JorgeA

Looks like some Half Life game (mod). Notice the lambda letter instead of 'n' in 'windows'. Ah, thanks! --JorgeA

This is only partially true. MS requires a recovery solution of some type to be available with the sale of a computer and this has gone back to at least XP. That meant that if hard disc based recovery was provided, then the OEM could sell a PC without the Recovery CD/DVD. I first saw this configuration with Sony VAIO in 2003. However, it is not to mean that just because you have hard-disk based recovery that a disc is not allowed. The "forcing" of adding a recovery partition is a 2 part problem. First was MS idea to unify the product lines with Windows 8. While they could have said "if the hardware is of x configuration" (like they do for other things) then it wouldn't be required. They did not and thus did require recovery partition for all Windows 8 (and newer) OS that they pre-installed. Second, consider early market forcasts of the time indicated what is true. Computers are being sold without ODD and of course small-form tablets and the like do not have them. Still, it does not mean a disc cannot be provided. So in summary: 1. Microsoft requires a recovery solution to be made available with the sale of a computer. 2. This recovery can be recovery partition, DVD and/or USB 3. DVD or USB recovery can only be made by an Authorized Replicator (see lawsuit mention in the quote) The complaints people have about the recovery media not coming with the computer or having to pay for it later are against the OEM and not Microsoft. This is a decision the OEM has made to keep costs down. Sony, for example, used recovery CD sales in XP days as a profit booster. If it cost them $10 per disc to make it, they would sell them for $60. Thanks for the explanation, Trip. My first experience with the no-DVD policy was in 2008 when I bought my first Vista PC (a Hewlett-Packard model). Even in my technologically-challenged condition back then, I remember my first reaction being, "What?! I can't believe how cheap they're getting!", and my second reaction being, "Hey, what if the hard drive crashes? That partition thing's gonna be useless!" As part of my purchase, the store made recovery disks for me, but in the back of my head I always wondered about all those people out there who wouldn't know to make them, or would never get around to doing it. It seemed a needless risk to make this an extra step. --JorgeA

Whoa! What movie is that poster from? --JorgeA

That's a little better than what we heard last week, but I would feel more reassured if Microsoft and/or Intel were to come out and state flatly that Windows 7 and 8.1 will be fully supported on all those CPUs through the announced end of the OSes' support cycles in 2020 and 2023, respectively. None of this "2017 and then you'll only get extraordinary patches" stuff. --JorgeA

OEMs only done this because Microsoft forced them to. Dell were quite happy sending out Windows Reinstallation DVDs with all their systems and Dell customers were quite happy that they could readily clean install with this media. They were then not allowed to include the Reinstallation DVD with the system. To market it as an improvement they stated it was green policies not to send out discs with the system. However still send out a Dell Drivers DVD for some time which of course was useless without the OS Reinstallation DVD. There are far more customers complaining that they did not get proper installation media with their system than customers complaining they got too many discs and that it wasn't "green" especially on the home consumer market. A UK PC chain company who tried to help their customers got sued by Microsoft so it is Microsoft who are making life difficult and not the OEMs[...] --JorgeA Really? That explains a lot. I thought the sudden disappearance of reinstall CDs after XP was just the OEMs being cheap. Yeah, that's what I had thought, too. --JorgeA

Apparently, this wouldn't be the first time that Microsoft has bullied hardware manufacturers. Check this out: OEMs only done this because Microsoft forced them to. Dell were quite happy sending out Windows Reinstallation DVDs with all their systems and Dell customers were quite happy that they could readily clean install with this media. They were then not allowed to include the Reinstallation DVD with the system. To market it as an improvement they stated it was green policies not to send out discs with the system. However still send out a Dell Drivers DVD for some time which of course was useless without the OS Reinstallation DVD. There are far more customers complaining that they did not get proper installation media with their system than customers complaining they got too many discs and that it wasn't "green" especially on the home consumer market. A UK PC chain company who tried to help their customers got sued by Microsoft so it is Microsoft who are making life difficult and not the OEMs[...] --JorgeA

Another article with more details on Microsoft's new policy not to support Windows 7 on Skylake processors: Microsoft: Skylake owners must upgrade to Windows 10 within 18 months, future CPUs will require it Note the following passage: [emphasis added] The part in boldface suggests to me that, in addition to the ongoing campaign to shanghai users into Windows 10, another reason for the policy change is sheer cheapness: they no longer want to expend resources on creating patches to help previous OSes work with newer processors. The computing public will keep paying for Windows in one fashion or another but will, in effect, receive diminished service for what they give Microsoft. "Windows as a service," indeed. A separate questrion: users presumably will still be able to install Linux on these systems freely? --JorgeA

