4 ms·

Agreed. Windows 7 is still a current Microsoft product and I don't think Microsoft is expecting the bulk of enterprises to move until 2020, if not later. And s

by scholia 11y ago

Agreed. Windows 7 is still a current Microsoft product and I don't think Microsoft is expecting the bulk of enterprises to move until 2020, if not later. And since Windows 10 is to a large extent a move into remote PC management, Microsoft obviously wants to manage them with as much info as possible. Telemetry is the quid pro quo for free upgrades for the life of the device. The handful of geeks (somewhat less than a billion users) who are capable of managing their own systems obviously don't like this. However... > the negative initial reaction they've been receiving in recent weeks Public interest has been phenomenal, the reviews have been overwhelmingly positive, and most people seem to be very happy with it.

Silhouette 11y ago
Telemetry is the quid pro quo for free upgrades for the life of the device. This is where I start to challenge what Microsoft should (as a matter of law and/or regulation) be allowed to get away with. As I've stated in other posts in this discussion, I think there is a reasonable expectation of support for a significant period for this kind of software product given that the only reason those updates are actually necessary is that the original product someone paid for was defective. We don't know how to write perfect software yet, but I don't think software companies should be allowed to ship defective software and then change the deal retrospectively in exchange for putting right what was their own mistake in the first place. Public interest has been phenomenal, the reviews have been overwhelmingly positive, and most people seem to be very happy with it. I wouldn't know. Among people I actually know personally in real life, whether professionally or friends and family, geeky or not, I'm aware of literally no-one who has actually installed Windows 10 other than for testing purposes. On the other hand, I do know plenty of people, again both professionally and personally and both geeks and not, who seem quite convinced that they don't want it for now in light of things like forced updates, privacy concerns, hesitation after being disappointed by the Windows 8 touch-biased UI, hearing about paying to hide ads just to play a game, and other negative aspects. Moreover, so far no-one I've talked to seems to have found any good, concrete reason to upgrade, other than the not-really reasons like "it's free" and "it's the new version". The occasional gamer mentions DirectX 12 and the occasional web developer mentions Edge as something they might need to test with, but the general reaction seems to be a resounding "meh" in the circles I move in. YMMV, of course. I'm also curious about where these positive reviews are, because the Internet I've been reading for the last few weeks has been one disaster story after another as far as Windows 10 coverage is concerned. In light of my previous point, I assume the Internet all those other people have been reading has looked similar. But again, YMMV.
- scholia 11y ago
  I don't understand your opening para. Either way, I don't think defective software has anything to do with it. Microsoft keeps writing new versions for all sorts of reasons that have nothing to do with defects. Some are to add useful functionality, or ease of use, or to keep up with a changing world. Some are essentially changes in fashion. A quick google.... Windows 10 review: Why the new Start menu, Edge browser, new apps and Cortana make Windows 10 the best Windows yet http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/review/operating-systems-software/windows-10-review-best-3574736/ http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/review/operating-systems-software... Windows 10 review: The OS upgrade we've all been waiting for http://www.pocket-lint.com/review/134797-windows-10-review-the-os-upgrade-we-ve-all-been-waiting-for http://www.pocket-lint.com/review/134797-windows-10-review-t... Windows 10 review http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/software/operating-systems/windows-10-1267364/review http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/software/operating-s... Microsoft Windows 10 review 5 stars http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/software/operating-systems/1403703/microsoft-windows-10-review http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/software/operating-systems/14... Are you a Windows 8 user? Still using Windows 7? Either way, you'll love Windows 10. http://money.cnn.com/2015/02/22/technology/windows-10-review/ http://money.cnn.com/2015/02/22/technology/windows-10-review...
  - Silhouette 11y ago
    I don't understand your opening para. Either way, I don't think defective software has anything to do with it. That seems where we disagree. With other kinds of product I buy, at least in my country, there are consumer protection laws about the being of sufficient quality and fit for their intended purpose. If a product doesn't live up to those standards, I am entitled by law to have the situation put right or compensated one way or another, for example through repair, replacement, or ultimately a refund of some or all of the money I paid to buy the product. If a product is so bad that it causes other harm as well then in some cases I would also have grounds for further compensation. (The situation is also somewhat different when selling to businesses vs. private individual in my country, so I'm oversimplifying here.) With software, developers have historically been given a lot of slack, in part because none of us know how to write bug-free programs so expecting everyone to achieve that standard before being able to sell anything is unhelpful. However, the same basic legal principles do still apply, and they have sometimes been used in practice. Part of the reason that big software developers like Microsoft don't fall foul of those rules more often and wind up paying back a lot more in refunds and/or other compensation is that they do make reasonable efforts to fix defects in their software for a reasonable time after purchase. My point is that providing a reasonable degree of support is not really optional for them and they are not really being generous in providing it. If they stopped doing so, and their customers then started suffering real damage because of bugs or vulnerabilities in Windows, then Microsoft would risk being sued until either they fixed the problems or their business failed. This has absolutely nothing to do with any other kind of update. Microsoft has, to my knowledge, no obligation after a customer has already purchased their copy of Windows to provide ongoing development of new features, drivers for other vendors' hardware, or their UI. They might choose to do that, and they might choose to offer those things to customers in return for money, data, or any other agreed form of compensation. But whether or not they do that, it doesn't change the basic obligation they do have to provide a decent product if they're charging real money for it, and to make reasonable efforts to fix defects or compensate for them if their original product is flawed. The customer is entitled to get what they paid for, not a broken version of what they paid for, and not a version where a defect was fixed but some other unwanted change was also made so it's still not what the customer was originally supposed to be buying. A quick google.... I'm not sure how much credibility I'd give reviews from that kind of source. Of course they look favourable, because they seem to make little effort to be at all critical of anything and almost completely gloss over the widely reported problems and backward steps in favour of... ooooh, shiny! For example, several of them highlight robustness as a big point in favour of Windows 10. Given the huge amount of negative comments from people who were in the beta/preview programme and the multiple, widespread, system-breaking forced updates that have already been pushed out within just a few days of launch, I don't see how any unbiased review could possibly conclude that stability is a strong point for Windows 10 so far, and I see no basis for the blind faith several reviewers seem to have that Microsoft will fix the fundamental risk of bad updates bricking boxes. Few of the reviews make a big deal of removed features like Media Center, or hardware incompatibilities with older devices, which are the kinds of issues that won't trouble the majority of users but will be very bad for those who are affected. I don't see much mention there of clunky search tools or the confusing division of what used to be in the control panel into multiple areas. None of the reviews that I looked at even mentioned things like privacy concerns, or spamming ads at you unless you pay subscription money to turn them off, or the WiFi Sense security concerns. Try Googling a few other relevant terms, like say "Windows 10 laptop reboot loop" or "Windows 10 WiFi Sense security" or "Windows 10 search", and see how overwhelmingly positive the commentary looks then.

