These apps are not part of Suggested Apps (those only cover suggestions appearing in your Start Menu).
Source? Because there are plenty of articles on the net saying they are, and I can only confirm that I don't have any of those apps on any Widnows 10 machines except briefly on the one where that one setting was disabled. After enabling that setting none of the listed apps appeared again.
Bullshit. A smart 13 year old can spot a scam. The problem is not age but upbringing.
No, smart has nothing to do with it. An experienced person regardless of age can spot a scam. But you're absolutely right, it's all the Boomer's fault:-)
As someone who never locks my front door, whose girlfriend walks home just fine at 3am through an unlit park, maybe the fact that millennials are not getting the "experiences" you got is because the world around you has improved.
Kavanaugh is that you? Yeah I mean the expectation of living in a society without rapists thieves and creeps is horrible. It was totally her fault she got assaulted.
Huh? Ethernet? Isn't that the thing that Linux users use?
I jest, but only slightly. Ethernet is being reduced to the domain of the techhead and away from the millennial with their laptops on their couches watching adverts that ask "what is a computer".
And for us techheads there's HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\NetworkList\DefaultMediaCost
But I do actually have one complaint of my own for how they have implemented this system. Bluetooth access points (i.e. sharing internet on your mobile phone) appears to the system as an ethernet connection.
But I have little sympathy for *this* complaint. Whining about your data because the Windows store downloads Candy Crush on a system well known for downloading multi gigabyte OS updates in the background without warning or visual cue is a disingenuous. I struggle to get outraged, especially since the downloading of "Suggestions" is controllable by a windows setting.
Show me one cloud vendor who will pay for actual losses cause by their outages
Amazon, Microsoft, Google to name a few. Just because you're using a shitty little free service doesn't mean that enterprise contracts don't have very long and strict performance metrics with legal teams on both ends.
or one that will not provide government with data they request or simply provide a back-door.
Rather than asking to prove a negative, you can start by displaying the positive.
It's nice how many providers claim 99.999% availability but are unable to offer insurance against it assuming those odds
And yet that insurance is precisely what is in enterprise contracts.
But ultimately your complaints are completely off point. Before you start incorrectly criticizing the reliability and insurance of cloud based vendors you should first ask yourself: Can I do better? *You* may be able to. The hordes of small business owners on the other hand whose backup strategy involves coping files from one folder to another on the same disk i.e. the types of people who use Zoho in the first place aren't able to.
But then everyone likes to think they are better or top shit until they actually come across a problem of their own. Mersk didn't use a cloud vendor when they managed to globally take down their entire very well funded IT infrastructure including geographically disperse and redundant AD controllers. Maybe they should have.
What nutjob thought it would be a great idea to have to unlock this puzzle by going to the other side of the island and having to solve two more puzzles first?
It wasn't streamed in the first place. Not being able to expand is a far sight from your comparison to "shutting down a league" and to be honest your issue with streaming rights is absolutely par for the course for ALL sports.
There's endless stories about streaming rights being given to one group who end up not providing the content in favour of something else. Those sports none the less continue, as did the tournaments in your examples.
I'll take the French, UK, and India still doing it over your isolated example of a single USA failure. Interesting that you hold up the West Valley which operated only for a couple of years as the USA example, instead of e.g. Svahnnah River which was close to 10 times the reprocessing capacity, operated for 50 years, was closed less than a decade ago, and by your accounts should have flooded half of the country in nuclear waste by now... but hasn't.
No. I don't bash anyone. I do criticise however. The USA has a fascination with energy waste mostly driven by the insanely low cost of energy. It's the fundamental economic principle behind it. Humans the world over will opt for comfort and convenience. Just in much of the world where energy is taxed to clean up the externalised costs it's more expensive so people take more care of it.
