Microsoft's Hidden Windows 8 Feature: Ads 635
MojoKid writes "Despite the fact that I've been using Windows 8 for the past three weeks, I somehow managed to overlook a rather stark feature in the OS: ads. No, we're not talking about ads cluttering up the desktop or login screen (thankfully), but rather ads that can be found inside of some Modern UI apps that Windows ships with. That includes Finance, Weather, Travel, News and so forth. On previous mobile platforms, such as iOS and Android, seeing ads inside of free apps hasn't been uncommon. It's a way for the developer to get paid while allowing the user to have the app for free. However, while people can expect ads in a free app, no one expects ads in a piece of software that they just paid good money for."
M$ (Score:5, Funny)
M$
Re:M$ (Score:5, Funny)
Like Smokey (almost) says: Only you can kill it with fire.
Re:M$ (Score:5, Funny)
£inux
Re:M$ (Score:5, Funny)
Appl€?
10 LET M$ = "Microsoft" (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No, "(GBP)inux" and "Appl(EUR)" aren't quite the same as "M$". Microsoft started out as a publisher of interpreters of the line-numbered BASIC programming language. Names of string variables in early BASIC always ended in $, making LET M$ = "Microsoft" valid code. What language are you talking about that uses the symbol for GBP or EUR?
Both Java and JavaScript allow the pound sign and euro sign in variable names, there are probably others.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
MS, M$, MSN, and M$N (Score:3)
They spent up big in the 70s and 80s promoting funding for research into multiple sclerosis 'MS', for a condition that affects the brain, something really important to geeks and nerds.
Of course the difference between multiple sclerosis and Microsoft [jokebuddha.com] is that one is a debilitating and surprisingly widespread affliction that renders the sufferer barely able to perform the simplest task, and the other is a medical condition.
So M$ is Microsoft and MSN is Microsoft Networks but MS is multiple sclerosis.
And M$N is the peso moneda nacional [wikipedia.org], a former currency of Argentina.
Re: (Score:2)
£inux
You'll get more of the same with *buntu, however.
* - http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/09/ubuntu-bakes-amazon-search-results-into-os-to-raise-cash/ [arstechnica.com]
Re:M$ (Score:4, Insightful)
However, while people can expect ads in a free app, no one expects ads in a piece of software that they just paid good money for.
Re:M$ (Score:5, Funny)
Good! I'm glad some one has the balls to hypothetically speak up with their hypothetical outrage about their hypothetical purchase! Way to hypothetically let them know what you really think of them!
Re: (Score:2)
Ubuntu is allowing Amazon search results in their search results. I'm not sure that constitutes direct advertisement or bloatware. They're just opening search to also include a commercial entity.
By "better" do you mean worse? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't believe that hosts is faster than adblock, which blocks content before the domain name is resolved. Firefox goes through a process to decide whether and how to send a request, which ABP uses. Benchmark it for me.
Also, why should I trust a piece of closed-source software with my DNS records?
If you're dynamically updating a hosts file, it would seem that you are reinventing the square wheel -- this is what a DNS cache is for. A local DNS caching server is going to be just as fast, and much more flexible. You can run one on your desktop, or have it on a separate machine, and either way you can route all other DNS requests to it, instead of having a script running on each machine. They support dynamic blacklists [wikipedia.org] as well, and you can match wildcard addresses (e.g. *.malwareserver.com). What is the problem with using tools designed for this purpose?
You mention the home address. The problem with 127.0.0.1 isn't that it it's slower. The problem with it is that it's a valid IP address, usually for a local web server. If there is a server listening, it will process the request.
Longer execution path (Score:5, Informative)
No, that's not how things work.
Without Adblock,
User requests a piece of content -> Firefox uses content policies to determine how and whether a request should be sent -> Firefox checks the local browser cache for the file -> Firefox requests the DNS record for the domain in question -> The OS parses the local DNS cache (the hosts file should be preloaded)-> finds address 0.0.0.0, returns that to Firefox.
Adblock stops that process at step 2. Hosts would be faster IFF [wikipedia.org] Adblock adds more overhead to the content policy process than it would take to actually make the request.
I took a minute to actually test this.
Atom netbook, Linux, Firefox 17 beta, Adblock Plus, Firebug, Mozilla's internal DNS/file cache disabled, hosts file 34 lines long:
Normal DNS name resolution: 3 ms.
With hosts blocking : 3 ms.
With Adblock : 0 ms.
A larger hosts file would of course increase the time taken for DNS resolution.
Not only this, but it can also filter parts of addresses (e.g. filter example.com/badcontent but not example.com/goodcontent). You can filter all sorts of things with regexes that are completely impossible with naive blacklists, like blocking content based on its type.
