of time without contacting a certain domain.

    I would think not, since there's plenty of legitimate reasons to have a permanent offline computer besides avoiding the surveillance. It would open up a lot of nasty lawsuits on Microsoft's end.

    Then again, it's certainly not impossible.

  18. All I can say is... by execthis · · Score: 1

    All I have to say about this (yet another f_over by M$) is:

    HA! HA! HA! HA!

    LOL!

  19. Does MS have any idea what they are doing? by tekrat · · Score: 1

    There are a lot of windows partners that sell hardware that BARELY runs Windows 10 as it is. In the race to make cheaper and cheaper hardware, there are products like the HP Stream notebook that comes with only 2GB of RAM and Windows 10 pre-installed. By the time you're done booting up, you have maybe 500mb of RAM available to run *A* application. (do not try and run multiple applications)...

    And that's with most of the crap turned off. My guess is that people with minimal hardware who choose to update, won't even get to the desktop before running out of RAM.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:Does MS have any idea what they are doing? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Microsoft's revenue depends on OEMs who want to sell the cheapest, shittiest hardware possible. That's why Windows, since the earliest versions, uses your hard drive as additional RAM, constantly swapping things back and forth.

      This is a troll, right? Not only were we paging on Unix in days of yore, but the system was so primitive you had to allocate space for your physical memory at the head of the paging file.

      I forget when Macs got virtual memory. System 7?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Does MS have any idea what they are doing? by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

      heh I took a cruise thru Frys Electronics the other day.. They had one of those tablets with a foldout keyboard running Windows 10 for $79 with a whopping ONE GIGABYTE of ram... Asked the salesdroid if they'd sold any, he said they were selling like hotcakes.. (shudders) The salesdroid kind of admitted to me that the store was likely to see a LOT of returns on THAT item... Was normally $120, but on sale for $79...

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    3. Re:Does MS have any idea what they are doing? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Unix managed to evolve beyond this though.

    4. Re:Does MS have any idea what they are doing? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Unix managed to evolve beyond this though.

      Yes, it evolved to the point where we no longer had to allocate space for our main memory in the paging file. But Unix systems still include paging by default, even though it is stupid when RAM is cheap. It's goddamned pointless because if a process runs away and eats all the RAM I want it killed, not swapping.

      I am not using any paging space on Windows or Unix. My Windows 7 system has 16GB and my Ubuntu system has 8GB, and there's no need for paging thankfully. This isn't even a lot of RAM any more, it's a pittance.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Does MS have any idea what they are doing? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I've used plenty of machines that do use swap space. Servers with VM images, with the whole point of such servers being to overallocate resources. So less frequently used stuff gets swapped out. You ask them to upgrade memory and they laugh and nothing happens. It's the real world.

      Given that price points changed so that RAM is now relatively cheaper, it's still theoretically possible for it to go back the other way again in time, where getting beyond 128GB is just too expensive to justify when you've got terabytes of dirt cheap storage on your servers.

    6. Re:Does MS have any idea what they are doing? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Nope. Never did. Even the earliest system I used (UNIX v6) didn't do that.

      You had to do it with SunOS, up until... 4.1.4? Maybe 4.1.3_u1? Certainly on my 4.1.1 system.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Does MS have any idea what they are doing? by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Microsoft's revenue depends on OEMs who want to sell the cheapest, shittiest hardware possible. That's why Windows, since the earliest versions, uses your hard drive as additional RAM, constantly swapping things back and forth.

      This is a troll, right? Not only were we paging on Unix in days of yore, but the system was so primitive you had to allocate space for your physical memory at the head of the paging file.

      I forget when Macs got virtual memory. System 7?

      Ten. You need virtualized memory before you make virtual memory. Macs had no virtualization or memory protection of any kind before OS X.

  20. Re:i came to slashdot on a boat by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 1

    Poorly constructed haiku is poorly constructed.


