Windows 10 passes 50 per cent adoption - among Steam users

[DanceswithUnix]

Some people bought new PCs, they only had one choice of OS or most of the games on Steam won't run. The numbers seem inevitable to me.

[peterb]

Win 10 offers nothing more for me than Windows 7. I now only have two machines (a dual boot laptop and in a virtual environment) running W7 for some legacy software some word processing complex word processing tasks.

[tag75]

i have had no probs with win10 , nice OS .

[Saracen]

DX12

Yes, I honestly believe it is that simple.

....

I'd bet the "while it's free" thing was as big a factor, if not more so.

[Lucio]

I'd bet the "while it's free" thing was as big a factor, if not more so.

Except it's not free, it's paid for by the userbase being willing to sign over excessive levels of data collection, which in turn allows Microsoft to sell targeted advertising information.

So yeah, there's a cost in there, and it's a one I'm unlikely to be willing to pay.

[Saracen]

Except it's not free, it's paid for by the userbase being willing to sign over excessive levels of data collection, which in turn allows Microsoft to sell targeted advertising information.

So yeah, there's a cost in there, and it's a one I'm unlikely to be willing to pay.

Quite so.

It's free in the sense that rewards on store "reward" cards are free .... but paid for by data collection.

But it's also free in the sense that previous version upgrades have required users to part with cash, and this one didn't.

Personally, I don't mind parting with the cash for a worthwhile upgrade but, like you, I'm not signing up for the intrusive aspects of W10. Hell will freeze over first.

[FRISH]

Windows 10 has been mostly fine with me, although there are is the odd thing that could've been better.

However I have to say that imo when it was free for a long time and that windows is the most popular platform, I think only having 50% shows massive concerns over windows 10 that should be addressed. If it was a great upgrade with little concerns, then upgrading should've been a no brainer.

[Tabbykatze]

Really do just need a footnote on any article regarding Windows 10 with "Cue Saracen".

Microsoft's "spying" is fairly minor in the grand scheme of everything else that's done to gather data about you

[Corky34]

The because everyone does it argument never holds water for obvious reasons.

[scaryjim]

... it's paid for by the userbase being willing to sign over excessive levels of data collection ...

Whether it's excessive or not depends on how you calculate the value of the product it's being exchanged for. I wonder how many people who dislike Windows 10's data collection have diligently blocked all the google analytics cookies that most websites use nowadays? At least with Windows 10 you know what you're getting in return for the data collection.

My issue with Windows 10 is the follow up cost if you don't have a valid upgraded license. Want to build a new Windows 10 PC? It'll cost you as much for that OS license as with any previous version of Windows. If a Windows 10 license was no more than £50 I'd've bought one last week when I rebuilt my gaming PC. As it is I'm still busy hunting around my various previous Windows purchases trying to work out if I have any spare licenses for previous OSes that have been upgraded to Windows 10. I'm not far off sticking Linux on it instead and streaming games from my laptop!

[Saracen]

Really do just need a footnote on any article regarding Windows 10 with "Cue Saracen".

Microsoft's "spying" is fairly minor in the grand scheme of everything else that's done to gather data about you

So, I'm not allowed an opinion now?

Note - my first post actually defended Win10 against the "it's utter crap" charge. In my opinion, a lot of it is very good. Sadly, the bits I object to are SO objectionable as to override that.

As for data gathering, it wasn't me that brought it up. My major objection to Win10 is that forced updates means MS seizes ultimate control of my PC, allowing it to change what it wants, when it wants to. Regardless of what it's doing now, or done to date, that principle us a non-starter.

And as for data gathering, how are we supposed to know whether it's the thin end of the wedge? Give an inch, and they'll tske a mile. MS did announce, publicly, that they're "changing how they monetise" Windows but never defined quite what that does, and does not, include.

So yes, even if what MS do is "fairly minor, in the grand scheme of things" of data collecting and mining, it's PART of the overall effort, and if you care about your privacy at all, then you, like me and everybody else, has to decide what to put up with and what to fight.

Whether you care, and to what extent, is up to you. There's no right or wrong answer. It's personal choice.

I do care, and not using Win10 is a "fairly minor" part of what I do to minimise it, and indeed is not primarily about that at all. But for that same privacy-protecting reason, I NEVER use store reward cards or discount schemes that involve divulging personal data, even if it's just name and address. I'm VERY selective about handing out telephone contact data, and almost as careful with email address. I am obsessive about ticking the opt-out boxes (after reading which way round they work) on the few forms I do complete, I'm on the restricted electoral roll, have only ever had ex-directory phone numbers, and I use a Level 6 (or P7, dtpending on the DIN definition) shredder on all documents, plus a rather cheaper crosscut shredder for DVD media, etc. Oh, and you ought to see the "shredder" that desls with hard drives .... a drive goes in, intact, and a pile of shrapnel comes out. That one isn't mine, but I have sufficiently low volumes that a company I know just does them for me. Oh, and I very rarely use debit or credit cards unless it suits my needs. Mostly, I pay cash. Also, most of my more sensitive data is encrypted, and on machines that are permanently air-gapped from the internet.

Am I advocating that sort of stance for others? No, mainly because most people don't care enough, or haven't thought it through enough, to worry.

[Saracen]

Whether it's excessive or not depends on how you calculate the value of the product it's being exchanged for. I wonder how many people who dislike Windows 10's data collection have diligently blocked all the google analytics cookies that most websites use nowadays? At least with Windows 10 you know what you're getting in return for the data collection.

....

