The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #157780 Message #3727965
Posted By: Bill D
03-Aug-15 - 11:12 AM
Thread Name: Tech: Windows 10-what's happening - updates
Subject: RE: Tech: Windows 10-what's happening with rollout
The image I posted back there was shared by a very well-respected computer expert. He has since added these comments as part of a discussion with a doubter: single > are from the doubter he is debating. double >> are repeat quotes from the expert who is trying to warn people. *I* still have a year to think about it, and I have a Win XP machine that will be retired sometime this year, and 2 Win 7 Professional machines (one brand new) that I seem to have control over. I rather expect that I will survive without M$ 'enhanced' updates... if not, I will take them offline and switch to Linux.
===================================================================
(This first remark follows the image that I, Bill D, linked to)
IMHO, it is scary what people not only accept, but actually *embrace*
when sth. is marketed as shiny-new / must-have / limited time free
update / afterwards always free /...
Only Enterprise edition *seems* to offer a reasonable level of privacy
and control of update selection. Time will show, if it really does...
The other editions are Big Bother at full scale in standard setup, and
Big Bother standing foot-in-door even when configured most restricted.
Not that Android (e.g.) is noticeably better, though... :-(
----------------[then follows the debate]
>> IMHO, it is scary what people not only accept, but actually *embrace*
[...]
> Well it's pretty obvious that most of those highlighted T&C's relate to
> Cortana.
Forced Updates (not only security-wise, but also unknown functionality),
forced re-enabling of switched-off settings, telemetry, monitoring and
optional access_to /upload_of private files and data,... - That's not
"just Cortana". :-(
Win10 Enterprise SA per-user LTSB would probably be the edition, that
could be worth a look for privacy-concerned home users. But since it
only is sold through business channels, MSDN or Technet ("Platforms"
has more-the-less been canceled, though), it isn't too easy to come
by for the average user. And it ain't cheep in small quantities, since
it requires an /additional/ "normal" base license of Win7 or later.
> There was a lot of fuss here about Windows Search which is now a
> component of Cortana. Time will tell whether Cortana will be successful but
> I can only speak with any authority about Windows Search. For me spidering
> all my files and emails has been a godsend.
I don't need to /search/ for my files. Although I have several TByte of
programs and data, I simply /access/ them. Well-structured filing system
and descriptive folder and file names aren't that hard to maintain.
/When/ for once I do search, then inside one or very few subfolder(s).
No need for indexing. If deemed necessary, folders get additional
Info-files. And that's it. More important than search is quick filtering
inside large folders, i.e. reducing the files shown while typing a filter
condition. - Something, that decent file managers have been providing
for years...
----------------------
> Forced security updates is a good thing.
No, it is not. MS (and most other software vendors) just designed the update
process in a way, that any alternative to forced automatism *seems* far too
complicated and time-consuming for average users. The information that is
delivered with most updates is laughable; the necessity to follow a link
for each KB article separately - about not only details, but even the most
general information - is ridiculous.
MS disabled whole businesses (let alone millions of home PC's) by sending
out broken updates in past. Apart from that: The day someone manages to
intercept the update process and sends malicious code along it, the world
will notice the idiocy of unattended automatic updates...
> I've yet to use Windows 10 in anger so I'll see what else is really
> forced upon me.
Question is, *why* MS is so persistent in emphasizing, that even with
disabled auto-update for new features and additional apps, those updates
will be rolled-out to Win10Pro and standard Win10Enterprise users after
8 months, with /no/ chance for opt-out?! From a marketing POV, such a
statement is a general trade-off for acceptance. It only makes sense,
when the potential future trade-off will be even bigger. (Create facts,
while people still are eager to jump on the shiny-new train.)
> There's always shovel loads of FUD every time there's a new release
> of Windows.
There have been great technical improvements "under the hood" in past
and quite a few debatable design decisions, as well. But I really can't
imagine, what got into MS, to create the privacy and security disaster
Win10. (All editions except probably Enterprise LTSB.) I guess, it will
be (commercially) successful, anyways. - Although companies ought to
(probably will) be really reluctant before incorporating it.
But, IMHO, an independent evaluation of the code base and the data
acquisition scope/amount surely seems to be in order. If the US gov
isn't concerned, maybe the EU will be. In the past, the NT core was
considered en route to mathematical proof for important aspects of
security. Since WinXP, such considerations don't seem to matter even
a bit, anymore... :-(
> Turning on the anti-virus seems like a good idea to me.
