Next-Gen CPUs Will Likely Require Windows 10
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
Windows 10 is basically a BIG BROTHER PROGRAM. Free distribution to those owning the last 2 OS versions? They're giving away software that would normally cost $99-199 for free! What kind of "business" does that? The kind with a scheme!
The software collects data on users and constantly connects online, much like 8 did/does. Websites browsed, filed downloaded, programs installed, etc. The collected data is used to put in-software advertisements directly on the panels that the user views on their computer. Again, this was a pilot thing done on Win8 first. However with Win8 it was on that panels window that a lot of users worked around and didn't use too much (MS didn't like that and it was a failed first round at user control). That dashboard system plays with the user, manipulates their way of thinking.
Forget a tinfoil hat. We all need to wrap our PCs with 3 rolls of tinfoil and then dump them in a lake for safe keeping. This is the only way to prevent the M$ control scheme!
The software collects data on users and constantly connects online, much like 8 did/does. Websites browsed, filed downloaded, programs installed, etc. The collected data is used to put in-software advertisements directly on the panels that the user views on their computer. Again, this was a pilot thing done on Win8 first. However with Win8 it was on that panels window that a lot of users worked around and didn't use too much (MS didn't like that and it was a failed first round at user control). That dashboard system plays with the user, manipulates their way of thinking.
Forget a tinfoil hat. We all need to wrap our PCs with 3 rolls of tinfoil and then dump them in a lake for safe keeping. This is the only way to prevent the M$ control scheme!
I feel a need to take a second to contemplate the sheer ridiculousness that the chief competitor of Windows 10 is... an earlier version of Windows.
Just... let that sink in for a moment.
Hmm.
These things will happen. I've had trouble finding a router that was compatible with Windows 7, early on. I've also had more than one friend tearing their hair out about getting things like scanners to work with their latest OS. Many hardware manufacturers seem to drag their feet on making their products agree with the newest and latest.
Eventually, I don't doubt that it will be hard to find hardware that works without Windows 10; given Microsoft's alleged "this is our last OS" stance, it will be interesting to see what comes after that. (I'm suspecting some sort of subscription, which is part of the reason I'm dragging my feet like anything on moving to Windows 10.)
But I think that "eventually" is quite a ways off. And it's a better reason to perform a hardware upgrade that makes one's computer future-shock-proof for five years or so than it is to move to Windows 10.
Just... let that sink in for a moment.
Hmm.
These things will happen. I've had trouble finding a router that was compatible with Windows 7, early on. I've also had more than one friend tearing their hair out about getting things like scanners to work with their latest OS. Many hardware manufacturers seem to drag their feet on making their products agree with the newest and latest.
Eventually, I don't doubt that it will be hard to find hardware that works without Windows 10; given Microsoft's alleged "this is our last OS" stance, it will be interesting to see what comes after that. (I'm suspecting some sort of subscription, which is part of the reason I'm dragging my feet like anything on moving to Windows 10.)
But I think that "eventually" is quite a ways off. And it's a better reason to perform a hardware upgrade that makes one's computer future-shock-proof for five years or so than it is to move to Windows 10.
I agree for the most part, any sensible computer user would be able to "avoid" this feature if they so wished; the biggest problem with Wi-Fi Sense by far is not from the point of view of the Network's owner giving out access. Its that anyone ELSE who connects to the network (with your permission, obviously, since you need to give them the password) may unwittingly broadcast your WiFi password to all their contacts. I don't know about you, but I generally don't want my friend's "friends" to have access to my network without my knowledge. Additionally, MS talk about how the passwords are "secure" and the recipients of WiFi Sense access cannot see the password, nor access any internal network stuff through it only the Internet, but all of these features are at the OS level, which means its on the User's machine, which means it can be hacked. Trivially. So, in reality, as soon as you give your Wifi password to a friend, and they accidentally upload it to MS's server, you've lost control over your network. The best bit? They have a "solution", which is to RENAME YOUR NETWORK so it has "_optout" on the end! So, let me get this straight MS, if I want to retain control over my own network despite your half-baked features, _I_ have to change _my_ network configuration? Makes sense.BeerTent said:
On a side note, why people find it so hard to just type in a password is truly beyond me - WPS and WiFi Sense are both systems designed to obliviate the need to enter a password, and I really just don't see that typing a password is a problem. In both cases they raise serious problems of their own, WPS being thats its security is fatally flawed and the WiFi sense being control issues mentioned above, all to solve a non-problem. That's progress for ya!