    Microsoft's new hell Cortana records your pain Winter comes for 10

    --
    "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
  21. Re:i came to slashdot on a boat by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 1

    Microsoft's new hell
    Cortana records your pain
    Winter comes for 10

    --
    "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
  22. How to disable BITS by WaffleMonster · · Score: 3, Informative

    Not exactly on topic but without BITS ...windows won't update.

    As you already know if you simply disable BITS Windows will automatically re-enable it and turn it on again whenever it feels like it.

    The solution is to create a user account, disable the user account and then configure BITS service to run as that disabled user. This will cause it to permanently fail. Microsoft isn't yet checking for this.

    I would comment further but anything I say would be obvious and repetitive like arguing with Natas over the finer points of running Microsoft.

    1. Re:How to disable BITS by rudy_wayne · · Score: 1

      Here's somethingI discovered. Since Windows Firewall is useless crap, i always use a third party firewall that lets me actually block things I want to block (good for blocking "telemetry"). However, Windows 10 will not update if you disable Windows Firewall. Updates will simply fail. After some digging I traced an error number back to a Microsoft document confirming this.

      At least that's how it was in all previous versions. I have no interest in this current version.

    2. Re:How to disable BITS by mrprogrammerman · · Score: 1

      If you won't to disable Windows from updating just change the group policy setting.

    3. Re:How to disable BITS by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Current version of 10 still has that issue, just tested on my fiance's Win10 machine. With the Firewall off you cannot get any updates at all unless you do something like WSUS Offline Update.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  23. back to windows 7... by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

    I upgraded to windows 10 imagining that it would be a good idea to accept a free offer to extend the lifetime of my windows license. I assumed Microsoft had sorted out their shit, and wasn't going to piss everyone opff after the bad press of windows 8. Afterall windows releases go good (XP) bad (Vista) good (7) bad (8) good (10), right?.

    I've been using windows 10 for about a year now. It seems ok I guess. The one super annoying thing is that file transfers on my dirves are super slow for me. I spent a couple hours trying to fix this. As per the suggestions on the internet including microsoft, I tried turning off write cache flushing, adjusting the page file size, disabling remote differential compression, disabling the anti-malware, etc.

    The only thing that sort of worked was disabling write cache flushing, which sped up my transfers from 20 MB/s to about 35 MB/s, but it should be at least like 120 MB/s because that's what I remember getting in windows 7.

    I am not a windows hater. I use lots of different operating systems. But I honestly can't figure this one out and it's starting to get annoying. At this point I'd rather have an OS that's going to reach end of life that sooner if it doesn't have bad data transfer rates.

    Or if anyone out there knows how to fix this please let me know.

    1. Re:back to windows 7... by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --Not sure what you mean by "file transfers" but if you mean copying files to another location on the same drive, try Teracopy. It's a free utility that either works with or replaces Explorer's file copy.

      http://www.codesector.com/tera...

      / standard disclaimer, I have nothing to do with Teracopy - just have used the software and found it to be useful for me

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    2. Re:back to windows 7... by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      Yes I mean copying files from one hard drive to another or from one drive to the same drive. Incidentally transfers to a network drive are also slower by about the same factor.

      I think it's ridiculous that an operating system released in 2015 can't do file transfers efficiently. Yes I can try teracopy. Or I can go back to windows 7 (which worked perfectly fine), and not rely on 3rd part file transfer programs. The only reason I upgraded to windows 10 was that I was pretty sure it couldn't be (much) worse than windows 7. But after using it for a few months I can honestly say it is a noticeably worse experience.

      BTW. Is there any reason you have to think teracopy might work better? Does it bypass the OS in some way (e.g. write cache flushing, etc)? Is it advertising that it fixes this or similar problems? Or is it just a shot in the dark that may work even though we would have no idea why?

    3. Re:back to windows 7... by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --From what I've heard (and some light personal use) it's written more efficiently than the OS-level copy function. That's all I know ;-)

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    4. Re:back to windows 7... by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      Every application that performs file copying is using an OS level copy.

