All they need to do to make all this go away is to include a 4th option of NONE.

 

I'm going to take the article at face value.

That said, it really changes nothing. I never though MS had any nefarious intent...other than making it a pain in the ass to control what my OS is doing with my network connection...but that's more than enough for me to be legitimately pissed off.

I get it, MS wants to make a better OS. That's all well and good, but better is subjective and the means they use to pursue this end are, quite frankly, offensive.

The best OS, from my perspective, is the one that does what I tell it to do, and no more than I tell it to do, with a minimum of fuss. That is not Windows 10.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by OC'ing Noob

All they need to do to make all this go away is to include a 4th option of NONE.

While they're at it, they can also bring back the old Windows Update (I refuse to accept those all-or-nothing forced feeding updates).

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpriest667

made sure to give you folks a dosage of reality.

Cheers to that!

 

Nothing surprising here. Still don't want any of the telemetry services running on my personal system.

 

Perception IS reality.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by OC'ing Noob

All they need to do to make all this go away is to include a 4th option of NONE.

This

 

Wake me up when I can configure windows update properly, all updates have release notes and I can disable telemetry.

Also Microsoft doesn't need to have some evil intent - they are located in lawless country where all companies can be forced to share data with intelligence agencies so just collecting that data is enough.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blameless

I'm going to take the article at face value.

That said, it really changes nothing.

Pretty much /thread for those who are concerned about their privacy here. I read MS's article, and they're talking in basically the same generalities that their privacy policy is written in while continuing to talk about the almighty "dialog" with Insiders and then saying "HEY LOOK OVER THERE NEW PARENTAL CONTROLS." Ed Bott may or may not be correct with his apologia, but it still doesn't address the elephant in the room: telemetry was an opt-in feature that is now impossible to completely turn off unless you're running Enterprise or Education, neither of which are purchasable by your average layman.

Also, all of this "but for most of us ordinary citizens, the Internet is a better place when we share information with other people and organizations," tedium is getting really old. It's great that people are perfectly fine with all of their data nebulously existing in the Internet ether. Not all of us are, and increasingly the response is "lol we don't care." I'm happy that Ed "expect{s PCs} to anticipate our needs and make suggestions rather than simply waiting passively for commands," but I don't like how he appends the normalized "we".

10 is an OS with a great backend that has been marred by an organization that thinks it knows what to do with our PCs better than we do (automatic driver/software updates, telemetry that isn't completely switchable, silent downloading of 10 to systems running 7/8, P2P updating of machines when they know full well that many people are running off of metered connections, the list goes on and on and on.)

10 Education is only on my school laptop because I can Group Policy everything that I don't like.

My drop-dead requirements for upgrading my main rig are:
1) An option that (actually) allows me to disable driver updates.
2) Restoration of the "check for updates but let me choose when to download and install them" option. I'll even sign a legal waiver if MS is sooooo worried about spooooooky spoooooooky malware.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by PiOfPie

Pretty much /thread for those who are concerned about their privacy here. I read MS's article, and they're talking in basically the same generalities that their privacy policy is written in while continuing to talk about the almighty "dialog" with Insiders and then saying "HEY LOOK OVER THERE NEW PARENTAL CONTROLS." Ed Bott may or may not be correct with his apologia, but it still doesn't address the elephant in the room: telemetry was an opt-in feature that is now impossible to completely turn off unless you're running Enterprise or Education, neither of which are purchasable by your average layman.

Also, all of this "but for most of us ordinary citizens, the Internet is a better place when we share information with other people and organizations," tedium is getting really old. It's great that people are perfectly fine with all of their data nebulously existing in the Internet ether. Not all of us are, and increasingly the response is "lol we don't care." I'm happy that Ed "expect{s PCs} to anticipate our needs and make suggestions rather than simply waiting passively for commands," but I don't like how he appends the normalized "we".

10 is an OS with a great backend that has been marred by an organization that thinks it knows what to do with our PCs better than we do (automatic driver/software updates, telemetry that isn't completely switchable, silent downloading of 10 to systems running 7/8, P2P updating of machines when they know full well that many people are running off of metered connections, the list goes on and on and on.)

