lexluthermiesterThis is my PC and I'm NEVER going to let anyone else[Microsoft included] control it.

Just think how frustrated you'll be in the IoT / BigData / autonomous car future.
This is a good (if not the last) moment to soften your approach at least a bit. :D

notbJust think how frustrated you'll be in the IoT / BigData / autonomous car future.
This is a good (if not the last) moment to soften your approach at least a bit. :D

That's an interesting point of view. And by IoT you mean internet connected refrigerators, microwaves and what not? Those kinds of things are going to be wifi and to keep them off the net you simply don't setup the wifi. And if that appliance "needs" inter to start up, then it goes right back to the store to be exchanged for something that doesn't require an internet connection. As for cars, NEVER GONNA HAPPEN! I will never buy, drive or ride in an autonomous car. Several reasons. If an accident happens, the DRIVER still gets the blame, legally. And I will not trust a computer that can be hacked and controlled remotely with my safety and the safety of my loved ones. Technology is a great thing, but like everything else in life, it much be taken in moderation. It is meant to enhance our existence, not take it over and control it.

lexluthermiesterThat's an interesting point of view. And by IoT you mean internet connected refrigerators, microwaves and what not?

Pretty much anything. Look around you and think about what smart houses/offices already offer. It's both appliances (where the IoT funcionality is an addition) and IoT-specific things (like sensors and controllers).

lexluthermiesterThose kinds of things are going to be wifi and to keep them off the net you simply don't setup the wifi. And if that appliance "needs" inter to start up, then it goes right back to the store to be exchanged for something that doesn't require an internet connection.

10 years ago we still though that smartphones will exist along more traditional phones in all segments. People were afraid of tracking, poor battery life, vulnerable screens and so on. And what happened? Traditional phones survived only in the cheapest segment.
What you've written is very bold. What if in 10 years only the cheapest fridges are non-IoT? You buy a poor quality appliance just to avert having to connect it to Internet?

And we can easily imagine IoT appliances to be mandatory in some situations (e.g. gas stove monitoring).

lexluthermiesterAs for cars, NEVER GONNA HAPPEN! I will never buy, drive or ride in an autonomous car. Several reasons.

And what if only autonomous cars (in self-driving mode) are allowed on some highways or city centres? Can you live with that?

lexluthermiesterIf an accident happens, the DRIVER still gets the blame, legally.

Based on current law - yes. This will change very soon - few years at most.
Many countries are already preparing new legislation, while car manufacturers are hiring people from insurance business, who will prepare the new products (because car/AI manufacturer will be responsible).

lexluthermiesterAnd I will not trust a computer that can be hacked and controlled remotely with my safety and the safety of my loved ones.

Do you fly? I mean: as a passenger, in large aircrafts.

Actually glad you brought up these points.

notbPretty much anything. Look around you and think about what smart houses/offices already offer. It's both appliances (where the IoT functionality is an addition) and IoT-specific things (like sensors and controllers).

True, but they still need a LAN/WiFi connection. And so far, when denied such they run fine.

notb10 years ago we still though that smartphones will exist along more traditional phones in all segments. People were afraid of tracking, poor battery life, vulnerable screens and so on. And what happened? Traditional phones survived only in the cheapest segment.

If by "traditional" you mean feature phones, then ok. That's not really what I meant though. And for the record, I have a very nice Android phone but only have a talk&text plan. No data. The phone only gets internet over WiFi.

notbWhat you've written is very bold. What if in 10 years only the cheapest fridges are non-IoT? You buy a poor quality appliance just to avert having to connect it to Internet?

It's not likely to happen, but if it does I'd likely find a way to hack it. Or yes, I'd buy a cheaper non-IoT model. There's no practical need for those kinds of things.

notbAnd we can easily imagine IoT appliances to be mandatory in some situations (e.g. gas stove monitoring).

Rubbish, and again, I don't care. NOT gonna happen in my home. I recently bought a car that had an early version of the automotive "black-boxes" in it. It was swiftly, permanently, removed.

notbAnd what if only autonomous cars (in self-driving mode) are allowed on some highways or city centers? Can you live with that?

No, but it's unlikely to happen were I live and if it does, I'll just take the subway.

notbBased on current law - yes. This will change very soon - few years at most.
Many countries are already preparing new legislation, while car manufacturers are hiring people from insurance business, who will prepare the new products (because car/AI manufacturer will be responsible).

