
Credibility and trust: Microsoft blows it by forcing Windows 10 on users - sidcool
http://www.networkworld.com/article/3077932/windows/credibility-and-trust-microsoft-blows-it.html
======
snarfy
They wouldn't have to do this if they would just make the next version of
windows better than the previous versions.

Technically they usually are, but then management starts making decisions
about what is best. Not what is best for the user, what is best for Microsoft.
If they just focused on the users, it would all work itself out. People would
want to upgrade. Instead we get to login to our local machine with a Microsoft
account, data tracking, etc. These are all things good for Microsoft.

~~~
Piskvorrr
As far from an MS fanboy as I am, this is one thing I need to disagree on:
WinX, from my experience, seems like a well-made system; at least on fresh
installs. The spying "features" can all be disabled (apparently), and function
all-local, no MS account required.

The botch (which just keeps getting worse) is the forced-by-any-means upgrade;
if you have an upgrade path planned, and you're in the middle of testing,
having all the workstations pull the rug from under you (because "This is
where you want to go today!") is, IMNSHO, borderline criminal.

In other words: We had wanted to upgrade. Within weeks. Now we're dug in the
trenches, locked down and hoping we didn't miss one of the upgrade backdoors;
the upgrade plan is, of course, scrapped altogether. In a sentence: COMPLETE
LOSS OF TRUST.

~~~
zxcvcxz
>WinX, from my experience, seems like a well-made system;

I've had the opposite experience. The OS that's supposed to have all the
drivers didn't have all the drivers and I know a ton of people who were stuck
without wifi (and a few who could not even connect through ethernet), had
graphics problems which basically made their OS unusable, had all sorts of
performance issues (especially on small netbooks that auto upgraded), the list
could just go on.

You shouldn't have to disable spyware when installing an OS. You shouldn't
have to install powershell to remove candy crush (which is what you had to do
when Win10 first came out). You shouldn't have to uninstall adware on a new
OS. You shouldn't need an SSD and other newer/high-end hardware to run an OS,
especially when other operating systems run flawlessly on low-end hardware.

Nah, Windows is a trash OS and it seems like the only people who use it are
people who are forced to because of program compatibility.

~~~
WayneBro
I see you comment negatively on Microsoft articles just about every single
time they're posted. It makes me think that you have some sort of agenda and
so I don't really trust your opinion at all.

For myself, having used Linux since early Red Hat releases and Macs
(professionally) since System 6 - I am certain that OS X and every Linux
desktop are absolute garbage compared to Windows.

Anyway, to address your concerns:

> You shouldn't have to disable spyware when installing an OS.

You don't have to. Problem solved.

> You shouldn't have to install powershell to remove candy crush.

You don't have to do that either. Problem solved.

> You shouldn't have to uninstall adware on a new OS.

There is none. Problem solved.

> You shouldn't need an SSD...

You don't need one. Problem solved.

> Nah, Windows is a trash OS and it seems like the only people who use it are
> people who are forced to because of program compatibility.

Well, that's your opinion. I use it because it's the best. So, given that
you're obviously wrong that "people only use it program compatibility [and no
other reason]" we'll have to conclude that your opinion is not based on facts.

~~~
zxcvcxz
>You don't have to. Problem solved.

You do if you don't want to be spied on.

>You don't have to do that either. Problem solved.

You did.

[http://superuser.com/questions/958562/how-do-i-remove-
candy-...](http://superuser.com/questions/958562/how-do-i-remove-candy-crush-
saga-from-windows-10#958608)

>There is [no adware]. Problem solved.

I consider Candycrush is adware

>You don't need [an SSD]. Problem solved.