HOWEVER the 1st world includes the European Union and Japan
Countries where cars get significantly higher mileage and are used far less (cost of gasoline 4x higher than the USA). And back to energy use, the average USA connected house uses 10800 kWh / year, a statistic similar to countries with similar energy cost. In the EU the average is 3900kWh / year. Japan is actually quite high being closer to 7500kWh / year.
both of whom are shutting-down nuclear plants
While I find little information for the latter, the former has managed to do so while still reducing greenhoues gases. The investment in green energy has dwarfed the effects of shuttering nuclear reactors. Even now in Germany the nuclear baseload matches the continuous green energy production that has been built up over the past few years, and on sunny / windy days is about 1/6th of the green energy supply.
To be clear America is not "the suck". It's a great country with many things to be proud of.
It does however suck specifically in terms of energy consumption per household, and greenhouse gas emissions per household.
I mean, people keep getting Windows despite all the abuse they are subjected to.
That's because people in general don't crumble into a ball of tears whenever they get their feelings hurt. If having Candy Crush installed is "abuse" then yeah humans in generally will happily take "abuse", hell some (bored housewives) may even thank Microsoft for their thoughtful "abuse".
Now if you'll excuse me I need to "abuse" on the Firefox update on my machine. That's how we're using that word right? Maybe I'll reboot my phone while I'm at it so the latest update can be "abused" on the phone.
No there was not. There was a lawsuit about a specific anti-competitive behaviour targeted at a specific company's product through bundling. But that ultimately has zero to do with what is going on here.
This is controlled by a few settings and from what I gather there may also be a regional case to it. For one, turning off "suggested apps" typically kills all of these shenanigans along with many others (I never saw a popup over the Chrome icon declaring the awesomeness of Edge either).
Just uninstalling the apps doesn't undo the fact that having downloaded them in the first place counts against the monthly data transfer allowance that your ISP imposes.
If you have such a sensitive cap then why is your connection not set to "metered" in Windows? In which case you will in fact not have those downloaded apps.
"Grooming" will not recover the $10 per GB that your satellite or fixed-wireless ISP bills you for having downloaded the apps in the first place.
Setting your connection to metered will prevent the Windows Store from downloading apps just fine. Maybe users should use the settings they have available to them?
Full Disclosure: I have never seen these 3rd party apps on my Windows systems. Either I'm very lucky or doing something righter than those numnuts at Windows Central.
Can you please tell me something significant that current Word can do that Word 97 couldn't do?
Generate a document more than 10 pages long without horribly fucking up the formatting? Seriously there's a lot to complain about on Office, but holding up Word 97 as some great example is like declaring a turd sandwich to be the pinnacle of lunchtime cuisine.
I remember Word 97. I remember file formats that corrupted easily. I remember what was on the display not looking remotely like what came out on the printer. I remember problems adjusting formatting, tables breaking documents. I remember a document full of text with one picture that generated a file that was over 100mb closely filling up my HDD at the time. I remember endless crashes that made the save every 5minutes feature a critical addition that you were taught to enable on page 1 of the Word 101 course. I remember there being no file recovery.
I remember losing a lot of time that I don't lose anymore.
No. It highlights the danger of not vetting vendors. There's nothing here cloud specific. A shitty vendor had a poor step with a crappy 3rd party that had the ability (and exercised it) to bring them down.
I mean shit I had this same example on a welding job recently. Company we engaged didn't have the necessary quality control to vet their sub contractors and ensure that they wouldn't suddenly leave them high and dry during a critical day. Fortunately we identified this months ago and had a plan b ready.
There's no inherent problem with outsourcing to cloud providers, you just have to know how to vet the cloud providers.
That's a great theory, a thought experiment for the ages. But do you honestly think enough people give a damn about a thought experiment that actually hasn't negatively impacted any e-sport to date, much less get worked up enough to cause a flash mob to build?
Have you met the average consumer? If you tell them that this "clean energy" will only cost them twice as much most won't approve.
Eventually the USA will join the 1st world and stop ignoring externalised costs, the "average consumer" will actually pay for the real cost of electricity and not only opt for the green choice, but maybe start doing something to actively bring the horrid energy consumption per household of the USA down to more reasonable levels.
