[vel0city]

> Who in their right mind would find it acceptable if their program/operating system decided to automatically download candy crush

Your argument wasn't really based in reality. Windows didn't have Candy Crush actually installed; it was a shortcut to get it from the store.

And even then, we could rephrase that. Change "candy crush" to "mahjong titans" or "3D pinball" or "minesweeper" or "hover" or "hearts" or "solitaire" or "reversi", all games that were actually installed on a fresh install of Windows instead of just being a link to install it separately. Why aren't you then complaining about Reversi or Hover? Where was the outrage in the 1980s over this? Why is it such a big deal that its "candy crush"?

Microsoft has been bundling in games to its operating systems since 1985. I don't get why people suddenly made a big deal about it when it became a shortcut to Candy Crush.

[Out_of_Characte]

When I used windows, candy crush was not just a shortcut. It showed up as an installed program on my machine. Windows updates put it there after the ISO install. I did not check if the full game was there This is pure cope. Candy crush and adverts in windows are the nails that stick out.

There was another huge legal issue when microsoft decided to push their own web browser over crome and firefox. The EU decided to rule against microsoft for doing so despite edge and windows both being from the same company. Why? Because windows is an operating system.

>Your argument wasn't really based in reality.

>Why aren't you then complaining about Reversi or Hover?

You're out of your mind. Are you suggesting that my absence of disagreement with every unknown transgression proves that I'm hypocritical? Just because not every infraction gets punished does not mean that no infraction should get punished to remain 'fair'

>Where was the outrage in the 1980s

My age lacked positive digits back then. I guess that's when any criticism failed to achieve merit in your eyes.

[vel0city]

> It showed up as an installed program on my machine.

Sure, but did you check the "installed size" of the app? 1KB? Really think that game shipped as 1KB? You didn't even bother understanding what happened before you got enraged about it. Nice.

> my absence of disagreement with every unknown transgression proves that I'm hypocritical?

No, just that every version of Windows included games but somehow everyone makes a big deal over Candy Crush as if including a game in Windows is somehow a new thing.

> My age lacked positive digits back then.

Ok then, so you were outraged about Hearts? Space Cadet Pinball? Internet Checkers, pushing MSN accounts on people? Who in their right mind would find it acceptable if their program/operating system decided to automatically download Purble Place. Or were you negative digits old when Windows Vista and 7 shipped?

> Are you suggesting that my absence of disagreement with every unknown transgression proves that I'm hypocritical?

I'm arguing your extreme selection of what to be upset about makes you seem either pretty ignorant or hypocritical.

> hostile attempt by microsoft to push unwanted and distracting software onto consumers.

One could argue Solitare was one of the most distracting pieces of software in the 90s. Imagine how many hours people spent playing that and Hearts. People didn't choose to install that, it was "pushed" upon them. Acting like its a new thing with Candy Crush is once again ignoring history.

Replace every instance in your argument of "candy crush" with "solitare" and see what that sounds like. "Who in their right mind would find it acceptable if their program/operating system decided to automatically download solitare. Let that sink in. Either you accept that solitare itself is malware preying on an innocent microsoft or there is a significant and hostile attempt by microsoft to push unwanted and distracting software onto consumers." Someone so angry that Microsoft bothered bundling in a card game in their OS, oh my! A distraction application came bundled into an operating system, dear lord what ever is this world coming to.

[Out_of_Characte]

>Who in their right mind would find it acceptable if their program/operating system decided to automatically download Purble Place.

>People didn't choose to install that, it was "pushed" upon them

So we're on the same page? Or are you being sarcastic? I'm not sure what your stance is at this point.

[vel0city]

My point is this is how Windows has always been, it's not something getting worse over time. Acting like suddenly now they're including Candy Crush is the line that makes it into malware is laughable to me and overly hyperbolic. If it's malware today because it had a shortcut to Candy Crush it was malware in the 1980s with Reversi. Essentially Windows has always been malware if having a pack-in game distractionware is the standard.

Did you also find Windows XP to be malware? Windows 95? Windows 7?

Is Chrome malware because it's got a hidden game Easter egg in it as well?

Is some Linux distro that defaults to having cowsay malware?

[Out_of_Characte]

Is there a line windows could cross that would make you change your mind? And stop calling me a hyperbolic ignorant hypocrite for drawing the line at candy crush and ads.

[vel0city]

Sure, if you want to bring up something truly user hostile Microsoft has done/been doing recently one could point to when an update moved everyone's user profiles to their OneDrive folder, an update they later pulled for being a pretty poor decision. That was a pretty boneheaded and user hostile decision. Making Hearts and Solitaire and what not an ad-supported micro transaction game when it was free was a pretty crappy move. It's not entirely out of character though.

There's lots of things Microsoft has started doing in the past few years which can be considered user hostile in certain lights. Having a pack-in game isn't something they only recently started doing though, so yeah I'll continue to consider people making a massive deal about a Candy Crush shortcut as being hyperbolic and ignorant. Acting like distractionware being bundled into Windows as a new thing (or even advertisements for their services or even third party services) is an ignorant position to take.

[AlexeyBelov]

Different type of game.

[vel0city]

All of those games are different kinds of games. Hover isn't exactly the same game as Reversi. So, I'm not sure what you mean by that.

Lots of these pack-in games were developed by outside studios and were sometimes published by different companies as well, so that it's a King game instead of something developed in-house by Microsoft also doesn't seem different from the past. Microsoft had already included games with social networks and online aspects such as Internet Hearts and Internet Backgammon. Those bundled Internet suite of games even pushed people to make an MSN account.