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

Microsoft Presenter Gives Up on Edge, Installs Chrome

gizmodo.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 101 posts

Re: Microsoft Presenter Gives Up on Edge, Installs Chrome

#91

Post by WorldMaker »

vetinari wrote: post #89
WorldMaker wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My criticism was not meant to be derision. It was genuine curiosity to ask how up-to-date you have tried to be. "Privacy issues" still seems like every other comment about Windows 10 here on HN and elsewhere like Ars Technica and The Verge. It's a very repetitive refrain at this point (y'all are quite a vocal minority). It's also a criticism that I'm having an increasingly hard time understanding or sympathizing with…

Apple was able to create exactly two checkboxes in the system settings: 1. Allow telemetry 2. Allow sharing telemetry data with third-parties. There was no need to "improve privacy tools". There is simply an option to not send anything. You don't need to research "what's new in this version". One checkbox, done, forever. The result is verifiable on the firewall. I'm sure, that if Microsoft did the same, including res…

The privacy options started as one drop-down with only three choices, one of which was unavailable to choose for non-Enterprise consumers, which is nearly the same number of options as the checkboxes you reference. Some complained that wasn't enough options so now there's a half-dozen checkboxes.

The telemetry Windows 10 didn't allow you to opt-out of at launch was the same telemetry every version of Windows since Vista (including 7) have not allowed you to opt-out of (including Windows Error Reporting, which even Windows XP had a stripped down version of that). There's a bit more of it in 10, but it's not like it magically appeared overnight...

Now there's half-dozen or so checkmarks, all in one spot, with a lot of information (and links to a lot more information) on a lot of detail as to what each checkmark includes (and what is impacted by turning it off). It's overkill compared to Apple's "one checkbox", but a lot of voices shouted they wanted a lot more information and a lot more ability to pick and choose.

The same people that trust Apple to just have one checkbox and be done with it, are some of the same people that want 100-page documents with specifics from Microsoft and why we've come to this page full of checkboxes and tons of stuff to read impasse. This is part of why I'm getting cynical about privacy complaints and feel like this discussion isn't going anywhere productive.

Re: Microsoft Presenter Gives Up on Edge, Installs Chrome

#92

Post by vetinari »

WorldMaker wrote: post #91
vetinari wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple was able to create exactly two checkboxes in the system settings: 1. Allow telemetry 2. Allow sharing telemetry data with third-parties. There was no need to "improve privacy tools". There is simply an option to not send anything. You don't need to research "what's new in this version". One checkbox, done, forever. The result is verifiable on the firewall. I'm sure, that if Microsoft did the same, including res…

The privacy options started as one drop-down with only three choices, one of which was unavailable to choose for non-Enterprise consumers, which is nearly the same number of options as the checkboxes you reference. Some complained that wasn't enough options so now there's a half-dozen checkboxes. The telemetry Windows 10 didn't allow you to opt-out of at launch was the same telemetry every version of Windows since Vi…

The problem wasn't enough options (though not enough transparency still is). The problem is the one option that anyone wants and is still not available: do not send anything. Zilch. Nada. Nothing. Null. Radio silence. As if the computer wasn't even connected to the Internet. I don't believe it is a difficult concept to understand, except for those that do not want to understand. (the Enterprise version exclusive option is not that either. The "Security" level still collects and sends data).

Meanwhile, all the new options look like convoluted way to not change anything, but being able to demonstrate to regulators and PR, that something is being done. An effort for show, do not care about the result.

The reason, why Apple can do one checkbox and everyone is happy, but there is a higher standard for Microsoft is very simple: Apple has demonstrated, that they can be trusted, while Microsoft has demonstrated exact opposite. Dragging their feet doesn't exactly help. Even Canonical when they did their misstep with Amazon, had a lot to do to repair their reputation. But they honestly tried; Microsoft didn't start yet.

Re: Microsoft Presenter Gives Up on Edge, Installs Chrome

#93

Post by Sylos »

WorldMaker wrote: post #61
rk06 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At my workplace, most users are on Windows 7, and few on Win 10, and fewer (if any) are on windows 8.1 Migration to windows 10 is not going to happen until it is absolutely necessary.