10 Education is only on my school laptop because I can Group Policy everything that I don't like.

My drop-dead requirements for upgrading my main rig are:
1) An option that (actually) allows me to disable driver updates.
2) Restoration of the "check for updates but let me choose when to download and install them" option. I'll even sign a legal waiver if MS is sooooo worried about spooooooky spoooooooky malware.

As I said several times before (in several threads), those two and the ability to turn off all reporting are non-negotiable. Why can't they understand that?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by OC'ing Noob

All they need to do to make all this go away is to include a 4th option of NONE.

People who disagree with this, could you explain your logic to me?

 

Maybe they should have done this after the first week when this train wreck started....
Sometimes i wonder what these company's do.

Anyways still doesn't change the fact that its not really about collecting data but more about the option of turning it on or off. For the past few years the whole world is trying to decide and push things with the statement "is best for us".
People don't like being told whats best for them they like to decide themselves. Specially with non important stuff like this.

 

There was no train wreck as you state, 14 million machines were upgraded during the first 24 hours of its release. Just because a small group of people are scared about concealing their "privacy" doesn't mean Windows 10 was a flop lol.... so far from it.

 

cool MS, so you aren't feeding us to the leviathan.
that still doesn't mean I wouldn't like to streamline what my PC is doing when, where and how.

 

The fact that MS was so vague about it in the first place (and, frankly, still is) is reason enough for me to no longer trust them, never mind the forced updates and the loss of WMC.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by JKuhn

Quote:

Originally Posted by PiOfPie

Pretty much /thread for those who are concerned about their privacy here. I read MS's article, and they're talking in basically the same generalities that their privacy policy is written in while continuing to talk about the almighty "dialog" with Insiders and then saying "HEY LOOK OVER THERE NEW PARENTAL CONTROLS." Ed Bott may or may not be correct with his apologia, but it still doesn't address the elephant in the room: telemetry was an opt-in feature that is now impossible to completely turn off unless you're running Enterprise or Education, neither of which are purchasable by your average layman.

Also, all of this "but for most of us ordinary citizens, the Internet is a better place when we share information with other people and organizations," tedium is getting really old. It's great that people are perfectly fine with all of their data nebulously existing in the Internet ether. Not all of us are, and increasingly the response is "lol we don't care." I'm happy that Ed "expect{s PCs} to anticipate our needs and make suggestions rather than simply waiting passively for commands," but I don't like how he appends the normalized "we".

10 is an OS with a great backend that has been marred by an organization that thinks it knows what to do with our PCs better than we do (automatic driver/software updates, telemetry that isn't completely switchable, silent downloading of 10 to systems running 7/8, P2P updating of machines when they know full well that many people are running off of metered connections, the list goes on and on and on.)

10 Education is only on my school laptop because I can Group Policy everything that I don't like.

My drop-dead requirements for upgrading my main rig are:
1) An option that (actually) allows me to disable driver updates.
2) Restoration of the "check for updates but let me choose when to download and install them" option. I'll even sign a legal waiver if MS is sooooo worried about spooooooky spoooooooky malware.

As I said several times before (in several threads), those two and the ability to turn off all reporting are non-negotiable. Why can't they understand that?

That's fine, MS doesn't care about you.

It is non-negotiable, but it is so in their favor, not yours. They're giving it away for free for a year, they lose nothing by you denying it.

All if means is when/if you do eventually go to 10, if you miss the year mark, you get to pay them. If you never go to 10... same result as if you got it right now. Most everyone who cares about this also doesn't care about the Store they want to make money on anyway.
Quote:

Originally Posted by cookieboyeli

Quote:

Originally Posted by OC'ing Noob

All they need to do to make all this go away is to include a 4th option of NONE.

People who disagree with this, could you explain your logic to me?

Sure.

Users are computer stupid. They would rather gripe about the problem than so much as click a "Send report to Microsoft" button. As a result, Microsoft chose to by default enable a way they might even be able to combat the problem by taking a more proactive approach in fixing the problem; by seeing that there even is one.

