> Microsoft-branded ARM microcontrollers running an embedded linux distribution. Microsoft rolls out security updates over Azure to reduce the risk of the device becoming part of a botnet.
It does. But, it's also pretty surreal for those of us that worked through the anti-linux Microsoft of the 90's. Windows subsystem for Linux, and initiatives like this are a real confirmation that MS finally "gets it". Right tool for the right job. Good for them.
It's also a big swing for me in that I trust MS more than Google now to do the right thing. I'd have thought that impossible a couple of decades ago.
Have you actually used Windows 10?? The spotlight is squarely on Facebook and it's privacy intrusions right now, but the data collection when you own the OS must be several orders of magnitude larger.
Don't be so eager to forgive them. They're not hugging Linux right now because they're a Good Company trying to Do No Evil.
Have you used Windows 10 Server Core, or Windows 10 Enterprise LTSB? There's no data collection in either of those, because they're for serious people.
The Home and Pro editions, meanwhile, are effectively "Xbox OS for PCs." They turn your computer into an entertainment appliance run and maintained by Microsoft itself. Of course they collect data, just like there are data-collection agents on all the nodes of your average production system cluster. When Microsoft is the sysadmin, Microsoft needs to collect ops data.
And, personally, I don't think that's a bad thing, per se. It's a choice you make. You can take control of your PC while still running Windows, if you like. (It's just a big hassle, because truly administering a modern Windows system is a big hassle.)
There's something fundamentally wrong with that to my mind, given how the Pro release of Windows has always been placed.
I should not need to get an Enterprise release to be able to manage my own machine, restrict the phoning home, and control other basic features of my machine used in a professional context. I've no need of 101 features for managing 1,000 desktops and neither have many smaller businesses who are also now landed with "Xbox OS for PCs".
According to blog posts and articles on tech sites there still is no way to disable all telemetry on windows 10. I don’t use windows for a long time now so I cannot tell myself.
Anyhow, it is /not/ ok for an OS to spy on their users by default - even if you can disable it manually.
You can't. It still phones home a lot, even at the lowest telemetry settings. The only edition where you can disable it is LTSB and even there it is hidden in Local Group Policy Editor.
Microsoft have marketed it to business and portrayed it as intended for professional business use ever since XP introduced the version split. Until large enough to be allowed near volume licensing SKUs, when you pass some point past a hundred seats, it's the most professional offering a business can get.
That covers nearly all small and medium businesses.
Do I, as a single person, have the option of buying a non-spyware version of windows 10? I paid $175 for windows 7... I'd pay $300 for a non-spyware version of windows but I don't think I can even buy solo windows 10 enterprise.
Same as with previous releases: an unknown, invisible, price because it generally comes with the machine. Choose Win x Pro if you want a more "corporate" laptop and get features to connect to the work network, Bitlocker and so on.
As far as I am aware the pitch has not changed - Pro is for for a business environment, Enterprise if you're in need of centralised management of an estate of machines. So no, Pro should not be taking liberties.
So now to be treated professionally I need to buy a laptop with Win 10 Pro and buy Win 10 again to reinstall it / upgrade it with Win 10 LTS? Can you even buy a single copy?
My windows 10 Pro cost me $270 when I got it on christmas sale.
I can't disable debug telemetry or cortona. If I set the options to via admin (or even safe mode) via registry edits. After a reboot I'll find them back on.
So tell me, where can I buy that for my personal computer?
>because they're for serious people
No, because those who can get Windows 10 LTSB actually have the power to push back. Imagine telling Dell or HP that everything they type may be sent to MS at any time.
>You can still take control
So how can I permanently end all telemetry, now and forever on my box. I'm even willing to sign a letter that I won't hold them responsible for any viruses that I get because I didn't update in time.
You used to be able to download a trial off the open web on MS' download portal.
I ran LTSB for a year and it was brilliant. But on day 366 (or whever my slmgr -rearm trick ran out) you get locked out with no real way to change to a different SKU or reset without a clean install :(
There's a program called BlackBird (http://getblackbird.net/) that claims to strip out all that telemetry. I have been running it for a while and while I haven't closely inspected traffic to validate the author's claims my bandwidth monitor widget doesn't have a lot to report, rarely rising above 1kb/sec unless I'm doing something.
>So how can I permanently end all telemetry, now and forever on my box.
Simple: you use a different OS that doesn't spy on you. Microsoft is under no obligation to provide a product or service to you the way you want. They've decided they only want to offer products that spy on you, and that's their right. If you don't like that, you're free to not buy or use their products, and use something else instead. There are alternatives out there that don't spy on you.
Security and antivirus protection exist as much to protect others as oneself, much like vaccines. I wonder whether Microsoft considers updates to be protecting the users of a specific machine from a virus, or the community at large from many machines having that virus?
The problem is, security updates should stick to security, and should be clearly separated from feature updates - especially from the ones that remove features.
Interesting GDPR situation, MS will need to tell people how they're using all that data, who they're selling to, and AIUI enable deletion of it. Organisations using software that includes telemetry will have to tell the users, as the assumption must be that such telemetry will leak PII.