Sorry but that's a lot of bollocks. Reprocessing does not generate 10x the amount of original waste. The final waste product is still very much the same the only difference is there's a hell of a lot of additional energy that is able to be extracted in the process which means per unit energy generated the final waste product is significantly reduced.
There's a reason sensible nuclear nations reprocess fuel. Of course the USA's interest in reprocessing was to extract plutonium for weapons manufacture, and that process including the working of the resulting plutonium generated quite a lot of waste during the cold war. But ultimately all of this has zero to do with the power industry.
There are some yet to be broken laws of physics that smartphones have not surmounted yet.
I think before we continue this all needs to be re-read. I'm not sure why you think I said anyone was using a smartphone camera....
We're arguing past each other. 8^)
That much is now plainly clear:-)
But just to provide context on my last use: Photoshoot with a quality camera with the WiFi module. Galaxy Note used as a larger display, at least I thought it worked really well last time I did it like this. Galaxy Note used in airport lobby to cull initial 1000 photos down to something reasonable. Using the Lightroom mobile I did some minor changes to images. And then I put my toys away when I got home and let the threadripper rip.:-)
But back to my original point. The Note really REALLY struggles with 50mpxl images. It would help if it were much faster.
Sure. The point was, the actual actions do not rise — in their gravity, danger to society, and other infamy — to what's normally understood by the terms used.
Sure except the point was that what is normally understood by the terms varies with location. You write "rape" and dismiss it. The Swede would write RAPE and angrly attack you for sympathising with the rapist.
Slashdot Mirror
You have the choice of being punched in the face and having your guitar broken, or not getting off the ground in the first place.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
These apps are not part of Suggested Apps (those only cover suggestions appearing in your Start Menu).
Source? Because there are plenty of articles on the net saying they are, and I can only confirm that I don't have any of those apps on any Widnows 10 machines except briefly on the one where that one setting was disabled. After enabling that setting none of the listed apps appeared again.
Bullshit. A smart 13 year old can spot a scam. The problem is not age but upbringing.
No, smart has nothing to do with it. An experienced person regardless of age can spot a scam. But you're absolutely right, it's all the Boomer's fault :-)
As someone who never locks my front door, whose girlfriend walks home just fine at 3am through an unlit park, maybe the fact that millennials are not getting the "experiences" you got is because the world around you has improved.
Kavanaugh is that you? Yeah I mean the expectation of living in a society without rapists thieves and creeps is horrible. It was totally her fault she got assaulted.
Huh? Ethernet? Isn't that the thing that Linux users use?
I jest, but only slightly. Ethernet is being reduced to the domain of the techhead and away from the millennial with their laptops on their couches watching adverts that ask "what is a computer".
And for us techheads there's HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\NetworkList\DefaultMediaCost
But I do actually have one complaint of my own for how they have implemented this system. Bluetooth access points (i.e. sharing internet on your mobile phone) appears to the system as an ethernet connection.
But I have little sympathy for *this* complaint. Whining about your data because the Windows store downloads Candy Crush on a system well known for downloading multi gigabyte OS updates in the background without warning or visual cue is a disingenuous. I struggle to get outraged, especially since the downloading of "Suggestions" is controllable by a windows setting.
Show me one cloud vendor who will pay for actual losses cause by their outages
Amazon, Microsoft, Google to name a few. Just because you're using a shitty little free service doesn't mean that enterprise contracts don't have very long and strict performance metrics with legal teams on both ends.
or one that will not provide government with data they request or simply provide a back-door.
Rather than asking to prove a negative, you can start by displaying the positive.
It's nice how many providers claim 99.999% availability but are unable to offer insurance against it assuming those odds
And yet that insurance is precisely what is in enterprise contracts.