Well it runs terribly whithout one.

~~~
WayneBro
> You do if you don't want to be spied on.

It's telemetry and it's not spying. Do you use a smartphone? If so, you are
already running something that has telemetry in it.

> I consider Candycrush is adware

Who cares? Again...do you use any smartphone? Do you realize that just about
every smartphone that people use has some sort of app on it that has some ads?
You're making a big deal out of absolutely nothing.

> Well it runs terribly whithout [an ssd].

Well my long time experience with Windows says otherwise. You apparently don't
use Windows, so how would you even know? Besides that, why would you want a
non-SSD for any OS in 2016?

------
athrun
Up until about two weeks ago, I thought people were being unreasonably whinny
about the changes in Windows 10.

This was before I noticed that Candy Crush Saga silently installed itself on
my Windows 10 machine. Not only that but it was listed as a running
application in the Task Manager. Think about it: the system is silently
installing & running third party apps without your consent (!) and there's no
option to control that behavior. (This is not me having hallucinations, see
[1] for other reports of that behavior).

I don't know why it took that long but it seriously compromised any trust I
had with the company.

[1]
[https://www.google.ie/search?rls=en&q=windows+10+candy+crush...](https://www.google.ie/search?rls=en&q=windows+10+candy+crush+keeps+installing)

~~~
legodt
Slight correction, but it doesn't take away from your overall comment: On
Windows 10 installs that Candy Crush "app" is actually a silently bundled
advertisement/link to manually installing the game. The point about
insidiously injecting unwanted data into your computer still stands, but this
is a minor difference.

~~~
athrun
Thanks for the correction! I was in panic mode when I found that app listed in
the Task Manager, I really thought my computer had been compromised and I
uninstalled that app right away without actually looking at it. Glad to know
it's 'only' an ad and not arbitrary code.

But as you point out, it's still an obvious violation of trust...

------
captainmuon
To offer a counterpoint, I've had several people in the family who _tried_ to
update to windows 10 and couldn't manage to do it - even with all the prompts,
nagging, and supposed auto-installation. And hilariously, all you have to do
is to press Next a couple of times and wait an hour.

I'm one of those people who updated early, and had a lot of problems - with
Wifi, touchpad, and incompatible software (Cisco VPN). And still, I'd advocate
that Microsoft should just update everything automatically. Yes, it hurts some
users (who should be able to opt-out easily!) but is the right option for >95%
of home users.

Heck, I wouldn't even announce it as a new version. If the user had Windows 7
and updates to the latest windows, keep "Windows 7" in the info box and keep
the glass theme (and put the real version in the small-print). Then at some
point drop the version number altogether (something I believe MS is planning
to do soon anyway), and offer the user to "download the exciting modern theme
for free!".

The truth is, the difference between Windows 8.1 and 10 is smaller than
between some service packs for previous versions. Actually, 10 rolls back some
much-hated changes in 8, so it is very close to 7 in some regards.

The way I see it, there are two ways to get people to run current Windows: 1)
secretly update it under their seats and don't make a fuss about it or 2) make
people excited so they really want to upgrade (like 95 or XP). What MS is
doing now - show ads and make it look like they have ulterior motives to
update your 'perfectly fine' OS - might not be the best solution...

~~~
Hermel
That approach is not compatible with making users explicitly agree with the
new privacy policy that basically allows Microsoft to access your data. So it
might have been the corporate lawyers that demanded this to be an upgrade that
requires explicit consent.

~~~
captainmuon
True. But most of the changes to the privacy policy are to make Cortana work,
which in the current state works like crap for me anyway.

If they'd not shove that into their OS, but make it a separate product (that
actually worked and not just opened Bing all the time), people would be more
willing to sign their terms (and might even pay for it).

------
corv
I was recently invited to a demo of a complex 3D rig. A couple of days earlier
someone must have given in to the Windows 10 update nag. Suffice to say, once
the system was on location it never got out of a reboot loop.

Fortunately a replacement was on hand but imagining a botched live performance
in front of a large audience is cringe inducing.

When you see Grandpa running a 'Windows 10 update blocker' and 'Start Menu
reverting utility' something must have gone very wrong during UX development,
or the company simply doesn't care about its users.

On the flip-side, I've never seen recent converts being so happy with their
Linux installs, nor have I had so many requests for that "Linux thing".

There are use cases where Windows simply doesn't belong, such as digital
signage and ATMs. It's a pity many developers keep choosing what they are
comfortable with instead of the right tool for the job.

