If you upgrade to Windows 10 you have 30 days to change your mind

[jigger]

Because you have individual insight into the inner workings of Microsoft that nobody else seems to have, or at least seems to want to publish?

Yes, it matters. Misinformation is misinformation, no matter how well intentioned. All it provides is more ammunition for those that seem to have come to conclusions based on bias, hatred, or.... well, I'm sure people can further fill out that thought process.

No, but do you or even Microsoft? It's safe to assume that to get Windows 10 we will have to sacrifice our current OS.

What do you mean bias and hatred? MS have done a very poor job with win10 so far and people are rightly sceptical IMO. I'm not seeing hatred.

[crossy]

What do you mean bias and hatred? MS have done a very poor job with win10 so far and people are rightly sceptical IMO. I'm not seeing hatred.

Actually I'm going to partially disagree ... the technical side of W10 - so far at least - looks pretty solid. Remember the "joy" of Windows7 compared to Vista? Well, it looks like 8->10 is going to repeat that experience.

No, where Microsoft have "poked the puppy" (cleaned up version of an American saying) is in the PR for this. Heck, if I was in Microsoft's PR department (note to Redmond: make me an offer?) I'd be touting 10 as "8 with all the naff bits removed". Then there's all the will-we-won't-we about licensing, and media, and MS accounts, etc. A cynic would say that they're making all that up as they go along - basically doing the politician-style "we're listening to you, so we won't do X that we said we would".

I can't remember a OS launch from MS that has approached this level of shambolic. Please don't tell me that without the Chair-Thrower-General* that MS have lost their way a bit? (* Steve B)

[Saracen]

...

Is that classed as official microsoft?

In my opinion, no. Sadly.

From what I can make out, the author is as MS community moderator, and an MVP, but not even an MS employee never mind an executive with the authority to make commitments on MS's part.

It's a pretty good, comprehensive document and makes a good read, but does appear to carry the authority of the OPINION of someone that ought to be fairly clued in, but clued in to publicly available information, not MS future strategy.

What I would REALLY like to see is a document that comprehensive that did have official MS status, but it doesn't look to me that that does.

Put it this way. Moderators here are (mostly) volunteer community members selected and invited to help out. We're more in the know, as it were, than general members, at least on SOME issues at HEXUS, but certainly not official company spokespeople.

Admins here, and mods here, have some authority, but only in the sense of delegated authority intended that we do what the board owner would do, were he handling something himself. I have a pretty good grasp of what that authority, here, includes and also what it does not include, mainly as a result of being extensively briefed on the issue. But I'm acting for the board owner, doing what I best judge he'd do. If I announced HEXUS were going to start a pet grooming company, it doesn't commit them to doing so, or mean they would.

[GuidoLS]

In my opinion, no. Sadly.

From what I can make out, the author is as MS community moderator, and an MVP, but not even an MS employee never mind an executive with the authority to make commitments on MS's part.

It's a pretty good, comprehensive document and makes a good read, but does appear to carry the authority of the OPINION of someone that ought to be fairly clued in, but clued in to publicly available information, not MS future strategy.

Agreed - I wouldn't take it as official for the reasons Saracen listed, as well as the fact that it is dated back in January.

THIS is the current OFFICIAL Windows 10 FAQ.

It does not address the question asked, though.

Also, MS has just revised their privacy statement, and it takes effect 1 August, 2015 - HERE are the details - again, these don't go active until the first of August, even though dated June - I couldn't force the re-direct page again that stated exact dates. Perhaps this will come up when you hit the link itself.

[Corky34]

That's one very invasive and long privacy statement.

[GuidoLS]

That's one very invasive and long privacy statement.

As are they all - and believe it or not, that's quite a bit less draconian than the prior ones... but on the flip side, the privacy settings in Win10 are far more comprehensive than any I've seen in any other OS, regardless of manufacturer. I'd say that you can be more privacy/security conscious with Linux, but you'll need a significantly higher tech/nerd IQ to get there.

Now all we need is the final TOS/EULA.

[Corky34]

I've not looked at other OS privacy statements so IDK how invasive it is, does someone like Apple collect data about you and your friends, calendar events and the names of the people in your appointments, information about your contacts including names and nicknames, allows administrators to overrule your disabling location services, keeps records on children’s activities, checks downloaded files and web content sending the file names, a hash of the file’s contents, and the file’s digital certificates, full web address, your browsing history, collects data about you from maps even though maps may be turned off.