Would you trust each doctor to know enough about IT security to be capable of protecting patient data without hiring someone else to run their enterprise IT infrastructure?
No. But I would expect that the government (or a doctors professional organization on behalf) publishes a list of things he is allowed to use to work with patient data. Windows 10 shouldn't be on the list in my opinion.
> Have you used Windows 10 Server Core, or Windows 10 Enterprise LTSB? There's no data collection in either of those, because they're for serious people.
How does one, as a non-enterprise, even get W10 Enterprise LTSB? I would, in a heartbeat, but MS wants to shove crapvertising down peoples' throats no matter the cost. And it's logical, given that when the users with money to spend and technical expertise fall out of the advertising eyeball pool, the eyeball pool loses its worth as it will be filled with poor noobs to whom all you can sell is the latest iteration of Candy Crush and snake-oil "antivirus".
Not if you're a developer. It has all other features stripped down. Even a photo viewer is absent. Linux subsystem is at beta level, no store (there are some good apps on the store), also no new windows features (fluent design, emoji?, gpu tracking in task manager, etc... you get the idea).
If you buy something you shouldn't have to jump through hoops to own it. The fact those data collection features are there at all for a paid product is bad in my opinion.
Much of this comment seems like apologism to me. "Hey, it's bad, but I like Microsoft, so it's all good?"
Why would only people who pay $200 for a windows edition get (some) privacy?
Remember the days when the products you bought didn't spy on you? It seems like now companies are double-dipping or triple-dipping with this spying and selling of your data after you've already purchased the product/service.
And we're getting reconditioned to live with it and agree to it, especially from comments like yours.
Companies are double/triple-dipping with spying because consumers are happy to allow it.
Don't like it? Don't buy it. If you pay hard-earned cash for a product, and then complain that it spies on you even though you knew this before you bought it, you don't really have much cause to complain. If you really value your privacy, then put your money where your mouth is.
The corporate version of Windows 10 is different, which is where my experience lies. Good observation though.
At a higher level, Gates seems more credible than Larry or Sergey to me. Totally biased by my history, but I'm pretty strong on that point. Gates mellowed out and seems more broadly interested in "greater good".
Gates has done good work since leaving MS but I wouldn't say he mellowed out towards the end of his time at Microsoft. He was still very much proactively trying to control 3rd parties. Whether it was IRC via Microsoft Chat (which was actually a pretty cool idea but it didn't belong on public IRC servers), MSN, IE Vs Netscape wars, then IE Vs HTML wars (eg ActiveX, Silver light, etc). The whole Java wars (which did eventually give us .NET so some good eventually came of it, but it took years before .NET matured). MS Office Vs open standards (eventually we got a compromise with OOXML but it still feels like the battle was lost given every other office suite used the non-propriatory ODF).
And this is all without going into how he tried to destroy Linux, control UNIX, successfully destroyed competing DOS platforms (eg DR DOS), blocked OEMs / shops from selling PCs with competing OSs (or was it machines without Windows preinstalled? I forget now), ruined EeePCs and their form factors (by selling With dies at a loss), etc.
I think the only reason Gates didn't try his luck with data collection was because it simply wasn't a thing back then.
That said, I do still respect the guy even though I disliked his products and how he monopolised the market. Which is more than I can say about Balmer.
Yeah, personally, I think Windows for home users is a dying market. My wife and kids use either ChromeOS or OSX. Everything has moved to the web for younger people. Fat client apps are increasingly the exception. Very niche...like "I need Adobe tools, Photoshop, etc".
Office 365 is accelerating that. No need for local Word, PowerPoint, Excel, etc.
Windows Is For Games™. Despite the existence of things like SteamOS, I don't think your average e-Sports player is going to run anything besides Windows any time soon. Windows Home/Pro is essentially "the firmware for a custom-built Xbox."
The last I checked, Microsoft doesn't create shadow profiles of people who don't have accounts. Nor does Microsoft make it hard to turn off privacy, or sell the data to research firms in an attempt to create profiles that be used for advertising or manipulation. Also, the last I checked all this attention to Windows 10 data collection usually includes a comprehensive list of how to turn it off. Finally, when you set up Windows 10, one of the setup screens actually lists out these options and gives the user the chance to turn them off. You could argue that these should be left off by default, but I'd argue that allowing developers to collect telemetry data for debugging purposes, and forcing people to keep their computers updated is a good idea, since most normal users don't bother.
Company histories asside, someone had to develop a hardened kernel--and they had to be big enough that the client could sue in the event of a problem. Redhat comes to mind, but I honestly can't think of a better company than MSFT to own this (and the associated libility).
It makes terrific financial sense for them to take ownership, liability (and revenues) for a product class their native technology can't compete in.
It’s pretty trivial to disable the data collection on the home version, and the corporate version doesn’t have it. For work Linux is perfect, for games Windows is still the better choice. Luckily nothing stops people from having both on the same box.
Ubuntu is following MS lead and introducing data collection by default in 18.04. Google also have a couple of linux based options that are built with the sole purpose of collecting your data.
MS for all their faults are at least still in the business of selling operating systems and not selling you.
