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

Woman wins $10k judgment against Microsoft for forced Windows 10 upgrade

extremetech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 451 posts

Re: Woman wins $10k judgment against Microsoft for forced Windows 10 upgrade

#291

Post by intopieces »

vetinari wrote: post #201
intopieces wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the pop-ups that appear on my Windows 7 machine, there is no button they says "Do Not Update"; both buttons (Update now, update later) lead the system to download and install Windows 10. That both of your users report explicitly clicking a button that references update makes me suspicious that they in fact just clicked the wrong button. Sneaky of Microsoft, but I'm having trouble buying these tales of the OS going…

Even dismissing the windows is considered "yes, upgrade". That way beyond sneaky, that's just black pattern.

But the upgrade still requires that the user accept the EULA. I agree that the system is hostile to user preference (any reports of a computer behaving in a way the user doesn't expect should be examined, whether the user "should know better" or not) but it's important to get to the bottom of exactly what happened, and sometimes that requires figuring it what the user actually did, not just what they report they did. Anyone who has worked in tech support has this instinct.

Re: Woman wins $10k judgment against Microsoft for forced Windows 10 upgrade

#292

Post by tracker1 »

marssaxman wrote: post #271
freehunter wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I could keep fixing my 92 Toyota Corolla to keep it on the road, but at some point it becomes more effective to just move on. There are some things inherent in older software that go beyond a simple patch, design decisions that may have made sense at the time but don't today. The only real way to go about that is how Apple does it, releasing a huge service pack that makes pretty major changes to the OS. And at th…

Toyota doesn't get to come to your house and tow your Corolla away when they think you ought to move on. You get to decide that: it's your car, and it's your choice. If Toyota feels so embarrassed by the fact that you are driving your Corolla that they want to spend some money trying to convince you to replace it, they can certainly make you a trade-in offer. But maybe you like your Corolla, or you don't feel like de…

If they offered me a 2016 Corolla in trade for a 2002 Corolla, I'd probably do it.

edit: If they had a recall/replacement on the car because it was unsafe for other drivers on the road, people would probably agree as well.

Re: Woman wins $10k judgment against Microsoft for forced Windows 10 upgrade

#293

Post by tracker1 »

profeta wrote: post #212
Someone1234 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sympathetic both ways on this one. I think Microsoft went "too far" but I also agree that we don't want another "XP situation" with Windows 7. Effectively having 20%+ of the market on a super old OS holding back the industry and less secure. Microsoft claim they're planning to avoid this in the future by no longer releasing named new OS's, and instead just update Windows 10 for "free" forever. Basically the same…

it is self serving on both ways. There's tons of ways they can make windows 7 continue to be safe. But pushing out w10 is easier/cheaper/more profitable for them.

I'm not sure that it's entirely fair to force MS to maintain N forks of Windows until the end of time.

Re: Woman wins $10k judgment against Microsoft for forced Windows 10 upgrade

#294

Post by tdkl »

chipperyman573 wrote: post #75
vblord wrote: post #72

Ugh... I missed my opportunity. I upgraded the OS on my iPhone 3G and the thing ran soooo slow after that. It was so slow that it was almost impossible to use it. I should have sued Apple!!!

Why would you sue Apple for that? They didn't force you to upgrade and you could have researched any negative effects before you upgraded.

That's BS. Advertising how awesome $vendor is with updating their own hardware but failing to note that it runs like crap, that user should do the research and isn't possible to revert, while nagging you with update notifications should result in a class action suit as well.

Re: Woman wins $10k judgment against Microsoft for forced Windows 10 upgrade

#295

Post by tdkl »

whatever_dude wrote: post #47
ak217 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, Windows 10 is a poor upgrade from Windows 7 on laptops and desktops. The interface is a buggy, half-hearted attempt to roll back the trainwreck that is Windows 8 to something resembling 7, except 7 still works better since it doesn't have to deal with all the Metro (tablet/touch interface) bits. For now I'm keeping Windows 7 with manual updates - while loathing the fact that I have to use Windows at…

Coming from Windows 7, and being completely baffled by 8.x, I feel 10 is an upgrade in most ways. A bit inconsistent in how apps draw/behave, but still an upgrade.

If I punched you in the face (Windows 8) the slapped you after (Windows 10), you'd find the slap quite an upgrade as well. It still doesn't mean it's pleasant (halfassed Settings).

Re: Woman wins $10k judgment against Microsoft for forced Windows 10 upgrade

#296

Post by sametmax »

eropple wrote: post #216
PhasmaFelis wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not an excuse. Microsoft can and has been pushing updates to 7 to enable the constant upgrade nagging. They've even been continually pushing new updates that get more and more naggy. There is nothing preventing them from including an update that makes 7's restart logic less sadistic, but they've chosen not to do that.

Can you explain to me why Microsoft should expend time and effort to encourage behavior (staying on Windows 7) that increases their costs and increases fragility in their ecosystem? I'm not sympathetic to the dark patterns they use to push people to upgrade, but I'm 100% onboard with not pushing improvements to an older operating system.

Because we paid for their OS and expect it to be supported ?

Windows 8 was out in 2013, 3 fraking years ago. Even Ubuntu, which is free, has LTS supported for 5 years.