Your A, B, C, D list is all handled by a DNS caching server. Do note, this is not the same thing as the built-in local DNS cache, so your comments are really completely off-base.
DNS caching servers may be a bit more complex, but again they're also more useful: they work for any device that supports TCP/IP networking. The one I am using weighs in at a hefty 39.9 kilobytes. How big is your implementation?
A "plain" manually updated hosts file is going to be larger in itself than any other form of blacklisting. Even so, you might have an argument still by virtue of simplicity. When you start updating it with a script, you've just tossed all that out the window: your software performs the exact same function as a dns caching server, except badly, with more resources, and less flexibility.
The fundamental weakness of hosts is that you can't do regexes, and you cannot enumerate all malicious domains. It is difficult to strictly compare the performance of string matching (hosts) versus regular expressions (DNS, ABP). A small hosts file would have a chance of beating the other solutions, in theory. In practice, not so much, and by the time we get to multi-megabyte hosts files, you're pretty much screwed for performance.
Are we done here?
Faster is not sending the request at all (Score:3)
I ran benchmarks. Adblock is faster. Requests that are not generated by the browser are faster than ones that are and resolve locally in the hosts file. The language being executed makes zero difference.
This is how Microsoft says DNS works. [microsoft.com] The ironic part is how you go through all these contortions to make sure that hosts is resident in RAM, when it would be anyway if you just used the Windows DNS Client.
You're totally ignorant, it seems, of how Firefox operates internally. What I outlined was exactly corr
Square Wheel Round Two (Score:3)
That is what your script is.
Except by using the hosts file, you screw yourself out of being able to use it to manage the whole network. Among other failures.
I asked some random tech, "What do you call a program that manages DNS entries?"
"A DNS server."
So, I'm going to look at your solution and compare it to other DNS servers. Hmm. Looks like it's broken, featureless, and bloated beyond belief.
With that i
Square Wheel Round Three (Score:3)
Adblock can do #2 and #8, and it should not do these other things. When I want to fuck with my DNS, I'll use a tool designed for the job, [wikipedia.org] not your broken and featureless hosts nonsense. And did I mention bloated? You have a tenth of the features for thousands of times more CPU and memory usage.
You don't need programming ability to use Adblock either -- I don't even bother to configure it, just install and forget about it. If an ad slips through, I right click on it and select "block this with AdBlock." It d
You must be new here (Score:3, Informative)
You can't moderate and post on the same topic, dipshit.
You have this hilarious persecution complex, where you think all ACs are the same person, and the moderators *must* be sockpuppets of the same people who disagree with you.
If you really think I've been modding you down somehow, even though the site doesn't allow that, then you should write to the site admins and report me. They should be able to correlate the IPs and determine whether I've been sockpuppeting. I invite you to do this, because I am damn s
That's OK (Score:5, Funny)
I only pay for applications with bad money instead of good money, so I'm fine with the ads.
Re:That's OK (Score:5, Funny)
So there's someone using bitcoins after all.
Re:That's OK (Score:4, Funny)
So there's someone using bitcoins after all.
Comment of the day. Oh for mod points.
Just... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Just... (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft will send you the bill for their licensing of Reuters etc.
This is a stupid non-story. The reason Microsoft has ads (besides a desire to make money) is that these features are delivering content that costs money. Stock symbols don't just magically tell you their value, you have to subscribe to someone who host's live stock tickers. You have to pay Reuters, the WSJ and New York Times to publish their news stories. You have to pay the Weather channel to provide you with detailed hourly forecasts and historical data.
Microsoft is providing a premium service through the ad supported apps. And these are also applications which aren't a part of the core OS experience. If you don't want them... uninstall and pick another app without ads.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not the point.
Re:Just... (Score:5, Insightful)
The OS doesn't have ads; it's a couple built-in (Metro) apps you probably won't ever use after that one time you open them to see what they are. I agree it's an asinine move, but it's one that won't affect most users.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe the ads don't effect many users now, but that's how they get their foot in the door.
Remember the Xbox 360 dashboard when the system first came out? Now look at it. You can barely see the screens you want to use, because everything is cluttered with ads.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Just... (Score:5, Funny)
On what planet does 0.003 * 1e9 = 3e8? Do you work for Verizon?
Re: (Score:2)
It does suck that Windows now ships with crapware default, but at least they make it far, far easier to uninstall than the hardware vendors. Simply right click on any of the shipping apps and they can be uninstalled with one click.
How do you right-click a touchscreen?
Re: (Score:2)
If its the same as Windows7, you touch the icon and hold for a second until a symbol pops up.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd think that anything involving the middle finger while using Windows would cause a whole bunch of false positives.