From the perspective of someone who has to fix the problems (Not MS associated), no, you (imaginary-person) do not get to decide anymore. You can not be trusted to report to me what the problem is, and you are more likely to yell at me over the phone than be helpful. So forget that, Event Log data is accessible by me, I'll read the error for myself and collect as much information as I can get my hands on to try and find several solutions to your problem before I even call you to help. It'll cut down how much time it takes for me to be on the phone with you, and It'll automate the Tier 1 script-reader process everyone hates so much. It'll allow me to, if I see any given error happening a lot, forward it on to people that can fix it before it becomes a serious issue.

Yes some people on OCN would never need my help. But I can not enable the deny option, because one of you will post online how to disable it fully and the stupid ones will follow your advice even though they do need my help. And now we're back to where we started.

It will not impact anyone significantly, and those that really truly care and have the skill to never need my help will find a way like they always do. But I will make it as hard as I can to stop them from making my life as hard as they can.

TL;DR Because it helps the average user and because being able to automate so much of it both improves service and cuts costs significantly, regardless of what some OCNers think.

______________________________

As for forced updates, even people on OCN deny security patches. They are obviously not in a mental state that can be trusted. They are the Anti-Vaxxers of the computer world.

The only concerns are if it (telemetry or updates) impacts a capped data plan, or if something bad was being done with the info, and if MS did something bad with your info, well, it wouldn't end well for them.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Fitzgerald

The fact that MS was so vague about it in the first place (and, frankly, still is) is reason enough for me to no longer trust them, never mind the forced updates and the loss of WMC.

Exactly. They're so vague I can't help but think they don't want to publicize it. It's not like they're incapable either. There are plenty of subjects and topics they go into great detail about. Privacy is a big deal nowadays. If a company isn't completely transparent regarding privacy and data collection this is exactly what happens.

 

Their attempt changes absolutely nothing simply because they didn't change their stance. Not a single line of their privacy policy or how Windows 10 works regarding telemetry or control over updates was changed. This is them simply trying to PR their way out of the mess they put themselves in.

From the article and Microsoft's blog post:
Quote:

From the very beginning, we designed Windows 10 with two straightforward privacy principles in mind:

1. Windows 10 collects information so the product will work better for you.
2. You are in control with the ability to determine what information is collected.

Where is the part where they acknowledge that

nr 1. is annoying corporate pretentious bullcrap about them knowing better than the users and thus forcing things on them?;

nr. 2. is a lie? What control? I cannot completely disable telemetry! And even with on-line search turned off every time someone types something in the search box it pings Microsoft's servers so they get to know at what times you were on-line and using search, which is even more intrusive than the minimum "Basic" setting. Is it necessary to remind them that Steam's Hardware and Software survey is optional and opt-in?

Also, have they by any chance changed the misleading installation procedure where you are given the option to turn diagnostics "off" (really), but then after the installation is complete and you go check what it did you realize that it merely changed the default telemetry from "Full" to "Enhanced", not even to "Basic", and that there is no such thing as an "off" setting after all?

How exactly do they want people to take them seriously?

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

Quote:

Originally Posted by OC'ing Noob

All they need to do to make all this go away is to include a 4th option of NONE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blameless

I'm going to take the article at face value.

That said, it really changes nothing. I never though MS had any nefarious intent...other than making it a pain in the ass to control what my OS is doing with my network connection...but that's more than enough for me to be legitimately pissed off.

I get it, MS wants to make a better OS. That's all well and good, but better is subjective and the means they use to pursue this end are, quite frankly, offensive.

The best OS, from my perspective, is the one that does what I tell it to do, and no more than I tell it to do, with a minimum of fuss. That is not Windows 10.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JKuhn

Quote:

Originally Posted by OC'ing Noob

All they need to do to make all this go away is to include a 4th option of NONE.

While they're at it, they can also bring back the old Windows Update (I refuse to accept those all-or-nothing forced feeding updates).

Quote:

Originally Posted by michaelius

Wake me up when I can configure windows update properly, all updates have release notes and I can disable telemetry.

Also Microsoft doesn't need to have some evil intent - they are located in lawless country where all companies can be forced to share data with intelligence agencies so just collecting that data is enough.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PiOfPie

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blameless

I'm going to take the article at face value.

