9 ms·

Should have just branded it Windows 7 SP2. But I guess everyone expects MS to support multiple branches of code forever. These discussions always avoid talking

Should have just branded it Windows 7 SP2. But I guess everyone expects MS to support multiple branches of code forever. These discussions always avoid talking about the merits of data-driven design and always assume malicious intent.

0xmohit 10y ago
Not sure what else has changed, but the changes in personalization (including Cortana) and telemetry changes warrant that it be called a new version. With LinkedIn in it's arsenal, Microsoft now wants to surpass Google in the amount of user information that can be collected.
sjm-lbm 10y ago
If I buy a computer and/or pay Microsoft money, I think it's reasonable for me to expect my computer to do what I'd like it to do (and only what I'd like it to do). The problem isn't data-driven design, it's how the data is being collected. I'd be annoyed if my home builder occasionally came through my house while I was gone in an attempt to analyze how I was arranging furniture and using my space. They could, undoubtedly, use that data to better their future work - but I'd still feel violated.
- Grishnakh 10y ago
  >I'd be annoyed if my home builder occasionally came through my house while I was gone in an attempt to analyze how I was arranging furniture and using my space. They could, undoubtedly, use that data to better their future work - but I'd still feel violated. Too bad. If you sign a contract with your builder allowing him to do this, or you sign a contract allowing him to change your agreement and force new terms on you whenever he wants, then you brought this on yourself. Worse yet, if you willingly buy from a builder who is infamous for a decades-long history of horrible customer service and shoddy house designs and construction, I have zero sympathy for you. Customers have a responsibility to research their purchases beforehand, and avoid patronizing vendors with poor reputations.
  - syshum 10y ago
    While true, this also gets into the ethical, moral and legal obligation a company has when for all practical purposes they have a monopoly on a market segment. This type of action is what got MS is legal trouble in the EU and US in the 90's
    - Grishnakh 10y ago
      >While true, this also gets into the ethical, moral and legal obligation a company has when for all practical purposes they have a monopoly on a market segment. First off, companies do not have ethical or moral obligations at all. Corporations are purely amoral. It's up to customers to penalize them for unethical or immoral actions by refusing to support them. If the customers refuse to stop throwing money at them, it's the customers that are to blame. Secondly, MS does not have a monopoly, except for having an OS that runs software designed to run on Windows, just like Apple has a monopoly for the market of "OSes that run software designed to run on iOS or OSX". Lots of people run Macs rather than Windows-based PCs, and some run Linux. If you're not happy with Windows, it's your job to look for alternatives, just like if you're not happy driving a Chevy, it's your job to look at Hondas and Subarus instead of whining that Chevy isn't living up to your expectations. MS didn't have any legal trouble in the US, ever. They "lost" an antitrust trial in the 90s and the penalty was absolutely nothing, and that trial was all about their OS forcing the bundling of their browser. Their OS still forces the bundling of their browser, except these days, only clueless morons actually use IE/Edge, and everyone else uses either Firefox or Chrome or some variant (while some use