Good luck with that class lawsuit. I've seen much worst lawsuits result in minimal payout in the form of a credit towards products of the defending company. D-Link has one for their mass defective firmware and resulted in a $10 discount coupon on the next purchase of a D-Link product.
All the "possible damage" cases listed are a real joke and may as well be classified with "Coffee is hot?".
With Windows 8 it became apparent that they think desktops are going away
I think everybody agrees that Windows 8 was a mistake. MS gets it and that's why Windows 10 is the fix they needed. It's the OS that carries to all platforms while providing the best possible experience on each of the platforms. Windows 10 is just a easy to use on a desktop as Windows 7 with the added bonus of customizing your start menu. Want metro, then simply enable it. This caters to all users, not just touch base users.
I don't want an "OS as a service" that is designed for phones, and with ads and an app store
MS isn't going to force ads on you, the software makers are. Choose apps that don't have ads no different than on your phone. MS understand that corporate people pay for what they need. Home users tend to want things for free so they have to cater to them too otherwise they get pushed out of the market.
Linux Mint is sounding better all the time, since I can run Windows programs in a virtual box. If that is where MS wants to drive its longtime customers, so be it
Your a long time disgruntled customer so just do it. There's nothing wrong with that. I know plenty of people that enjoy the freedom from MS products. In my industry we can't avoid MS and we have no reason to either. The average cost of software per work station is less than $250 per year and that includes OS, office, Cad software, industry specific software and many more. That cost is a fraction of the cost of the hardware and a fraction of the cost of the labour so from a business standpoint, a drop in the bucket.
I think companies in the computer and even consumer electronics sectors eventually realized that there isn't a reliable need to replace
I don't disagree with this but in many cases I find companies try to convince companies to stay on a subscription system for different reasons. Ultimately it's to fund the continued R&D on said software. The challenge comes when company or individual "A" is satisfied with the product features and no longer needs improvement but rather just security and bug updates as well as product support. Unfortunately software makers do no branch their projects that way because it adds a lot of overhead as well as complications to the development process.
There are industries for which it's difficult to justify the larger fee but without it the company folds and the software support completely disappears. For that reason support programs make sense but they would not cover software upgrades which may be required for some support issues to be resolved.
Seems that many users on/. think the subscription model is a way to gauge the customers. I tend to disagree. It's the means required to keep an entity alive so that the user base still has a place to get help from. An alternative is to open source the product but that also has it's issues. Unfortunately, most larger companies price their support programs with the intent of keeping the whole development team. That's what makes the model fail in many cases.
MS is never going to make major inroads into the phone market, but they will lose more of their huge desktop customer base
Your starting to sound like the previous MS CEO. "iPhones will never pickup pace".
MS may be way behind in the mobile market but marketing shifts are expensive and take years to execute on. Considering their big push just started last year, I would bet it's too early to predict their future in mobile let alone their future all together. You sound very bitter at MS which makes me wonder why you bother using their products. Oh, let me think. You have no choice. Someone as angry as you would not force themselves to use a product unless it filled a niche they could not easily avoid.
Devs have always been able to monetize their work on Windows
Low cost software is often pirated or simply replaced with larger packages that cost more but do more regardless of the user's actual needs.
There are millions of apps on smart phones, but only 10 are ever worth using
Another empty statement. Your on a roll
Why would we want to support those lame apps through the cesspool of the advertisement model
The review system takes good care of that. As the user base increase so does the cleanliness.
If you're on Windows you may as well use a web browser because all of the apps I ever saw on Windows did not work as well as the same thing done in a browser
You keep repeating yourself but it looks like you haven't used the app store in months. It's new so it's content is growing in quantity and quality. Netflix was crappy too when it first came out. Look at it now. You got to let it grow and by the looks of it you haven't looked at it since release in July.
I won't argue that there are some apps that attempt to replace web sites and do a poor job at it (Android, IOS and Windows Mobile all have that problem) but there are also great news apps, money helpers, todos, calendars... and the list goes on.
What I foresee is that all apps will be purchased from a central location no different than games on Steam. It's a great model that just works.
What about Android? You are commenting on a thread you don't even understand. MS has a marketing strategy that looks at what users do, not what they used to do.