That said, it really changes nothing.

Pretty much /thread for those who are concerned about their privacy here. I read MS's article, and they're talking in basically the same generalities that their privacy policy is written in while continuing to talk about the almighty "dialog" with Insiders and then saying "HEY LOOK OVER THERE NEW PARENTAL CONTROLS." Ed Bott may or may not be correct with his apologia, but it still doesn't address the elephant in the room: telemetry was an opt-in feature that is now impossible to completely turn off unless you're running Enterprise or Education, neither of which are purchasable by your average layman.

Also, all of this "but for most of us ordinary citizens, the Internet is a better place when we share information with other people and organizations," tedium is getting really old. It's great that people are perfectly fine with all of their data nebulously existing in the Internet ether. Not all of us are, and increasingly the response is "lol we don't care." I'm happy that Ed "expect{s PCs} to anticipate our needs and make suggestions rather than simply waiting passively for commands," but I don't like how he appends the normalized "we".

10 is an OS with a great backend that has been marred by an organization that thinks it knows what to do with our PCs better than we do (automatic driver/software updates, telemetry that isn't completely switchable, silent downloading of 10 to systems running 7/8, P2P updating of machines when they know full well that many people are running off of metered connections, the list goes on and on and on.)

10 Education is only on my school laptop because I can Group Policy everything that I don't like.

My drop-dead requirements for upgrading my main rig are:
1) An option that (actually) allows me to disable driver updates.
2) Restoration of the "check for updates but let me choose when to download and install them" option. I'll even sign a legal waiver if MS is sooooo worried about spooooooky spoooooooky malware.

Agreed with all of you.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by KyadCK

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

That's fine, MS doesn't care about you.

It is non-negotiable, but it is so in their favor, not yours. They're giving it away for free for a year, they lose nothing by you denying it.

All if means is when/if you do eventually go to 10, if you miss the year mark, you get to pay them. If you never go to 10... same result as if you got it right now. Most everyone who cares about this also doesn't care about the Store they want to make money on anyway.
Sure.

Users are computer stupid. They would rather gripe about the problem than so much as click a "Send report to Microsoft" button. As a result, Microsoft chose to by default enable a way they might even be able to combat the problem by taking a more proactive approach in fixing the problem; by seeing that there even is one.

From the perspective of someone who has to fix the problems (Not MS associated), no, you (imaginary-person) do not get to decide anymore. You can not be trusted to report to me what the problem is, and you are more likely to yell at me over the phone than be helpful. So forget that, Event Log data is accessible by me, I'll read the error for myself and collect as much information as I can get my hands on to try and find several solutions to your problem before I even call you to help. It'll cut down how much time it takes for me to be on the phone with you, and It'll automate the Tier 1 script-reader process everyone hates so much. It'll allow me to, if I see any given error happening a lot, forward it on to people that can fix it before it becomes a serious issue.

Yes some people on OCN would never need my help. But I can not enable the deny option, because one of you will post online how to disable it fully and the stupid ones will follow your advice even though they do need my help. And now we're back to where we started.

It will not impact anyone significantly, and those that really truly care and have the skill to never need my help will find a way like they always do. But I will make it as hard as I can to stop them from making my life as hard as they can.

TL;DR Because it helps the average user and because being able to automate so much of it both improves service and cuts costs significantly, regardless of what some OCNers think.

______________________________

As for forced updates, even people on OCN deny security patches. They are obviously not in a mental state that can be trusted. They are the Anti-Vaxxers of the computer world.

The only concerns are if it (telemetry or updates) impacts a capped data plan, or if something bad was being done with the info, and if MS did something bad with your info, well, it wouldn't end well for them.

