I bought a couple of full win7 licenses when they came out. So glad I did now. Somewhere I have a disc of ubuntu that I'd always intended to play with on an old machine. Since my relly decided he didn't want the old P4 I've had this box sat in the lounge gathering dust. Time to see how I fair with ubuntu. I sense a few help request threads coming from me in the near future
you got a win mister!Originally Posted by sykobee
I just starting to like windows 8.1, but there are privacy concerns to it. this windows is bounding your machine with your id very deeply, and its forcing you to stay online. Cortana for example is a great feature, but again its online feature and will a lot of your data. this data is directly connected to your id (windows does not store it together however during the activation all machine, windows and user information are sent to the server and this information is permanently stored in microsoft)
Now, i like the features but i dislike how much of my info goes to web.
i am fine with logging to server for email, but login to my computer account via online is a privacy concern for me.
everytime you are login to your computer, microsoft gets update what ip address you actually have, so all you do is easy to track(yes you, not some user or random guy, you).
microsoft claims it does not use this information for any purpose other to improving the system(and keeping open eye on piracy). so i believe them that they are not doing it YET.
i was strongly supporting microsoft as i mostly like their products, now however is start to think more into going for linux.
i just follow the rule:you can get what i want to give you for free, pay for rest - its my personal belonging, my personal achievement or my idea. so if i like sweets and i am not telling it openly, i dont want you to know that. i absolutely dont care how silly it is.
google in the other hand doing all the surveillance - they checks your emails, searches and so on. most of the ppl dont care, so i guess microsoft want something for himself... information is $$
with all that knowledge i think i wont switch from windows 7 on my main computer. i dont care if they track my work related activities - my company has lawyers for that. but seriously, stop f*** tracking ME.
i dont think that the business data is a problem(company has lawyers and money to make sure the information that will be stolen, will not be used by anyone else.) you however dont.or me... I don't mind the option of cloud extras but on a business level I wouldn't trust my stuff being purely in the cloud, surely the recent hacking of apple/sony etc should make people more aware of it's major short coming.
As to MS monetising windows... I will NEVER pay a subscription for such a fundamental part of a computer as the OS, I'll move to linux or stay on an old version. I don't mind paying extra for more features, within reason, as long as they're one time fees. I hate the subscription model that everyone seems to be jumping on with a passion, whoever came up this stupid idea needs to be 'metaphorically' shot.
They don't want to bother putting more adverts in the OS either, we have enough of them when we browse the web (thank you adblock), when we watch tv and it's bad enough having ad in MS apps like the weather app. I have NEVER been influenced by an advert to buy the stuff they're trying to sell, a good product doesn't need an advert to sell well.
the business data which you are doing for yourself is totally different thing.
you naked pictures also
so in case data like that will be stolen, you wont win anything from it. the wall of company lawyers will hold you good.
there is no such thing as being not influenced - you are lying yourself - you dont have to take any action to be actually influenced. after some time you will want something related to the advertise - for example new graphic card, even if yours still doing fine. and the best part is, you will actualy believe you need it
DevDrake... windows 8.1 can run quite happily without using a 'hotmail' or similar account - linky to changing to a local account.
If you're worried about MS having your info you have bigger issues to worry over, pretty much EVERY site uses google analytics these days so google can track you with even more detail...not to mention MS would get your ip address from you logging into your account via a website, unless you're paranoid and use a vpn or tor.
And I can assure you I have NEVER bought an item because of an advert, I work in design and I know all the junk that is used to help 'sell' an item, it just doesn't work on me. Going with your pc reference - I replace pc hardware when I get to the stage where I hit the limits of what the pc can handle (I work from home hence my business comments) in my 3D programs etc or it can no longer keep up with the speed I want to work. This is not want or need, it's necessity.
Bye buy Windows...