Would you expect Linux users at your workplace to still be running Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic Koala)? Or to be a bit more generous, Windows 7 SP1 is closer to Ubuntu 11.04 (Natty Narwhal). Neither of which have been supported for at least half a decade. Even Windows 8.1's equivalent Ubuntu 14.10 (Utopic Unicorn) fell out of support two years ago. Though arguably that's intentionally unfair because Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr)…

Upgrades of Linux distributions typically are actually upgrades and if they're not, you'll find a not-shit upgrade path somehow, be it by switching to a different distro or to a different flavor of the same distro.

With Windows, it's very much arguable if the upgrade from 7 to 8.1 or to 10 is beneficial (or even legal for you to do, thanks to the increased surveillance) and if you dislike this upgrade path, then you can't easily switch to the next operating system, run all your same applications and continue using most of your configurations and scripts.

There's also still a monetary cost to upgrading Windows.

Re: Microsoft Presenter Gives Up on Edge, Installs Chrome

#94

Post by Sylos »

WorldMaker wrote: post #83
vetinari wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So maybe people would be more willing to migrate, if the new version respected their privacy? Unless there is no option to keep the chattiness of the system only to user-initiated connections (and keep that option on the same value after updates!), many people simply won't migrate.

Windows 10 FCU (the version released this month) continued the trend of making the privacy options as explicit as possible (and making them much more opt-in in the onboarding/setup process). Microsoft also apologized about updates resetting privacy options to defaults. YMMV, but I feel that Windows 10 is respectful about my privacy and that Microsoft has been working to address every concern people have had. Have you…

It still likely violates EU privacy laws: https://autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/en/news/dutch-dpa-micr...

If they introduce highly illegal telemetry and dial it back to slightly less illegal, then it's still illegal and yes, it very much makes sense to keep grinding that same axe from two years ago until Microsoft abides the law.

Re: Microsoft Presenter Gives Up on Edge, Installs Chrome

#95

Post by Klathmon »

vetinari wrote: post #92
WorldMaker wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The privacy options started as one drop-down with only three choices, one of which was unavailable to choose for non-Enterprise consumers, which is nearly the same number of options as the checkboxes you reference. Some complained that wasn't enough options so now there's a half-dozen checkboxes. The telemetry Windows 10 didn't allow you to opt-out of at launch was the same telemetry every version of Windows since Vi…

The problem wasn't enough options (though not enough transparency still is). The problem is the one option that anyone wants and is still not available: do not send anything. Zilch. Nada. Nothing. Null. Radio silence. As if the computer wasn't even connected to the Internet. I don't believe it is a difficult concept to understand, except for those that do not want to understand. (the Enterprise version exclusive opti…

But Apple's "one checkbox" doesn't even act like you want. It still sends quite a lot of data back to Apple for various reasons.

Re: Microsoft Presenter Gives Up on Edge, Installs Chrome

#96

Post by vetinari »

Klathmon wrote: post #95
vetinari wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem wasn't enough options (though not enough transparency still is). The problem is the one option that anyone wants and is still not available: do not send anything. Zilch. Nada. Nothing. Null. Radio silence. As if the computer wasn't even connected to the Internet. I don't believe it is a difficult concept to understand, except for those that do not want to understand. (the Enterprise version exclusive opti…

But Apple's "one checkbox" doesn't even act like you want. It still sends quite a lot of data back to Apple for various reasons.

It silences telemetry, but not the other services, I know: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14490293 (scroll to cca middle).

Still, silencing a Mac on the network is way easier than silencing a Win 10 machine. It is not only the telemetry and the visibility into which process does what, but also the control over updates and persistence of your rules. Silent updates that change or misinterpret your settings (firewall rules bound to executable version, then updating this executable and applying default rules instead of yours are definitely not my favorite experience) significantly increase the time and effort needed, compared to other systems.

Re: Microsoft Presenter Gives Up on Edge, Installs Chrome

#97

Post by earenndil »

Klathmon wrote: post #39
schlipity wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a good bit ludicrous that they are providing Edge for IOS / Android but not for previous versions of Windows. My life as a programmer would be better if I didn't have to support IE11 / Windows 7, but instead of doing that, they spent some time getting it running where no one wants it.