For Ubuntu is a checkbox at install, this is a big difference between that and 20 hidden switches in registry that each stop different spying code and also get reset by mistake at each update.
Sorry, but a zero tolerance policy of is the only way to stay sane. I don't have time to keep up with every policy change and update on what every app and tool I use has done lately.
I ditched windows for a reason (several, but privacy was one) and I've got no intention of checking every 3 months how far down the slippery slope ubuntu has gone. And they will go down that slippery slope because it's abundantly clear that they as an organisation they don't value privacy.
You are spreading FUD, for some reason a person that has no tiem to read the privacy settings checkboxes you are aware of the latest FUD campaigns, the latest one is about the program that collects hardware info at installation time, this is not tracking you, it is an option to send hardware info upsteeam so developers have real information, now everyone has to quote the Steam survey and this source is gaming focused.
Also, you can use distros based on Fedora/RedHat if you are a Canonical hater.
Generally agree with you, but those of us who knew Microsoft in the 90s are also cautious about the company getting too cozy with the Linux ecosystem, or any competing technology in general.
I assure you MS is still not to be trusted. I find this recent uptick in naivety about them dangerous. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me, can't get fooled again.
The difference between the '90s and now is that in the '90s Microsoft spread FUD against Linux, and now segments of the Linux community are spreading FUD against Microsoft. FUD is bad no matter who spreads it.
I would say they are just as likely. I'd like to take a moment and point out that I see this response type way too often around here. Someone criticizes something and is almost always asked about why they aren't criticizing this other thing too. It's intellectually lazy and logically fallacious, as if when leveling justified ire on a person or company, you must then start listing every violator of the same type.
They're being practical. They couldn't win - neither by spreading FUD, calling Linux "a cancer", funding the SCO lawsuit - so they choose to "embrace" Linux and open source whenever it suits them.
On the other hand their contempt for the (paying!) customer is sill blatantly evident, it's right there in Windows 10 telemetry settings being reset.
All I can read into it is that it's in their best interest to stop being deliberately hostile towards Linux and open-source. We can trust them doing The Right Thing only as long as The Right Thing benefits them.
A lot of the fear I see on here about Microsoft makes me laugh. Many on here haven't got over the Micro$oft mentality from a decade ago.
With that being said, there's a huge difference in acknowledging a company becoming more developer focused, and trusting a company. You shouldn't trust any company to do "the right thing", regardless of how noble their actions may seem on the outside. As Google have shown, your motto can literally be "do not evil" and in the space of a decade you are viewed as a monster.
Should be interesting to see if Fuschia gains some mindshare. Linux is "bloated" by LOC standards, but once you target a specific architecture, the LOC drops dramatically.
The whole LOC drama train is tied to code that doesn't get compiled when you specify the architecture.
Are people who call Linux bloated for IoT-like devices really talking about lines of code? I always thought the main focus was on Linux's architectural layout and how closely tied it is to the x86 memory model & the PC in general.
Realtime OSs are currently in vogue because they better match how some IoTs devices work, so there's less abstraction that doesn't apply to that circumstances (and therefore improved performance/reduced complexity).
...how closely tied it is to the x86 memory model & the PC in general.
Is it, though? Linux has had NOMMU (running without an MMU at all) support since the early 2000s, and the atomics / barriers are more based on Alpha's memory model than anything else - several of those primitives just compile out to a compiler barrier or nothing at all on x86.
Most heavyweight things you don't need in an IoT context can be compiled-out completely - I think probably the major bit of infrastructure you can't is support for multiple user IDs?
That's fair. What's the counterpart example though? Is it Fuschia, or QNX, or similar? If so, why are they so niche? If there is an obvious better answer I'd expect more noise.
To underline this, the LOC has actually dropped in the next version of the kernel (which has just hit -rc1), primarily because a set of no-longer-used architectures were removed.
It's been an interesting ride for sure to follow Microsoft the last few years. The work they do with Azure and dev tools and open source is pretty neat. Folks like Scott Guthrie and the new CEO certainly made Microsoft more appealing again. It's kind of funny even how times change and how I think of Microsoft as one of the top cloud and online companies now, even before Google but still behind Amazon. Certainly a personal opinion, but that's how times and my opinion changed.
me too, I've swung back to Bill, amazon, google, youtube, facebook, none of them are going to help us, Bill on the other hand, I trust you Bill, I love your surface book, I love your international approach, make the geeks proud again :)
It's nitpicking. They existed in 1998, so "a couple of decades" is debating months in the scope of decades. Google incorporated as a privately held company on September 4, 1998.
Microsoft now cares about subscriptions (office365, etc) and monthly recurring "rental" revenue. Anything that gets people to spin up more Azure VMs and pay for them monthly, forever, and possibly get locked into the hosting platform, they're totally OK with. Doesn't matter if it's a Linux VM or a Windows VM running on their hypervisors as long as people are paying the bills.
It does sound great. My main concern is what happens when devices go out of support. Will MS keep on pushing updates indefinitely? Will there be a mechanism to take over the updating process if they decide that a certain set of devices are no longer supported?
It's also a big swing for me in that I trust MS more than Google now to do the right thing. I'd have thought that impossible a couple of decades ago.