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute
Thank you sir for the link!
as for the adverts, its very hard to believe, but ok - i believe you.
so you are probably one of 100 millions.
i think i am resistant for the adverts, but i am catching myself of thinking about advertised items - simple example. i am searching for good screen as i need new one, and i cought myself waiting for freesync screen even i never seen the real benefit from it.
yes i know the theory, i read a bout that a lot, i sow some videos about, but does i need it? i think i do. but why? because i need it or because i want it?
and obviously adverts are not always obvious. another example - what you see in the movies are adverts(what they wear what they drink, if they smoke etc) a lot of this stuff was never in the script.
till now i remember jvc camera in the back to the future
I absolutely, 100% object to Cloud OSes (and in fact Cloud Storage). I will never buy a Chromebook, and I will never buy a version of Windows that forces you to log in with a global account or defaults storage to OneDrive etc. With Windows 8 and 8.1 I have seen Microsoft pushing us more and more toward the global login idea, and if ever they insist upon it I will move to Linux permanently.
For the same reasons I have never owned an Apple device, I only ever put information on the internet that I truly don't care about the whole world knowing, and I do almost all of my web browsing in Incognito mode.
What many people seem to forget when it comes to the Cloud is that if we want to trust the company we can do so all we like - but they can still be hacked!
They're handy but not essential. If you lose your licence or change your machine enough to invalidate the one that you have, you can still use Win 7.
After reinstalling Win 7 on a machine a while back, I couldn't be bothered to activate it as I was tinkering quite a bit and suspected that I might have to scratch the install and start again. After the activation period expired I discovered that Win 7 continues to be no different in its essential function except that it went a bit "shareware", with a pop-up message every hour reminding me that it wasn't activated and setting the desktop background to black. It's a bit of a nag but it can be lived with if necessary.
I'd hope that it would be something similar whereby you'd continue to get the essential service but lose some of the frills and get nagged a bit.
I avoid that one by using a simple Proxomitron filter that changes the url of various tracker javascripts so that they don't load. For instance, the filter makes "google-analytics.js" become "NOT-google-analytics.js". No script, no google-snoop. ;-)
I think like most people here I'm vehemently against the idea of a subscription-based OS, but relatively chilled that some "premium" (i.e. optional!) features might be rented on a monthly or annual basis. So if Windows 10 Home was free and there was a reasonable charge for Pro features, then I'd probably get it (depending of course on what those Pro features were).
CloudOS's - like ChromeOS - really don't interest me since a modern OS isn't exactly going to use up the whole of the multi-gigabyte solid state devices we have access to now anyway. In fact, the only use I'd have for a Chromebook would be as a cheap way to get hardware to put a proper OS on!
If MS decided to do "monetization" by encouraging cloud storage and then charging for a goodly slab (say 500GB) then I'd be content with that too. Notice the underline under "encouraging" - an OS that forced storage in the cloud is a non-starter in my book! Actually that's something that bugs me about Microsoft - the way that you're effectively tricked by a bundled Windows8+ OS image into having that god-awful "online" presence. And a relative of mine got caught beautifully because his shiny new 8.1 install decided that the default location for all new documents was going to be SkyDrive, sorry OneDrive. I'll quite happily use cloud storage, but only if I get to explicitly choose what goes to the cloud - systems that cloud sync all documents unless you set exceptions are non-starters for me.
Then again, I only use Windows for a few specific apps, apart from that it's a gaming-only setup. Anything "serious" is done on my (Ubuntu) Linux box because it's quicker, more reliable and a lot less annoying.
Career status: still enjoying my new career in DevOps, but it's keeping me busy...
I'm amazed how many people seem to know exactly what Microsoft are going to charge you for in the next version of Windows on the basis of a couple of third-party-reported quotes on a news site. You must all have critted your Insight rolls
If MS think they need to reduce the license costs for Windows on certain devices to ensure they can acheive greater penetration in those markets, it stands to reason they'll need to make up revenue in another way. They already have a significant and well-developed services arm - mostly targetting corporate, but also including outlook.com and Office Online on the consumer side. It only makes sense that they'll look to increase revenue in the services division to make up for the reduction in revenue from device licenses. Beyond that, we don't know what the business plan will look like, and even what devices and versions it will cover. So I'd suggest people decide if they want to buy the new version of Windows after the features and business model are announced. That way it'll sound like an intelligent, reasoned decision, rather than a mob-mentality knee-jerk reaction
I wouldn't be prepared to pay a subscription for those premium "services", regardless of what they were.