Today users search the web, install software, chat, talk, watch video, work, play... MS is saying all devices are equal with one OS across all of them. Desktop devices will have more power than hand held devices but the feel and capabilities won't be limited to desktop. IMO it's the right way to go because one device doesn't fit all but one highly compatible OS does. It's their best way to convince users to move over to their mobile platform.
You base your argument on incorrect facts? You just a Ill informed as he is. Lookup MS quarterly revenues on Google, Bing or whatever else you want to use. They all yield the same results clearly stating MS is doing better than ever.
MS is in the process of killing themselves because they are unable to understand Google is a search engine and Windows is an operating system.
You opinion isn't fact. Their revenues tell a different story. They brought in 6 billions more in 2015 than in 2014. Stop grabbing fictional facts from your butt hole.
First off they made a mistake as quoted: "this was a mistake and we are removing the check". The only systems I've seen this happen on is the systems for which I had registered. I could not find anything confirming my finding other than my own experience with 5 PCs.
From the article:
Our own testing shows that, yes, the optional update is getting chosen by default, and that's not supposed to happen to optional updates.
For those not wanting to make the switch to Windows 10 just yet, all is not lost; the installer does require human intervention to actually proceed
So sounds like most here are crying over spilled milk since it didn't actually install automatically. People miss understand "push" with "force update".
For Windows, doing nothing was the right approach when the only alternative they came up with was to ignore the users and go full steam ahead with their smartphone like operating system
False, they used tones of user feedback as well as a voting system to decide what features to add, improve and remove. User feedback was a huge part of MS's success with Windows 10.
Microsoft has a very long history of removing options from users, each new release has less customization ability.
Also wrong. MS has been known to support legacy software and hardware for a very long time IMO to their own detriment. 16 bit apps are still supported in the 32 bit version of their OS and 32 bit in the 64 bit. There are banks and retail chains that run on 25 year old on Windows 7. So you claims of cancelling support is far fetched to say the least.
I've never seen any hint that they are willing to work with users except in the case of a major publicity backlash
It's ok that you aren't aware of the large support MS has gotten from it's users during Windows 10 BETA. This is where you get involved with any of their product. http://connect.microsoft.com/
They know that there is nothing useful in Windows 10 that anyone on Windows 7 or 8.1 would want (Cortana? Give me a break), so they are resorting to unusual marketing tactics
Better H/W support, better usage of h/w resources, better performance, much faster start time, integrated app store, Edge, IE support (for legacy), removal of the infernal Metro interface (available for those who like it or use a touch device). The list is actually very large. They finally removed Media Center and floppy drive support.
I don't mean to be rude but you appear ill informed on Windows 10. It's ok for you to hate it but at least don't make it blind hatred.
The are plenty of good applications. The fact that companies can easily distribute their PC software without having their own proprietary download site or installer makes it a much better experience for the users. Sure, the content on the app store isn't perfect yet but the ratings are coming in and soon you'll have a very nice eco system that is safer than downloading a random.exe off a site that adds it's malware to it.
(and with my free or low cost OSX upgrades I have seen zero advertisements)
Some free apps have adverts present. They also piggy back off on the store sales which in my opinion should be enough for MS too but I'm assuming they are offering their devs the opportunity to monetize their dev work. Can't blame MS for giving devs an opportunity to monetize their work while providing free services
Particles do settle to the ground, get absorbed by the vegetation or ends up in our water. The issue is the same regardless. Airborne particles toxic or not are toxic when present in large enough volumes. There's two kids that died in Canada no long ago from exposure to dust from a type of grain. Just tells you how fragile the repertory system can be.
Considering much of the manufacturing in China isn't for themselves it's hard to say whether or not their carbon footprint is larger than ours. I'm pretty sure the carbon footprint/capital is smaller in China than it is in North America but that's only because their population is poor and living in lower standards than ours.
I think our rules and regulations are probably tighter than theirs but I'm honestly ill informed about China's pollution regulations.
One may generalize but there is progress made at political levels. It's often easier to make changes when everybody agrees. Events like this one in China as they occur more often will cause businesses and individuals to pressure governments for a solution. After all it's human nature. Look at how much pressure has been put to get pot legalized in the US and Canada and it's now happening.
I haven't been on this earth for that long and I've seen significant progress in many areas including the closure of gas plants, the implementation of solar panel programs that have already proved successful and the implementation of regulations in polluting industries. Governments can't solve all problems at once so they prioritize as well as they can with the information they have.
