JorgeA

I have an update on the above post: The two references to telemetry settings that I mentioned there, refer to the same exact setting in the Group Policy Editor. And adjusting its value to 0 (no telemetry) is "applicable to enterprise and server devices only." To be precise, you can set it to 0, but the description says that the setting will be treated like a 1. I assume that using regedit would not yield a better result. --JorgeA

Point-counterpoint: Microsoft now uses Windows 10's Start menu to display ads Microsoft says Start menu app suggestions in Windows 10 are not ads What is "advertising"? Definitions.net says: InvestorWords says: Advertising need not be "paid" in order to qualify as such. Nor does it necessarily mean you're trying to "sell" a product or service. If you glue posters for your community playhouse to people's windshields in a parking lot, that counts as advertising. Of course what Microsoft is plastering on the Start Menu is advertising. And I don't want it on my PC's Start Menu. Nor should I need to "opt out" of these ads. Tell me about the feature, ask me if I'd like to use it, then make it "opt-in" and leave me alone, thank you. --JorgeA

Anything is possible and this is a real concern. Microsoft claims the right to dig into our own files on our own PCs, and to monitor all sorts of processes, without a clear explanation of what exactly they're doing. I'm more optimistic on this front. A whole bunch of PC OEMs and component makers would have to be willing to commit commercial suicide by going along with such a generalized "kill" order. If I learned that they'd opted not to speak out against such a scheme, I would go back to typewriters for my documents and #10 envelopes for my mail. As for the IoT, better hope that no single entity gains control of the whole network. --JorgeA

I vaguely remember that happening. Sounds like, at least back then, MSFT didn't have the power to totally control the computer market with a locked-down (hardcoded?) OS. This is reassuring. IMHO if they did try to dictate what OS could go on a PC, they'd be faced with the wrath of the blogosphere in addition to that of the Linux world. Maybe they figured they could get away with it in the case of Win9x because so few people were using those versions or cared about them --JorgeA

--JorgeA Something MS doesn't realize with this is trading in your old computer, getting a discount on a much more powerful one, and then formatting and installing Windows 7 or 8.1. That would be a classic case of a strategy backfiring. --JorgeA

Thanks, jaclaz. I suspected that it might not be suitable for our needs, but wanted to make sure. --JorgeA

^^ Well, suddenly I feel more sane. --JorgeA

Desperation? Planning to purchase a Windows 10 computer? Microsoft will buy your old device --JorgeA

Assuming MS is now in possession of a multi-billion dollar royalty carrot over Samsung and now privy to the confidential business information of Samsung (presuming hardware drivers, etc) the question is what delivery method are they going to use to start "upgrading" Android phones to Windows 10 with custom ROM's? Huh, so Microsoft might let Samsung off the hook for some of those royalty payments in exchange for being allowed to install Windows 10 on their phones. The reaction from Samsung phone users would be interesting to follow. I don't know about others, but myself I view all smartphones as basically having the same (or similar enough) hardware capabilities that then it's the OS that matters. So my choice is based on the OS, its features, UI, and preinstalled apps. If I suddenly get switched from my chosen Android to Windows 10, there'll be hell to pay. At the very least I'll be looking for a different phone and/or carrier ASAP. --JorgeA

Anybody here who's familiar with this product? For those who know how to use such tools, might it be useful in determining what sorts of connections Windows 10 is making, or not really? --JorgeA

Another set of observations, that I'd like to throw out there for commentary: I can't claim to understand everything that's in that TechNet article (in particular, references to "Windows provisioning" and "MDM" leave me scratching my head), but to my non-expert eyes it really doesn't look like there's much in there that we are not already familiar with. Most of it simply goes over the privacy settings in the UI, with details on how to accomplish the same things in Group Policy or in regedit. You may find other stuff that's not already been covered in MSFN threads or in the blogs out there (please let us know if you do). One aspect that puzzled me is the existence of two seemingly distinct references to telemetry settings. If you go to the "Feedback & diagnostics" heading and scroll down a little to below the "based on these settings" chart, you'll see that it tells you that, while you can't set the telemetry level to Security via the UI, you can do that in Group Policy. So far, so good (well, if you have more than a Home edition of Win10 anyway). But then if you scroll way down to the section, "Manage your telemetry settings," it states clearly there that the "Security" level of telemetry is available only for the Enterprise, Education, and IoT Core editions. Even after reading on from there, it's not made entirely clear whether the level can be set to Security via regedit in other editions. But either way, on the face of it this section appears to contradict what the same article says under the "Feedback & diagnostics" section. Are they talking about two distinct types of telemetry here, or did the writer of the TechNet article goof? Maybe you guys can interpret what's going on here better than I can. --JorgeA

That's a great question. I'm not aware of anything in the Vista or 7 agreements to suggest that MSFT is allowed to invalidate our Windows activation if we fail to install Windows Updates. I suppose that they could change the EULA/TOS/MSA/whatever at any time, but at the very least they would need to announce such a change very prominently, else it would be Class Action City. I do know of people running Windows Media Center PCs who've had updates disabled for years, without consequence. --JorgeA