    5. Re:back to windows 7... by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --That may not be a completely valid assumption. Have you visited the website? Teracopy can completely replace Explorer's copy/move function and has a number of additional features.

      --Obviously I don't know the low-level technical details, but feel free to give it a try and see if it helps your situation; I'm not here to argue a trivial point. ;-)

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    6. Re:back to windows 7... by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      Explorer (being an application) is also using the OS level copy (i.e. read/write). So yes I'm sure teracopy can replace explorer, but there is no way it's not using the OS level read/write commands.

  24. Update even includes a new peripheral device by pmikell · · Score: 1

    A saucepan for Cortana to boil your pet bunny in if you accidentally call her Siri.

  25. No problem by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    I block Bing and the rest of the phone-home servers at the router level.

  26. Not a lot of difference. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "there's not a ton of difference between Cortana and the operating system's basic search capabilities."

    Yeah, except the standard search bar doesn't listen to every word I say within earshot.

    1. Re:Not a lot of difference. . . by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Look at the bright side, you now have a good excuse for a search history containing a lot of pictures of heavily dilated assholes.

      "Yeah, I ... heh, well, I swear sometimes, and Cortana... well, you know..."

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  27. Re:No Connectivity - No Work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It wouldn't surprise me, I've seen it happen on Windows 7 so I'm sure they've included the feature in 10.

    I did some consulting for awhile at a tool manufacturing company. They had been with some garbage MSP who convinced them to outfit their sales reps with a fleet of Dell Latitudes running Windows 7 Home Premium (don't get me started). Now these sales reps were mostly grizzled old guys, many of them had been using printed catalogs, pen and paper, pocket calculators, calling in their customers' orders over the phone for 20+ years and saw no reason to change.

    These guys would go out on the road for 2, 3, maybe more weeks at a time and they weren't using the laptops like you or I would. They stayed in the trunk of the car. However, each rep was required to submit a monthly mileage report through a third party website in order to get paid for their mileage. So once a month these guys would fire up their laptop and invariably they were greeted with the same bullshit, a message at boot saying "This copy of Windows can't be verified as genuine" and Windows dropped back to some limited functionality mode. One of the things it won't do in that mode is connect to the internet, so the reps couldn't submit their mileage reports.

    Now these were legit machines with legit OEM Windows licenses. I saw the Dell invoices. There was no reason at all for these machines to behave this way. Oddly enough, the reps who did regularly use their laptops on the road, connecting to hotel wifi all the time, never experienced this problem. Windows, despite being both genuine and activated, was deactivating itself because it couldn't phone home, having not been connected to the internet for some time. I'm not sure what the timeout was but I assume 14 days.

    Ultimately I had to lay hands on each laptop, get the install ID out of SLUI, and call Microsoft for a manual activation key for each machine. This seemed to fix the problem permanently. But it was very clear that the laptops with frequent internet connections never deactivated themselves, only the ones that sat around offline had the problem. The mother ship doesn't like it when you don't check in on the regular.

  28. Re:Looking for recommendations for by gweihir · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ask Cortana. She probably knows all the best brands and how to apply them.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  29. Slow network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Another thing ive noticed about Windows 10 is that the network layer has deadlocks in it! The more data going through it the more deadlocks it gets, causing complete system stuttering since this is in kernel components.
    1mb a second = 1 stutter every hour or so.
    10mb a second 1 every 10 minutes or so

    Doesnt matter which network card or wifi dongle you use, its NDIS and TCPIP kernel drivers that has the deadlock somewhere.

  30. Re:i came to slashdot on a boat by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 1

    clever you are not
    your penis has many AIDS
    please die in a fire

    --
    "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
  31. Bullshit by Khyber · · Score: 1

    Block all of Microsoft's servers in my router. Can't bypass what you don't control.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    1. Re:Bullshit by jason777 · · Score: 1

      What if you take your laptop out of your house?

    2. Re:Bullshit by Khyber · · Score: 1

      I have full control over the Jetpack cellular modem+micro router I have attached to it.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    3. Re:Bullshit by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      2 Problems.