Ugh, they're like a clingy ex. There's a reason I keep dismissing the "Upgrade" to Windows 10 notifications, please stop asking me.
...That goes for you to Kaspersky, take a hint. I'm with Mr. Norton now, because he doesn't make my computer run like ass.
...That goes for you to Kaspersky, take a hint. I'm with Mr. Norton now, because he doesn't make my computer run like ass.
That doesn't stop surveillance, it just means you might catch it.Naldan said:
And yeah, I know of many ways in which you can attempt to hide your trail and catch the government attempting to pry into what you're doing. But my understanding is also that you can lump every measure imaginable on top of itself and you're still at some risk the instant you start connecting to any Internet or cellular network. Even the people behind Tor and many VPNs ultimately have to admit to their limitations, particularly with regards to target surveillance.
At best, you can make it difficult enough that the government will just move on and take out whoever is providing you a service (provided they care to begin with). Total and guaranteed anonymity on the Internet is a lie, and anyone claiming otherwise attempting to sell you something.
If memory serves, that was just a potential privacy concern. People were more concerned about what could be done, not what it was doing.
And besides, most of what I've been talking about regarding Microsoft's stance has been within the last year, after the Kinect 2.0 ordeal.
I can understand suspicion, but I also don't see a lot of reason to believe Microsoft's current stance is some multi-million dollar fa?ade that would already have a strong, recent precedence for crashing down on them.
Honestly, I doubt anyone is manually sifting through what we do. With the technology we have today, we can predict search queries, recognize speech patterns, recognize writing patterns, recognize faces and (to a lesser extent) expression, parse files, identify songs, identify information in a receipt, and fix a developer's code (though not perfectly). We're also getting to the point where speech software picking up context, AI giving smart responses that they learn, and plenty of other almost sci-fi-level stuff could happen in the near future. And except for writing the code, most of this is done through automation, not someone sitting at their computer trying to do all of it manually.
So I doubt anyone is watching porn alongside anyone. Chances are, no person there knows you exist or even knows what you do. There's just simply not enough resources to monitor hundreds of millions to billions of people. They no doubt automate everything, and you likely aren't going to be personally identified until that automation raises a flag.
There's a lot of reasons for Microsoft to want to move to a single OS that remains relatively at the same update version for everyone. Rather than investing resources in Windows 7, 8.1, and 10, they can focus on just one. This would also minimize the variations they have to deal with, which creates fewer risks of an update breaking everything for someone. Also, the more people that update now the less likely Microsoft will run into another XP-level headache in 2020. On top of that, Windows is converging into a large ecosystem, and it is a lot harder for Microsoft to get that ecosystem to grow when so many of their users are on older OSs.
Those are just some of the more immediately obvious reasons Microsoft is trying to push Windows 10. They're not trying to get to all your data. They're trying to get all their resources going in the same direction, which makes a lot of sense from a business standpoint and is no doubt appreciated by their developers.
Yes, you can get the OS for free at the cost of advertisement. Isn't that how we do things now?Deathfish15 said:
Is your preferred idea that the business give away their goods and services for free for real? Because that would technically cease to be a business.
I have a hard time believing that the new processors will be so radically different than current architectures that they will lack compatibility modes for software that's only a few years old.
Of course, even if it is true, it's things like this that make me glad that I'm a Linux user and don't need to depend on what a crappy company like Microsoft is willing to give me.
Of course, even if it is true, it's things like this that make me glad that I'm a Linux user and don't need to depend on what a crappy company like Microsoft is willing to give me.