~~~
Piskvorrr
Digital signage and ATMs? I think the Windows Embedded line is built
_specifically_ with these in mind (of course there are non-Windows options as
well); hacking and slashing through the desktop Windows would bite you in such
use cases :)

------
origami777
The perception of MSFT in the IT Industy has been improving. Seems like it has
been largely due to their open source and innovation activities.

I have recently competed against MSFT in the field. And I can assure you they
are up to their old dirt bag tricks. The one I disliked the most was modifying
customer contracts to inflate sales numbers of some of their products.

When I see news like this I'm not surprised.

Their moves don't seem genuine. Just some PR plan. Putting lipstick on a pig.

~~~
cm3
While they cannot take back open sourcing some of the core technologies
liberally, this doesn't mean their management had to be become friendly as
well.

Microsoft is so big that it's no wonder that one team does something great for
everyone while another team partly voids the improvement by doing something
stupid. Windows 8 and 10 have, as usual, improved the kernel and the
surrounding subsystems but the stuff on top got worse in many aspects.

My conclusion is that Microsoft is in need of a charismatic leader who keeps
quality in check and regression to a minimum. Someone who doesn't tolerate the
stuff they're pulling right now.

------
milansm
When I bought my laptop I got Windows 8.1 with it. I didn't want to delete it
immediately so I dual boot Ubuntu and used Windows only occasionally. Then one
day I couldn't start Windows because it was stuck in infinite update loop,
even though I turned off updates because of those annoying "please update to
win 10" messages. Now I run only Ubuntu.

------
JohnTHaller
I spent a chunk of yesterday talking my girlfriend's dad through downgrading
back to Windows 7 since his laptop had (helpfully) upgraded on him which
killed his ability to use QuickBooks to manage his business. Fun fun.

At this exact moment, I'm trying to troubleshoot the dreaded "Remote procedure
call failed" error on my barely used Windows 10 laptop which breaks all the
fake apps (aka Windows store apps) that come bundled with the OS. If you want
reliable apps on Windows 10, use real Windows apps not Windows store apps.

------
hoodoof
Meh. I totally understand Microsoft's position - it absolutely requires its
user base to move to Windows 10, and has been severely punished by having a
user base stuck on versions going all the way back to XP. Something has to
change - people don't upgrade unless they are forced to.

~~~
sametmax
> people don't upgrade unless they are forced to.

Do you hear yourself? What if people don't need to upgrade ? Sorry, but I'm
the one knowing best about if I need to upgrade my OS.

And when you pay for a machine, a lot of money, and you pay for a system, a
lot of money, you expect to have the choice of what you do with said machine
and system.

Plus, do you know why people sticked to XP ? Because it worked. Same with
windows 7.

If you don't need a new system, there is no reason to change. It's work. It's
uncertainty. It will break things. And I won't even begin with the w10
spywares.

Not to mention the way it's been done which is downright disrespecteful.

~~~
captainmuon
> Sorry, but I'm the one knowing best about if I need to upgrade my OS.

I can't speak about you, but _I_ certainly don't think I know best about when
to upgrade my OS. I rarely need new features, and hate unnecessary changes to
my running system like anybody else. But I've seen spreading malware crap far
to often to take chances.

Remember the time when you had to disconnect the computer from the internet
while installing Windows XP, because unpatched installations would be taken
over in minutes by worms? For most people (unless you have an excellent
firewall and don't browse the web), the only sane option is to keep everything
up-to-date with all security updates.

If Microsoft decides they can't afford to backport security updates to older
versions after some years, then at some point we have to swallow the toad and
upgrade. It's just the unfortunate reality of current OSes.

