[Delmania]

How is this different than getting an ad for Chrome when you go to google.com?

[annadane]

What is up with the recent wave of relativism-type comments? "Yes, Facebook is bad, but what about Reddit?" "Yes, Microsoft is bad, but what about Google?" etc etc

They're not productive. Yet a ton of people are doing it. It almost smells like astroturf.

[xenophonf]

That's wrong, too, but the subject under discussion here is Microsoft.

[yjftsjthsd-h]

Why should it be any different? Both are abuses of a monopoly position.

[Vrondi]

Because we paid money for this OS license, and we didn't go to Microsoft.com

[will4274]

Should Hulu's business model be illegal? Paid+ads is a valid product strategy and Win10 consumer editions follow this strategy.

[disiplus]

you pay for windows and still get ads.

[Spivak]

You pay for TV and still get ads. I'm more than happy to pay to remove ads but I think it's presumptuous to assume that if you pay any amount of money it's expected that it will be ad free.

I mean Red Hat has ads in their RHEL installer.

[koalaman]

google.com is ad supported. I pay a ton of money for Windows.

[eternalny1]

> google.com is ad supported. I pay a ton of money for Windows.

I am the OP who called on Microsoft to stop this.

That being said, they upgraded me to Windows 10 for the low cost of $0.