Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft no longer allows admins to block Windows Store access in Win10 Pro

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 251 posts

Re: Microsoft no longer allows admins to block Windows Store access in Win10 Pro

#241

Post by tdkl »

setyfse4 wrote: post #211
hackuser wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that their choice?

Not being confounded by choices they dont understand or care is also what they want. Chrome and Firefox auto updating without user intervention by default is a good thing. If Chrome were to ask permission before downloading updates, many of them will just cancel it and get on with whatever they wanted to browse. If the system is compromised by malware because of an unpatched security issue, it is the vendor who takes…

Chrome is a browser, not an OS. I don't run my software under Chrome, so I'm not as affected if it had issues with auto-updating (there rarely was anything, which is another point).

If Google were playing beta testers with Chromebooks and messing around like MS does, you'd think there would be anything positive written about them ?

Re: Microsoft no longer allows admins to block Windows Store access in Win10 Pro

#242

Post by tdkl »

794CD01 wrote: post #232
hackuser wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that their choice?

Sure it is. So what? Are you going to pretend that they are the only ones affected? It hurts the rest of the internet when their machine is then used by hackers to attack others. It hurts the banking system and indirectly, small vendors when these people's credit card information is stolen and used to make fraudulent purchases. Taking away the right of individuals to make bad decisions that harm others is the entire…

> Taking away the right of individuals to make bad decisions that harm others is the entire point of society.

Thanks, this has to be one of the most idiotic statements I've read this year.

Re: Microsoft no longer allows admins to block Windows Store access in Win10 Pro

#243

Post by setyfse4 »

tdkl wrote: post #241
setyfse4 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not being confounded by choices they dont understand or care is also what they want. Chrome and Firefox auto updating without user intervention by default is a good thing. If Chrome were to ask permission before downloading updates, many of them will just cancel it and get on with whatever they wanted to browse. If the system is compromised by malware because of an unpatched security issue, it is the vendor who takes…

Chrome is a browser, not an OS. I don't run my software under Chrome, so I'm not as affected if it had issues with auto-updating (there rarely was anything, which is another point). If Google were playing beta testers with Chromebooks and messing around like MS does, you'd think there would be anything positive written about them ?

Chromebooks also do auto updates, and do it such a way that typical non technical end user finds it difficult to turn off permanently.

That's a good thing too.

Re: Microsoft no longer allows admins to block Windows Store access in Win10 Pro

#244

Post by lstamour »

snuxoll wrote: post #237
lstamour wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is too bad about Intune. I think the Azure AD with joining is only hybrid, unless I've missed something, which means you still need a local AD resource. Reminds me of Azure-compatible Storage Spaces Dorect -- an amazing idea until they told me I would need four identically configured servers and I realised it would be a waste of time when I only need one server and less redundancy to start. Wish they could figure…

As of Windows 10 you can join directly to Azure AD without any on prem AD implementation.

Sweet. News to me, thanks. Will definitely try this. :)

Re: Microsoft no longer allows admins to block Windows Store access in Win10 Pro

#245

Post by brazzledazzle »

digi_owl wrote: post #220
brazzledazzle wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No joke, it's like that in no small part because corporate types love it that way regardless of business size. If it's easy to buy licenses they'll find a way to go through a VAR anyway. I've seen a consultancy engaged to middle-man the Google Apps purchase and configuration and ultimately the only value they provided were a couple trainings and some initial configuration any idiot with a few minutes and the ability…

Why do this remind me of how big media had to dragged kicking and screaming into the streaming age?

Perhaps because it's an obviously worse system that would be replaced if only the incumbents weren't protecting it.

I'm sure any individual middle manager would give you a very reasonable explanation for any of these behaviors. If you're operating in a political environment and you don't play the game you're going to end up the sucker sooner or later. How do you fix the problem when you need to be part of it to have any leverage to fix it? The only thing you have power to do in that situation is behave ethically or unethically (depending on who's definition of unethical you're using of course).

I'd like to think that startups that grow enormously will prove over time that slow enterprise-y corporations are at a huge disadvantage and that will slowly make it's way into business schools. But part of the reason risk averse behavior takes hold is because the stakes get higher as you get larger. Today's spectacularly successful startups are tomorrow's enterprises unless they make a deliberate effort not to be.