It's in large part my choice of financial management methodology. My income is irregular, and has been for, oh, 30 years or more. I get NO regular, repeat, predictable income, like a salary. What I get is a decent income, averaged out on a monthly basis, but in large chunks. I mean, it's not like (as an example) £36k per year, in the form of £3k/month. It's more like £36/year, but in three of four chunks, which might be £16k in one chunk, nothing for months, £7k, nothing for a bit, then £13k in a chunk.
The £36k is entirely illustrative, by the way, picked 'cos it divided nicely into 12. I could equally have used £12k or £120k.
Anyway, the result is I make a decision to buy or not buy based on a KNOWN cost, and known up-front. Take Office, for example. I have several versions, including (IIRC) office 97, 2000 and 2007. They're high-end versions, including Access ('cos I use it) and boxed, and legit. I'll buy those, IF I need them, and IF it can be done in one, known chunk. I am NOT signing up for a subscription. And ditto, for Photoshop. Despite using it since, oh, v3 I think (not CS3, but v3) I am not, under any circumstances, paying a subscription. Even if it means, as it seems it does, never upgrading again. Adobe have lost any future revenue from me as a result.
Why? Well essentially, because I'll buy what I know I have the money for, right now, but I'm NOT signing up for an on-going monthly cost for ANYTHING that is not either an essential, or for which an overwhelmingly good argument exists.
I'm not at all happy about paying for broadband monthly, but as an on-going service, it's hard to avoid. No software, for me, is an on-going service, and certainly not an OS or Office suite.
Well, depends (for me) how they define "encourage".
No form of encouragement, payment, bribe or inducement is EVER going to get me to store data in the cloud. Well, not unless the inducement is enough to let me retire, vanish into obscurity and live the life of a billionaire recluse, and I'm not holding my breath waiting for the billion pound offer if I store my data in the cloud.
If it's a genuine choice, then fine, but my choice will "no".
However, I do not trust MS' s honesty in this. We've seen the deceitful way they try to con people into signing up for an MS account, making it harder and harder to find how to use a local account, even if the user is savvy enough to understand the difference. I've lost track of how many Win8 users I've spoken to that didn't know you didn't have to have an MS account.
So, trust is not there. And I want to be sure, 100% absolutely certain, that NONE of my data is going onto MS servers, or any other cloud server, by virtue of trickery, deceit, or innocuous sounding default settings the true implication of which I didn't catch, unless I specifically, explicitly and in full knowledge of the implications, choose to do so. Which I never will.
I don't object to MS "encouraging" it. I just don't trust them to stop there, based on their actions to date. Which is why my more personal data is ONLY stored on air-gapped systems. And even then, encrypted.
Personally, I will decide after details become clear, based not just on cost and business model, but also what they do over the UI debate.I'm amazed how many people seem to know exactly what Microsoft are going to charge you for in the next version of Windows on the basis of a couple of third-party-reported quotes on a news site. You must all have critted your Insight rolls
...
So I'd suggest people decide if they want to buy the new version of Windows after the features and business model are announced. That way it'll sound like an intelligent, reasoned decision, rather than a mob-mentality knee-jerk reaction
If they pull another deceitful PR stunt, like the 'return' of the Start button, then they can shove Windows 10, regardless of price or business model. If they get past that, then IF I can buy a perpetual licence, I will, if price and features are right. If they go subscription, then I'm out, regardless of details, costs, etc. If they go subscription, it doesn't matter to me what the details are, my answer is no. This is not knee jerk. It's that I'm not paying a subscription for either OS or Office suite. Period. That decision is long-standing, not knee jerk. The only variable in it is whether they do, or don't, do that. And I have no idea, though I'd guess not.
If they do, I don't care why they did. If it's because they reduced licensing costs to achieve greater penetration in other markets, well, I don't give a flying fig why did it, just whether they do or not. It might make bysiness sense to them. Again, not my problem, and I have no say in that. I do have a say in whether I pay on a subscription basis or not, and regardless if whatever MS' s reasoning or justification was, it isn't going to happen.
Put it this way. Despite being a very early online user, going back to pre-broadband days and when PCs were business tools, and virtually unknown in homes, I'll go offline and entirely computerless before I'll pay MS a subscription for an OS. When I say I'm not paying a subscription for an OS, I'm utterly, deadly serious about it. Knee jerk, it ain't.