I wish I could up-vote you! As someone who releases Apps on a market that already had forced telemetry (iOS) users will go out of the way to disable crash-reports and then email me or call me disgruntled about an issue and only offer a one line explanation along the lines of "It doesn't work" "It crashed." Microsoft, Apple, Google deal with this issue but times a million! Most of the time even the techies that do know what error reporting does get caught in the bystander effect. "Oh another person has had this before and must've already reported it I don't need to." Only a select few that usually are in the programming/software development field/community will actually send the reports, or manually submit reports that they can go through first if there is a "Don't Send" type of button. Software is a whole different beast when it comes to support. I wish I could just ask the customer to send it back for a refund or exchange but you cannot do that with software.
TL;DR; Both techies and "Average Joes" have ingrained tendencies to not send any kind of bug report, I stay suspicious of said reports and auto-reports but I hate when people get up in arms about this when Apple auto sends crash reports without an easy no button in 10.11 and iOS or Android by default always sends telemetry and we don't get this outcry.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewq2

I wish I could up-vote you! As someone who releases Apps on a market that already had forced telemetry (iOS) users will go out of the way to disable crash-reports and then email me or call me disgruntled about an issue and only offer a one line explanation along the lines of "It doesn't work" "It crashed." Microsoft, Apple, Google deal with this issue but times a million! Most of the time even the techies that do know what error reporting does get caught in the bystander effect. "Oh another person has had this before and must've already reported it I don't need to." Only a select few that usually are in the programming/software development field/community will actually send the reports, or manually submit reports that they can go through first if there is a "Don't Send" type of button. Software is a whole different beast when it comes to support. I wish I could just ask the customer to send it back for a refund or exchange but you cannot do that with software.
TL;DR; Both techies and "Average Joes" have ingrained tendencies to not send any kind of bug report, I stay suspicious of said reports and auto-reports but I hate when people get up in arms about this when Apple auto sends crash reports without an easy no button in 10.11 and iOS or Android by default always sends telemetry and we don't get this outcry.

Just because the current status quo is not properly handled that does not excuse them to go full privacy invasion on people.

Make a better designed product - both Windows and third party applications - that have a "send error report about the last crash or last x number of crashes" button that is easy to find and display a list with the information that is going to be sent. Also, make it clear to the customer to not expect a swift response without said report. This is a matter of setting a standard that everybody knows about and we can all agree on.

If you do this on a case by case basis instead of just collecting everything about everyone you both preserve the vast majority of people's privacy, but you also get to have the information that is helpful to try and help those that need it.

 

Let's assume for a minute that Microsoft is the sweet innocent corporate behemoth that we've come to love and adore all these years past. They are not data mining for nefarious purposes, and they have no hidden agenda.

Now, let's assume what can happen anyway:

1. Hackers/foreign governments/NSA hacks MS, and gets all your data.

2. Microsoft changes its stance, new EULA is published, you are forced to accept to continue use of the OS. Now they can do whatever they want with your data.

3. (I've said this one before) WHO WATCHES THE WATCHMEN? Yep, the old "power corrupts/absolute power corrupts absolutely" mentality. Some may call me paranoid/delusional/crazy/take your pick. If there is one thing life has taught me so far, it's that Murphy's Law is legit.

Chew on that for a bit.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Fitzgerald

The fact that MS was so vague about it in the first place (and, frankly, still is) is reason enough for me to no longer trust them, never mind the forced updates and the loss of WMC.

Exactly. If it wasn't so blatantly vague and brushed under the rug I wouldn't be as suspicious. The fact that you have to dig and use third party tools to disable a good chunk of it is my problem. Some people are just not comfortable with sharing, even if the data is supposedly anonymized. I don't trust that the data is anonymized correctly. Plenty of things are recorded that "shouldn't be", even if it's just emails or ip addresses, there's the potential for security breaches and leaks. I just got a letter in the mail the other day stating that the medical information my insurance company has was compromised in a breach. Social security number, financial information, everything they had. Not that MS is collecting data nearly as sensitive as this, but if a company that holds your SS # and medical information can be breached than nothing and no one can be assured their data is 100% safe. A company's intentions and the outcome can be completely different. Sure it was probably technical incompetence that lead to the breach, but of course every company assures you that everything is completely secure, without actually giving details as to how. People make mistakes ALL THE TIME. I'm of the philosophy "take no unnecessary risks".