I thought the invasion of privacy carried out by the NSA & GCHQ was unacceptable, but Microsoft has nothing on those guys.

[Jonj1611]

That doesn't sound different from most other companies.

Look at most apps in app stores etc they need most if not more information, for things like syncing calendars, child controls, sending files for anti-virus etc etc, most sounds about normal to be fair.

Though not sure about changing the location service, unless maybe thats a windows phone emergency function perhaps?

[GuidoLS]

I've not looked at other OS privacy statements so IDK how invasive it is, does someone like Apple collect data about you and your friends, calendar events and the names of the people in your appointments, information about your contacts including names and nicknames, allows administrators to overrule your disabling location services, keeps records on children’s activities, checks downloaded files and web content sending the file names, a hash of the file’s contents, and the file’s digital certificates, full web address, your browsing history, collects data about you from maps even though maps may be turned off.

I thought the invasion of privacy carried out by the NSA & GCHQ was unacceptable, but Microsoft has nothing on those guys.

Everything you've listed is only a matter of 'concern' if you use their products in addition to Windows. And yes, Apple collects as much, if not more information. So does Canonical, who didn't even offer the transparency when they were discovered to be routing all searches, web or local, through Amazon. And if you're using 8.1, you're already providing the same information. Same if you're using 7 and the different services listed, such as MSN, Bing, OneDrive, etc etc etc. The easiest way to avoid that is to not use them. You'll still be giving up the same data, and oftentimes more, to other purveyors. Google probably knows the waistband size in your skivvies, and what breath mints you use. Your cell company already knows when, how often, and with whom you're having your dirty text sessions with. Think DropBox gives a flip about your privacy? Or GMail? Or Yahoo? Not only do they not care, they won't bother to tell you how little they care.

As I've said before, there's a great deal of privacy accessibility built into 10 - far more than I've seen easily available in any OS. It's possible to achieve more in Linux, but you'll have to go into the kernel to get there. The only absolute guarantee of privacy is to go off-grid, and that kind of defeats the purpose.

[crossy]

As I've said before, there's a great deal of privacy accessibility built into 10 - far more than I've seen easily available in any OS. It's possible to achieve more in Linux, but you'll have to go into the kernel to get there..

<sigh> I thought you said you didn't work for Microsoft - because that "you have to go into the kernel" nonsense is their fud. And yes, 10 does have some privacy controls but it's still a LOT more 'public' than previous Windows have been. I'm cautiously okay with this (because I already use MS services like OneDrive) but the selling of the collected data to "selected 3rd parties” is of concern. I'm hoping that the EU Info Commissioner is keeping a close eye on this.

[GuidoLS]

<sigh> I thought you said you didn't work for Microsoft - because that "you have to go into the kernel" nonsense is their fud. And yes, 10 does have some privacy controls but it's still a LOT more 'public' than previous Windows have been. I'm cautiously okay with this (because I already use MS services like OneDrive) but the selling of the collected data to "selected 3rd parties” is of concern. I'm hoping that the EU Info Commissioner is keeping a close eye on this.

I don't see any FUD there. It is possible to be even more secure with Linux than it is with Windows. Some of that does require going into the kernel. Anything else requires somewhat the same weakness that plagues Windows, OSX and Android - reliance on 3rd party programs. That's not FUD. That's reality. Is it necessary? No - but it is a viable option for those that wish to go to the extra effort. Now, if I had of said that for Linux to be as secure as Windows, you had to go into the kernel, then that would be FUD. And untrue. Of course, none of that matters if Joe Dingus goes running around the 'net as su, downloading and installing everything that will install.

Windows 10 is no more public than 8/8.1, but most people 'on the net' have never taken that release all that seriously, so the issues weren't as much in the forefront. The only reason it seems more public than 7 is because much of what makes 10 more public is semi-integrated, whereas you had to actually seek out and activate them in 7. But a funny thing happened on the way to band camp - a lot of people that don't hang out on geeky tech sites, nor care much about them, discovered they liked aspects of 8 and 8.1 - enough so that they are being made mainstream front and center on 10. The difference this time is that instead of seeking things out, we now have to turn things off (or on, as it may apply).

Simply put, if I could use every program (mainly games) on Linux that I use on Windows, even via wrapper, I'd kick MS to the curb. Even the 60-70% we're at now is not sufficient. But until someone actually leads, instead of just talks about it, things won't change. Free hint to GabeN - we don't have a hardware issue - we have a software issue...

