Windows 8 - Deeper Impressions

[TELVM]

Microsoft awarded with top honors for trying to protect customer data from the government

 

Microsoft has earned top honors from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) for the company's efforts to protect customer data from the government ...

 

Perhaps it's just me but sounds a bit surreal    .

 

I wonder if this might be telling us something about the add-on https everywhere, also courtesy of the EFF?

[JorgeA]

Huh, it does give me pause. While I still doubt that MSFT voluntarily gave access to the NSA, those guys are hardly worthy of lpraise for their interest in privacy. (Remember Kinect; their taking down a photographer's erotic artwork from his own SkyDrive account; and their cooperation with the NYPD to create a network of surveillance cameras.)

 

--JorgeA

[JorgeA]

Another fantastic analysis by SemiAccurate:

 

Microsoft is now irrelevant to computing, and they want you to know it

 

...[M]ost people didn’t grasp how badly Microsoft had fallen, they were totally irrelevant and had no more monopoly to leverage. This played out with the Windows 8 launch, Microsoft was desperately trying to stay relevant in mobile by forcing the entire computing ecosystem to adopt their new mobile OS. In theory this would lead to software being leveraged across platforms, and between Office and Exchange, they could force people to use Microsoft mobile products.

 

A funny thing happened though, an entire generation of users didn’t want to give up their beloved iPhones or Android devices for an inferior, slower, more expensive, app-free Microsoft device. Microsoft repeated their threat loudly, “Use our mobile OS or you won’t get Office or Exchange on your phone!” To their abject horror the response was almost universally, “OK, bye”.

 

[...]

 

Windows 8 was the first OS to make PC sales drop with the release of a new OS. Not only that, they dropped by double-digit percentages and are still dropping almost two years later. Microsoft forced an actively awful OS on customers that didn’t want it, leveraged their remaining monopoly powers to exclude any other offerings, and lost all their partners about 25% unit sales. The result of the Windows 8 debacle was a customer base that now actively avoids Windows where possible and an OEM base that is actively tying to sell those customers anything but Windows. Microsoft failed badly here too.

 

 

A lot of good stuff up and down that article. On the XBox One:

 

Microsoft made a gaming box that didn’t game well, banked on controlling the content gateway with an expensive peripheral that customers despised and resented paying for, and wondered why it didn’t sell.

 

--JorgeA

 

 

[TELVM]

Who does that server really serve?
 

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html

 

... If “cloud computing” has a meaning, it is not a way of doing computing, but rather a way of thinking about computing: a devil-may-care approach which says, “Don't ask questions. Don't worry about who controls your computing or who holds your data. Don't check for a hook hidden inside our service before you swallow it. Trust companies without hesitation.” In other words, “Be a sucker.” A cloud in the mind is an obstacle to clear thinking. For the sake of clear thinking about computing, let's avoid the term “cloud.” ...

 

Edited May 19, 2014 by TELVM

[JorgeA]

A lot of good points in that piece. The bottom line:

 

In the meantime, if a company invites you to use its server to do your own computing tasks, don't yield; don't use SaaSS. Don't buy or install “thin clients”, which are simply computers so weak they make you do the real work on a server, unless you're going to use them with your server. Use a real computer and keep your data there...

 

One thing I do disagree with him on is the very last sentence (echoed throughout the article):

 

Do your own computing with your own copy of a free program, for your freedom's sake.

 

...which is elaborated on earlier in the piece:

 

For the simple case, where you are doing your own computing on data in your own hands, the solution is simple: use your own copy of a free software application. Do your text editing with your copy of a free text editor such as GNU Emacs or a free word processor. Do your photo editing with your copy of free software such as GIMP. What if there is no free program available? A proprietary program or SaaSS would take away your freedom, so you shouldn't use those. You can contribute your time or your money to development of a free replacement.

 

I concur with the "do your own computing" part, but I disagree with Stallman that I give up my freedom by using a proprietary application. I am free to buy or not buy, and then to use or not use, such a commercial program. Indeed, were I to refuse (as he suggests) to do a certain kind of computing if the only available applications for it were commercial, then in practical terms I would thereby be limiting my own freedom to get things accomplished more severely than whatever it is he's concerned about.

 

At a more fundamental level, I see nothing wrong with trading value for value, my money for the program vendor's time and effort. If anything, eliminating the exchange system decreases my ability to influence the developer into including features that I want or excluding features that I dislike, as then it becomes purely a matter of what the developer feels like doing.

 

And the bit about "open source" enabling you to know what's going on behind the scenes is almost completely impractical, applicable only to people who can read and understand computer code. We might argue that the rest of us "dummies" are theoretically somehow protected by "those who know," but in practice things work differently -- witness the Heartbleed bug that went undetected for years at heaven knows what cost to users.

 

--JorgeA

 

[JorgeA]

China Bans Windows 8 From Government PCs

 

The official explanation doesn't quite hang together:

 

China’s official Xinhua news agency Tuesday said the ban was aimed at ensuring computer security after the shutdown of XP.

 

If computer security because of XP's EOS is the issue, then it doesn't make sense to avoid switching to a current, supported OS. I suspect that the real reason has to do with a reluctance to shell out more money for new Windows licenses in the wake of EOS. Or maybe the relevant decision-makers in China just don't care for the Metro UI. 

