Microsoft says Windows 11 changes are "directly influenced" by users
- Thread starter midian182
- Start date
JamesBlond
Posts: 490 +298
We all know its about control, just some people don't want admit it.
This was covered by Ai
disinfect8280
Posts: 104 +49
Windows has to ship as a "one size fits most" product. That means bundling apps, cloud hooks, and guardrails because most users don’t configure anything, at all, they expect it to just work out of the box. That’s why “Photos” replaced the old viewer ... it’s slower, sure, but it handles way more formats, sync, editing, and integrates across devices. That’s the trade off and users wanted it.
The frustration is that enthusiasts lost the ability to easily opt out of things. Windows 7 gave you more control by default. Windows 11 still can be trimmed down, but now it takes effort, policy tweaks, or third party tools, which is where the annoyance comes from.
So it’s not that Microsoft doesn’t know what people want. It’s that they’re optimizing for the 90% and making the 10% jump through hoops.
Calling people filthy casuals because they want it to just work is completely missing the point.
There is a OS for your type, you know for enthusiasts that aren't "filthy casuals"....its called Linux.
onebignerd
Posts: 144 +75
Agreed, run your PC how you want!
While I won’t defend MS, this has become an issue that can no longer be ignored… Your unsecured box no longer affects just you. Hackers use these unsecured boxes to attack others - and I suspect that MS (and other companies) are facing pressure to “do something about it”.
Much like you don’t have the right to drive your car (which you own) any way you like, this is now coming to networked computers / routers as well.
MS could secure their OS without forcing unwanted and buggy updates upon everyone, they simply choose not to because a consumer OS is only a fraction of their total business.
Also "age verification" coming to computers and routers is a matter of control and stripping away the right of privacy, it's the loss of a personal computer being personal.
Historically, I can think back decades ago when I'd purchase an "OEM System" with Windows on it and the handful of HOURS I'd spend "debloating" the system. At some point MS insisted that OEM's provide a 'clean slate' (or otherwise) option and I recall using the "system restore" option on a new OEM PC to have merely a fresh copy of Windows7 installed without any OEM bloatware. Those were the days.
Fast forward to WIN10 and even more so with WIN11 and Microsoft themselves was stuffing Windows with bloatware. Leading to many scripts and hacks to "debloat windows".
While I still own and use WINxx systems they have been highly customized and are used in very restricted & secure environments. None of them could "phone home" even if WINxx wanted to.
Fast forward to WIN10 and even more so with WIN11 and Microsoft themselves was stuffing Windows with bloatware. Leading to many scripts and hacks to "debloat windows".
While I still own and use WINxx systems they have been highly customized and are used in very restricted & secure environments. None of them could "phone home" even if WINxx wanted to.
Probably because he’s a troll… but hey, I’ll bite…
MS almost certainly CANNOT secure their OS - either with or without “buggy updates”. There’s no OS on Earth that is 100% secure - and Windows, which needs to remain compatible with different types of hardware, use cases, etc has no chance of it.
What they CAN do is their best to secure it - which means sending updates out regularly to their MILLIONS of users and having them install them. Since you can’t trust millions of people to do ANYTHING- forcing the installation is probably the only way they could think of to get it done… you got a better way, maybe send them an email?
Calling me a troll because you disagree is interesting, but certainly nothing new with the usual online discourse nowadays which has killed off most tech forums, can't have a civil discussion, just accuse the other person of being a troll.
Linux and Mac OS are secure without either of them shoving updates down your throat, Windows 7 was still secure enough without forcing updates and allowed the user to choose what updates they wanted, no reason MS can't go back to that other than it's easier to shove updates at everyone instead.
Linux and Mac OS are secure without either of them shoving updates down your throat, Windows 7 was still secure enough without forcing updates and allowed the user to choose what updates they wanted, no reason MS can't go back to that other than it's easier to shove updates at everyone instead.
Linux and MacOS aren’t 100% secure - but nice try… there’s a reason updates get released for them as well.
It’s not that I disagree with you - it’s that you apparently disagree with me… and you quoted my post and then argued a different point entirely…
Windows 7 wasn’t secure either - but there wasn’t the same pressure to secure it back then…
LimyG
Posts: 589 +252
I strongly back up that recommendation. It's free, and quite simply fast and excellent.
disinfect8280
Posts: 104 +49
1) do you have an example of this being a widespread issue with home PCs?: "Hackers use these unsecured boxes to attack others"
2) you don't have a right to drive a car on public roads anyway you like but no one is breaking into your garage and installing a speed limiter and changing the engine so you have less horsepower and forcing you to use lane guidance systems with no off switch, etc.
3) your premise is tyrannical. A home PC is personal property.
4) another example is guns. Your premise implies that it is ok to get rid of the 2nd ammendment because someone could break into your home (I.e. a hacker) and use that stolen property to kill someone.
Yes - do a google search for botnet…
Nor does someone have the right to break into your home and install stuff on your PC - it’s done remotely. Much like your car’s firmware can be altered remotely…
It is - but the software IS NOT. You buy a license to use it… you don’t own Windows.
I would stay far away from the US’ ridiculous gun laws… countless studies have shown that you are FAR more likely to shoot a loved one than any criminals breaking into your home…
Gravitytr1
Posts: 220 +132
Their microslop windows 11 PR is now run by copilot
You're the problem if your non-airgapped PC becomes part of a bot network because you chose not to secure it with updates.
HomeyBroDude
Posts: 28 +26
That statement is without merit or proof. If all you have ever known is Socialism, this scare tactic works well on you. Forks make people fat, drunk drivers kill people, etc. These claims can be cited and proved. Your claim of "FAR more likely" is gaslighting, nothing more.
The FBI has self-defense shootings at about 200-400 per year… accidental shootings at 500……. So… yeah…
A gun’s sole purpose is to shoot someone- or to threaten to shoot someone… I don’t see why we want the average person (who tends to be stupid, lazy and selfish) to have these abilities…
Similar threads