Not anytime soon in the United States. As I said elsewhere, technology is a great thing, in moderation. It's wonderful when it enhances our lives, not when it replaces us.

notbDo you fly? I mean: as a passenger, in large aircraft's.

Glad you mentioned aircraft. As a pilot myself, how technology on aircraft works is something very familiar to me. Aircraft, until recently, could not even be accessed remotely. Only UAV's fly remotely. And as for Auto-pilot, there have been a number of accidents where pilots depended way too much on automation and didn't fly the aircraft themselves. Computers and technology can make flying safer, but it can not replace an experienced and seasoned pilot. Likewise an automobile driver can not truly be replaced. It's an interesting idea, but it's not practical and I do not trust computers completely for one simple reason; they can not "think" for us. And they should be allowed to try.

lexluthermiesterTrue, but they still need a LAN/WiFi connection. And so far, when denied such they run fine.

I'm talking about something else: situations, when you'll decide to have an IoT-enabled devices online. There could be very different reasons, but I'll repeat the main three:
1) you decide you can benefit from IoT,
2) someone will make you do it (e.g. fire safety regulations or whatever),
3) some non-IoT related issues will win over - e.g. you'll decide that having a top-of-the-line fridge that is IoT-only (that only works online) is the most interesting option anyway - despite the potential spying, that you could block by getting a more basic model that can work offline.

And the fridge example is already fairly subjective, while I think there are a lot of IoT devices that will be much easier to accept.
For example - do you have anything against flood sensors? Do you find it a threat that someone unprivileged could hack into and check whether you're house has been flooded?

lexluthermiesterGlad you mentioned aircraft. As a pilot myself, how technology on aircraft works is something very familiar to me. Aircraft, until recently, could not even be accessed remotely. Only UAV's fly remotely. And as for Auto-pilot, there have been a number of accidents where pilots depended way too much on automation and didn't fly the aircraft themselves.

As a person from insurance business, I actually know a bit about crash statistics, but let's leave that. We agree that at this point there must be a pilot in the plane.
But I'm also doing a lot of research in computational decision making methods, so now the discussion is really moving into my comfort zone. :D

lexluthermiesterComputers and technology can make flying safer, but it can not replace an experienced and seasoned pilot. Likewise an automobile driver can not truly be replaced.

This is not a proper comparison and you're making a mistake here. :)
Pilots are trained not to operate planes when everything works (because autopilot is doing that). They're precisely prepared to take over when the autopilot is malfunctioning or can't do something necessary.

It's actually the exact opposite with cars: drivers are thought to operate cars in the most probable situations.
Cars have security systems that are there to handle extreme situations and malfunctioning, because drivers can't. It's not possible to teach an average person e.g. how to safely handle sliding on a wet surface. This would take months and still eliminate many applicants.

And BTW: because cars don't drive on their own (yet), they're not designed to avert crashes.
Car safety is all about minimizing the results of a crash, when it happens (because the designers assume it will).
Such approach clearly can't be used in planes. Here it's all about staying in the air and landing safely.

lexluthermiesterthey can not "think" for us. And they should be allowed to try.

By contrary, they can. :)
You're thinking about "thinking" as a creative process, that computers can't do reliably (yet...).
However, "thinking" in general is mostly about fairly programmable reactions, which computers are designed to do. Your brain:
1) gets input: task to do and current state of the world around you,
2) processes it based on what it knows and the historical outcomes (experience) -> neural network,
3) chooses the best solution.

Think about games.
Computers are fairly rubbish in designing them, because this is a creativity task. They can, however, play many games very well.
The important fact is that if a game has finite number of states, theoretically a computer will always win with a human, because it can choose the optimal strategy. It's just a matter of processing power and storage for the states (inputs) and strategies (outputs).
For example: computers are already superior in simple games (e.g. checkers) and are surpassing us in more complicated ones like chess.
But Go has too many states - you can't teach a computer to handle all possibilities. As a result the AI has to, for example, rely on a neural-network ("intelligence") approach and these are still not as efficient as the biological ones we have.

