Re: The Windows 10 New World Order
Yep. Windows 3.0 for me. 95 good, 98 rotten, 98 SE good, Windows ME pretty awful, Win NT/2K double-plus good, XP initially awful but then got to pretty damned excellent at about SP1, really at SP2. Vista made me switch to OS X. 7 was just Vista with a lick of paint; not so good, really. 8/8.1 terrible until people figured out Classic Shell, then much better than 7. 10? Ugh!
@hadi.gsf: I don't mind your blatant fanboyism at all, as long as you're being objective. You have a right to praise and a right to bitch, just as I do. And you will notice that I'm not above tearing Apple a new hole every now and again, either. I too run Linux only on servers. Clearly though, we do have different tolerances for what we're willing to put up with, and I'm afraid I just can't help thinking MS have got me into a darker corner than ever. Just as the Linux fanboys fail to understand the needs of practical desktop users, I'm having a lot of difficulty understanding why people would support MS's present-day practices.
Well, define inaccepteble in today's world of control and domination. Microsoft is just following other big company's footprints specially now that It has the most desktop and laptop user base (what is that 98%?) So they could get more and more money. And I doubt that It's user Base is going to decrease soon unless Linux steps out in desktop features / or Apple scales down it's prices and gets video games developed for it. (which is not going to happen very soon). Well, That's true, Microsoft is that big evil corperation that steals data off computers, But I don't think It's the only one; If you think your ISP or other perpriotary software kindly respects your delicious data, You're deadly wrong. But at that point you gotta wear the tinfoil hat and hide somewhere in the dark. Microsoft is going to force windows 10 apon its users and the best way to stop them from tracking you and your friend's data is to spread the news about the scripts and things that you can do to close down those stuff.
No, I think it's different. M$ are well aware how much control they now hold, on the desktop, entirely unlike those other companies that use different business models which rely on user data apart from in the normal course of operation (so your ISP really doesn't count, and anyway we have encryption if that's what you need), and are exploiting that to gain their userbase. So maybe you accept the loss of privacy. Fair enough. I don't. Do you remember Scroogled? Not only does MS fail to realise just how much trust they are burning with Win10, but also the claims they made, that consumers were being "Misled" by Google and Facebook, could not possibly apply more to M$ now if they tried! Your desktop uses its Internet connection to spy on you just because it can, and there's nothing you as an ordinary user can do about it. It is the purest form of hypocrisy. The greedy bastards even want your money at the end of the "Free"* one-year upgrade offer. It's so incredible, you almost have to imagine that M$ are teaming up with Apple and Google to cover the market: Google at the bottom, MickeySoft somewhere in the middle, and Apple at the "Premium" end. The mind just boggles that people can simply roll over and tolerate it.
Sebby wrote:Summary: commend the good. But the customer is always right, and right now M$ are failing to bloody well deliver.
Ok, I have to laugh at your statement here; I will tell you why. Just go and read the feedback of a general windows customer in the time of prerelease win10. I can give you some examples:
User puts a feedback on accessibility section: "Please, I want the UI larger and brighter. and a bit more beautiful". "Hi, Why can't i snap the windows with one click instead of two clicks" "Hey, Can the icons be not like in 1970's? I want cool icons!" "This is terrible, make my screen more brighter" "The top bar looks childish, make it <incert color here>"
Well, There you go, general customer. I hope you get the irony.
Irony? If by "Irony" you mean the apparent disconnect between my insistence of users being right and asking for superficial features as opposed to privacy, then yes, maybe that could be considered ironic. But, since it is precisely these concerns that M$ are so good at ignoring, with the result that Windows never actually ends up being of any great use to anybody (remember Metro?), perhaps that "Irony" is better reserved for MS fanboys who keep revising their opinions depending on whatever M$ happens to think is a good-looking user interface at the time. Users may not be aware that their privacy is being invaded; that still doesn't make it any more right for M$ to do it, and if users were ever motivated to ask, they'd meet with just as much disdain in that regard as they would in regard of the right size and shape of icons. I hope you can see the irony in trying to make the case that users should be ignored in one respect, while they are also being ignored in respect of the ways they consider more important.
TBH, While this is extremely horrible to say, But I just have to laugh at people who connect to internet and expect that their precious data is safe and sound. It's bad I agree, But If you want your sensetive data to be more lightly touched, Best option is maybe running a machine on a virtualized software such as what qube OS implements, Buy a deticated server and run a vpn from your computer to that server hoping that the provider never touches your info, Then go through tor; Although that's still not safe but that'd give you another layor of protection; That's only the software side, You gotta buy one other router for having it be the gate way and go on.... If you want your data to be never touched, don't connect to the internet.
I think it's sad that people are so eager to give up so easily. But, hey, if it's good by you, it's good by everyone. Yes? The fact of the matter is that having an Internet connection does not need to equate to privacy violation; it is only that we have allowed non-consensual violation to occur, because it is so convenient, and because the "Trade" so often yields "Free" products for the consumer. Oh yeah, and it pays well--more than the consumer knows, in all likelihood--and that's just how the corporations like it. But everybody else in the net, those who choose a different balance of priorities, are now being hurt by the majority, who aren't even aware that it is happening to them. Sad.
And just to be clear, you mentioned some technical countermeasures. I'll just add that, actually, I'm in favour of *less* anonymity, not more. I would love ISPs to assign fixed IP addresses, to publish whois data, and to allow customisable reverse DNS. Does this surprise you? It shouldn't, because all of that is balanced, consensual, and a necessary part of using the Internet. It is the covert back channels that I am taking issue with here, not the legitimate ones. See also this wonderful speech by European Commissioner Margrethe Vestager. Thank goodness I'm an EU citizen--at the moment.
_______________________________________________ Audiogames-reflector mailing list Audiogames-reflector@sabahattin-gucukoglu.com https://sabahattin-gucukoglu.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/audiogames-reflector