by scholia 11y ago

Silhouette 11y ago

Telemetry is the quid pro quo for free upgrades for the life of the device. This is where I start to challenge what Microsoft should (as a matter of law and/or regulation) be allowed to get away with. As I've stated in other posts in this discussion, I think there is a reasonable expectation of support for a significant period for this kind of software product given that the only reason those updates are actually necessary is that the original product someone paid for was defective. We don't know how to write perfect software yet, but I don't think software companies should be allowed to ship defective software and then change the deal retrospectively in exchange for putting right what was their own mistake in the first place. Public interest has been phenomenal, the reviews have been overwhelmingly positive, and most people seem to be very happy with it. I wouldn't know. Among people I actually know personally in real life, whether professionally or friends and family, geeky or not, I'm aware of literally no-one who has actually installed Windows 10 other than for testing purposes. On the other hand, I do know plenty of people, again both professionally and personally and both geeks and not, who seem quite convinced that they don't want it for now in light of things like forced updates, privacy concerns, hesitation after being disappointed by the Windows 8 touch-biased UI, hearing about paying to hide ads just to play a game, and other negative aspects. Moreover, so far no-one I've talked to seems to have found any good, concrete reason to upgrade, other than the not-really reasons like "it's free" and "it's the new version". The occasional gamer mentions DirectX 12 and the occasional web developer mentions Edge as something they might need to test with, but the general reaction seems to be a resounding "meh" in the circles I move in. YMMV, of course. I'm also curious about where these positive reviews are, because the Internet I've been reading for the last few weeks has been one disaster story after another as far as Windows 10 coverage is concerned. In light of my previous point, I assume the Internet all those other people have been reading has looked similar. But again, YMMV.