Safari). In fact, last I heard, Chrome had the largest marketshare of all browsers. The lesson here is that if you're hoping for the government to step in and save you, you're hopelessly naïve, as proven by history. The US government in particular is never, ever going to do anything to rein in MS, and really, why should they at this point? As I pointed out above, if you don't like Windows, there are viable alternatives now (the alternatives were much worse in the late 90s, now they're actually much better). If your 3rd-party software vendor doesn't support non-Windows platforms, then maybe you should find a better one.
      - syshum 10y ago
- ghostly_s 10y ago
  I don't understand why you think you're entitled to that expectation. If you don't like what Windows does, buy an OS from someone else.
  - sjm-lbm 10y ago
    I'm not saying that I'm entitled to an exception (and do use desktop Linux and macOS in any situation that allows me such a choice, gaming and Office usage being my primary barriers - and I'll leave aside whatever Apple may be doing with my usage statistics there, which probabally isn't great). Rather, the comment that I'm replying to infers that there is nothing wrong with what Microsoft is doing because they are using all of this data for some sort of Good Reason, and I personally think that their methods of data collection are shady enough to make whatever good they may be doing with that data irrelevant.
  - ashark 10y ago
    My guess is you disagree with the notion that it's a legitimate role of government to set and enforce standards for various market products. That's fine, but if you truly don't understand why someone might hold that position (distinct from agreeing with it) then frankly the kind of reading you need to do to gain that understanding isn't likely to materialize in response to barbed comments on Internet message boards.
jameskilton 10y ago
I would argue that no, it's not an assumption of malicious intent, it's an assumption that Microsoft will not keep this data private and contained. It will leak, either to governments (which Microsoft has time and time again helped without a question of whether they should) or to other non-scrupulous actors.
tunap 10y ago
You should write a blog about the merits and submit it to HN, throw-away-account guy.
creshal 10y ago
> But I guess everyone expects MS to support multiple branches of code forever. No, I only expect Microsoft to support their software for exactly as long as they promised to when releasing said software. They can't just cheat themselves out of support contracts like that.
anExcitedBeast 10y ago
Everyone understands the merits of data-driven design. There is heaps of merit. No point to further discussion. Everyone does NOT agree on the ethics of force-feeding this model on non-technical users without meaningful and informed consent. Toss in lack of transparent or comprehensive opt-out and misleading adoption strategy and you have a real problem. Microsoft's market share in consumer computing is still massive and what they decide to do matters. It is worth talking about.
dingaling 10y ago
> But I guess everyone expects MS to support multiple branches of code forever. No, just until January 2020 ( Win 7 ) and 2023 ( Win 8 ) as per the published lifetime.
WireWrap 10y ago
> These discussions always avoid talking about the merits of data-driven design and always assume malicious intent. Perhaps because most of the time the implementations do some harm, the doing of that harm is by design, there are ulterior motives, it is forced upon users, and the representations made to users are intentionally vague and misleading. A simple litmus test: Is telemetry opt-in?