EDIT: It is true that there are many companies who can achieve a level of security so complete that you really are almost 100% secure with them. However, Microsoft is NOT one of these companies! - Some good examples are Protonmail, Lastpass, and a number of encrypted "dropbox" like services. They don't say they're perfect, but their approach is intelligent, competent, and they assure mathematically, logically, scientifically, whatever, that their system is secure and infallible to the best of their collective knowledge. If you can't trust them, you can't trust anyone.

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

Quote:

Originally Posted by KyadCK

Quote:

Originally Posted by JKuhn

Quote:

Originally Posted by PiOfPie

Pretty much /thread for those who are concerned about their privacy here. I read MS's article, and they're talking in basically the same generalities that their privacy policy is written in while continuing to talk about the almighty "dialog" with Insiders and then saying "HEY LOOK OVER THERE NEW PARENTAL CONTROLS." Ed Bott may or may not be correct with his apologia, but it still doesn't address the elephant in the room: telemetry was an opt-in feature that is now impossible to completely turn off unless you're running Enterprise or Education, neither of which are purchasable by your average layman.

Also, all of this "but for most of us ordinary citizens, the Internet is a better place when we share information with other people and organizations," tedium is getting really old. It's great that people are perfectly fine with all of their data nebulously existing in the Internet ether. Not all of us are, and increasingly the response is "lol we don't care." I'm happy that Ed "expect{s PCs} to anticipate our needs and make suggestions rather than simply waiting passively for commands," but I don't like how he appends the normalized "we".

10 is an OS with a great backend that has been marred by an organization that thinks it knows what to do with our PCs better than we do (automatic driver/software updates, telemetry that isn't completely switchable, silent downloading of 10 to systems running 7/8, P2P updating of machines when they know full well that many people are running off of metered connections, the list goes on and on and on.)

10 Education is only on my school laptop because I can Group Policy everything that I don't like.

My drop-dead requirements for upgrading my main rig are:
1) An option that (actually) allows me to disable driver updates.
2) Restoration of the "check for updates but let me choose when to download and install them" option. I'll even sign a legal waiver if MS is sooooo worried about spooooooky spoooooooky malware.

As I said several times before (in several threads), those two and the ability to turn off all reporting are non-negotiable. Why can't they understand that?

That's fine, MS doesn't care about you.

It is non-negotiable, but it is so in their favor, not yours. They're giving it away for free for a year, they lose nothing by you denying it.

All if means is when/if you do eventually go to 10, if you miss the year mark, you get to pay them. If you never go to 10... same result as if you got it right now. Most everyone who cares about this also doesn't care about the Store they want to make money on anyway.
Quote:

Originally Posted by cookieboyeli

Quote:

Originally Posted by OC'ing Noob

All they need to do to make all this go away is to include a 4th option of NONE.

People who disagree with this, could you explain your logic to me?

Sure.

Users are computer stupid. They would rather gripe about the problem than so much as click a "Send report to Microsoft" button. As a result, Microsoft chose to by default enable a way they might even be able to combat the problem by taking a more proactive approach in fixing the problem; by seeing that there even is one.

From the perspective of someone who has to fix the problems (Not MS associated), no, you (imaginary-person) do not get to decide anymore. You can not be trusted to report to me what the problem is, and you are more likely to yell at me over the phone than be helpful. So forget that, Event Log data is accessible by me, I'll read the error for myself and collect as much information as I can get my hands on to try and find several solutions to your problem before I even call you to help. It'll cut down how much time it takes for me to be on the phone with you, and It'll automate the Tier 1 script-reader process everyone hates so much. It'll allow me to, if I see any given error happening a lot, forward it on to people that can fix it before it becomes a serious issue.

Yes some people on OCN would never need my help. But I can not enable the deny option, because one of you will post online how to disable it fully and the stupid ones will follow your advice even though they do need my help. And now we're back to where we started.

It will not impact anyone significantly, and those that really truly care and have the skill to never need my help will find a way like they always do. But I will make it as hard as I can to stop them from making my life as hard as they can.

TL;DR Because it helps the average user and because being able to automate so much of it both improves service and cuts costs significantly, regardless of what some OCNers think.

______________________________

As for forced updates, even people on OCN deny security patches. They are obviously not in a mental state that can be trusted. They are the Anti-Vaxxers of the computer world.

