It's only "useful" because there are billions of dollars of legacy x86 programs and drivers written for it. The core of the OS is inferior in just about every way to the Unixes.
Jesus Christ, we get it. Microsoft recommends people upgrade their operating system to the newest one. Big fucking deal, let it go. Reading Slashdot means like I'm continually kept updated on whenever Microsoft recommends people to upgrade. I don't need to be in on the loop about it.
You didn't read the article. It's not Microsoft "recommending people" upgrade to to Win10. What they've done is actively circumvent the people that explicitly chose to deny the Windows 7/8.1 update KB 3035583 that installs GWX ("Get Windows 10"), which is the malware that silently downloads Windows 10 and tries to install it without the user's permission.
I've had to hide KB 3035583 over a dozen times now. It's really not worth my time to micromanage this crap on every PC in my office, so I just installed GWX Control Pane: http://www.majorgeeks.com/file...
It's not so much a problem that OEMs and carriers don't make/withhold security patches, but rather the fact that a buy comparing different Android devices has no idea how long the OEM/carrier intends to support it. If it were made blatantly obvious that Lenovo was only going to release a single patch for my Moto E (2014), I certainly would never have bought it to begin with!
The only sensible solution right now is to buy a Nexus device; at least Google explicitly tells you how long your device will be supported. For everything else, you just have to guess.
Even Microsoft can make an OS that doesn't require the manufacturer's blessing to install updates. Google needs to fix the OS, not the OEMS.
Disagree. I don't trust Google to reliably test every single Android device on the market and send out updates that don't brick any of them. The carriers and manufacturers need to be held criminally liable for (1) not patching devices that have been for sale for under two years and (2) withholding any security updates for marketing reasons.
so I wouldn't pay extra for extended security support. Besides, it's quite inhumane to ransom already-crafted security updates just to make a few extra pennies. Either don't update and clearly declare a device EOL, or update it.
I concur. I hate hate hate Comcast and I can prattle on about a million things they do I hate. But this seems fairly reasonable; as of this writing (2016), 1 TB per month is more than enough for 99.9% of the world. If you're a professional movie reviewer that streams 4K all day or a pirate or somebody that needs more than that, you can pay an extra $50 a month to have unlimited bandwidth--again, that's really not so bad, if your career depends on it.
Facebook and Twitter are public forums. Although they do some evil things, the expectation of any kind of privacy in a public forum is orders of magnitude less than what one expects from their PC (which, on every OS I have ever known beside Win10, keeps everything locally except for mild telemetry).
If you don't move to Windows 10 then you deserve all the security problems you will inevitably have. GUI and "principle" issues aside - it is a smart move.
Most people should be forced to switch. If you are too dumb to prevent the switch then you are in the camp of people who should be forced to switch. The tears mean its working.
Windows 10 fits more criteria for "malware" than the most well-known malware suites do. Forcefully installs itself? Check. Spies on you? Check. Displays ads to you? Check. Uninstalls competitors' programs? Check. Doles out your security keys to people on your contact list? Check.
It's one step away from literally being ransomware.
DogDude and all the other MS shills have assured me that Windows 10 doesn't install itself, it's just my younger sibling playing a prank on me (he/she's obviously quite talented to break into my office and install it on my co-worker's computer!). Of course Microsoft, being the honest company they are, would never ever try to force their ad+spyware onto their customers without their thorough approval given by root password, last four digits of their social security number, and a hand-written letter to the executive board of Microsoft--everybody knows their customers are all serious-business enterprise clients that wouldn't tolerate anything remotely close to what TFA is insinuating, so therefore Microsoft can't be doing it! They are, after all, infallible.
Why the hell should I buy a Windows license (along with any surveillance, backdoors, etc. hidden in the source code I'm not privy to) in order to run software that I am legally entitled to?
If Wine is a copyright infringement, then so is Windows.
Maybe you should read the article you just quoted. Google wasn't seeking a royalty license to use the intellectual property of the Java API. They were offering to co-opt Java with Sun and develop it together.
If Oracle wins this case and all the appeals, where it's ruled that using open APIs is copyright infringement, then I would strongly suggest you get into corporate law.
Because the end result is that basically every software company in the world (including not just Oracle and Google but Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Intel, Samsung, etc.) will suddenly find themselves in a Mexican standoff of potentially trillions of dollars in "intellectual property" suits ready to be fired off. The only winner will be the one with the best legal department; oh, and the lawyers.
All the aforementioned companies would be wise to pen amicus curiae letters in favor of Google.
Slashdot Mirror
It's only "useful" because there are billions of dollars of legacy x86 programs and drivers written for it. The core of the OS is inferior in just about every way to the Unixes.
So what's your favorite part about Windows 10, the 107 domains that the OS sends your personal information to, the uncontrollable auto-updates that reboot while you're in the middle of your work, or when the OS deletes programs installed on your computer so you'll use the Microsoft equivalent instead?
If you deny the fucking update, you haven't given permission for it. No means no.
Jesus Christ, we get it. Microsoft recommends people upgrade their operating system to the newest one. Big fucking deal, let it go. Reading Slashdot means like I'm continually kept updated on whenever Microsoft recommends people to upgrade. I don't need to be in on the loop about it.
