465
Microsoft addresses Windows Recall backlash, promises to fix security issues and make it opt-in
(www.windowscentral.com)
this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2024
465 points (96.2% liked)
Technology
60082 readers
3839 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I've had so many people jump down my throat for listing some of the many obviously fucked things Microsoft did on my PC just over the life of Windows 10. (And not that it should matter, but I even paid for Pro).
I turned all their various advertising and spying "features" off through legitimate settings, group policies, whatever, and the list of things that reverted themselves over time was insane.
User: Goes through 15 step process to turn off unwanted "feature".
Windows: I turned this on, in case it got turned off accidentally. I'll do this every reboot.
It should matter though. If MS wants to give away Windows for free, then users should expect compromised privacy. But it's not. They charge hundreds for it.
If Windows made a paid version that was private and secure, and that the user was in control of, I would buy it in a heartbeat.
If they were giving away Windows for free, their behavior would still be unforgivable.
There is no scenario where any operating system including spyware or ads can ever theoretically be acceptable behavior. Any person who contributes in any way to that happening belongs in a prison cell.
Well that's the only way a "free" product is sustainable.
Linux is free qnd plenty sustainable.
If you can't support providing something for free via a mechanism that isn't pure and unadulterated evil, then don't do it for free. "We have to be monsters to make money" is not a valid position.
It also has a vast array of enormous compromises, which is why no one uses it.
I understand you have qualms with Linux, and that's plenty fine, but when the large majority of servers and smartphones around the world run it, you can't say that no one uses it.
That's not true at all. It has a huge market share, just not in desktops.
But again, that's completely and utterly irrelevant. If being evil is the only way for your business/product to exist, it does not deserve to exist.