So going back to driving (but staying in game theory language): if you have a system with both AI and humans "playing", you have infinite number of states, which have to be approximated by a finite set - just to let an AI do anything useful. And it's still a huge set, because there are countless possible situations on roads.
As a result it's a difficult task just to program a car to drive between humans that follow the game rules. On top of that you have to teach a car to handle situations, where humans are breaking the law.
However, if you limit the game to a smaller area with less states (e.g. a single city) and all players are playing according to the same rules, you can teach cars to always drive safely. In other words: if every car is autonomous, you can give each of them precise, deterministic instructions for each situation (e.g. each junction).
At that point you're only left with unpredictable objects to cover: pedestrians, pets and so on. And here also the autopilot will win, because, despite having an inferior "intelligence", it gathers a lot more information than a human can. It will, for example, "see" people hidden behind an obstacle.

lexluthermiesterNot if the world refuses to accept it. We, the people, have the ultimate say. We vote with our choices and wallets. And people are NOT voting for Windows 10. Most people dislike it.


YOUR opinion and not one supported by certain facts, nor supported by popular opinion.


Let's be fair, it has a TON of drawbacks. The keystroke logging[which is blatantly illegal without a warrant where I live], spying and general disregard for user privacy for starters. The cumbersome, unintuitive and at times clunky UI for second. The sheer lack of customization options and the fact that access to a lot of admin options and settings have been hidden or removed for thirds. I could keep going like this, but the general point is that Microsoft is showing us all that they have ZERO respect for us. We do NOT have to tolerate such behavior.


Yes a couple, not a TON of them.


8 was a train wreck of a launch, and made the Vista launch and problems look simply delightful by comparison. And 8.1 was just a slap in the face. The public asked for the start button back, but we wanted the menu that went with it. Instead we click the button and we're taken straight away back to that "tiles" crap. In case you're wondering, that was the Microsoft UI designers way of saying "eff u". And we the public responded accordingly.


You're right, it's about wanting to stay with an OS that is MUCH easier to use, much more configurable, looks better, and doesn't spy on us[so long as everyone removes the "diagtrack" service that was included in a recent update].


Except that 7 is one of the most well loved OS's in history[though with Android that is changing]. Windows 8/8.1 was Microsoft's too-little-too-late-me-too grab at the mobile computing market. It was fully crap, rubbish and few liked it. Windows 10 is Microsoft's belligerent unwillingness to accept that the public does not have to like it when they put complete trash on the market.


Oh? How is it common sense to accept such invasive and disrespectful intrusions to our privacy and rights?


As mentioned above, much of the telemetry Microsoft is using has already been ruled unlawful in some courts, and the keystroke logging is downright illegal in many areas. How is that not evil? They're committing crimes and because they're a large corporation they are getting away with it. That will not last for long.


Most of what was said in this paragraph was so lacking in accuracy that it would be laughable if it were not so sad. Clearly you have but a tenuous grip on reality.

This is exactly the kind of "bend me over and do what you like" mentality that is so dangerous to digital security on a personal level. Microsoft is NOT trustworthy. They prove that with every move like this that they make. Is it any wonder that the most dominant OS in use on the planet is Android? Microsoft is killing the PC market, and people like you are helping them. GET a CLUE!

Some insight for you then to consider;

- You get the same telemetry stuff in Windows 7 and 8, the only new feature is Cortana in 10. But in Win 7 and 8 most of that telemetry data sent to MS, does not serve you in any way, while in 10, it does through its new features. Whether you'll use them or not is another thing, but the idea that 'you're free from spying on 7' is utter nonsense.

- 10 is a safer OS on kernel level than 7 can possibly become.

- 'Popular opinion', where are those numbers? The adoption rate of 10 is pretty solid, especially when compared to previous OS versions. www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0
25% is extremely decent at this point in time.

- Same link from above shows nearly 9% of users STILL on Windows XP, which entirely supports my argument that people are just being idiots for not upgrading. There is NO sensible excuse to still use XP when connected to the internet.

- 'Such invasive blablabla of our rights'. Support that with facts please. Show us how MS has 'violated' our privacy in ANY of its OS iterations including 10, please do, I'm curious... FWIW Microsoft relies heavily on its business, cloud (Azure) and services divisions, all of whom value privacy incredibly high. And then there are examples like this:
www.microsoft.com/en-us/trustcenter/compliance/eu-model-clauses
www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/14/microsoft_wins_landmark_irish_warrant_case_against_usa/

- A TON of drawbacks you mentioned (3, 4?) are old news. All power user functionality in 10 is accessible, and can be made easily accessible too. Customization is better in 10, most notably of its Start menu. 10 is more flexible in every way.

I could go on, but most of what you have put forward is not supported by sources or facts, the other half is old news and what remains is purely personal taste. To each their own, but my Bullshit alarm went off bigtime when reading your response.