My approach to that is layered.

1) Turn off third party cookies.
2) Regular cookie deleting.
3) Tools like Ghostery and SDC.
4) Anonymising proxy service, and for some purposes, TOR.
5) I have a source of internet connection that cannot be traced to me.
6) A high proportion of my web browsing, which is limited anyway, is done on a device with ZERO personal data on it. And which never connects (and can't connect) to my network
7) I'm very selective about what websites I visit in the first place, and don't browse much at all.
8) Don't do online banking, and after someone tried to set it up on my account, it's locked down by the bank. To unlock and enable requires a oersonal visit at a designated branch with several designated forms of proof of ID including passport.
9) Very rarely shop online. Last time must be .... well, years ago.

Am I guaranteed to dodge all Google analytics? No. But I do periodically indulge in a bit of peeing in their data soup with misinformation. It turns out I'm male, female and neither, am black, white, Asian and unspecified, have somewhere between 20 and zero kids, am 5, 15, 25, 35, 45, 55 and 65, and am a tree surgeon, cardiac surgeon, butcher, racing driver, financier, care worker, bus driver and I forget what else.

And for a very few sites, this one among them, I bypass all that. Well, mostly.

[Corky34]

Whether you care, and to what extent, is up to you. There's no right or wrong answer. It's personal choice.

I'd say there is a right and wrong answer as peoples blasé attitude towards privacy effects society as a whole, privacy is one of those things people don't know they've lost or how important it is until they need it and realise it's not there.

[Jonatron]

I'll try to get this thread back on the subject of Windows than on privacy in a more general sense.

I tried windows 10, but switched back to windows 7 yesterday. I thought it's the way forward for gaming, but there's major issues.

Borderless windowed mode shows the taskbar randomly.
Every time I started DOTA 2, it'd ask me to disable MS's screen recording software for performance. So I clicked disable, but it'd get enabled again. I had to google how to remove it, which involved using powershell commands? Even that didn't seem to get rid of it properly.
Then there's the privacy issue.
There's also UI inconsistencies.

So I switched back to Windows 7. It should have been a case of just installing from the official ISO right? No. Microsoft have completely broken Windows 7 automatic updates. I had to ask around, and eventually got given a link to a thread on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/windows/comments/4tx4s9/windows_7_slowstuck_checking_for_updates_fix_as/
It probably took about 3 hours to create a usable windows 7 image that is up to date, once I had that link. Many hours completely wasted before that.

Microsoft have really annoyed a lot of people. After Windows 7, something changed. They started forcing things on everyone, without any choice. Such as the Metro UI on Windows 8, and the forced upgrade to Windows 10. Removing choice of updates. Breaking Windows 7 updates. It'd be nice if more games worked on Linux, so I can ditch Windows.

[scaryjim]

... After Windows 7, something changed. ...

Yep - they started seeing themselves as a services company. A once-every-four-years flood of income from a new OS launch followed by years of trickle from new OS licenses and their other products didn't fit into the business paradigm that everyone else was following. The move towards Windows 10 (and let's be honest, Windows 8 was just an initial stumble onto that road) was a move towards becoming a more consumer-electronics style company. Problem is the PC install base is so varied, and has so many players, that there's virtually no way for MS get the control they want over it.

I almost feel sorry for them - they're stuck in a really bad place in a lot of ways. If they just provide the OS and allow OEMs and individuals to tinker to their hearts' content they have no control over the Windows experience people receive, despite the fact that everyone will blame MS and Windows when things go wrong. If they try to control the environment they're dealing with so many hardware configurations that they're bound to fail miserably. There's really very little way to get where they want to go from where they're starting.

I do wonder if they'll eventually spin off a Windows Core product, in the same way they're open-sourcing a big chunk of .NET under the .NET Core banner. Something with minimal functionality that won't hammer their core enterprise and consumer markets, but will appease the enthusiasts. Then they'll try to push more OEMs down the Windows Signature programme (which looks pretty good, tbh, and strips lots of nasty bloatware off new PCs) which will allow them to at least have full knowledge of the various hardware configurations running "full" Windows, and give them half a chance of handling the rolling updates and ecosystem control the way they want to...

[peterb]

Microsoft looked at being a services company with XP with the spectre of annual licensing - at least for coporate use, but there was an unsurprising backlash. In some respects they were ahead of the game as other software companies, notably Adobe have gone the same rout, as have Microsoft with Office 365.

Google are also a successful service company, their online products are pretty good, (notwithstanding privacy issues) funded by data gathering from their search engine and targeted advertising.

Apple are a successful hardware company, but with an ecosystem that is locked down so the the user experience is consistent and makes their support problem a whole lot simpler.

Which leaves MS in a tricky position. Are they hardware or software based? Services or product? And trying to be all things at the same time.

Their foray into the mobile phone market has been lacklustre, although they appear to be doing well with tablet type devices like the surface pro.

They must also be mindful of the IBM lesson - for years IBM was the corporate computer supplier, when mainframes ruled the roost. They had some completion from Digital with the PDP series but that was it. Then almost overnight IBM fell from grace. Trouble with being at the top of the heap is that there is only one way to go, unless you are responsive enough to adapt. That's true of MS and also Apple.

Google and Apple embraced cloud computing fairly early on, MS are still trying to catch up. They may do so, but making predictions is difficult.

For the non tech, windows 10 automatic updates to make a product that 'just works' may work, but it won't work for enterprise users (which is why it isn't a 'feature'). But then most coprate users have IT department or outsourced support to ensure their systems run consistently.