~~~
Piskvorrr
Well...how about "our HW vendor has been promising WinX drivers for some
months now, but for now, supported OSes end at Win 8.1"? Is MS still in the
best position to decide "eh never mind, it's not like you are actually using
that very specific piece of hardware - off to WinX you go"?

In other words, "I am not capable of deciding" does not translate into
"therefore everyone gets force-fed the upgrade (because of course they're not
capable of deciding, either)."

~~~
captainmuon
Well I agree if you have a good reason (like a lack of driver) then you
absolutely should be able to delay or cancel the update.

I think there are two different questions. Should updates auto-install by
default (after a warning), and should you be able to reject any update? I'd
say yes to both, but unfortunately Microsoft tends to no for both sometimes.

------
cm3
What I never got an answer to is how Windows users cope with the abysmally
long update times and reboot/update/reboot cycles. Just the process to check
for updates takes ages on most machines, regardless of RAM or SSD. On Linux
(Debian, Arch, Fedora) or FreeBSD this is just a matter of a couple minutes,
applying the upgrade included. This is one of the huge advantages which, if we
can show it to Windows users, they might get more envious and ready to try an
Ubuntu release.

I do understand Microsoft's insistence to allow removing particular upgrades
selectively, and that might be used as an argument for the inefficient update
system, but if you do that, it's just as easy to leave a broken Windows, so I
don't buy it.

If Microsoft could at least take some hints from Apple, where you have always
just one latest version of a component, it might be step forward. As it
stands, you'll have 4 MSVC runtimes, 3 .Net runtimes, and so on, all
complicating matters. A little streamlining of their components with an
improved update software implementation should do wonders.

That said, I'd love read more about this from someone who knows Windows deeper
than me, because I cannot believe MS so ignorant of the abysmal update times.

------
Pxtl
I have win10 on several of my machines and while I think the UI is a nice fix
of the lousy win8 UI, thing is buggy as hell. I was getting video driver
crashes during sleep and other sleep-of-death bugs on multiple devices,
including a Surface. And the file browser crashes a lot.

------
Neil44
Most days I'm taking calls from people who's business machines have updated to
Windows 10 and something has stopped working.

What is the rationalle for forcing people to upgrade the OS on business
machines that are mid-life and doing their job perfectly well as is? It's not
your decision Microsoft, and you're costing these people money.

------
acqq
My example why I can't upgrade and regularly have to fight the updates that
try to force me again and again: two notebooks, one older, one relatively
recent.

Windows 10 breaks things on both. On the older, even if the "Update to 10"
says "everything's OK," after the update the machine is so unstable that it
gets often stuck and crashes regularly. It has enough RAM, the cause is
"officially unsupported" Intel WiFi card that I can't replace with the newer.

On the newer notebook, the touchpad remains effectively broken: its
sensitivity is different, the scroll areas can't be activated. The screen is
somehow also more prone to temporary "burn-in" effects. The notebook is
specifically not listed by the manufacturer as "upgradable to Windows 10."
Microsoft however forces upgrade again and again.

From my point of view, Windows 10 upgrade definitely has problems with
notebooks.

------
rasz_pl
Microsoft is currently transitioning whole desktop division to the Iphone
model. They tried to succeed in mobile for 20 years now (CE release) and
failed regularly every single time, often times _destroying_ their strategic
mobile partners (palm, nortel, very famously sendo, finally nokia). Ballmers
last 'brilliant' plan was to kill their own Desktop business in an effort to
gain mobile foothold with unified Windows Phone platform. Obviously that didnt
work either, backup plan is ... there is no backup plan, they will simply
transform desktops into disposable walled garden centrally managed phone
systems full of junk apps pushed from the mothership and a steady revenue
generated by all the spywar^^^buildin analytics.

Microsoft dreams about that 30% cut of every app sold, and they will murder
desktop to get it.

------
dep_b
One hand Apple does the same with OS X, where every Mac from 2008 onwards
basically still receives free OS updates. On the other hand those OS upgrades
are usually barely more than a UI refresh and never seem to cause any problems
_knocks on wood_.

I usually wait out half a year or something before upgrading because I don't
have any pressing reasons to upgrade, maybe one computer that gets the new
version so I can test stuff.

Windows seems to change radically with each version. And none of the changes
seem to be permanent. At least the OS on my Mac really changed when it changed
and then it stayed the same for 15 years again.