      First, keeping current with MS playing DNS whack-a-mole.

      And second, updates. You do want your OS to be patched, but that requires you to allow access to servers that belong to MS.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Bullshit by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "First, keeping current with MS playing DNS whack-a-mole."

      Nope. Just route *.microsoft.* to 127.0.0.1 in my router settings.

      "And second, updates. You do want your OS to be patched, but that requires you to allow access to servers that belong to MS."

      Nope, that's what manual patch installation is for using WSUS Offline Update, burn to disc and install that way.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    5. Re:Bullshit by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You might want to reroute a few other domains, too. Like live.com, nsatc.net, bing.net ...

      And whatever MS invents in the next months.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:Bullshit by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Uhh, you *DO* know how wildcards work, right? So my current set auto-filters shit like watson.telemetry.microsoft.com.nsatc.net (that's an actual DNS entry out of roughly 40 in my list related to microsoft.)

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  32. Nope by Leslie43 · · Score: 1

    Intel and Microsoft joining hands in making a Windows 7 unfriendly ecosystem – SpeedStep to add support for RAM and more
    http://wccftech.com/intel-skyl...

    Skylake users given 18 months to upgrade to Windows 10
    "And next generation processors, including Intel's Kaby Lake, won't be supported in old Windows."
    http://arstechnica.com/informa...

    1. Re:Nope by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 1

      You're talking past each other. Read what you're responding to carefully. x86 is still x86, but new optional features are still being added that will require newer Windows versions.

  33. That's ok because by thundercattt · · Score: 1

    I can turn off Windows 10 install with Never10. Eat it MS

  34. Re:No Connectivity - No Work? by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

    You're wrong---whether it is lying, ignorance, or missing details is beyond me to figure out.

    If Microsoft required phone-home connectivity for Windows 7, you'd still have problems after entering the confirmation ID.

    Also, network connectivity isn't restricted when the activation grace period expires. You get a black background and annoying prompts, but that's it.

    You clearly know jack about Windows activation.

    Windows, despite being both genuine and activated, was deactivating itself... I'm not sure what the timeout was but I assume 14 days.

    Windows is not activated at the factory. A user must complete the activation process online or over the phone after acquiring it.

    The activation grace period is 30 days from first boot.

    Once a MAK-licensed system is activated, it stays activated unless someone resets the activation store or makes major changes to the hardware.

    Since Windows looks and acts normally within the grace period, that "deactivation" was likely the expiration of the grace period.

    But it was very clear that the laptops with frequent internet connections never deactivated themselves, only the ones that sat around offline had the problem.

    I assume the frequently-connected laptops completed the activation online without fanfare. By default, they'll prompt the user and be done with it in less than a minute.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  35. can-i-completely-disable-cortana-on-windows-10? by joeshmothethird · · Score: 1
  36. Re:Linux. by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

    JUL.. Thats also my cure for the MS "disease" called "Windows NSA Edition".....

    --
    THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
  37. Quick, post a 15 step workaround on reddit by cfalcon · · Score: 2

    Find a 15 step workaround on reddit
    Find the downvoted comment that has a 16th step that is vital and left out, but got democracied down by fools.
    Perform all the steps
    Test with wireshark to be sure it worked
    Discover a 17th step
    Perform that, post it as reply so randos can downvote it

    Or maybe just install an OS that doesn't fucking hate you.

  38. Has anyone made a howto to block it with openwrt? by mark-t · · Score: 1

    If one has a router through which all internet traffic must pass, is there any way to configure the firewall on the router to block outbound requests that come from cortana without blocking all outgoing connections from a windows machine's MAC?

  39. Why does Microsoft hate its users? by JohnFen · · Score: 3

    Every time I think Microsoft has been as shitty about Windows 10 as possible, it finds a way to be even shittier.

