31–40 of 149 posts
I'm fed up with these hardware vendors incessantly messing with software. Why doesn't Microsoft tighten up its OEM licensing terms to put an end to this kind of thing?
I'm fed up with these hardware vendors incessantly messing with software. Why doesn't Microsoft tighten up its OEM licensing terms to put an end to this kind of thing?
Meta: I submitted this post with the article's title but it seems the mods have changed the title to something less loaded.
If the article title makes a wrong claim, the comments and the voting mechanism will take care of that, does not seem to be the call mods should be making....
Why couldn't samsung's service just programmatically uninstall the default windows drivers and install their own? Was that too hard compared to just disabling windows update?
Most vendors I've dealt with have their drivers certified with Microsoft's WHQL program and pushed out automatically through Windows update. I'm not sure why Samsung couldn't have done it this way.
I don't understand, why is Samsung pulling stunts like this all the time? It would make sense if they were trying to get up the ladder but they are already there, they hold an unquestionably large market share of Android. Things like these won't do any good in the long run but only prompt consumers to actively avoid the brand. Some of the things that really surprises me: [1] http://gizmodo.com/samsung-rigged-the-s4-t…
I think the most simple explanation is that they can get away with it without substantial backlash.
I'm fed up with these hardware vendors incessantly messing with software. Why doesn't Microsoft tighten up its OEM licensing terms to put an end to this kind of thing?
Because the US and EU have repeatedly told Microsoft that they're not allowed to force OEMs to use their software.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yet, Microsoft is responsible for allowing such software to run in the background with no notification or authorization by the user or means to disable it.
It's really hard to find the correct middle-ground. Would you prefer if Windows worked like iOS where there are serious limitations on what apps can do in the background and where every application has to go through a central authority for vetting? Or do you propose a solution that gives both freedom to the user while also not allowing something like this to happen? Yes, there are whitelisting solutions (built into t…
I've thought about this for a while, and honestly, for desktops/notebooks/tablets? Yes. Maybe not just one App Store like iOS, but at least sandbox all possible non-os code similarly to ChromeOS, in a way that's on by default and requires a boot-time flag to disable (and users should be allowed to do this, but OEMs shouldn't.)
Recently my dad bought a new $300 toshiba laptop because his old machine was just "slow", as in he had so much spyware on his computer that it was easier to just buy a new one than going through the hassle of cleaning up his old one. Even though his old laptop was perfectly good and of a recent hardware generation.
I'm 100% positive he's going to have the same issues on his new laptop, and his response was that he uses his iPad so much that it doesn't matter anyway.
The role of the modern day OS has changed immensely over the years. Nowadays there's simply no reason for legitimate applications to have the level of access to the underlying system that they used to have. Apps really don't need arbitrary filesystem access. They don't need to be able to overwrite core system files. They should be run in a sandbox or a container with as restricted of a set of permissions as possible.
For servers and development workstations the story is a little bit different, but those are exceptions to the rule, and with the proper release hatches like boot-time enabling of un-sandboxed code it's a good tradeoff IMO.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Windows 10 isn't released yet, so there's no way that I'm aware of for it to download Windows 10 in the background.
Although the language is a bit cagey, it seems like at least parts of Windows 10 will be downloaded before the official availability date: > Between reservation and when your upgrade is ready, the files you need for the upgrade will be downloaded to your PC to make the final installation go more quickly. (from http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/windows-10-faq > What happens when I reserve?).
I think we should start focusing on a fundamental shift on what management means and how accountable that position is.
OEMs should just throw their weight behind one of the commercial Linuxes and be done with the madness. They want to compete with Apple and OSX, that's their chance.