~~~
2muchcoffeeman
Apple adds lots of new features every release.

[https://www.apple.com/au/osx/whats-new/](https://www.apple.com/au/osx/whats-
new/) (I just learnt that I could wiggle my finger really fast to find my lost
mouse pointer)

I agree that it never really feels like it though. The last big features that
really changed/improved things were 2 finger right click and scroll, Spotlight
and Time Machine.

------
arca_vorago
I feel like people are losing sightnof the big picture here, which at it's
core, Microsoft has always been opposed to user freedom.

Windows is a closed source black box that you dont have control of. You can
spruce it up all you want, but its the cold hard truth.

Foss is the future, so those ofnus freeing ourselves of the clutches of
proprietary where we can will be ahead of the game when in 6 months we learn
_via document leaks_ , (because those of us paying attention) realize the NSA
backdoors are so deep now good luck being a dissident and running doze.

------
cm3
Another data point: Windows Media Center is either not available in the to-be-
upgraded-to-licensed version of Windows and you have to buy it now, or it's
not available anymore, don't remember. But people's HTPC's were updated and
there was no Media Center anymore. What did users do? They installed a non-
Windows media center solution, completely replacing Windows. This cannot be in
Microsoft's interest, unless they want to rid themselves of those users.

~~~
ascagnel_
In the US, at least, WMC was the only commercially-available software that
supported anything other than copy-freely CableCard programs. So if you were
planning on watching Game of Thrones (HBO is usually a channel whose programs
are copy-flagged), MS screwed you pretty badly.

------
xori
While I agree this is a loss of trust I think this is a total logical move
from Microsoft. Windows 7 first came out in 2009, and they can't afford to
keep supporting an old OS in today's market. And leaving their users with an
unsecured OS isn't smart for PR in the long run either. Apple's point of view
on this is "upgrade or be left in the cold", which I personally think is
worse.

------
cm3
The update tool claims your system (including drivers and software) is
compatible with Windows 10, only later to realize that some hardware doesn't
work or an application doesn't start anymore. While these are rare, it's
unacceptable to force people to update when it's incompatible to upgrade the
existing installation.

~~~
greggman
Oh yeah, I went through that a few months ago 48 minutes to install only for
it to fail, ~70 minutes for it to back out. Then my mistake I hit upgrade
again and had to do the entire 128 mins again :( Still on Windows 8.1 on that
machine

~~~
gengkev
I have a machine that got stuck at around 42% through the upgrade process and
I left it there for a whole day before holding down the power button to shut
it off. Then the recovery process started.

------
homero
Automatic updates are a no go and now they brought it to Windows 7! I feel
like they're hacking my computers and now I'm constantly checking that 10
isn't being installed behind my back! It's stressful!

------
someguydave
I do not want Windows 10 because Microsoft dropped Windows Media Center
support.

------
galfarragem
I'm one (of several - I'm sure) that updated to Win10 and 2 hours later
reverted to Win7. 'Cut your losses' is normally a good advice.

------
saiya-jin
well, since linux is far from easy for most non-tech people and not 100%
working for all windows apps, I presume popularity of up-to-date hacked
distros will soar.

so far i don't see a single reason to move from Win7, and I instructed my
fiancee to not interact with any update dialogs on her laptop, just move them
outside of screen. Well done, Microsoft, well done

------
melling
Microsoft loses credibility? What does that mean? People complain all day on
the Internet while Microsoft's desktop monopoly of 90% falls 0.1%? Microsoft
has nothing to lose and much to gain by getting more of their customers on the
latest version of Windows.

In fact, developers, especially web developers, should be excited that
Microsoft is upgrading everyone they can.