You already got marked troll but I figure you should know that goods use to be made here and people survived. Moving our manufacturing to China removed accountability (hence the poor quality of some products) and increased wastage. Over consumption is a real problem and it stems from low cost goods.
I don't see MS doing this for the sake of users, I see them doing it because they think this will provide greater revenue streams
MS is doing what it needs to in order to maintain it's offering alive. The competition is undercutting them with a $0 up front cost. All they are doing is responding by going after the same revenue stream.
Google employs the same strategy. Why is it ok for them to do it and be the most popular device choice but when MS does it it's a sin? I'm confused by the double standard.
That would be the best way for MS to kill it's end user business so I don't foresee any of that happening. They won't do it for the simple fact that to stay in the end user market you need to give products at no or very low charge with little to no inconvenience.
MS tried to stick to a model (buy/own a product) that was antiquated by Google's model (ad supported). Google instead offers everything at no charge while making money off the ads they push in your face. Users have embraced this model (even if most claim they hate it). For that reason MS is changing it's offering by monetizing through ads + a cut of app sales. Some will argue that MS is late to the game but I believe they resisted the change because they though people would go back to owning software. Corporations still try to own software but it's becoming more difficult. As an IT leader it can be very difficult to find an ROI on a product you pay for on a monthly basis.
So at the end of the day these changes are the result of what users want (not us the techies).
The most popular browser performs automatic updates every time you open it. A/V also updates their virus library automatically. I'm not suggesting the two are the same or that one is better than the other but the product does what it does. I honestly think far more damage is done from not updating and maybe that's what the reasoning was. I too often see tech people (myself included) linger on the details that on the large scale don't matter to most.
Everything is worthy of a class action lawsuit if you spin it right but as far as I can tell most users have welcomed the change and don't give a damn about this unless its caused them issues with their PC. By now most users are used to the aggravation that comes with PCs which is why many avoid them by using tablets and mobile devices instead. Heck, I just had my OSMC on Pi 2 corrupt itself by installing updates.
About a year ago I would have drilled MS for this, but instead because they've actually shown interest in working with it's users I'm more than ever willing to see what they'll do next. MS knew this change was going to be difficult but they forced it down our throats because they feel it's the right thing to do for the future the PCs. IMHO, doing nothing was definitively not the right thing to do.
Wrong. There will a lot more new hardware requiring low level programmers to make interfaces that connects with modern APIs and such.
As for enterprise software dev, you're probably not far from the truth as GUI based programming has really grown inside corporations and enterprises. GUI do ok with simple designs but when you get into more complex designs involving highly engineered solutions you still need code to be written. Keep in mind that some code can be far easier to read than a GUI in most cases. GUIs are great for representing work flow. Otherwise they become bulky and hard to comprehend.
To me comparing GUI programming with text based coding is like comparing sign language with spoken language. Spoken languages are more accurate and more efficient at delivering the message.
I'm sure MS would have loved to drop 32 bit support. After all it's double the trouble (more or less). The fact is that MS isn't in a position to be picky about what end user H/W they want to support.
Did you know ISIS was born of intervention policies from the U.S. government?
But not their brutal ways. I don't care who you are but when you start broadcasting the beheading of civilians and the mass killing of "non Suni" people you are in serious need of a spanking. Maybe you're ok with watching the injustice while sipping on your coffee but FORTUNATELY not everybody feels that way.
I would be of a different opinion if they were just an occupying army trying to create stability but they are the exact opposite of that..
It's interesting to hear stories like that. I live in residence. I found the residence to be self cleansing. What I mean is that year after year there was only about 20% tenants turn over since most were in residence for 3 - 5 years depending on their field of study. Often those not compliant with the residence lifestyle would end up getting an apartment instead. The rest go along very well.
There was supervision at night but it was limited to keeping hallways quiet after 11pm and emptying the trash to avoid food smells.
Slashdot Mirror
Good luck with that class lawsuit. I've seen much worst lawsuits result in minimal payout in the form of a credit towards products of the defending company. D-Link has one for their mass defective firmware and resulted in a $10 discount coupon on the next purchase of a D-Link product.
All the "possible damage" cases listed are a real joke and may as well be classified with "Coffee is hot?".