Re:Just... (Score:5, Funny)
You use a finger on your right hand, duh
Re: (Score:3)
You fap to finance apps?
Kind of sleezy (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Kind of sleezy (Score:5, Insightful)
Disclaimer: I don't like ads; in fact, I generally hate them.
However...
Do you think Apple doesn't 'embed' a music store in their OS? Doesn't iTunes come pre-installed on both MacOS and iOS?
Re:Kind of sleezy (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, but neither the iTunes player nor the store show me ads.
You launch the music player, you play music. You launch the music store, and it will show you stuff to buy.
This is ads embedded in the native apps ... which is a whole different thing.
Re:Kind of sleezy (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, but neither the iTunes player nor the store show me ads.
You launch the music player, you play music. You launch the music store, and it will show you stuff to buy.
This is ads embedded in the native apps ... which is a whole different thing.
Of course iTunes does -- the whole right column in the display is ads trying to get you to buy music related to what you've got, or complete the album the music is from, etc ...
Re:Kind of sleezy (Score:4, Insightful)
Which is trivially collapsed and never seen again.
TFA is talking about full page ads, and the weather application showing ads for hair products.
As I said, a whole different thing.
Re:Kind of sleezy (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
You should really think of the Music App as Spotify that can also play your local music. It's really designed to be used with the subscription, hence the overt push to use it as such.
When you use it as a glorified Spotify + Hard Drive MP3s the UI works pretty smoothly. A search for music returns either your music or streaming music. If you choose a Pandora style mix it uses again both your own music and the internet service.
If you just want a pure "play my music" the UI is atrocious.
Apple v. Samsung (Score:2)
Apple isn't legally a monopoly.
It is on touch screen smartphones. Apple v. Samsung.
Valve's reaction to Windows Store (Score:5, Informative)
just think of how Apple is going to react to MS embedding a music store in the OS, or Steam is going to react to adding a games store in the OS.
Valve has already published its reaction to the Windows Store in Windows 8. See stories from late July [slashdot.org] and late October [slashdot.org].
Operating systems have come a long way (Score:4, Funny)
I guess Tanenbaum will have to add a new chapter to the next printing of his Operating Systems textbook.
No one expects ads in paid software (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:No one expects ads in paid software (Score:5, Informative)
Or like how Steam tries to bombard users with popup ads anytime they want to play the games they've already paid for?
I'm not sure how you're using Steam, but this has never happened to me.
Re: (Score:3)
You can disable that, I haven't seen any steam ads in years.
View -> Settings -> Interface -> Notify me (with Steam instant messages) about additions or changes to my games, new releases, and upcoming releases.
Re: (Score:3)
What - Like Angry Birds on the iPad?
But Angry Birds doesn't ship with iOS, does it? To me, that's a big difference. You expect - apparently naively - for your OS vendor to be classier. The unspoken agreement is that they're supposed to sell you a clean system that you can then pollute as you see fit.
When you buy a TV, you expect that you'll see ads in the shows you watch on it. You probably don't expect the TV itself to display ads. Well, that's the sort of separation we've always had with our operating systems, and it's one I'd very much lik
You paid for a license (Score:5, Insightful)
You paid MS to license Windows8. You didn't buy a copy. Ergo, you are agreeing to pay MS a specified sum of money to view ads which happen to come with programs that you can also use.
Re:You paid for a license (Score:4, Insightful)
It doesn't seem much different from cable TV, if you put it this way.
Re:You paid for a license (Score:5, Funny)
I think it was +5+5i "Funny Because it's True"
I'd explain, but it's complex.
Whyput 8 on a desktop or laptop? (Score:4, Insightful)
Is there, or has there ever been, ANY reason why you would put Windows 8 on a desktop or laptop? There's not a single positive new feature or advantage of it that I've heard of. And I'm being serious, I really haven't heard one thing it does new or better than 7.
Phones/Tablets, I can understand, but why would you on a desktop or laptop?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Is there, or has there ever been, ANY reason why you would put Windows 8 on a desktop or laptop?
Because the store no longer sells computers with Windows 7 perhaps?
Re: (Score:3)
I just went to Dell site....looking in the Home and Small business offerings, they all seemed to be Win7 as the OS they come installed with.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Whyput 8 on a desktop or laptop? (Score:5, Interesting)
I installed it on an old XP machine. Why? It was suffering from Windows rot and so I needed to re-install Windows. Installing XP seemed silly, so I went looking for a downloadable copy of 7. I found Microsofts seemingly "too good to be true" offer of $40 for 8, so I downloaded and installed it.