But ultimately your complaints are completely off point. Before you start incorrectly criticizing the reliability and insurance of cloud based vendors you should first ask yourself: Can I do better? *You* may be able to. The hordes of small business owners on the other hand whose backup strategy involves coping files from one folder to another on the same disk i.e. the types of people who use Zoho in the first place aren't able to.
But then everyone likes to think they are better or top shit until they actually come across a problem of their own. Mersk didn't use a cloud vendor when they managed to globally take down their entire very well funded IT infrastructure including geographically disperse and redundant AD controllers. Maybe they should have.
What nutjob thought it would be a great idea to have to unlock this puzzle by going to the other side of the island and having to solve two more puzzles first?
This mechanic has evolved into the fetchquest.
It wasn't streamed in the first place. Not being able to expand is a far sight from your comparison to "shutting down a league" and to be honest your issue with streaming rights is absolutely par for the course for ALL sports.
There's endless stories about streaming rights being given to one group who end up not providing the content in favour of something else. Those sports none the less continue, as did the tournaments in your examples.
In 1966 when the US tried this
I'll take the French, UK, and India still doing it over your isolated example of a single USA failure. Interesting that you hold up the West Valley which operated only for a couple of years as the USA example, instead of e.g. Svahnnah River which was close to 10 times the reprocessing capacity, operated for 50 years, was closed less than a decade ago, and by your accounts should have flooded half of the country in nuclear waste by now ... but hasn't.
Nice USA bash. "America is the suck."
No. I don't bash anyone. I do criticise however. The USA has a fascination with energy waste mostly driven by the insanely low cost of energy. It's the fundamental economic principle behind it. Humans the world over will opt for comfort and convenience. Just in much of the world where energy is taxed to clean up the externalised costs it's more expensive so people take more care of it.
HOWEVER the 1st world includes the European Union and Japan
Countries where cars get significantly higher mileage and are used far less (cost of gasoline 4x higher than the USA). And back to energy use, the average USA connected house uses 10800 kWh / year, a statistic similar to countries with similar energy cost. In the EU the average is 3900kWh / year. Japan is actually quite high being closer to 7500kWh / year.
both of whom are shutting-down nuclear plants
While I find little information for the latter, the former has managed to do so while still reducing greenhoues gases. The investment in green energy has dwarfed the effects of shuttering nuclear reactors. Even now in Germany the nuclear baseload matches the continuous green energy production that has been built up over the past few years, and on sunny / windy days is about 1/6th of the green energy supply.
To be clear America is not "the suck". It's a great country with many things to be proud of.
It does however suck specifically in terms of energy consumption per household, and greenhouse gas emissions per household.
I mean, people keep getting Windows despite all the abuse they are subjected to.
That's because people in general don't crumble into a ball of tears whenever they get their feelings hurt. If having Candy Crush installed is "abuse" then yeah humans in generally will happily take "abuse", hell some (bored housewives) may even thank Microsoft for their thoughtful "abuse".
Now if you'll excuse me I need to "abuse" on the Firefox update on my machine. That's how we're using that word right? Maybe I'll reboot my phone while I'm at it so the latest update can be "abused" on the phone.
As a result every employee gets Candy Crush and the like installed on every machine.
Which idiot system admin let company machines out the door with the "Suggested Apps" setting enabled in Windows?
Really? There wasn't a huge lawsuit about this?
No there was not. There was a lawsuit about a specific anti-competitive behaviour targeted at a specific company's product through bundling. But that ultimately has zero to do with what is going on here.
This is controlled by a few settings and from what I gather there may also be a regional case to it. For one, turning off "suggested apps" typically kills all of these shenanigans along with many others (I never saw a popup over the Chrome icon declaring the awesomeness of Edge either).
Just uninstalling the apps doesn't undo the fact that having downloaded them in the first place counts against the monthly data transfer allowance that your ISP imposes.
If you have such a sensitive cap then why is your connection not set to "metered" in Windows? In which case you will in fact not have those downloaded apps.