Edge for android and iOS use the built-in rendering engines on each platform. Edge for Android is using Blink, Edge for iOS is using Webkit. They could give you "Edge for windows 7" but it wouldn't be the same rendering engine from Edge on windows 10.

...except that they could? It would probably be simple to port the engine from win10 to win7, in a way that it wouldn't be to port it to a completely different os that is also mobile.

Re: Microsoft Presenter Gives Up on Edge, Installs Chrome

#98

Post by zamalek »

TylerH wrote: post #90
zamalek wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they are doing damn good work. I've been using it for a while. Overall, it feels significantly faster than any Chromium-based browser I've used. Chrome, Brave, etc. are simply no longer good enough. That being said, I'm considering switching to Quantum. Edge breaks the 1Password plugin[1] and Microsoft is closing the bugs "as designed" or they have lost all traction. Breaking a password manager relegates the entire…

Was Brave ever good enough? I thought it was just Brendan Eich's swan song

I used it for a very long time and loved it. It's perceptually faster/more lightweight than Chrome, I think that's a goal? The adblocker was workable, but nowhere near uBlock. It's close but noticeably slower than Edge.

Firefox on mobile is an utter trainsmash, so I use it there out of necessity (Chrome doesn't have add-ons/adblockers).

Re: Microsoft Presenter Gives Up on Edge, Installs Chrome

#99

Post by WorldMaker »

Sylos wrote: post #93
WorldMaker wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you expect Linux users at your workplace to still be running Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic Koala)? Or to be a bit more generous, Windows 7 SP1 is closer to Ubuntu 11.04 (Natty Narwhal). Neither of which have been supported for at least half a decade. Even Windows 8.1's equivalent Ubuntu 14.10 (Utopic Unicorn) fell out of support two years ago. Though arguably that's intentionally unfair because Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr)…

Upgrades of Linux distributions typically are actually upgrades and if they're not, you'll find a not-shit upgrade path somehow, be it by switching to a different distro or to a different flavor of the same distro. With Windows, it's very much arguable if the upgrade from 7 to 8.1 or to 10 is beneficial (or even legal for you to do, thanks to the increased surveillance) and if you dislike this upgrade path, then you…

I think this is a pretty apples-to-apples comparison: the timeframe in question for Ubuntu has just as many ups and downs as for Windows in terms of upgrades. It includes the Gnome 2 -> Unity -> Gnome 3 transition. The systemd transition is in there somewhere.

That kind of supports my point that if you were sticking to Ubuntu specifically you've seen a lot of change during the support lifetime of Windows 7. No IT department in their right mind would still be running a comparable Linux distribution on user desktops as old as Windows 7, and those Linux distributions have changed nearly as much as Windows 7 through to Windows 10.

Monetary cost is apples-to-oranges and irrelevant to the point I was trying to make, but: the Windows upgrade from 7 and 8.1 to 10 was made free for consumers and small businesses, and Microsoft has aligned with Apple that starting with Windows 10 upgrades are free for the support lifetime of the hardware; businesses above a certain size (the most likely ones to be conservative in their IT) have always paid for the latest version of Windows with their software assurance agreements, regardless if they deploy/upgrade to it.

Similarly alternative distributions are great, it's nice to have alternatives, but are also irrelevant to my point. Certainly in the Windows 7 support lifetime maybe you moved Ubuntu to Mint because you thought Unity was a mistake and maybe by now you are considering moving back to Ubuntu now that it is switching back to Gnome. The point is that you've still done many more distribution upgrades than Windows upgrades in the same timeframe and don't question it. (For the most part you'd still want the latest kernel and applications support, you mostly aren't just leaving machines be and not upgrading them.)

Not having more options in Windows upgrade direction is a fair complaint, but the point was that Microsoft in return granted one of the longest security support lifetimes of any desktop or mobile operating system out there.

I think it is useful to have that perspective on that, regardless of what you think about Windows or Microsoft. Whether or not Windows is moving the direction you want it to, the fact that so many people have the option to rest on their laurels for three more years before the next major scramble to a supported Windows version for their desktops (I'm ignoring servers and embedded appliances, this thread has always been about desktops), is largely unprecedented outside of Windows, and the refusal by some major corporations to keep Windows up-to-date would be laughed at if they were running Ubuntu or macOS.

Post reply on HN