Yup, totally agree. If it's in the cloud, it's out of your possession and beyond your control. When you keep your stuff locally, if you lose it it'll be because you have much bigger things to worry about (such as your house burning down). I would only use cloud storage as a secondary backup (backup to a backup), and even then only after encrypting what I put up there. --JorgeA

Just to brighten up the mood, here's something to cheer about: How to restore features Microsoft removed from Windows 10 This is tempting me to boot up my Win10 test partition for the first time in weeks, to see if it works and how well. Depending on how it's implemented, a tool like this one could be an immense help for the bulk of Windows users who are not highly technically savvy. --JorgeA

I'm not sure if it's actually part of a master plan, but for sure having a central cloud would make it easier to scr*w up almost everyone's life at the same time for maximum impact. I tend to believe it's more of an, umm, "emerging opportunity" than something that was foreseen and planned for. --JorgeA

As a friend of mine puts it: "Buy gold, guns, and ammunition!" --JorgeA

Cyber attacks on industrial Internet of Things are on the rise --JorgeA

^^ Well, I can see how that could lead to awkward conversations with your guests, comparable to "What, you won't let me use your bathroom?!?!" Just as the way to avoid that uncomfortable situation would be not to have any bathrooms in the house, the (more feasible) solution to the Wi-Fi situation is not to have Wi-Fi in the house. --JorgeA

That's key, IMHO. Once lost, trust is very hard to win back. --JorgeA

If and when that does happen, you and I will have a field day going back to all the old threads on various forums, and posting new replies to the fanbois who claimed "that will never happen," "how absurd, "stop the FUD," and so on. --JorgeA

That's a very important difference that's often missed by the folks who say (for example) that "Google and Apple vacuum up your private information too, so what's the problem with Microsoft doing it?" If you don't like the way Google operates, you don't have to get a Google account. (You don't have to get a Microsoft account, but MSFT does make it hard to do without one in Windows 10.) But more importantly, if you don't like Google's business model there's a wide variety of alternative search engines out there that you can use. As you point out, it's not nearly so easy to run a business (or church or volunteer group, for that matter) without Windows. Not only do you have to learn a whole new operating system, but the software applications you need may not even be available. So there's a case to be made that Microsoft is abusing its dominance of the PC space. This past week, I was actually fantasizing about winning the Powerball lottery and using the winnings to finance the development of a compatible alternative to Windows. I even mentally budgeted a couple of hundred million to the legal department to fight off the inevitable attacks from Microsoft's sharks. Unfortunately, the plan didn't go as expected, and will have to be shelved for now. --JorgeA

Mary Jo Foley has additional information on MSFT's changes to Windows 7 support: New Microsoft Windows support changes: What they mean to business users She thoughtfully points out that these changes could actually have a negative effect on PC sales, at least in the short run: In the next paragraph, she provides the official Microsoft line -- -- which is ridiculous on its face. What is it about the upcoming new CPUs that makes Win10 so much preferable to Win7, that CPUs from, say, 2012 didn't have? What worthwile features are we talking about, exactly? But she goes on to display a healthy skepticism about this sloganeering: --JorgeA EDIT: clarification

Man, that sounds like the ending of a grim end-of-the-world movie. --JorgeA

Just wow. I have to ask are enterprise customers actually interested in 10? I know the article pointed out they are interested in the security features, but if the system is garbage it self (also very nosy I doubt MS is going to not use anonymous telemetry on enterprise systems)why use it especially if you have a setup that just works. This raises a couple of questions. First, in view of the following -- -- are they changing the rules to say that, for these processors, Windows 7 will "not really" be supported through the long-advertised 2020 end date for its support cycle? And second, what (if anything) does this mean for Linux? In recent years, concerns have been expressed off and on that at some point it would become impossible to run Linux on new PCs due to some hardware "security" feature. --JorgeA

Fresh reports of obnoxious behavior by Win10: I wouldn't be surprised to learn, eventually, that this turned out to be a "bug" or "mistake" of some sort on Microsoft's part. What would surprise me would be to hear of a mistake that happened to respect the user's preferences or actually increased his choices (such as, say, a "bug" that made it possible to use native Aero Glass or that allowed users to decide which Windows Updates to install). --JorgeA

Your smart doorbell may let in unwanted visitors --JorgeA

PC market sees biggest-ever drop in shipments, but don't blame Windows 10 No, anything and everything except Windows 10 is keeping PC buyers away in droves. --JorgeA

All so true, and eloquently put. Home users and small (even if home-based) businesses do have different needs and approaches. If I were in the market for Windows 10, though, I would get the Pro version, as at least it offers the Group Policy Editor through which you have some remaining control over updates (not sure if it offers any better control over telemetry, I'd have to check). --JorgeA

KB2952664 popped up yet again in this month's Patch Tuesday set. --JorgeA

^^ The article reads: LOL, let me fix that for them (corrections in boldface red): --JorgeA