You didn't read the article. It's not Microsoft "recommending people" upgrade to to Win10. What they've done is actively circumvent the people that explicitly chose to deny the Windows 7/8.1 update KB 3035583 that installs GWX ("Get Windows 10"), which is the malware that silently downloads Windows 10 and tries to install it without the user's permission.
I've had to hide KB 3035583 over a dozen times now. It's really not worth my time to micromanage this crap on every PC in my office, so I just installed GWX Control Pane: http://www.majorgeeks.com/file...
It's not so much a problem that OEMs and carriers don't make/withhold security patches, but rather the fact that a buy comparing different Android devices has no idea how long the OEM/carrier intends to support it. If it were made blatantly obvious that Lenovo was only going to release a single patch for my Moto E (2014), I certainly would never have bought it to begin with!
The only sensible solution right now is to buy a Nexus device; at least Google explicitly tells you how long your device will be supported. For everything else, you just have to guess.
Even Microsoft can make an OS that doesn't require the manufacturer's blessing to install updates. Google needs to fix the OS, not the OEMS.
Disagree. I don't trust Google to reliably test every single Android device on the market and send out updates that don't brick any of them. The carriers and manufacturers need to be held criminally liable for (1) not patching devices that have been for sale for under two years and (2) withholding any security updates for marketing reasons.
so I wouldn't pay extra for extended security support. Besides, it's quite inhumane to ransom already-crafted security updates just to make a few extra pennies. Either don't update and clearly declare a device EOL, or update it.
Unless the cars themselves are sapient, the headline should read "A Third Of New Cellular Connections Last Quarter Were Cars".
I concur. I hate hate hate Comcast and I can prattle on about a million things they do I hate. But this seems fairly reasonable; as of this writing (2016), 1 TB per month is more than enough for 99.9% of the world. If you're a professional movie reviewer that streams 4K all day or a pirate or somebody that needs more than that, you can pay an extra $50 a month to have unlimited bandwidth--again, that's really not so bad, if your career depends on it.
I got an offer for an Uber coupon while using Google Maps on my phone the other day.
It was a text ad and wasn't very intrusive. Still, though, unsettling.
They don't encrypt your data and threaten to withhold it without paying a subscription or consenting to their spyware/adware.
At least not yet.
Facebook and Twitter are public forums. Although they do some evil things, the expectation of any kind of privacy in a public forum is orders of magnitude less than what one expects from their PC (which, on every OS I have ever known beside Win10, keeps everything locally except for mild telemetry).
My wife accidentally clicked it on her admittedly elderly machine, now it won't boot up, no way to roll it back, all her files are gone.
This is different than malware... how is that?
Make a live USB/CD with Linux and retrieve the files that way.
If you don't move to Windows 10 then you deserve all the security problems you will inevitably have. GUI and "principle" issues aside - it is a smart move.
Most people should be forced to switch. If you are too dumb to prevent the switch then you are in the camp of people who should be forced to switch. The tears mean its working.
Windows 10 fits more criteria for "malware" than the most well-known malware suites do. Forcefully installs itself? Check. Spies on you? Check. Displays ads to you? Check. Uninstalls competitors' programs? Check. Doles out your security keys to people on your contact list? Check.
It's one step away from literally being ransomware.
Go home Nadella, you're drunk.
+5 Insightful
DogDude and all the other MS shills have assured me that Windows 10 doesn't install itself, it's just my younger sibling playing a prank on me (he/she's obviously quite talented to break into my office and install it on my co-worker's computer!). Of course Microsoft, being the honest company they are, would never ever try to force their ad+spyware onto their customers without their thorough approval given by root password, last four digits of their social security number, and a hand-written letter to the executive board of Microsoft--everybody knows their customers are all serious-business enterprise clients that wouldn't tolerate anything remotely close to what TFA is insinuating, so therefore Microsoft can't be doing it! They are, after all, infallible.
Why the hell should I buy a Windows license (along with any surveillance, backdoors, etc. hidden in the source code I'm not privy to) in order to run software that I am legally entitled to?
If Wine is a copyright infringement, then so is Windows.
Not a license to use Java's API. They were seeking an alliance with Sun to develop Java together.
Maybe you should read the article you just quoted. Google wasn't seeking a royalty license to use the intellectual property of the Java API. They were offering to co-opt Java with Sun and develop it together.
Suppose the government made breathing ("oxygen infringement") illegal. Would you suffocate yourself to death in the name of justice?
Bell Labs...
If Oracle wins this case and all the appeals, where it's ruled that using open APIs is copyright infringement, then I would strongly suggest you get into corporate law.
Because the end result is that basically every software company in the world (including not just Oracle and Google but Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Intel, Samsung, etc.) will suddenly find themselves in a Mexican standoff of potentially trillions of dollars in "intellectual property" suits ready to be fired off. The only winner will be the one with the best legal department; oh, and the lawyers.
All the aforementioned companies would be wise to pen amicus curiae letters in favor of Google.
SCO doesn't own Unix. Novell (in turn owned by Attachmate) does.