Yikes, what a mess. The "guts" are fine - it seems exactly like Windows 7. But the interface is going to go down as a "teachable moment" at colleges, I think. It is quite literally two completely separate GUIs crudely duct-taped together. It's a lot like running a virtualized instance of another OS on a separate screen. The one side is mostly unaware of what the other side is doing. They even have two totally separate "control panels" now.
In XP I used to run a utility that let me hit a button and start typing the name of the application I wanted to run, and then enter. Vista and 7 had this built-in when you hit the Windows key. Now, the Windows key brings up the Start Screen, and while you can still start typing, the results come up in a separate area and you need to click on them. So now I'm back to a utility that lets me quick-start applications! Full circle.
Oh, and file transfers are now counted in "files per second" rather than "megabytes per second". I certainly hope some MS engineers resigned in disgust over that little change.
So to answer your question... no, there is no reason to put Windows 8 on a desktop or laptop. And it looks to me like even a Surface would be a pain in the ass. There's no file browser on the full-screen side, so you still have to poke around in Windows Explorer with your finger. Control Panel is still necessary, since not all settings are available in the full-screen side - so you have to poke around with your finger there as well. I know that Windows has had tablet versions almost forever, but they all really needed a stylus.
Re: (Score:3)
Windows 8 is actually a very very good OS, despite the underdeveloped windows App portion. The ui that blends desktop and "modern ui" (apps) is actually very well done. Its a very efficient OS, the problem is that MS as usual, has put out a great idea, that is not well supported or developed to perfection. This is what Apple is so good at. Apple tends to focus on the user experience, and Microsoft focuses on the tech idea, but not fulfilling the experience.
Windows 8 is technically an amazing OS. It is FASTE
Automatic Payments (Score:2)
From Microsoft Wallet.
Corporate IT is going to hate this (Score:5, Interesting)
One more reason to exercise "down"grade rights.
even more reason to migrate to Linux (Score:2)
My wife likes Linux, though has XP on her dying laptop.
We were considering going OS X and MacBook, but Apple's stringent control is to the liking of neither of us (and she's the opposite of a techie). And the rumour of moving to ARM?
Thus, when her laptop dies, she'll get a new one with either Ubuntu or Mint, and our move to the next, new, modern operating system will by
Value Ad Apps != OS (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
There was a better distinction between OS and applications on Win 7 and before; you could download Skype and MSN messenger which had ads, but they didn't come with the OS. The only ad in Windows 7 was "Anytime Upgrade" and that was well hidden in the control panel, so I accepted that even with strong dislike of ads in important software.Thankfully I'm now on Fedora Linux (and considering BSD), and don't have to worry about this
Re: (Score:3)
Hint: You're Supposed to Delete Them (Score:2)
Oh! Oh! I know where this goes... (Score:3)
They're so targeted to my interests, it actually adds value to the experience? It makes it easier and more intuitive to find the products I need? The costs would otherwise be passed on to the consumer?
Fuck you.
This is a good thing! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Valve's focus at this point is standard Linux, not Google's incompatible platform.
Classic viruses aren't the problem now. These days it's all trojans run by unsuspecting users.
What ads? (Score:5, Interesting)
I haven't noticed any ads, myself.
Of course, the first thing I did after I installed Windows 8 was install classic shell and disable metro entirely, so maybe that's why. ^_^.
Re: (Score:3)
It's all about profit... (Score:3)
.
The question is --- With Apple and Google cleaning Microsoft's clock in the mobile world, at what point will the value of Windows be reduced to the point that it is just another delivery medium for ads?
Eh, I noticed the ads too... yawn. (Score:5, Interesting)
I paid $15 for the OS upgrade (before they fixed the loophole in their upgrade promo site), just to see what all the commotion was about. Upgrade went fairly smooth considering I did the unthinkable and actually tried to upgrade a Microsoft OS without starting from scratch (I imaged my boot drive ahead of time just in case).
I played around with the Modern UI apps for the first day or so, smirked at the not-so-subtly placed ads, installed Classic Shell and haven't bothered to go back to the Modern UI since. The Modern UI truly has no place on a desktop computer... or anything without a touchscreen for that matter. It's a consumption-oriented tablet UI that probably excels at keeping you occupied during an extended shit session. I'll stick to the desktop and benefit from Win8's tighter security and streamlined bootup/shutdown. With a couple tweaks, it's like a really well made service pack for Win7.
MS executives have been touting this for years (Score:3)
It looks like this is a core component of Redmond's business plan in all their OS offerings.
Re:EULA? (Score:5, Insightful)
I can hardly believe this article was posted without researching the EULA. I would imagine it addresses this new feature. If it does, that's not news (other than the usual EULA hilarity). If it does not, that's news.