With Windows 8 it became apparent that they think desktops are going away
I think everybody agrees that Windows 8 was a mistake. MS gets it and that's why Windows 10 is the fix they needed. It's the OS that carries to all platforms while providing the best possible experience on each of the platforms. Windows 10 is just a easy to use on a desktop as Windows 7 with the added bonus of customizing your start menu. Want metro, then simply enable it. This caters to all users, not just touch base users.
I don't want an "OS as a service" that is designed for phones, and with ads and an app store
MS isn't going to force ads on you, the software makers are. Choose apps that don't have ads no different than on your phone. MS understand that corporate people pay for what they need. Home users tend to want things for free so they have to cater to them too otherwise they get pushed out of the market.
Linux Mint is sounding better all the time, since I can run Windows programs in a virtual box. If that is where MS wants to drive its longtime customers, so be it
Your a long time disgruntled customer so just do it. There's nothing wrong with that. I know plenty of people that enjoy the freedom from MS products. In my industry we can't avoid MS and we have no reason to either. The average cost of software per work station is less than $250 per year and that includes OS, office, Cad software, industry specific software and many more. That cost is a fraction of the cost of the hardware and a fraction of the cost of the labour so from a business standpoint, a drop in the bucket.
I think companies in the computer and even consumer electronics sectors eventually realized that there isn't a reliable need to replace
I don't disagree with this but in many cases I find companies try to convince companies to stay on a subscription system for different reasons. Ultimately it's to fund the continued R&D on said software. The challenge comes when company or individual "A" is satisfied with the product features and no longer needs improvement but rather just security and bug updates as well as product support. Unfortunately software makers do no branch their projects that way because it adds a lot of overhead as well as complications to the development process.
There are industries for which it's difficult to justify the larger fee but without it the company folds and the software support completely disappears. For that reason support programs make sense but they would not cover software upgrades which may be required for some support issues to be resolved.
Seems that many users on /. think the subscription model is a way to gauge the customers. I tend to disagree. It's the means required to keep an entity alive so that the user base still has a place to get help from. An alternative is to open source the product but that also has it's issues. Unfortunately, most larger companies price their support programs with the intent of keeping the whole development team. That's what makes the model fail in many cases.
MS is never going to make major inroads into the phone market, but they will lose more of their huge desktop customer base
Your starting to sound like the previous MS CEO. "iPhones will never pickup pace".
MS may be way behind in the mobile market but marketing shifts are expensive and take years to execute on. Considering their big push just started last year, I would bet it's too early to predict their future in mobile let alone their future all together. You sound very bitter at MS which makes me wonder why you bother using their products. Oh, let me think. You have no choice. Someone as angry as you would not force themselves to use a product unless it filled a niche they could not easily avoid.
Devs have always been able to monetize their work on Windows
Low cost software is often pirated or simply replaced with larger packages that cost more but do more regardless of the user's actual needs.
There are millions of apps on smart phones, but only 10 are ever worth using
Another empty statement. Your on a roll
Why would we want to support those lame apps through the cesspool of the advertisement model
The review system takes good care of that. As the user base increase so does the cleanliness.
If you're on Windows you may as well use a web browser because all of the apps I ever saw on Windows did not work as well as the same thing done in a browser
You keep repeating yourself but it looks like you haven't used the app store in months. It's new so it's content is growing in quantity and quality. Netflix was crappy too when it first came out. Look at it now. You got to let it grow and by the looks of it you haven't looked at it since release in July.
I won't argue that there are some apps that attempt to replace web sites and do a poor job at it (Android, IOS and Windows Mobile all have that problem) but there are also great news apps, money helpers, todos, calendars... and the list goes on.
What I foresee is that all apps will be purchased from a central location no different than games on Steam. It's a great model that just works.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-u...
Look for yourself. There's plenty. They all work great on mobile and desktop. I used the facebook, Netflix, Kodi remote, games...
Bunch of stuff that works great for touch and non touch.
It has nothing to do with Metro.
What about Android? You are commenting on a thread you don't even understand. MS has a marketing strategy that looks at what users do, not what they used to do.