  40. Please,sir, will you root my PC? by TechForensics · · Score: 2

    The laundry list of what you can and can't do with Windows 10 is so noxious and Windows control so pervasive, someone with a new Windows 10 installation needs to effectively root the machine. Some URLs (MS telemetry) cannot be blocked by firewall. The administrator/user will not have access to the hosts file. (Boot under Linux and edit hosts file? Maybe or maybe not.) The owner/administrator needs a further level of root privilege (or just REAL root status in the first place) to prevent MS and its corporate industry partners from setting non-modifiable advertising and and hosts.ini to default settings via hardware-- if Intel were on board even running Linux could be subject to mandatory privileges blocking no one could avoid. We have to realize what is happening- MS is turning into Verizon and intel PCs are locked-down Verizon phones. Do we want to have to root each new PC we set up, or go en masse to Apple? That may be how it is lining up. Is there anything at all we can do? At this point with the Win10 handwriting on the wall I see nothing but converting to Linux or Apple as a group. MS is apparently getting ready to sign its own death warrant. We need to get really angry and DO something? (It's Apple with VMs for me.)

    --
    Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
  41. Re:No Connectivity - No Work? by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

    Is this the future of Windows? You will allow us to monitor your every keystroke and sound or bugger off!

    That would be my guess....

    --
    THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
  42. Re:Linux. by aliquis · · Score: 1

    You can't turn off Microsoft in Windows ? News at 11. JUL.
    (Just Use Linux=)

    Yeah! Just install Ubuntu.

    (There's a joke in here somewhere.) .. or you could use Android!

    (Actually now there's two.)

  43. I do windows because I"m a gamer, but I'm old by Nyder · · Score: 2

    This is why I run windows 7 for my games. But considering dumping windows and going linux only gamer. Well, that and my old consoles, I have plenty of games I can play on those also. Very few new PC games do it for me anymore. Doom was a great disappointment. It's Quake III with better graphics. Which is cool if you are into arena shooters, but I'm not. Maybe I'm getting too old, but PC games suck these days for the most part.

    Linux before Windows 10 for sure.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  44. I turned off the cloud-connected bits! by Ihlosi · · Score: 1

    And I want to keep Cortana turned off, too.

  45. I just use ... by MxMatrix · · Score: 1

    O&O shutup 10 and is disables the registry keys. I also have a router ports and domains blocklist wich prevents cortana from reaching M$.

    I wonder if M$ can circumvent these blocks. Just a matter of time and we'll know.l

    --
    Bach says it all.
  46. Re:Receiving job offers based on 9-year-old CV by Fragnet · · Score: 1

    No joke, I do receive about 10 unsolicited tech recruiter emails per day. This is why when I was looking a few years ago I set up a different email account for it. Tech recruiters are some of the biggest spammers out there and most of them haven't got a clue what they're doing. They're worse than estate agents in my view. And their fees are shocking. I honestly don't know why employers use them.

  47. I have domains to register! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    www.fuckyoucortanaididnotwantyoutolookforthat.com
    www.shutupcortana.com
    www.whyisthatpieceofjunkstillactive.com

    and a few more. I foresee they will get a lot of traffic in the near future!

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  48. Here is a work-around by guacamole · · Score: 1

    Backup your files. Go back to Windows 7, then restore.

  49. Re:Steam OS by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Where you are seeing steam, all I can see is vapor.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  50. Re:Slashdot, partying like it's 1996. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Mostly 'cause it's easier to avoid them. Don't like Google? Use a different search engine, a different mail provider, use a different kind of cellphone if you don't like Android.

    Ubuntu? C'mon, don't tell me there is any way you could NOT avoid using Ubuntu.

    Avoiding MS? Way harder to pull off.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  51. Re:Is time for EU to step in? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Leave it to the French to aim at easy targets.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  52. And that's an update by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    I won't be doing. Or maybe I will and just block microsoft, bing etc. at my firewall. Then there's the option just go Ubuntu and the fuck with Windows forever.

  53. Surprised I haven't heard any jokes by PJ6 · · Score: 1

    about rampancy.

  54. I'm suprised there haven't been any jokes by PJ6 · · Score: 1

    about rampancy.

    -