Certainly, lack of both knowledge and concern are a major factor that Microsoft is counting on to make its Win10 abomination succeed. I'm reminded me of the old joke: Pollster knocks on a homeowner's door. The owner answers and is greeted by the pollster. "Good morning, sir. We're conducting a public opinion survey. What do you think about the level of ignorance and apathy among the general public?" "I don't know and I don't care!!" By staying on the sidelines and going along, people like that help make it possible for the Hitlers and Stalins of the world to go on and on. It's up to those of us who care to help them become aware of what's happening and to stir them into action. With regard to Windows 10, fortunately we don't have to dodge bullets and hide from secret police: we just do our research, talk to each other and compare notes in places like MSFN, then we go out to the blogs and to our friends and family and spread the word. The process worked in the case of Windows 8. After an initial warm reception with the usual hype, the tech press became increasingly cool toward that OS, and its readers and by extension eventually their families and friends came to understand why. It did help that visually the contrast with XP and 7 was so great. The same process can work with Windows 10. The challenge is greater, both because the differences from previous OSes are more conceptual and because Microsoft is pushing much more aggressively to get it installed on people's computers. But this could itself become the source of bad press and public pushback, and it may already be happening; see for example NoelC's graphs suggesting that Win10 adoption is leveling off and that 7 is bouncing back in spite of it all. I don't see Windows 10 giving Microsoft a path to the handheld device market, any more than Windows 8 did. Every device and OS the company has made for mobile has struggled and I'd be curious to learn how Win10 might change that. As far as I'm concerned, they're needlessly wrecking the Windows experience for their most loyal customers for the pie-in-the-sky of cellphone users who've never shown any great inclination to buy Microsoft. The tragic part of all this is is that it didn't have to be that way. There is no technical reason why users couldn't be offered the choice of Aero Glass on their i7 Core systems with 16GB of RAM. There is no need for Cortana to send my query about my next appointment to a server in Redmond -- that kind of information can be stored and retrieved locally just fine. I could go on, but it mostly boils down to the idea of choice. It's funny how Microsoft claims that it wants to "personalize" our PCs, but what Win10's drab color schemes, shrinking customization options, and forced Windows Updates actually lead to is a homogenized experience across the user base. As to whether Microsoft's moves turn out to be brilliant, I agree with you that time will tell. If they succeed and the sheep are happy to shuffle into the corral to be poked and tracked and analyzed no end for a few bytes of Candy Crush, then so be it. I'll watch the camp fill up and then make my way to Linuxland. In the meantime, anybody who has ears to hear with, I'll keep shouting to warn them about what they're getting into. --JorgeA

I read that Technet article. Note the incisive questions put forth at the bottom of the page by a user who's obviously familiar with the inner workings of MS Support. Note especially his final three questions: He goes on to write: He then goes on in all sincerity to ask that his concerns be forwarded to the appropriate circles. Good luck with that -- his comment is dated October 5 and there is as yet no reply, let alone the "answers to my questions specifically" that he requests. But he rightly concludes: Good luck with that. --JorgeA P.S. I do wonder what kinds of circumstances he has in mind that would allow such deep access to a user's PC by Microsoft engineers.

Well, since XP is EOL'd, it most likely won't be getting the GWX updates or telemetry updates. So if most Win7/8/8.1 users are forced onto Win10, there will be a big divide between XP and 10. MS could decide to provide the "upgrade" to spywareOS for XP, but I don't see them doing it. I often joke that MS ended XP support at just the right time, before all of these spyware updates and pushes to "upgrade". At this point, if XP's market share increases, I would not be the slightest bit surprised. I know my next PC will be running XP... The line really is drawn at XP. Vista isn't getting the GWX update, but my systems did get the telemetry updates offered to them. --JorgeA

At least you're getting some kind of MSFN notification by e-mail. It's been months since I've gotten any. --JorgeA

I really can see that being said over there... --JorgeA

For interested readers, here's a good article with more info on that topic. --JorgeA

^^ As for the folks who got caught in that MS trap and were suddenly confronted by Windows Update demanding to restart the computer in order to finish installing Win10 -- I wonder how (if) they were able somehow to avoid completing the installation. Or did they have to finish it and then revert to Win7? --JorgeA

Thanks, Formfiller. --JorgeA

[...] Get that Marvin a cigar. In the online chat, Marvin writes that Here's the tragic part of all this: The "unauthorized website" that the victim went to, is Windows Updates. The "advertisement" is one (or more) of these updates. The scammer with access to the victim's computer is MSFT. --JorgeA

Whoa. How did you find that? I'm curious as to the source of the document. Snowden? Wikileaks? --JorgeA

Well, on that last point anyway he's following Gandhi's advice: he's simply trying to learn as much as possible about each one of his company's customers. On the EQ side, though, he still needs a lot of work, as he keeps ignoring his customers' repeated pleas to stop the spying and to bring back Aero Glass. He may intellectually understand the bit about EQ, but I have to wonder if he really gets it. --JorgeA

Yea, I don’t buy it. No “optional update” is ever checked by default. Ever. That was deliberate, and they probably only scale back after some outrage happened. I totally agree. Their explanation is classic a$$-covering. They tried it to see how much of a reaction there would be, and pulled it when the noise level reached a certain point. More surprising (because a true "accident") would have been if a desired update had failed to appear on the list of updates or to get downloaded/installed. --JorgeA

You can do this with a router if you have one. I would recommend doing it at the router level anyways, especially if you have multiple computers on your network. Thanks, Trip. What would be a good source of information/explanation as to how to use these commands? In my limited experience with them, router manuals aren't exacly a model of clarity. --JorgeA