Today users search the web, install software, chat, talk, watch video, work, play... MS is saying all devices are equal with one OS across all of them. Desktop devices will have more power than hand held devices but the feel and capabilities won't be limited to desktop. IMO it's the right way to go because one device doesn't fit all but one highly compatible OS does. It's their best way to convince users to move over to their mobile platform.
You base your argument on incorrect facts? You just a Ill informed as he is. Lookup MS quarterly revenues on Google, Bing or whatever else you want to use. They all yield the same results clearly stating MS is doing better than ever.
MS is in the process of killing themselves because they are unable to understand Google is a search engine and Windows is an operating system.
You opinion isn't fact. Their revenues tell a different story. They brought in 6 billions more in 2015 than in 2014. Stop grabbing fictional facts from your butt hole.
Are you sober. I see no arguments, just rambling of a drunk hobo with a sign "save Jesus".
There is NEVER a valid excuse for disrespecting your customers
Your I'll informed on the issue. RTFA and come back when you know what your talking about.
With antivirus you can almost always opt out,
First off they made a mistake as quoted: "this was a mistake and we are removing the check".
The only systems I've seen this happen on is the systems for which I had registered. I could not find anything confirming my finding other than my own experience with 5 PCs.
From the article:
Our own testing shows that, yes, the optional update is getting chosen by default, and that's not supposed to happen to optional updates.
For those not wanting to make the switch to Windows 10 just yet, all is not lost; the installer does require human intervention to actually proceed
So sounds like most here are crying over spilled milk since it didn't actually install automatically. People miss understand "push" with "force update".
For Windows, doing nothing was the right approach when the only alternative they came up with was to ignore the users and go full steam ahead with their smartphone like operating system
False, they used tones of user feedback as well as a voting system to decide what features to add, improve and remove. User feedback was a huge part of MS's success with Windows 10.
Microsoft has a very long history of removing options from users, each new release has less customization ability.
Also wrong. MS has been known to support legacy software and hardware for a very long time IMO to their own detriment. 16 bit apps are still supported in the 32 bit version of their OS and 32 bit in the 64 bit. There are banks and retail chains that run on 25 year old on Windows 7. So you claims of cancelling support is far fetched to say the least.
I've never seen any hint that they are willing to work with users except in the case of a major publicity backlash
It's ok that you aren't aware of the large support MS has gotten from it's users during Windows 10 BETA. This is where you get involved with any of their product. http://connect.microsoft.com/
They know that there is nothing useful in Windows 10 that anyone on Windows 7 or 8.1 would want (Cortana? Give me a break), so they are resorting to unusual marketing tactics
Better H/W support, better usage of h/w resources, better performance, much faster start time, integrated app store, Edge, IE support (for legacy), removal of the infernal Metro interface (available for those who like it or use a touch device). The list is actually very large. They finally removed Media Center and floppy drive support.
I don't mean to be rude but you appear ill informed on Windows 10. It's ok for you to hate it but at least don't make it blind hatred.
The are plenty of good applications. The fact that companies can easily distribute their PC software without having their own proprietary download site or installer makes it a much better experience for the users. Sure, the content on the app store isn't perfect yet but the ratings are coming in and soon you'll have a very nice eco system that is safer than downloading a random .exe off a site that adds it's malware to it.
(and with my free or low cost OSX upgrades I have seen zero advertisements)
Some free apps have adverts present. They also piggy back off on the store sales which in my opinion should be enough for MS too but I'm assuming they are offering their devs the opportunity to monetize their dev work. Can't blame MS for giving devs an opportunity to monetize their work while providing free services
Particles do settle to the ground, get absorbed by the vegetation or ends up in our water. The issue is the same regardless. Airborne particles toxic or not are toxic when present in large enough volumes. There's two kids that died in Canada no long ago from exposure to dust from a type of grain. Just tells you how fragile the repertory system can be.
Considering much of the manufacturing in China isn't for themselves it's hard to say whether or not their carbon footprint is larger than ours. I'm pretty sure the carbon footprint/capital is smaller in China than it is in North America but that's only because their population is poor and living in lower standards than ours.
I think our rules and regulations are probably tighter than theirs but I'm honestly ill informed about China's pollution regulations.
One may generalize but there is progress made at political levels. It's often easier to make changes when everybody agrees. Events like this one in China as they occur more often will cause businesses and individuals to pressure governments for a solution. After all it's human nature. Look at how much pressure has been put to get pot legalized in the US and Canada and it's now happening.