0xmohit 10y ago

Not sure what else has changed, but the changes in personalization (including Cortana) and telemetry changes warrant that it be called a new version. With LinkedIn in it's arsenal, Microsoft now wants to surpass Google in the amount of user information that can be collected.

sjm-lbm 10y ago

If I buy a computer and/or pay Microsoft money, I think it's reasonable for me to expect my computer to do what I'd like it to do (and only what I'd like it to do). The problem isn't data-driven design, it's how the data is being collected. I'd be annoyed if my home builder occasionally came through my house while I was gone in an attempt to analyze how I was arranging furniture and using my space. They could, undoubtedly, use that data to better their future work - but I'd still feel violated.

Grishnakh 10y ago
>I'd be annoyed if my home builder occasionally came through my house while I was gone in an attempt to analyze how I was arranging furniture and using my space. They could, undoubtedly, use that data to better their future work - but I'd still feel violated. Too bad. If you sign a contract with your builder allowing him to do this, or you sign a contract allowing him to change your agreement and force new terms on you whenever he wants, then you brought this on yourself. Worse yet, if you willingly buy from a builder who is infamous for a decades-long history of horrible customer service and shoddy house designs and construction, I have zero sympathy for you. Customers have a responsibility to research their purchases beforehand, and avoid patronizing vendors with poor reputations.
- syshum 10y ago
  While true, this also gets into the ethical, moral and legal obligation a company has when for all practical purposes they have a monopoly on a market segment. This type of action is what got MS is legal trouble in the EU and US in the 90's
  - Grishnakh 10y ago
    >While true, this also gets into the ethical, moral and legal obligation a company has when for all practical purposes they have a monopoly on a market segment. First off, companies do not have ethical or moral obligations at all. Corporations are purely amoral. It's up to customers to penalize them for unethical or immoral actions by refusing to support them. If the customers refuse to stop throwing money at them, it's the customers that are to blame. Secondly, MS does not have a monopoly, except for having an OS that runs software designed to run on Windows, just like Apple has a monopoly for the market of "OSes that run software designed to run on iOS or OSX". Lots of people run Macs rather than Windows-based PCs, and some run Linux. If you're not happy with Windows, it's your job to look for alternatives, just like if you're not happy driving a Chevy, it's your job to look at Hondas and Subarus instead of whining that Chevy isn't living up to your expectations. MS didn't have any legal trouble in the US, ever. They "lost" an antitrust trial in the 90s and the penalty was absolutely nothing, and that trial was all about their OS forcing the bundling of their browser. Their OS still forces the bundling of their browser, except these days, only clueless morons actually use IE/Edge, and everyone else uses either Firefox or Chrome or some variant (while some use Safari). In fact, last I heard, Chrome had the largest marketshare of all browsers. The lesson here is that if you're hoping for the government to step in and save you, you're hopelessly naïve, as proven by history. The US government in particular is never, ever going to do anything to rein in MS, and really, why should they at this point? As I pointed out above, if you don't like Windows, there are viable alternatives now (the alternatives were much worse in the late 90s, now they're actually much better). If your 3rd-party software vendor doesn't support non-Windows platforms, then maybe you should find a better one.
    - syshum 10y ago
ghostly_s 10y ago
I don't understand why you think you're entitled to that expectation. If you don't like what Windows does, buy an OS from someone else.
- sjm-lbm 10y ago
  I'm not saying that I'm entitled to an exception (and do use desktop Linux and macOS in any situation that allows me such a choice, gaming and Office usage being my primary barriers - and I'll leave aside whatever Apple may be doing with my usage statistics there, which probabally isn't great). Rather, the comment that I'm replying to infers that there is nothing wrong with what Microsoft is doing because they are using all of this data for some sort of Good Reason, and I personally think that their methods of data collection are shady enough to make whatever good they may be doing with that data irrelevant.
- ashark 10y ago
  My guess is you disagree with the notion that it's a legitimate role of government to set and enforce standards for various market products. That's fine, but if you truly don't understand why someone might hold that position (distinct from agreeing with it) then frankly the kind of reading you need to do to gain that understanding isn't likely to materialize in response to barbed comments on Internet message boards.

jameskilton 10y ago

I would argue that no, it's not an assumption of malicious intent, it's an assumption that Microsoft will not keep this data private and contained. It will leak, either to governments (which Microsoft has time and time again helped without a question of whether they should) or to other non-scrupulous actors.

tunap 10y ago

You should write a blog about the merits and submit it to HN, throw-away-account guy.

creshal 10y ago

> But I guess everyone expects MS to support multiple branches of code forever. No, I only expect Microsoft to support their software for exactly as long as they promised to when releasing said software. They can't just cheat themselves out of support contracts like that.

anExcitedBeast 10y ago

Everyone understands the merits of data-driven design. There is heaps of merit. No point to further discussion. Everyone does NOT agree on the ethics of force-feeding this model on non-technical users without meaningful and informed consent. Toss in lack of transparent or comprehensive opt-out and misleading adoption strategy and you have a real problem. Microsoft's market share in consumer computing is still massive and what they decide to do matters. It is worth talking about.

dingaling 10y ago

> But I guess everyone expects MS to support multiple branches of code forever. No, just until January 2020 ( Win 7 ) and 2023 ( Win 8 ) as per the published lifetime.

WireWrap 10y ago

> These discussions always avoid talking about the merits of data-driven design and always assume malicious intent. Perhaps because most of the time the implementations do some harm, the doing of that harm is by design, there are ulterior motives, it is forced upon users, and the representations made to users are intentionally vague and misleading. A simple litmus test: Is telemetry opt-in?