181–190 of 212 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh my god just use wine. This is getting ridiculous!
Sadly still not compatible with all applications.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This isn't your system any more than buying a CD makes the music yours. You're renting their system. I really can't understand how people are ok with this. Now just with windows, but in general these days. Why are people ok with having things they don't really own after spending hundreds if not thousands of dollars on them. If I buy a computer, it's my computer, I don't give a fuck what operating system is on it, wh…
Do you live in a house you own? I'm sympathetic to your viewpoint, but I think rent is a society-wide problem, not just a problem with computers, and computers are far from the most acute example.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This isn't your system any more than buying a CD makes the music yours. You're renting their system. I really can't understand how people are ok with this. Now just with windows, but in general these days. Why are people ok with having things they don't really own after spending hundreds if not thousands of dollars on them. If I buy a computer, it's my computer, I don't give a fuck what operating system is on it, wh…
>I'll do whatever I want with my computer You pretty much can, I don't understand why you're upset. Windows on the other hand is not your property. Your laptop in this case is the CD, you own that. Windows is the music that you're renting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you live in a house you own? I'm sympathetic to your viewpoint, but I think rent is a society-wide problem, not just a problem with computers, and computers are far from the most acute example.
No, I'm not saying rentals, or using things you don't own is bad, I'm saying the line's being pushed too far towards non ownership of things that shouldn't be that way. Owning a house as a much much larger barrier of entry than a computer or other things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Clearly the "Your operating system? This isn't Linux, ..." assumes that Linux is yours beyond if it's free and open.
Regardless, "you're operating system" doesn't imply literal legal ownership, it implies ability to control, as in control when and what gets updated as the OP is upset about.
> it implies ability to control, as in control when and what gets updated as the OP is upset about.
Many routers run linux, the provider doesn't have to give you ability to control that OS, but in accordance with the copyright law they have to give you the code when you ask for it. So in that case you own both the device and the code but you don't necessary fully control it (unless it's flashed with OpenWrt or similar). So control and ownership are different things.
Microsoft had the dominant consumer operating system since the 1980s. Using that advantage (and not innovation and quality !) they were able to grab substantial chunks of other markets: Word processing, commercial compilers, cloud computing etc. Next up is digital assistants and advertising. What is the alternative for average consumers ? Chrome books ?
MS didn't use their OS to get word processing and compilers. There was plenty of competition in the 80s and early 90s. MS by almost every measure had the best products in those categories.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regardless, "you're operating system" doesn't imply literal legal ownership, it implies ability to control, as in control when and what gets updated as the OP is upset about.
I think in a legal sense it is yours. Heck you could even sell it, the license just requires you to provide the code if you change it. If you don't abide the license you can loose that ownership (by the legal copyright case), in a same way you could loose the ownership of your car or house in certain circumstances. > it implies ability to control, as in control when and what gets updated as the OP is upset about. Man…
A little bit irrelevant to the article: Unpopular opinion but, is opt-outtable telemetry that bad? Of course using tracked behaviors for add targeting is bad (which is why my opinion is irrelevant to the article) but using telemetry to do AB-tests, UX-tests, finding bugs, etc... what’s really bad about it? Every comment about telemetry in HN reads something like ‘Telemetry with opt-out is bad, so GitLab is bad, VSCod…
I would be okay with it if it was properly anonymized. I'm talking for instance some peer-to-peer mixing scheme, not just a privacy clause by which they swear they won't use the data to identify the particular users. There are technical solutions to privacy-conscious telemetry, but of course the non-trivial cost of implementation, and perhaps more importantly the loss of valuable data for the company means it's almos…
MS might properly anonymize it, CandyCrash as well, then antivirus company also does it properly, but when it's all combined nothing says it won't be properly de-anonymized, specially if the data is sensitive and valuable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This article is incredibly misleading and I can't believe almost everyone on HN is taking it at face value. You've clearly made assumptions to fit your conclusion without verifying the validity of the assumptions themselves. The items you list at the top are just part of the normal telemetry subsystem and have nothing to do with advertising. Windows has an separate system for advertising and it's completely isolated…
Do you mind if I paraphrase your comment and add it to the article? Thanks for checking the privacy guide, it establishes what Microsoft officially has to say about their data collection methods. And, I should have checked it before writing the article. I am cynical of any company that is trying to impede user's ability to turn privacy related settings off. They go out of their way to make it difficult. There are no…