Vayra86- 'Popular opinion', where are those numbers? The adoption rate of 10 is pretty solid, especially when compared to previous OS versions. www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0
25% is extremely decent at this point in time.

While I agree with most you've said (W10 is in fact an excellent OS), we must be very careful with this one.
Structure of PC market has changed. Notebooks and tablets have dominated the landscape and with them you usually get the latest OS available.
Direct comparison to times when a lot more people had custom-built desktops is risky at best.

Also the Windows' versions quality varies and impacts the adoption rate - especially in commercial segment.
Windows XP/2000, 7 and now 10 were great and became popular in business PCs. The rest (Vista, 8) were not.
Windows 7 is still a standard OS in large corporations which are now slowly transitioning to 10.
8 was totally ignored as being very poor productivity-wise (yes, it's mostly about the Start menu).
Even today, when ordering a business PC directly from large vendors (Dell, Lenovo, HP etc), you can easily get Windows 7 and it has full support (drivers, service etc).

I still remember getting a business notebook from HP in 2007 (in a normal store, no business-style ordering). It had the Vista Business (released 2006) preinstalled, but HP also bundled XP Pro, which was almost 6 years old at that point. :)

Vayra86Things you said

Windows 7 can easily be made secure. Windows 10 can not. Windows 7 has no keystroke logging functions built into it. Windows 10 does and is not easily removed.

People still using XP either have no reason or no desire to upgrade. In many cases doing so causes problems that have no solution in newer OS's. The cost of a complete system overhaul is not worth the trouble.

You keep thinking what you want to think. I'll rely on experience through proven methodologies and evidence obtained to make my decisions and recommendations.

R-T-BThat there is some plain old BS. Can't wait until they add Skylake to the list. :rolleyes:

That was the original idea, as seen over a year ago.

People should move from Windows 7, or we'll have another XP situation again. Or move to Linux/Mac. If it sees new hardware I would not mind a reminder when running Windows Update (because why indeed are you running spanking new hardware on a near-decade old OS?) Fully blocking Windows Update is too much though.

Windows 8.1 should definitely get the updates though, as it's still on mainstream support. Class action lawsuit anyone? Another one?

lexluthermiesterWindows 7 can easily be made secure. Windows 10 can not. Windows 7 has no keystroke logging functions built into it. Windows 10 does and is not easily removed.

People still using XP either have no reason or no desire to upgrade. In many cases doing so causes problems that have no solution in newer OS's. The cost of a complete system overhaul is not worth the trouble.

You keep thinking what you want to think. I'll rely on experience through proven methodologies and evidence obtained to make my decisions and recommendations.

Fact that your Windows opinion is even in your signature does not add to your legitimacy, just sayin'.

'Proven methodology' wut? Reading a few things on the web isn't a methodology.

About that keylogging...
www.zdnet.com/article/does-windows-10-really-include-a-keylogger-spoiler-no/

As usual it is a bit more nuanced than that, and it is something you can easily turn off... Also keep in mind this was about whether or not upgrading was a bad thing. I still have trouble finding a legitimate reason not to when you're upgrading your hardware - the Windows XP argument isn't going to fly :)

Vayra86Fact that your Windows opinion is even in your signature does not add to your legitimacy, just sayin'.

My sig clearly states my point of view. Your child-like ramblings clearly show yours.

Vayra86'Proven methodology' wut? Reading a few things on the web isn't a methodology.

More childish nonsense. Clearly you understood.. /sarcasm\

Vayra86About that keylogging...
www.zdnet.com/article/does-windows-10-really-include-a-keylogger-spoiler-no/

ZDNET often can't tell the difference between their bum and a hole in the ground and frequently stick their head in both. They certainly are not worthy of offering authoritative information on the subject of Windows security. And the article you cited is as irrelevant as it is misguided[and mis-quoted]. Microsoft has ADMITTED to the keystroke logging in two parts of the OS, a service called "diagtrack" and Cortana.

Vayra86As usual it is a bit more nuanced than that, and it is something you can easily turn off...

OK

Vayra86Also keep in mind this was about whether or not upgrading was a bad thing. I still have trouble finding a legitimate reason not to when you're upgrading your hardware

That was kind of the point, which you completely missed, again.

Vayra86- the Windows XP argument isn't going to fly :)

Thanks mommy. Do you honestly think the folks hanging on to XP care, at all, whether YOU approve? Do you think they care about Microsoft?

Some work has been done already on a workaround: github.com/zeffy/kb4012218-19
The author patched the device checking function IsDeviceServiceable to always return true and thus skipping the CPU check.