Re: Microsoft no longer allows admins to block Windows Store access in Win10 Pro

#246

Post by brazzledazzle »

leonroy wrote: post #150
Someone1234 wrote: post #2

If Microsoft wants SMBs to use Enterprise then make the Enterprise edition more easily available to SMBs, don't try to force them to move to it by making petty little changes to make their life more difficult. I can go on the Google Apps website right now and buy myself seats with a few clicks and a few minutes. If I want to buy Windows Enterprise licenses it will take weeks, cost an unclear amount (at the onset), an…

Adding my voice to the chorus. The Microsoft Windows ecosystem is a god send for those wanting to enforce single sign on, roaming profiles and group policy to control things deploy Chrome, 7-Zip or all manner of apps straight to the desktop or lock down access for say the demo room machines but give full access to engineering notebooks and enforce things like password policy, mapped network drives, etc. It honestly j…

>in comparison try doing the above with Mac OS X + Mac OS X Server - like pulling teeth

Because OS X Server is complete crap. As is ARD. Not even Apple uses OS X Server to manage their devices. I believe they use JAMF's Casper.

Re: Microsoft no longer allows admins to block Windows Store access in Win10 Pro

#247

Post by brazzledazzle »

chrismarlow9 wrote: post #154
Someone1234 wrote: post #2

If Microsoft wants SMBs to use Enterprise then make the Enterprise edition more easily available to SMBs, don't try to force them to move to it by making petty little changes to make their life more difficult. I can go on the Google Apps website right now and buy myself seats with a few clicks and a few minutes. If I want to buy Windows Enterprise licenses it will take weeks, cost an unclear amount (at the onset), an…

I worked for a startup a while back and we tried to get quotes on running Microsoft SQL server. The sales rep could not comprehend that we were a web company. They continued to try to ask us about how we would be using it to manage our in-house inventory. Even after explaining, "no we're a web company, like myspace", the rep still didn't get it. We used MySQL.

VARs don't even know how SQL Server licensing works. It's not hard when you take the time to read about it but it's convoluted and no one should have to waste their time doing it. Basically it comes down to this:

if ($number_of_clients * $client_license) > ($number_of_processors * $processor_license) buy per-proc, else buy client licenses.

Per-processor licensing is somewhere in the neighborhood of 30K (per CPU). Standby servers and processors aren't counted toward that total. Clients are any machines or users that directly or indirectly (like via a web app) use the database. That last point is important because sales reps at vendors who's software requires SQL Server will sometimes be ignorant of it or will lie and when you get audited you're the one left holding the bill.

Re: Microsoft no longer allows admins to block Windows Store access in Win10 Pro

#248

Post by 794CD01 »

tdkl wrote: post #242
794CD01 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure it is. So what? Are you going to pretend that they are the only ones affected? It hurts the rest of the internet when their machine is then used by hackers to attack others. It hurts the banking system and indirectly, small vendors when these people's credit card information is stolen and used to make fraudulent purchases. Taking away the right of individuals to make bad decisions that harm others is the entire…

> Taking away the right of individuals to make bad decisions that harm others is the entire point of society. Thanks, this has to be one of the most idiotic statements I've read this year.

You're welcome. That means a lot, coming from you.

Re: Microsoft no longer allows admins to block Windows Store access in Win10 Pro

#249

Post by pritambaral »

lstamour wrote: post #204
pritambaral wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linux goes a long way towards updating while running. In fact, in my seven years of administering Linux – and my distro updates once a week – I never had to reboot to continue an update. Every update - during and after - I could continue using my system exactly as I was using it before. Enterprise Linux also has the feature of updating the kernel on-the-fly. The infrastructure for it has been open-source, and anyone…

I'm pretty sure I've updated the kernel on the fly when trying to update the kernel on Digital Ocean-- the stock kernel loads (let's call it the bootstrap kernel) and then it eventually calls some code that replaces the running kernel with a newer more modern version. I've forgotten the details, as it sounded kludgy, but I'm pretty use like anything else Linux, a reboot isn't always required. In fact, with Nano serve…

> I'm pretty sure I've updated the kernel on the fly when trying to update the kernel on Digital Ocean

What you go on to describe sounds a lot like kexec, and a kexec is the same thing as a reboot for everything on a computer except the hardware. The new kernel during a kexec starts with a freshly-booted state.

What I meant was – and perhaps I wasn't clear enough – updating the kernel in-memory, while it runs so that even your userspace apps notice nothing - except perhaps a few fractions of seconds of time slipping by - and continue running while the kernel they're running on top of is patched with new code.

This has been possible for a while on Linux. It began with, IIRC, Ksplice as a college-project, then a startup, then bought-out by Oracle for Oracle Linux, then independent efforts at similar implementations by both Red Hat and Suse, which eventually got merged together and mainlined into Linus's tree.

Re: Microsoft no longer allows admins to block Windows Store access in Win10 Pro

#250

Post by jessaustin »

nitrogen wrote: post #64
merb wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

bizspark is only for up to 7 people. I mean you could actually create a single account and use the same key for multiple machines but if it comes to office your limited to 2 keys per user. but you could install every key on up to 2 machines but licensing forbids to use both installations at once.

Does Microsoft still unleash the BSA on small businesses that are out of compliance?

Does the pope shit in the woods?
Post reply on HN