The only concerns are if it (telemetry or updates) impacts a capped data plan, or if something bad was being done with the info, and if MS did something bad with your info, well, it wouldn't end well for them.

Ok you make some fair points there, I actually already understood and agree with that. It's (officially) for the good of the user. However, you didn't address the main point whatsoever.
Quote:

All they need to do to make all this go away is to include a 4th option of NONE.

Some people aren't OK with having what are essentially "holes" to collect data in the OS. I lock everything up because you can't know what sort of mistakes were made implementing this system. For all we know it's possible to hijack it and literally keylog everything. The functionality was here before. There are probably easier ways of compromising a system, but that's not a valid excuse when it comes to security.

In addition to all this, this article roughly says "it's unproven and the suspicion is unfounded". Perhaps, but that goes both ways! MS has been so vague about it to the point of being "sneaky" that I can't trust what they are saying and doing are the same, not that they even say EXACTLY what they are doing. I know blocking everything denies MS from legitimate diagnostic info. I don't want them getting ANY info, no matter how "sterilized" they say it is because they have not proven that this is the case.

So again, would it really be so bad to include an official disable option for all of these issues? THe don't even have to disable it by default, just plainly and clearly include the option to. The people insisting on total lockdown security would get it without 3rd party tools and hacks. The amount of people who would actually bother disabling everything officially who haven't already done so with 3rd party tools are very few. In reality, MS wouldn't be losing much diagnostic data at all. The issue would be officially solved and that's good for everyone (since the tools are not perfect, and anything MS changes would be included). It's positive PR for them too.

Unfortunately MS is very unlikely to do this in the near future. They are very stubborn about their position and will back up their statements and views even amidst widespread backlash. Most companies are like this.

In my opinion, the only way this recurring issue of user tracking and data collection will be resolved is by requiring full disclosure of everything collected and options to disable collection BY LAW. Not that the US would ever go for something like that... Hopefully the EU or more likely a few "advanced" (don't know the term) European countries will attempt this and lead the way. (That's not too political, right?)

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by tpi2007

Just because the current status quo is not properly handled that does not excuse them to go full privacy invasion on people.

Make a better designed product - both Windows and third party applications - that have a "send error report about the last crash or last x number of crashes" button that is easy to find and display a list with the information that is going to be sent. Also, make it clear to the customer to not expect a swift response without said report. This is a matter of setting a standard that everybody knows about and we can all agree on.

If you do this on a case by case basis instead of just collecting everything about everyone you both preserve the vast majority of people's privacy, but you also get to have the information that is helpful to try and help those that need it.

I read both their statements to be "your privacy makes my job harder so I'm against it". They should be willing to take pay cuts if their jobs are easier, right? lol

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpriest667

source

I didn't even quote 10% of the article, but it really is pretty accurate. There was a lot of crying and moaning about the unique identifier numbers but the fact of the matter is that it is trying to identify if there is problems with hardware compatibility with certain windows functions. I thought the tears over Windows 8 were pretty strong and then Windows 10 came and you guys threw another tantrum. AT work on my conference period and I immediately logged into OCN from a workstation here and made sure to give you folks a dosage of reality.

You're doing God's work, son.

Give people the ability to opt out and they'll be happy. As long as MS keeps forcing crap down people's throats, they won't be happy.

 

Why do Microsoft believe they need this information enough to ensure they have it?

Unlike every other operating system I've used, I never once had a major problem with windows 7 that was the result of a bug in the OS. All crashes have been the result of faulty/unstable hardware or windows deliberately crashing bad programs. If they could make that without any mandatory telemetry, then surely they can do it again?

Such telemetry is perfectly acceptable for a beta test, but on a final version, You should expect a product that works and is past these issues. I don't mind so much that it is there, or even that it is the default option, but I do mind that it, along with some of windows 10's other features, cannot easily be disabled.

Win10 treats the user as an idiot, even if they know exactly what they are doing and have a justifiable reason for doing it. I'm not just referring to the telemetry here, even the wording of text during the introduction and on the user interface seems patronising to me.