3 ms·
> Now you've banned solitaire, paint, file explorer, media player, photo viewer, pdf viewer, disk defragger, etc. etc. Good?, I would like to see a bare bones
by adriancr 5y ago
> Now you've banned solitaire, paint, file explorer, media player, photo viewer, pdf viewer, disk defragger, etc. etc.
Good?, I would like to see a bare bones windows version that I can just use for games that work only on windows. Right now all I see is added bloat/spyware with no way to disable it as such I'm not using it.
If other people want the 'complete' version - just buy the complete version.
That's personal preference, I don't see something wrong with your slippery slope.
Still, the main argument is Microsoft using their market dominance/operating system control to destroy alternatives which is the case here and was the case with internet explorer and office. It's nice to have operating system provide custom APIs just for your applications while closing competitors out.
- nodamage 5y agoSorry but shipping a crippled operating system at the expense of 99% of users that don't want to dig around and install two dozen utilities to make their computer usable is not good. If you want to argue that anything pre-installed should be removable, that's fine, I agree with that. But arguing that an operating system shouldn't be allowed to pre-bundle basic utilities to play videos, view photos, and unzip files is completely absurd.
- Nevermark 5y agoIf they can ship bare operating systems and bundled versions, as the purchaser requests, it would be useful to many people and for many use cases. I would be more interested in a bare bones Windows personally/professionally. Whether it created a wider market for the basic apps I don't know. But it wouldn't hurt it. I don't know where the line should be drawn, but giving purchasers the choice seems like a good principle to apply wherever it is drawn.