I'm of the view that Microsoft cannot 100% force cloud features in their OS, without alienating the business side of their customer base. Many businesses might well be embracing Cloud technologies, but not all. Some businesses have data that MUST be kept local, kept safe, and kept private. Those businesses will walk away from Microsoft if they would otherwise be forced to store data in the Cloud.
What might end up happening is that the Enterprise versions will be made cloud-free, with retail/domestic versions being laden with undesirable components. If that is the case, I will do one of two things - spend what needs to be spent via my business in order to ensure a cloud-free version, or go the Linux route.
MS already did do this 'charge for the os' then charge for extras with windows 8, they took out media center (including dvd playback) and charge extra. It didn't really make any difference to the price of the OS after the initial reduced period.
You could also argue that in some ways they're charging for the use of things like weather app etc in windows 8 too, that has adverts in the app so they're getting paid every time you use it.
As I said earlier I'm not going to pay a subscription for what is a fundamental part of a pc, you wouldn't pay a subscription for your pc components so how is the OS any different, forget to pay for any part and the entire pc becomes useless, it just doesn't work at the base level of a pc.
Admittedly large businesses do 'rent' hardware but that's not quite the same.
Are you sure? If the only alternative is to completely retrain all their staff on unfamiliar technology? That'd be a huge investment, and corporate inertia is one of the things keeping MS in a dominant position as far as PC OS goes. Most local networks aren't any less vulnerable to attack than cloud services - they're just a less tempting target. The vast majority of corporate services - including locally hosted ones - are internet-accessible now: companies want their staff to be able to work at any time of day or night, from any location.
Besides, integrating cloud-dependent features into the OS wouldn't force the OS to be cloud-only - the cloud features could happily co-exist with locally hosted services, which is the exact situation most companies are already in. Having those existing cloud-based features (Outlook/Office 365 etc.) baked directly into the OS simply means less procurement contracts to manage (a single Windows procurement, rather than separate Windows, Exchange and Office procurement). A properly planned and managed corproate network should have no problem handling that.
I'm not disagreeing with you. But why are we even talking about it? MS certainly haven't said anything to imply they'll move to a subscription-only model for Windows. They've talked about monetizing through services and add-ons. No, rational examination of the evidence doesn't support the thesis, so somewhere there's been a knee-jerk reaction that's started the whole discussion.
Premium services are just that - I made it pretty clear that I was speaking about stuff which is "nice to have", so things like Media Player etc. Actually I'd be pretty happy if IE was made a premium feature ... but that's mainly because I don't like it at all.
For ADSL type broadband you're probably correct, but wireless broadband - if you're willing to accept the "downgrade" in speed - definitely can be got as PAYG. I've got a "Wireless Pointer" hub (supports up to 5 devices) from T-Mobile. Oh, and given the availability of things like LibreOffice I wouldn't regard Office (note the capitalization) as an essential, so if that was Office365 then I'm okay with that - I'll go use Libre instead.
I agreed with you on that point - as you say it's low-level extortion.
Sorry that's a classic newbie fault - to assume that a "cloud" has to be a public app- or storage-service. IBM, HP and Microsoft (and probably others) are doing good business persuading enterprises to put in their own cloud infrastructure. Sure, there's financial advantage in it being leveraged (shared across many customers) but that doesn't meant that leveraged is the only game in town. I've seen, and in fact used, cloud app solutions that are specific to one customer.
Agree 100%
Microsoft have been talking about the possibility of moving to a subscription-only model as one of many possible futures for Windows - heck, I remember articles on this very site at the start of the year. And for businesses - especially large ones - it possibly makes a good deal of sense, merely replacing the current "support" contracts with one for"updates, upgrades and support". On the other hand, it makes zero sense for SMB's or home users. And note, this is not "knee jerk reaction" on my part - merely me putting forward my viewpoint on the possibility of a rented OS. If it doesn't happen (and I'm pretty sure it won't) then "no harm, no foul".
Career status: still enjoying my new career in DevOps, but it's keeping me busy...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote