The Black Underbelly of Windows 8.1 'Blue' 608
snydeq writes "Changes in Microsoft's forthcoming upgrade to Windows 8 reveal the dark underbelly of Microsoft's evolving agenda, one that finds pieces of Windows 8 inexplicably disappearing and a new feature that allows Microsoft to track your local searches cropping up, InfoWorld's Woody Leonhard reports. 'As Windows 8.1 Milestone Preview testers push and prod their way into the dark corners of Windows 8.1 "Blue," they're finding a bunch of things that go bump in the night. From new and likely unwelcome features, to nudges into the Microsoft data tracking sphere, to entire lopped-off pieces of Windows 8, it looks like Microsoft is changing Windows to further its own agenda.'"
A lot of the stuff the article gripes about are what Google has been doing for ages with Android: requiring a Microsoft account, funneling users to their services first, tracking your system usage, etc.
Same as Google (Score:4, Insightful)
Only that nobody want to use Bing or Hotmail. They both suck.
Then windows is well and truly dead... (Score:5, Insightful)
The only reason Windows gained market share in the 90s was because it went out of its way to not be a closed system. It's always sucked, it's just a matter of how little but that we still had control over our PCs than IBM and later Apple wanted us to have.
If Microsoft goes this route and enforces controls and advertising ala Google/Android styl Android will gain the lead as a desktop OS.
In short, the more Ballmer tightens his fist, the more users will slip through his fingers.
Re:what?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, yeah. But Google has an enviable image and works in emerging markets, where they can set consumer expectations. Microsoft has a crap image and works in entrenched markets, where customers have strong opinions and entrenched ways doing things. This is a bit of a simplification, of course, but I think it helps to explain why people complain so much about everything that Microsoft does, while they give Google a free pass.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Most people use Windows because they've been using Windows.
Windows 8 isn't really "Windows" as they knew it, it requires change. People hate change and if they're going to change, maybe they'll look at alternatives. If they have the cash, they might go for Macs (look at the sales figures lately).
If they don't... what's cheaper than Windows 8?
Re:Then windows is well and truly dead... (Score:5, Insightful)
"The only reason Windows gained market share in the 90s was because it went out of its way to not be a closed system."
Sheeit. The reason it gained market share was you could effortlessly copy the OS and Office and whatever apps you wanted then install them on any PC as many times as you liked. I expect many older Slashdotters can still recite Windows keys from memory.
"They'll get addicted, and then we'll collect"
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/apr/09/business/fi-micropiracy9 [latimes.com]
Re:Then windows is well and truly dead... (Score:5, Insightful)
MS prospered because so much of the stuff you did would not work if you did not continue to have MS stuff. The MS Word format was always ill defined and it was impossible to know what would happen if a version was skipped. Certainly in the mid to late 90's we were shooting MS Word files around and there was always an even chance they would bork on different versions, even if filters were installed.
Now that people are getting used to open standards, like HTML 5, MS is having a harder time locking in users. They tried to hook the desktop and the phone, thus creating a locked ecosystem, but they failed. Now they are trying to reassert control by locking the laptop and tablet to MS Windows 8. At least now they are trying to do so by adding value, like Apple and Google, but what value is being added to the user may be much less than we expect.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, how many people are going to switch to Linux over this? Nobody.
Even if that's the case, it will hurt them if people decide never to upgrade.
I run Windows 7 right now. I see absolutely zero compelling reasons to upgrade to Windows 8, and plenty of compelling reasons not to. I don't have to switch to Linux for Microsoft to lose out on my money. I just have to not buy any more of their products.
P.S. Lest I lose all of my Slashdot cred, I should point out that I dual-boot.
Wall-E was a documentary (Score:5, Insightful)
Even so, I've found Windows local search to be more trouble than it's worth anyway. the "perpetual green bar" kept getting in my way, so I just disabled Windows Search entirely. On the sad side, I can't use instant search in Outlook anymore. On the bright side, I replaced it with Everything [voidtools.com]. It legitimately searches everything, and does so instantly. I'd prefer doing that in Windows 8.1. If for no other reason, I haven't the foggiest idea why someone would want to simultaneously search the internet and a local drive for the same search string. They're foundationally different - internet search is for "stuff you don't have", and local search is for "stuff you have, but don't know where". I can't ever once think of a time I've wanted to search both at a time.
Serato really, REALLY needs to port itself to Linux.
Big difference (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't pay $$ for Google. If Microsoft wants to make its products free, then OK, but until then this is abusive. They are trying to eat their cake and have it, too.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Switching isn't the problem (From a market perspective Frankly they have more to fear from OSX then they do from desktop linux, no disrespect intended to linux intended) , its people staying put and not upgrading.
Consider how much trauma microsoft have had getting people of the decrepid Win XP. Now consider the problems getting them off the still very relevant Win7.
Unless your on a tablet or touchscreen machine, theres literally no reason to upgrade right now, particularly with the general dislike most people have for metro and metro apps.
and who's eye would you rather be under? (Score:4, Insightful)
Free Windows 8.1? (Score:5, Insightful)
Since they say that they will be showing advertisements on the desktop, does that mean that they will get rid of the Windows Home/Pro/Expert editions and just have a single Windows 8.1 which is free to download and install?
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
If the Desktop Linux bunch had spent time making Desktop Linux a closer replacement for Windows XP, very many organizations and people would have moved over when Vista came out. More so with Windows 8.
Instead they do weird stuff to make Desktop Linux even less unattractive to people who don't want change.
ReactOS is still in alpha or Microsoft would have sued it to death.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:4, Insightful)
Really? The downfall of desktop Linux is trying to emulate Windows. Much better off when it was more UNIX-y
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Uh... Android IS Linux and people have been switching in droves. Not because of privacy issues, or stability or anything else geeks have been raving about for years... It's cheap, and it's easier to use. The fact that this is exactly what the mainstreams been screaming at the Linux community for over a decade while they didn't listen, while at the same time they screamed at Microsoft for the very things that are bringing them down now and they never listened is the height of irony.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
For who? For you maybe. For the average, not particularly tech savvy consumer who just wants something easy to pick up, not at all.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:3, Insightful)
What is cheaper? Chromium. Google will win this by extending the Android platform to laptops (which they have already) and to desktops.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, how many people are going to switch to Linux over this? Nobody.
Except a whole bunch of OEMs who used to be staunch Microsoft partners.
"HP shows off 21-inch all-in-one Android desktop
PC makers are experimenting with Android given that Microsoft's Windows 8 devices have struggled to attract consumers"
http://www.infoworld.com/d/computer-hardware/update-hp-shows-21-inch-all-in-one-android-desktop-221316 [infoworld.com]
CoolShip,an android desktop computer that looks like a keyboard
CoolShip has a 1.5Ghz dualcore ARM processor inside.It is a low cost home PC,PC for elderly and children,also a solution of hotel PC for guests,educational PC.
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/coolship-an-android-desktop-computer-that-looks-like-a-keyboard [indiegogo.com]
Acer shows 21-inch Android desktop
Taiwan's Acer is breaking Android out of its comfort zone and has installed the operating system on a 21.5-inch all-in-one desktop PC that is expected on sale in the U.S. later this year.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2040886/acer-shows-21inch-android-desktop.html [pcworld.com]
Get used to it.
Not a chance. I'm really enjoying the innovation and competition that's coming our way now the Windows monopoly's tumbling. Can't wait until Office is usurped as well!
Re:windows 8.1 only for the USA (Score:4, Insightful)
"funneling users to their services first, " Yeah that'll work well with anti trust issue in EU. "tracking your system usage" Yeah that'll work well with data protection issues in EU.
As long as they share data with the local government's spying organization everything will be fine.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, not every direction away from Windows is productive.
For example... Unity. Departing from Windows in that direction was harmful. It's really hard to get used to it, and it isn't exactly self-explanatory. You have to become a power user to have more than half a clue of what you're doing and get it to stop being in your way. That's no good for office workers. It might work just fine for people who just want to surf the Web though.
Having something that works for a majority of people - both the home user world AND the office drone world - is what we need. Not something to scratch the itch of the UNIX guru 1%, because that part of the beast lives under the hood anyway. It has to be compatible with a huge variety of ways of thinking, and Windows has entrenched itself so deeply within the psyche of computer users that anything new absolutely needs to be similar and Just Work without loads of configuration.
Apple did the Just Work thing right. As much as I don't enjoy using their products, which seem to be designed to prevent you from doing anything that wasn't in their somewhat specific list of use cases, they got that right - it just works for their use cases. That, and they got the marketing right. Everyone was used to things being one way and they made something different look sexy to the general public. A particular Linux distribution could possibly be marketed well and succeed, but that would require dreadful amounts of money that FOSS just doesn't produce.
What's it gonna be? Something that only we enlightened Slashdot readers can really learn how to use? That's where we're at. Or will it be something that the common user will be able to be productive with?
Just watch, Android will emerge as a desktop OS someday, and it'll make waves...
My first thought was (Score:2, Insightful)
When did they not do that?
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is Desktop Linux is a bigger change for many of them.
MATE is much closer to XP/Windows 7 than Windows 8 will ever be. Just because Gnome and Canonical have gone full metal retard, that doesn't mean everyone has.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
If the Desktop Linux bunch had spent time making Desktop Linux a closer replacement for Windows XP, very many organizations and people would have moved over when Vista came out. More so with Windows 8.
Instead they do weird stuff to make Desktop Linux even less unattractive to people who don't want change.
The sad fact is that the newest version of KDE is a the perfect DE for anyone wanting to switch from Windows (XP, Vista, 7) to Linux: it's fast, full-featured, and looks and works much like the regular Windows desktop interface. Moreover, it's highly customizable and configurable, so a distro could easily make a theme for it that looks even more like Windows, and sets even more options to work by default just like Windows (but let users change from those defaults if they desire). The software is already here, minus that last bit to make the transition even easier for Windows refugees.
But instead of adopting KDE and pushing it as a Windows replacements, the mainstream distros are all dead-set on sticking with Gnome3 or Unity, interfaces which don't look or work remotely like Windows. Anyone who complains about this is met with comments like "Linux needs to be a pioneer, not copy someone else", and so Linux remains stuck in obscurity. And why Linux users so strongly want a DE that discourages configurability and modification, I have no idea; I thought Linux was supposed to be more attractive to tinkerers, but Gnome3's developers hate people who try to modify their holy UI.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple only got the marketing right with their mobile devices, the iPod, then iPhone, then iPad. MacOS X still has very low marketshare; not many people have switched to it. People were OK with adopting Apple's UI on small mobile limited-use-case devices (mainly because the existing offerings at the time totally sucked, especially MS's horrible offerings that tried to shove a Win95-style UI onto a tiny touchscreen), but they never did so for their desktop and laptop PCs.
It is not what I asked for ... (Score:4, Insightful)
I mean why I must register a Microsoft account to use a computer? I remember as we were told that it is "impossible to separate a browser from an OS".
Now it seems it becomes impossible to separate an OS and social network.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux has never had marketing behind it. Marketing is what sells to low-knowledge consumers. Linux has only seen success among high-knowledge folks (power users, server admins, scientists) and in scenarios where someone else does the marketing (Android).
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Their attitude has always been "my way or the highway." They've never been open to suggestions from anybody who isn't actively working as a Gnome dev or understood that Gnome isn't just something for them to tinker with as the mood strikes them but something that other people should want to use. (That's why they're called "users," you know.) Personally, I was so horrified by what Gnome 3 was going to be that I migrated to Xfce before Gnome 3 was released and never looked back. It does what I want, the way I want and is very configurable, none of which is true about Gnome 3. The big problem, as I see it, is that, as you say, most of the mainstream distros are Gnome-centric and most of the newer users aren't even aware that they have a choice.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Exactly right. (Score:4, Insightful)
Until it's an OS on par with Windows and OS X, there will be no mass migration to it.
Since Window 8 is now a tablet OS, Microsoft have already made Android an OS on par with Window.
And if you're going to have to run a tablet OS on your desktop, you might as well pick the one that's much more popular.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm probably going to get flamed here, but I've only recently tried unity and don't see what the fuss is about? Sure, network integrated search is a big turn off, but in terms of the UI I don't see any major problems with it? It can open multiple xterms, do drag/drop file management, and has a dock/application launcher. Is it the minor, fairly irrelevant UI semantics? I certainly find Unity less annoying than recent versions of KDE. And I'm sure KDE can do a lot of funky stuff I'm not attempting to use. Fact is, it is not intuitive in the slightest.
I understand performance did suck previously, but I've had no problems running it as a VM under OS X in Fusion, and i wasnt exactly liberal with resources.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's still that way with sound cards, wifi cards, and even graphic adapters, and even -- gasp!!! -- some monitor brightness controls on the various laptops I've tried to use over the years, and the secure boot stuff just confuses me. I haven't been able to get a boot cd to even boot on this stupid UFI or whatever 2013 laptop of mine ;-(
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
They've never... understood that Gnome isn't just something for them to tinker with as the mood strikes them but something that other people should want to use.
Except that 'Something to tinker with as the mood strikes them" is exactly what it is. It's open source and it's their project. It is whatever they want it to be, with whatever goals they want it to have. Now, those goals might be very different from what you, or me, or anyone with larger ambitions for the Open Source community might want them to be, but that's tough luck.
It's the big stumbling block of the Open Source movement. When the goals of the developers just happen to align perfectly with what users and the general community envision (i.e. the development of Firefox) the results are stupendous. When the developers are really just scratching their own itch with a public project (GIMP) you get years of frustration as features and design decisions completely baffle observers.
If you want it done differently, you can fork it yourself. And if you think there should be a middle ground between "meekly accepting whatever is tossed your way" and "full fledged OS developer", well, the OS community doesn't have a lot to offer.
Of course, you could provide monetary incentives to get people to provide the features you want. However, given the cost of funding an entire OS development team to do what you want you'll probably have to find some way to recoup the expense. Next thing you know, you're charging people money in exchange for software that does the things they want in the way that they want. What a ridiculous idea.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:2, Insightful)
Which is exactly the problem for beginning linux users.
Don't use this, they aren't doing it as good as that. Getting lots of conflicting advice and no actual solution.
If there is one thing stopping linux adoption, its probably people that feel the damn need to suggest using different whatever to fix a problem while the problem could just as well have been fixed with what they have.
This are people coming from windows ffs, they don't care about getting the best of the best, they care about getting something that works well enough for them. Like you don't care about getting the best of the best bike but whatever does the job.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, the UI of XP and of 7 is similar enough, and I never heard any complaints about that transition. People stick with XP because of compatibility with older - and very expensive - software and hardware that they invested into a decade ago and cannot just rebuy on a lark. Those upgrades are not free in the industry - they often require huge yearly payments for "maintenance."
Again, this has nothing to do with user's personal choice. A great deal of industrial software does not work well under Win7. One might say that it shouldn't, because it breaks the new security model. Perhaps. But the fact remains.
A few items cannot even be bought today, because the company either closed the doors, or moved on, abandoning an older product. Sometimes you have your technological chain dependent on very specific data path (.txt - .dxf - .dwg - custom reader - custom processor...) An upgrade, even if you can afford it, may wreck your business just because it is not compatible with a million other pieces of software that you must use. Xilinx's transition from XST to PlanAhead to Vivado is a great illustration of that disaster. Those tools don't even produce compatible files to exchange the pin data with CAD tools!