The only thing that's "news" here is the rather unbelievable concept that you actually think people read EULAs anymore. Even if it did address it, chances are the words "built-in ads" are summed up inside three paragraphs of legalese that no one understands anyway.
Re:EULA? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Only the second coment and it's parrotting "feature". How is this in any way a feature? features help the end user, anything that detracts from the user's experience is either a bug or a design flaw.
This is not a feature, it's a flaw. A really BAD flaw.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:EULA? (Score:5, Informative)
Fact the first: Adverts within an application consume display space, and in smaller screens, this becomes more apparent.
Fact the second: Adverts require that you be a bit more careful with your mouse/finger/stylus/whatever, lest you accidentally click on the advert and interrupt what you're doing (especially if you're playing a game or other activity that has a high chance of random clickage).
Fact the third: Ads in paid-for/included applications, delivered by the OS maker, cannot be rationalized, especially since the competition does no such thing. When an OEM does it, it is often labeled "crapware".
Fact the fourth:: Even if you do not use it (them), you are stuck with the application(s) residing on your hard drive, taking up space, and potentially running in the background, which would consume both CPU and networking bandwidth. For mobile devices with 3G/4G data caps and using Windows 8 (be it RT or x86), this becomes a potential extra cost... you are literally paying to see the adverts in programs you did not install or choose yourself.
Fact the fifth: You as a consumer were not made aware of this intrusion until after you purchased the item, and since it is software, good luck getting a refund on it from either OEM or OS maker.
Conclusion: This ad-laden software is a massive flaw, not a feature.
Re: (Score:3)
It's a nasty trick, but apparently it can be turned off although I haven't tried this yet; see thread below.
What's more evil, IMHO, is that the ads give location and context to users and invade their privacy, and potentially open the software being used to infection or manipulation vectors. Users didn't ask for their privacy to be given up, and it means that the apps have holes, perhaps big ones, to be manipulated by malware.
I understand the need for revenue, but this seems over the top.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they are right, maybe people won't mind and they will make tons of money, but it sure annoys me, and my guess is other people will be annoyed too. Who wants this stuff on their work computer?
Re:EULA? (Score:5, Informative)
On page 7 of the 11 page legal document called the Windows 8 EULA, in Section 6 "Windows Apps", Microsoft include the following wonderfully enlightening information...
"Some Windows apps include advertising. You may choose to opt out of personalized advertising by visiting choice.live.com."
Re: (Score:3)
"You may choose to opt out of personalized advertising by visiting choice.live.com."
".. by filling in the form with the mandatory fileds of First, Last and Maiden names, Birthday, Address, Phone number, Utilities bill and Blood group."
Re:EULA? (Score:4, Funny)
On page 7 of the 11 page legal document called the Windows 8 EULA, in Section 6 "Windows Apps", Microsoft include the following wonderfully enlightening information...
"Some Windows apps include advertising. You may choose to opt out of personalized advertising by visiting choice.live.com."
... Or you might aswell also opt-out by visiting www.ubuntu.com and avoid the hassle altogether!
Re:EULA? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I never see ads in Linux, even when using free apps.
It's a brave new world out there for Ubuntu users: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/09/online-shopping-features-arrive-in-ubuntu-12-10 [omgubuntu.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
Not an Ubuntu user then I take it.
Android is Linux too (Score:2)
I never see ads in Linux, even when using free apps.
I see ads in free applications for Android (a Linux-based operating environment for phones and tablets) all the time. Even Ubuntu 12.10 has Amazon ads. What Linux-based operating environment are you using? And do you play any free games with production values comparable to those of professional games on that version of Linux?
Re: (Score:2)
Slackware .9 ~
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. I expect to see ads anywhere and everywhere, except in apps distributed through my Linux distribution's software repository.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not like you pay for windows anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
"apps that Windows ships with." (Score:3)
How is this a Windows 8 Feature though and not something that the developer embedded into her app?
From the summary: "apps that Windows ships with."
Xbox Live: Silver vs. Gold (Score:2)
Re:Xbox Live: Silver vs. Gold (Score:4, Informative)
Gold gets you ads as well.
Re: (Score:2)
I was under the impression that BOTH the free and paid version got the ads.
Re: (Score:2)
Paid cable TV was meant originally to be a premium paid service free of ads. Look what happened. I'm just surprised that it took M$ this long to catch on.
Re: (Score:3)
Hell, even the damn satellite radio in my car is feeding me ads, and I pay money for that. Really defeats its appeal...
Re: (Score:3)
They're metro apps. They are sandboxed.