3 ms·

>Microsoft have a reputation for being a pushy company that doesn't take no for an answer Exactly, this Recall feature exists in the context of all the user-ho

>Microsoft have a reputation for being a pushy company that doesn't take no for an answer Exactly, this Recall feature exists in the context of all the user-hostile crap Microsoft has been pushing for the past decade or so. Those design decisions are a direct reflection of Microsoft's values and culture. Even if Recall itself is indeed perfectly fine, I wouldn't use it because the service operator is demonstrably disrespectful of their users' agency.

petterroea 2y ago
With Microsoft promising to fix their shit and promising no bad user patterns in only some cases where there has been enough backlash, it's an even worse situation than being outright bad. It makes them more unpredictable. I bet it would also ensnare more well-wishing sysadmins and non-tech consumers who take singular instances of apologizing/fixing at face value.
schmorptron 2y ago
That's been something I don't get. Someone at Microsoft must be aware that they've completely killed user excitement for new features over the last 10 or so years by pushing them relentlessly, the features mostly not being strictly a good deal for the users and them being hard to disable and even coming back after you've explicitly denied consent. Surely that isn't good for MS in the long term? Having a userbase that likes using your product must be better for business than a userbase that has been taught to be wary of anything you do, and to dismiss anything you come out with based on previous "features". Is it the typical hacker news theory of management looking for short term user number growth to get promoted, or something else entirely? When apple releases features, most of their userbase is excited. They have learned that in most cases it's either something cool they can use straight away or an optional service that they might or might not need. Apple still does some annoyances to push their services, but not nearly as bad as MS.
- skydhash 2y ago
  Operating systems are supposed to be boring, very much like databases or virtualization software. Improvements are nice and welcomed, but changes for the sake of changes are likely to upset people. Microsoft is free to create new software for their OS, but they shouldn't make them a dependency of said OS.

petterroea 2y ago

With Microsoft promising to fix their shit and promising no bad user patterns in only some cases where there has been enough backlash, it's an even worse situation than being outright bad. It makes them more unpredictable. I bet it would also ensnare more well-wishing sysadmins and non-tech consumers who take singular instances of apologizing/fixing at face value.

schmorptron 2y ago

That's been something I don't get. Someone at Microsoft must be aware that they've completely killed user excitement for new features over the last 10 or so years by pushing them relentlessly, the features mostly not being strictly a good deal for the users and them being hard to disable and even coming back after you've explicitly denied consent. Surely that isn't good for MS in the long term? Having a userbase that likes using your product must be better for business than a userbase that has been taught to be wary of anything you do, and to dismiss anything you come out with based on previous "features". Is it the typical hacker news theory of management looking for short term user number growth to get promoted, or something else entirely? When apple releases features, most of their userbase is excited. They have learned that in most cases it's either something cool they can use straight away or an optional service that they might or might not need. Apple still does some annoyances to push their services, but not nearly as bad as MS.

skydhash 2y ago
Operating systems are supposed to be boring, very much like databases or virtualization software. Improvements are nice and welcomed, but changes for the sake of changes are likely to upset people. Microsoft is free to create new software for their OS, but they shouldn't make them a dependency of said OS.