If I turn off AV, I do it for good reason. If a multi-day calculation
breaks on a stand-alone workstation (= no Internet), just because MS
seems it appropriate to turn on an interfering process by some internal
timer event, they won't get easily on friendly terms with me ever again!
There *might* be some reasoning pro "forced security" on Home editions.
With Pro and Enterprise, any decision of sysadmins (or authorized
power users) *has* to be respected!
> Windows always has had extensive monitoring. Developers need feedback.
> Don't feedback, don't get stuff fixed. I don't believe it's a ruse. It's
> necessary.
*I* decide, what information leaves my PC. Any other approach is
unacceptable. Besides, the scope of the data acquisition rights that
MS demands in conjunction with usage of Win10 exceeds crash dumps and
the like, by far. Btw., sending crash dumps /can/ be disabled for
Win10 Home and Pro; sending "diagnostic and usage data" (whatever
that means), however, is always switched-on on these systems. Maybe,
communication data is far more interesting than crash reports...
>> Win10 Enterprise SA per-user LTSB would probably be the edition, that
>> could be worth a look for privacy-concerned home users. But since it
>> only is sold through business channels, MSDN or Technet ("Platforms"
>> has more-the-less been canceled, though), it isn't too easy to come
>> by for the average user. And it ain't cheep in small quantities, since
>> it requires an /additional/ "normal" base license of Win7 or later.
>
> Most people don't have time or the skills to make any kind of informed
> judgment about any of this stuff, and none of us a significant amount of
> it.
Informed decisions can be based on recommendations. Therefore, /some/
people could suggest an appropriate edition and useful settings. Other
people could create scripts for automatically incorporating community-
approved sets of settings (like Black Vipers service managing scripts).
But how can this work, when the only suitable edition is practically
unavailable (and much too expensive) for the majority of all users?
> The bottom line is. Do you trust Microsoft. If you don't. Don't use
> their OS.
No. The bottom line is: Don't accept bad decisions. Complain, criticize.
If enough do it, MS will adjust. (As it did in past.) DOC / EU or other
governmental departments may interfere. (As they did in past, as well.)
Make sure to create a climate, where it doesn't really matter, how much
you trust MS or any other firm (or their employees). Software has to be
transparent about what it does and why. And software companies have to
issue self-committing declarations pro privacy of their users, that are
/enforceable/ and linked to /severe/ penalties.
>> I don't need to /search/ for my files. Although I have several TByte of
>> programs and data, I simply /access/ them. Well-structured filing system
>> and descriptive folder and file names aren't that hard to maintain.
>> /When/ for once I do search, then inside one or very few subfolder(s).
>> No need for indexing. If deemed necessary, folders get additional
>> Info-files. And that's it. More important than search is quick filtering
>> inside large folders, i.e. reducing the files shown while typing a filter
>> condition. - Something, that decent file managers have been providing
>> for years...
>
> Yeah, I used to try and do that, then I realised the power of indexing, and
> my life just got easier
Organizing data is no more time-consuming than dumping it. Organizing
and/or managing dumps of data, OTOH, is.
-------------------------------
>> the only suitable edition [ Win10 Enterprise SA per-user LTSB] is
>> practically unavailable (and much too expensive) for the majority of
>> all users?
>
> I think you are jumping the gun here. It always takes six months for little
> bits of freeware to arrive on the scene to fix whatever MS has missed out
> of the latest version. It's always been that way. The fixes always arrive.
> Why do you think the sky is going to fall this time.
The problem is routed in the licensing terms and the implied reasoning
behind creating such terms. It is one thing to correct a bad/unwanted
design decision by a freeware tool. It is a whole 'nother matter working
against an OS, which is /meant/ to violate your privacy and denies even
sysadmins the right to configure major security and privacy aspects
without jumping through hoops. (Which may - consistent with the licensing
terms - closed or replaced by a backdoor by an automated update just the
other day.)
As Android is to strictly be avoided in businesses on grounds of privacy
and security concerns, Win10 in most editions is now, as well. Because
of the immense market share of Windows on Desktop PC's and workstations,
most companies (and government agencies, NGO's,...) can not choose to
avoid Windows OS on near future. Therefore, MS new concept of Windows
as a service - combined with the new licensing - becomes, IMHO, a clear
matter of antitrust investigations and most likely requires prosecution.