~~~
Piskvorrr
That means "OS vendor has a backdoor open in our systems, on purpose" is very
bad news. Very, very, very, very bad news. As in "audit noncompliance bad
news". This is not a matter of mom-and-pop shops with three computers, or of
any interest to the home user, but the fallout might be _massive_ (as in "time
to look for a different vendor, can't have that").

~~~
melling
"Might be massive"

Thanks for the hyperbole. I guess you used the word "might" so you can't be
wrong when nothing changes? As I explained, there won't be any consequences.

~~~
Piskvorrr
Future is sort of hard to predict, at least for me. But you seem significantly
more capable thereof; come on, enlighten me!

(The "might" expands to this: a retraction of the, ahem, telemetry, and the
continuous update policy - at least for the enterprise segment - is one way
the MS could avoid this trap it's built for itself; given their behavior to
date, I doubt it will)

------
ourmandave
I wonder what the reporting of the transition to Windows 11 will look like?

~~~
sz4kerto
There won't be Windows 11. That's why all of this is happening -- Microsoft
changing the model.

(Almost) nobody is complaining about Google forcing them to update Android to
the next version -- it just happens. That's what Microsoft is doing right now.

~~~
Silhouette
_There won 't be Windows 11. That's why all of this is happening -- Microsoft
changing the model._

They'd like everyone to believe that, but I suspect the picture will look
quite different by the start of 2020 when Windows 7 support runs out. It's
certainly possible that MS will win this one through sheer determination, but
it's certainly also possible that their senior management will be removed and
the replacements will steer the ship back towards a more traditional and
trusted path, and there's also a significant chance that with so long to go
some other party will mount a credible attack on Microsoft's dominance on the
desktop by then.

~~~
Piskvorrr
Finally, The Year Of Linux On The Desktop! :D :D :D

(Probably not :))

~~~
Silhouette
I can't see any of the current Linux distros taking over desktops in any big
way, even with Microsoft's current strategy, by 2020. The application base
just isn't there.

In this context, I think Linux has most potential as the foundation for more
targeted platforms that might compete for specific niches within the
traditional desktop space, along the lines of Chrome OS or SteamOS. Android
has shown that you can build a very successful, very widely used platform on
top of Linux within the kind of time frame we're talking about here.

------
thatsdumbson
I love how anti-Microsoft articles are still considered "activism" by some
people. Does this article contribute to any kind of conversation that hasn't
been had a thousand times before on HN?

------
LoSboccacc
Meh. I see many users happy with the free upgrade, and many business badly
hurt because they were using the home version instead of a properly configured
pro/enterprise.

I just don't buy in the hyperbole., besides windows 7 is out of support and
windows 8 is going off next year. Those users will be the next in line into
botnets.

At least microsoft takes backward compatibility seriously and upgrades are
relatively painless compared to, say, linux.

~~~
sametmax
Just because something is not supported anymore doesn't mean you have the
right to force people to stop people using it.

Windows 7 is not out of support because it's obsolete, it's out of support
because of MS commercial strategy.

~~~
origami777
Excellent point. That's the heart of the issue. Changing the terms of the
relationship after they've been established. Great way to ruin trust.

~~~
gengkev
This is exactly my issue with the forced upgrade. With a browser like Chrome,
automatic upgrades are there from day one. Everybody expects them, and they
happen silently anyway. On the other hand, Windows 7 users never signed up for
forced OS upgrades when they purchased the OS. (Especially not an upgrade that
downloads gigabytes of data, forces your computer offline for hours, and
sometimes even bricks your computer.)