I haven't been on this earth for that long and I've seen significant progress in many areas including the closure of gas plants, the implementation of solar panel programs that have already proved successful and the implementation of regulations in polluting industries. Governments can't solve all problems at once so they prioritize as well as they can with the information they have.
You already got marked troll but I figure you should know that goods use to be made here and people survived. Moving our manufacturing to China removed accountability (hence the poor quality of some products) and increased wastage. Over consumption is a real problem and it stems from low cost goods.
How about going towards greener energy, greener manufacturing...?
Labour is so cheap I'm sure they can get a few million people peddling to generate power :)
I don't see MS doing this for the sake of users, I see them doing it because they think this will provide greater revenue streams
MS is doing what it needs to in order to maintain it's offering alive. The competition is undercutting them with a $0 up front cost. All they are doing is responding by going after the same revenue stream.
Google employs the same strategy. Why is it ok for them to do it and be the most popular device choice but when MS does it it's a sin?
I'm confused by the double standard.
That would be the best way for MS to kill it's end user business so I don't foresee any of that happening. They won't do it for the simple fact that to stay in the end user market you need to give products at no or very low charge with little to no inconvenience.
MS tried to stick to a model (buy/own a product) that was antiquated by Google's model (ad supported). Google instead offers everything at no charge while making money off the ads they push in your face. Users have embraced this model (even if most claim they hate it). For that reason MS is changing it's offering by monetizing through ads + a cut of app sales. Some will argue that MS is late to the game but I believe they resisted the change because they though people would go back to owning software. Corporations still try to own software but it's becoming more difficult. As an IT leader it can be very difficult to find an ROI on a product you pay for on a monthly basis.
So at the end of the day these changes are the result of what users want (not us the techies).
The most popular browser performs automatic updates every time you open it. A/V also updates their virus library automatically. I'm not suggesting the two are the same or that one is better than the other but the product does what it does. I honestly think far more damage is done from not updating and maybe that's what the reasoning was. I too often see tech people (myself included) linger on the details that on the large scale don't matter to most.
Everything is worthy of a class action lawsuit if you spin it right but as far as I can tell most users have welcomed the change and don't give a damn about this unless its caused them issues with their PC. By now most users are used to the aggravation that comes with PCs which is why many avoid them by using tablets and mobile devices instead. Heck, I just had my OSMC on Pi 2 corrupt itself by installing updates.
About a year ago I would have drilled MS for this, but instead because they've actually shown interest in working with it's users I'm more than ever willing to see what they'll do next. MS knew this change was going to be difficult but they forced it down our throats because they feel it's the right thing to do for the future the PCs. IMHO, doing nothing was definitively not the right thing to do.
Wrong. There will a lot more new hardware requiring low level programmers to make interfaces that connects with modern APIs and such.
As for enterprise software dev, you're probably not far from the truth as GUI based programming has really grown inside corporations and enterprises. GUI do ok with simple designs but when you get into more complex designs involving highly engineered solutions you still need code to be written. Keep in mind that some code can be far easier to read than a GUI in most cases. GUIs are great for representing work flow. Otherwise they become bulky and hard to comprehend.
To me comparing GUI programming with text based coding is like comparing sign language with spoken language. Spoken languages are more accurate and more efficient at delivering the message.
I'm sure MS would have loved to drop 32 bit support. After all it's double the trouble (more or less). The fact is that MS isn't in a position to be picky about what end user H/W they want to support.
Did you know ISIS was born of intervention policies from the U.S. government?
But not their brutal ways. I don't care who you are but when you start broadcasting the beheading of civilians and the mass killing of "non Suni" people you are in serious need of a spanking. Maybe you're ok with watching the injustice while sipping on your coffee but FORTUNATELY not everybody feels that way.
I would be of a different opinion if they were just an occupying army trying to create stability but they are the exact opposite of that..
It's interesting to hear stories like that. I live in residence. I found the residence to be self cleansing. What I mean is that year after year there was only about 20% tenants turn over since most were in residence for 3 - 5 years depending on their field of study. Often those not compliant with the residence lifestyle would end up getting an apartment instead. The rest go along very well.
There was supervision at night but it was limited to keeping hallways quiet after 11pm and emptying the trash to avoid food smells.