scholia 11y ago
I don't understand your opening para. Either way, I don't think defective software has anything to do with it. Microsoft keeps writing new versions for all sorts of reasons that have nothing to do with defects. Some are to add useful functionality, or ease of use, or to keep up with a changing world. Some are essentially changes in fashion. A quick google.... Windows 10 review: Why the new Start menu, Edge browser, new apps and Cortana make Windows 10 the best Windows yet http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/review/operating-systems-software/windows-10-review-best-3574736/ http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/review/operating-systems-software... Windows 10 review: The OS upgrade we've all been waiting for http://www.pocket-lint.com/review/134797-windows-10-review-the-os-upgrade-we-ve-all-been-waiting-for http://www.pocket-lint.com/review/134797-windows-10-review-t... Windows 10 review http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/software/operating-systems/windows-10-1267364/review http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/software/operating-s... Microsoft Windows 10 review 5 stars http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/software/operating-systems/1403703/microsoft-windows-10-review http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/software/operating-systems/14... Are you a Windows 8 user? Still using Windows 7? Either way, you'll love Windows 10. http://money.cnn.com/2015/02/22/technology/windows-10-review/ http://money.cnn.com/2015/02/22/technology/windows-10-review...
- Silhouette 11y ago
  I don't understand your opening para. Either way, I don't think defective software has anything to do with it. That seems where we disagree. With other kinds of product I buy, at least in my country, there are consumer protection laws about the being of sufficient quality and fit for their intended purpose. If a product doesn't live up to those standards, I am entitled by law to have the situation put right or compensated one way or another, for example through repair, replacement, or ultimately a refund of some or all of the money I paid to buy the product. If a product is so bad that it causes other harm as well then in some cases I would also have grounds for further compensation. (The situation is also somewhat different when selling to businesses vs. private individual in my country, so I'm oversimplifying here.) With software, developers have historically been given a lot of slack, in part because none of us know how to write bug-free programs so expecting everyone to achieve that standard before being able to sell anything is unhelpful. However, the same basic legal principles do still apply, and they have sometimes been used in practice. Part of the reason that big software developers like Microsoft don't fall foul of those rules more often and wind up paying back a lot more in refunds and/or other compensation is that they do make reasonable efforts to fix defects in their software for a reasonable time after purchase. My point is that providing a reasonable degree of support is not really optional for them and they are not really being generous in providing it. If they stopped doing so, and their customers then started suffering real damage because of bugs or vulnerabilities in Windows, then Microsoft would risk being sued until either they fixed the problems or their business failed. This has absolutely nothing to do with any other kind of update. Microsoft has, to my knowledge, no obligation after a customer has already purchased their copy of Windows to provide ongoing development of new features, drivers for other vendors' hardware, or their UI. They might choose to do that, and they might choose to offer those things to customers in return for money, data, or any other agreed form of compensation. But whether or not they do that, it doesn't change the basic obligation they do have to provide a decent product if they're charging real money for it, and to make reasonable efforts to fix defects or compensate for them if their original product is flawed. The customer is entitled to get what they paid for, not a broken version of what they paid for, and not a version where a defect was fixed but some other unwanted change was also made so it's still not what the customer was originally supposed to be buying. A quick google.... I'm not sure how much credibility I'd give reviews from that kind of source. Of course they look favourable, because they seem to make little effort to be at all critical of anything and almost completely gloss over the widely reported problems and backward steps in favour of... ooooh, shiny! For example, several of them highlight robustness as a big point in favour of Windows 10. Given the huge amount of negative comments from people who were in the beta/preview programme and the multiple, widespread, system-breaking forced updates that have already been pushed out within just a few days of launch, I don't see how any unbiased review could possibly conclude that stability is a strong point for Windows 10 so far, and I see no basis for the blind faith several reviewers seem to have that Microsoft will fix the fundamental risk of bad updates bricking boxes. Few of the reviews make a big deal of removed features like Media Center, or hardware incompatibilities with older devices, which are the kinds of issues that won't trouble the majority of users but will be very bad for those who are affected. I don't see much mention there of clunky search tools or the confusing division of what used to be in the control panel into multiple areas. None of the reviews that I looked at even mentioned things like privacy concerns, or spamming ads at you unless you pay subscription money to turn them off, or the WiFi Sense security concerns. Try Googling a few other relevant terms, like say "Windows 10 laptop reboot loop" or "Windows 10 WiFi Sense security" or "Windows 10 search", and see how overwhelmingly positive the commentary looks then.