The modified updates might break things so use with care.

I'm really getting tired of reading about why I shouldn't have built a new computer with the new generation Intel processors. AT NO TIME did any hardware company, especially Intel, MSI, Corsair, and Asus, warn me that M$ will not update their new expensive hardware and motherboards, if I want to run a paid for, full copy of W7. Nor did M$ warn me that they had no plans to service the new computers and would be blocking any critical updates. I have not read anywhere, that W7 had gone the way of XP already.

I use M$ for one reason, it's the only OS that will run the software applications that I need for my business. Now I find out, after spending 1.5k for a new rig, that I can't get needed updates. And if it wasn't for their pathetically written, full of holes software, I wouldn't need their constant critical update fixes anyway. They don't' even care enough about their long time costumers to at least explain what's at risk, just buy W10 or else. Am I open for anyone who wants to attack my computer? Will the Intel chip not function on rare occasions? Will it stop my Asus board from running? Let me know what the hell I'm going to miss and then let me decide what to buy before I spend the money! I guess to be worth one trillion dollars isn't enough for Gates to at least have some respect for his long time customers.

I'm not a programmer or techie, I'm a contractor with a business to run, and really don't need to spend any more time than necessary messing with my computer software.

CGBI'm really getting tired of reading about why I shouldn't have built a new computer with the new generation Intel processors. AT NO TIME did any hardware company, especially Intel, MSI, Corsair, and Asus, warn me that M$ will not update their new expensive hardware and motherboards, if I want to run a paid for, full copy of W7. Nor did M$ warn me that they had no plans to service the new computers and would be blocking any critical updates. No where did I read that W7 had gone the way of XP already.

I use M$ for one reason, it's the only OS that will run the software applications that I need for my business. Now I find out, after spending 1.5k for a new rig, that I can't get needed updates. And if it wasn't for their pathetically written, full of holes software, I wouldn't need their constant critical update fixes anyway. They don't' even care enough about their long time costumers to at least explain what's at risk, just buy W10 or else. Am I open for anyone who wants to attack my computer? Will the Intel chip not function on rare occasions? Will it stop my Asus board from running? Let me know what the hell I'm going to miss and then let me decide what to buy before I spend the money! I guess to be worth one trillion dollars isn't enough for Gates to at least have some respect for his long time customers.

I'm not a programmer or techie, I'm a contractor with a business to run, and really don't need to spend any more time than necessary messing with my computer software.

Buy prebuilt, or send the CEO, CTO, of ms a letter, because ranting here doesn't get anything done.

CGBI'm really getting tired of reading about why I shouldn't have built a new computer with the new generation Intel processors. AT NO TIME did any hardware company, especially Intel, MSI, Corsair, and Asus, warn me that M$ will not update their new expensive hardware and motherboards, if I want to run a paid for, full copy of W7. Nor did M$ warn me that they had no plans to service the new computers and would be blocking any critical updates. I have not read anywhere, that W7 had gone the way of XP already.

I use M$ for one reason, it's the only OS that will run the software applications that I need for my business. Now I find out, after spending 1.5k for a new rig, that I can't get needed updates. And if it wasn't for their pathetically written, full of holes software, I wouldn't need their constant critical update fixes anyway. They don't' even care enough about their long time costumers to at least explain what's at risk, just buy W10 or else. Am I open for anyone who wants to attack my computer? Will the Intel chip not function on rare occasions? Will it stop my Asus board from running? Let me know what the hell I'm going to miss and then let me decide what to buy before I spend the money! I guess to be worth one trillion dollars isn't enough for Gates to at least have some respect for his long time customers.

I'm not a programmer or techie, I'm a contractor with a business to run, and really don't need to spend any more time than necessary messing with my computer software.

There is a patch someone made that will allow you to update with Kaby and Ryzen, though I think he warns you that you use it at your own risk.

Activating Windows 10 with a Windows 7/8/8.1 key supposedly still works with Creator Update.

You could also try to return your Kaby Lake CPU and get a Skylake, it isn't currently blocked, though you many need to buy Windows 7 again.

CGBI'm not a programmer or techie, I'm a contractor with a business to run, and really don't need to spend any more time than necessary messing with my computer software.

Why not buy a prebuilt workstation (if you need more performance) or go mobile (if you don't)?
It has multiple advantages over custom builds. E.g. the onsite (in-home) service can be such a life-saver if you're running a business.