When you pay good money for an OS you use in your business, it's damn logical you want it to last you almost a decade without having to play the upgrade game all over again.

I don't have time for that. I don't have the money for that. And I don't need that. The OS is not a product I want to think about, it's this transparent thing that I'm supposed to forget while I doing actual work.

This Windows upgrade is uneeded and unwanted.

Yet it kept comming back to disturb me in my work with stupid notifications, reminding me that one day, it may reboot my computer at the worst moment, eat all my hard drive space or make me loose hours locking my computer.

What happened ? Well, one day my windows pratition broke for some reason I can't figure out and I got a perpetual guest account. I'm not even trying to fix it. I just stay 100% of my time on my Ubuntu one, because I don't want to deal with it.

Re: Woman wins $10k judgment against Microsoft for forced Windows 10 upgrade

#297

Post by freehunter »

marssaxman wrote: post #271
freehunter wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I could keep fixing my 92 Toyota Corolla to keep it on the road, but at some point it becomes more effective to just move on. There are some things inherent in older software that go beyond a simple patch, design decisions that may have made sense at the time but don't today. The only real way to go about that is how Apple does it, releasing a huge service pack that makes pretty major changes to the OS. And at th…

Toyota doesn't get to come to your house and tow your Corolla away when they think you ought to move on. You get to decide that: it's your car, and it's your choice. If Toyota feels so embarrassed by the fact that you are driving your Corolla that they want to spend some money trying to convince you to replace it, they can certainly make you a trade-in offer. But maybe you like your Corolla, or you don't feel like de…

There's actually precedent for that in the world of cars. The GM EV1 was leased out and later 100% recalled and destroyed. Under the license agreement with GM, they did have the ability to take away your car, much for the same reason Microsoft pushes OS upgrades: their inability or unwillingness to support the platform any further. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1#Program_can...

At some point Microsoft has to make breaking changes to Windows XP. Simple service packs won't suffice. Airbags, three point seatbelts, electronic fuel injection, variable valve timing, these are all modern conveniences that people expect in a car these days. Things that are very hard to retrofit into an old car without redesigning the platform at a core level. Sure, a 2016 and a 1992 model are still Corollas but it's hard to argue that Toyota should still be selling the 1992 model retrofitted to include all of our modern needs.

The argument here is "Microsoft should still be patching Windows XP." Should Toyota keep retrofitting modern safety features into their old car?

Re: Woman wins $10k judgment against Microsoft for forced Windows 10 upgrade

#298

Post by greenshackle »

nmc wrote: post #238
greenshackle wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scrolling direction? Though I'm sure you can change that in the parameters somewhere.

Of course you can. You can also, I think, reverse trackpad scrolling on Windows. However, I dislike the fact that on MacOs they call the setting "natural scrolling" and that they enable it by default for any trackpad you hook up. Moreover, since the "Magic Mouse" is basically a mouse with a trackpad for a scrolling wheeel, they also enable reverse scrolling by default for any mouse.

Yes, you can reverse it on Windows. I should know, Windows 10 activated 'natural' scrolling on my touchpad when I upgraded. I'm really not sure why.

Re: Woman wins $10k judgment against Microsoft for forced Windows 10 upgrade

#299

Post by eropple »

sametmax wrote: post #296
eropple wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain to me why Microsoft should expend time and effort to encourage behavior (staying on Windows 7) that increases their costs and increases fragility in their ecosystem? I'm not sympathetic to the dark patterns they use to push people to upgrade, but I'm 100% onboard with not pushing improvements to an older operating system.

Because we paid for their OS and expect it to be supported ? Windows 8 was out in 2013, 3 fraking years ago. Even Ubuntu, which is free, has LTS supported for 5 years. When you pay good money for an OS you use in your business, it's damn logical you want it to last you almost a decade without having to play the upgrade game all over again. I don't have time for that. I don't have the money for that. And I don't need…

> Because we paid for their OS and expect it to be supported ?

The upgrade is free. You are being supported. You can choose not to upgrade (and I think you're wrong, but it is your choice). What I don't understand the mindset behind "no, I won't upgrade, but I want a bunch of feature-change patches without making me upgrade" (as with the assertion that the auto-restart logic could/should be changed for Windows 7, not Windows 8).

Re: Woman wins $10k judgment against Microsoft for forced Windows 10 upgrade

#300

Post by eropple »

abakker wrote: post #234
eropple wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain to me why Microsoft should expend time and effort to encourage behavior (staying on Windows 7) that increases their costs and increases fragility in their ecosystem? I'm not sympathetic to the dark patterns they use to push people to upgrade, but I'm 100% onboard with not pushing improvements to an older operating system.

What about a computer that runs a specific piece of software (say, Mach3 for CNC control) that doesn't have a win10 alternative. It only runs in windows 7 32 bit. There is no good alternative. I would prefer to make the determination that the machine will NEVER update. I just need it to remain the same until mach 3 updates or an alternative comes along.

My understanding (I don't keep old OSes around so I can't test) is that Automatic Updates settings are still honored. Is this incorrect?

Past that, is there a reason that system should be connected to the Internet in the first place?

Post reply on HN