[Saracen]

It's that middle para that leaves me nervous about the "future direction" of MS, though, Guido. It kind-of suggests that MS are targeting the non-computer literate at least in part because they're not tech-literate enough to be aware of some of the issues, and ask the right questions.

On one level, IMHO, that's fine. Windows is MSs to target at who they wish, and their job is to make money. But there's almost a tone of underhandedness about it that worries me. If that is MSs direction of travel, fair enough, it makes my decision for me. And they're within their rights if it is. I would just appreciate a bit, well a lot really, more clarity about what they're up to and where they're going.

[GuidoLS]

It's that middle para that leaves me nervous about the "future direction" of MS, though, Guido. It kind-of suggests that MS are targeting the non-computer literate at least in part because they're not tech-literate enough to be aware of some of the issues, and ask the right questions.

On one level, IMHO, that's fine. Windows is MSs to target at who they wish, and their job is to make money. But there's almost a tone of underhandedness about it that worries me. If that is MSs direction of travel, fair enough, it makes my decision for me. And they're within their rights if it is. I would just appreciate a bit, well a lot really, more clarity about what they're up to and where they're going.

If I were to venture a guess, it would be that MS probably isn't 100% sure which direction they're going to go in just yet. They have a very large, very varied audience, and it's as obvious to them as it is to us that one size won't fit all. For example, I still seriously doubt we'll ever see a subscription model for the actual OS for the general public, but I think it very possible that we'll see it on the business side. It already exists, to a degree - multiple large corporations and government entities still pay a subscription to keep Windows XP functional, for example. OTOH, there's already a subscription process in place for the latest version of Office, and OneDrive requires a paid sub for anything larger than 30gb, so I can see an expansion on services and certain products as services.

And I look at it a little more cynically than you do in regards to the non-tech people. I believe the majority of them do have at least a base understanding of the privacy issues, not only as it relates to Google, etc, but also the NSA/GCHQ issues. And I believe the majority of them don't care. They figure if they're doing nothing wrong, they have nothing to worry about. And yes, I can see MS targeting them more directly than the tech people. There are more of them. A lot more. And they don't pay attention, because they don't care. And with all the fiascoes on the net lately that are hitting the national news (at least here) such as what's happened over at Reddit, what reason has 'our' part of the community given them to even bother? It may not be us specifically, but it is the techies...

[Corky34]

You say that it's obvious to Microsoft as it is to us that one size won't fit all but that's not the impression I get, in fact I get the impression that Microsoft seem to think one size is going to fit all, both in terms of how and what we use as an OS and in terms of TOS & legalities.

People maybe willing to forgo some privacy and usability when their using a portable computer (smart phone, tablet) but I'm not sure that same ethos transfers over to a desktop very well, just as there are some things I feel comfortable doing or saying in my own home that I wouldn't say or do in public.

[GuidoLS]

You say that it's obvious to Microsoft as it is to us that one size won't fit all but that's not the impression I get, in fact I get the impression that Microsoft seem to think one size is going to fit all, both in terms of how and what we use as an OS and in terms of TOS & legalities.

People maybe willing to forgo some privacy and usability when their using a portable computer (smart phone, tablet) but I'm not sure that same ethos transfers over to a desktop very well, just as there are some things I feel comfortable doing or saying in my own home that I wouldn't say or do in public.

My comments were more based on consumer vice business. It's never been the same model, and I doubt that it will ever be the same model. And as much as I hate to point it out, considering that the EU just fined MS 3/4 of a BILLION USD because it decided that people weren't smart enough to choose their own browser while installing a service pack, I seriously doubt they're going to allow MS to do anything even remotely nefarious in terms of privacy. After all, they forced Google to remove results on people that want to be forgotten. Now, if there's an issue with your politicians not playing nice, that's not MS's fault. We both have that problem, and other than learning how to protect our own privacy, there's not much that can be done one way or the other.

We don't know what the TOS and EULA are going to be at this point. They haven't been finalized nor released. You'll have a different one than I do. I've already covered the privacy statement. I'll not type out the obvious again. And in the end, if I don't like what I see, when I want to play a game, I'll boot up Windows 10, and when I want to do business/office/private work, I'll boot up Slack. Right now, I don't think it will come to that.