"Grooming" will not recover the $10 per GB that your satellite or fixed-wireless ISP bills you for having downloaded the apps in the first place.
Setting your connection to metered will prevent the Windows Store from downloading apps just fine. Maybe users should use the settings they have available to them?
Full Disclosure: I have never seen these 3rd party apps on my Windows systems. Either I'm very lucky or doing something righter than those numnuts at Windows Central.
Can you please tell me something significant that current Word can do that Word 97 couldn't do?
Generate a document more than 10 pages long without horribly fucking up the formatting? Seriously there's a lot to complain about on Office, but holding up Word 97 as some great example is like declaring a turd sandwich to be the pinnacle of lunchtime cuisine.
I remember Word 97. I remember file formats that corrupted easily. I remember what was on the display not looking remotely like what came out on the printer. I remember problems adjusting formatting, tables breaking documents. I remember a document full of text with one picture that generated a file that was over 100mb closely filling up my HDD at the time. I remember endless crashes that made the save every 5minutes feature a critical addition that you were taught to enable on page 1 of the Word 101 course. I remember there being no file recovery.
I remember losing a lot of time that I don't lose anymore.
'A dozen or so channels'? I get about 150 channels in my car, and 200 or so when using their internet service.
Yeah just like the GP said. A dozen or so channels. Sirius is like a cable company. Approximately 10% of the product is actually worth using.
No. It highlights the danger of not vetting vendors. There's nothing here cloud specific. A shitty vendor had a poor step with a crappy 3rd party that had the ability (and exercised it) to bring them down.
I mean shit I had this same example on a welding job recently. Company we engaged didn't have the necessary quality control to vet their sub contractors and ensure that they wouldn't suddenly leave them high and dry during a critical day. Fortunately we identified this months ago and had a plan b ready.
There's no inherent problem with outsourcing to cloud providers, you just have to know how to vet the cloud providers.
That's a great theory, a thought experiment for the ages. But do you honestly think enough people give a damn about a thought experiment that actually hasn't negatively impacted any e-sport to date, much less get worked up enough to cause a flash mob to build?
Have you met the average consumer? If you tell them that this "clean energy" will only cost them twice as much most won't approve.
Eventually the USA will join the 1st world and stop ignoring externalised costs, the "average consumer" will actually pay for the real cost of electricity and not only opt for the green choice, but maybe start doing something to actively bring the horrid energy consumption per household of the USA down to more reasonable levels.
Sorry but that's a lot of bollocks. Reprocessing does not generate 10x the amount of original waste. The final waste product is still very much the same the only difference is there's a hell of a lot of additional energy that is able to be extracted in the process which means per unit energy generated the final waste product is significantly reduced.
There's a reason sensible nuclear nations reprocess fuel. Of course the USA's interest in reprocessing was to extract plutonium for weapons manufacture, and that process including the working of the resulting plutonium generated quite a lot of waste during the cold war. But ultimately all of this has zero to do with the power industry.
There are some yet to be broken laws of physics that smartphones have not surmounted yet.
I think before we continue this all needs to be re-read. I'm not sure why you think I said anyone was using a smartphone camera....
We're arguing past each other. 8^)
That much is now plainly clear :-)
But just to provide context on my last use: Photoshoot with a quality camera with the WiFi module. Galaxy Note used as a larger display, at least I thought it worked really well last time I did it like this. Galaxy Note used in airport lobby to cull initial 1000 photos down to something reasonable. Using the Lightroom mobile I did some minor changes to images. And then I put my toys away when I got home and let the threadripper rip. :-)
But back to my original point. The Note really REALLY struggles with 50mpxl images. It would help if it were much faster.
Sure. The point was, the actual actions do not rise — in their gravity, danger to society, and other infamy — to what's normally understood by the terms used.
Sure except the point was that what is normally understood by the terms varies with location. You write "rape" and dismiss it. The Swede would write RAPE and angrly attack you for sympathising with the rapist.
Your norms are only normal for you.