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Go around a university library and see what the students are using. Here at Cambridge it's about 50% mac, 25% win, 25% pen and paper.
MS have lost the next generation of consumers.
Not a representative sample (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course an ivy league school full of the offspring of the rich/upper middle class is going to be chock full of Macs. Try going to average university where the students aren't loaded with money. Much fewer macintoshs there.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:3, Insightful)
That's because there are alternatives which are equivalent in every meaningful way. That's simply not the case for all types of software. For example there is no Linux equivalent for most Adobe products (I use Lightroom & Photoshop) - yes there is the GIMP and there are photo cataloging applications but they're not equivalent any more than Lynx is equivalent to Chrome. There's cool stuff happening in the Linux music world too, but nothing to seriously compare to the pro stuff like Ableton, Cubase, Logic, Traktor, etc.
I have nothing against Linux, I run it on several servers, but it's useless to me as a desktop environment if the third parties providing the software I use don't support it. And I realize I'm not everyone - but I am someone :)
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:4, Insightful)
I know this is popular to say around here but the answer isn't "never" or even "close to no one". It is a lot of people. I am one of them.
There are things I love on Linux and things I hate on Windows but if you want "gets out of the way" and "just works" Windows is the way to go. On Windows I can always find a piece of software to suit my needs; even if I would prefer to use Kate over Notepad++ (The only half usable editor I've found on Mac is TextWrangler).
The issue is how much do you have to fight with your system? Want the newest version of Postgres? Windows: install it. Debian: check repository and find an old version. Now you're compiling it from source and fighting with requirements and fighting the package manager. This is very common on Linux. The fighting becomes less when you are very skilled at it but that is definitely not an OS that gets out of the way.
IT departments like Windows because of the powerful, simple, maintained and supported administration options.
Windows does not maintain dominance on momentum alone. Microsoft may be incredibly stupid / greedy / blind but they have at least a few very skilled engineers and programmers.
Re:Expect more of this. (Score:3, Insightful)
You are clearly not an OS X user. OS X is extremely simple to use when compared with Windows or Linux. The applications that run on it are to an extent required to work in a simplified way by the OS.
OS X is the most intuitive, predictable and least surprising operating system I've ever used. The lack of surprise a user feels directly correlates with their abillity to understand the computer and get it to do what they want it to, this equates to more productivity on a day to day basis.
let me give you some examples from my elderly mum's, wife's, seven year old son's and boss's perspectives; need to find something? whatever it is, it is "in" finder. Looking for a setting in ANY application on the system? click the app menu, then preferences, settings can be found in the same place for every program on the whole machine, hell it's even the same place to physically aim at and click with your mouse. Need to install something? drag it to your Applications folder in finder. Need to uninstall or remove something from the system? grab it's icon and throw it in the bin. The whole system (applications included) is more predicatable and consistent than Windows or Linux. It's hard to explain but you have a lot less to learn when you open a new application on OS X for the first time because each application does not re-invent the wheel with regards to it's layout and behaviour.
I didn't understand that this was a problem until I used a Mac and experienced the benefits for myself, I was overwhelmed by just how simple a computer could (and should) be for the user. When you think about it, their is no reason to clutter up a user's workplace/time/mind with all of the complexity associated with the average windows or linux setup. Applications built for OS X seem to all follow this philosophy of simplicity that is just not present in Windows or Linux at all.
I'd like to add that I regularly use Linux (on my work's notebook exclusively for work), OS X (on my own macbook pro for both work and personal use), and Windows 7 (on my PC for games and *very* ocasionally for work i.e. an SSH session to the server or similar). I've been using all three OS's for many years and while I love Linux and use it daily, it does not compare to OS X for raw user productivity and Windows is not even in the same league as the two *NIXs with it's jaring user experience and maze of clicking to find the setting or configuration thing you need to get the whatever-it-is to work that "just worked" when you plugged it into OS X and Linux.