 

--JorgeA

 

[JorgeA]

Microsoft's Expansion of Surface Lineup May Be Ill Timed

 

The struggle in part reflects Microsoft's misjudgment of the market, analysts and people familiar with the company's strategy said. When it first introduced the Surface with a 10.6-inch screen, tablets with 7- to 8-inch screens were taking off in popularity. Small tablets accounted for more than half of tablets sold in 2013, estimates IDC.

 

It isn't just the Surface that is wheezing today. Tablet sales rose 3.9% in the first quarter from a year earlier, according to IDC. That was a sharp slowdown in growth from the first quarter of last year, when sales more than doubled.

 

Apple is responsible for a chunk of the slowdown. The company accounts for about one-third of tablets sold.

 

But some people in the technology industry wonder whether tablets are nearing their limits. Businesses and consumers are holding on to tablets longer and using large smartphones for some tasks they might have done on a tablet, according to IDC.

 

"Just as laptops chewed away desktop share, tablets will chew away at laptop share. But it is the smartphone that is the new transformative device," said Benedict Evans, a partner with venture-capital firm Andreessen Horowitz.

 

--JorgeA

 

[jaclaz]

I concur with the "do your own computing" part, but I disagree with Stallman that I give up my freedom by using a proprietary application. I am free to buy or not buy, and then to use or not use, such a commercial program. Indeed, were I to refuse (as he suggests) to do a certain kind of computing if the only available applications for it were commercial, then in practical terms I would thereby be limiting my own freedom to get things accomplished more severely than whatever it is he's concerned about.

 

At a more fundamental level, I see nothing wrong with trading value for value, my money for the program vendor's time and effort. If anything, eliminating the exchange system decreases my ability to influence the developer into including features that I want or excluding features that I dislike, as then it becomes purely a matter of what the developer feels like doing.

 

And the bit about "open source" enabling you to know what's going on behind the scenes is almost completely impractical, applicable only to people who can read and understand computer code. We might argue that the rest of us "dummies" are theoretically somehow protected by "those who know," but in practice things work differently -- witness the Heartbleed bug that went undetected for years at heaven knows what cost to users.

 

You have not clear (or you do not like ) the spirit of the word "freedom" as Stallman uses it.

 

Of course Stallman is a bit of extremist in his take on this, but he has some reasons.

 

Freedom is not only the possibility of choosing an interface that suits your habits or workflow, it is also about the possibility to change (or find someone capable of changing) the way a program works, to add or remove a feature, etc.

 

But I will give you a practical example.

 

I have, since the good ol' DOS days a DOS program (sort of accounting/POS kind of program) DBASEIV/CLIPPER based.

This is a Commercial program for which I paid since what? 1993 or so a yearly licensing and support fee to the software house.

This particular piece of software is not "modern", is not "multitasking", it is not "elegant", BUT it does what is supposed to do it in a PERFECT way, with the HIGHEST possible level of comfort/easyness of use and it is §@ç#ing RELIABLE:

 

I was extremely "lucky" (or "smart", you choose) to find it at the time and to choose that particular program among a number of similar ones and additionally was also very lucky that this small software house (because makes good programs and was well administered) is still around today.

 

Since 1996 (or so) the same software house made the "Windows" version of this same software.

It sucked in 1996.

It sucked in 1997,

It sucked in 1998.

They rewrote it form scratch in 1999.

It still sucked.

They made over the long years since every kind of betterings, but while it has reached a reliability similar to (but not completely up to) the old DOS version, it still has IMHO many issues in everyday use.

 

The old DOS version used (obviously) the keyboard ONLY.

The new Windows version has a "mixed" interface, you need to use to input data both the keyboard and the mouse, which is awkward and that slows data input considerably.

I have tried talking over and over with the good guys, but I was unable to convince them (actually I did manage to convince them about the issues, but seemingly the stupid CASE they use has some limitations, and some of the things I value cannot be done).

 

Now, next year they will put the DOS version in the out-of-support phase.

 

Over all these years the updates were things like "add this report", "change the way date field is printed", "add to the database a field for sorting by last operation on account", etc.

Now, I have personnel that can input data on it in (really) no time, possibly blindfolded and if needed with an arm tied behind their back, while sleeping, I can manage it (in case of issues, backing up, restoring, fixing databases) with absolute easiness,

 

Next year I will need to upgrade to it's stupid windows version (or find another program, possibly worse/less reliable), re-train personnel, upgrade my training to deal with it, change greatly the workflow to adapt it to the new stupid programs' one, which means hours and hours of time lost (and that will never be "compensated" since the new windows program is slower/more inconvenient).

 

If this was a free program (free as in freedom, not free as in free beer), I could easily do myself (or find a programmer capable of doing them) the little changes that may be needed. 

 

Remember this program (the DOS one) is a stupid program, does stupid and stupidly simple things, but it does them as quickly and as conveniently and as reliably as possible, it is not -say - "Mathematica" or "AutoCAD 3d", it is a simple, stupid database, stupidly storing some data and producing stupid printouts and stupid reports of these stupid data.

 

There were NO real changes in the data it stores, or in the actual outputs needed, it was designed to take care of the administrative part of a business that has substantially remained the same for hundreds or actually thousands of years, yet next year I will need to either change the workflow to adapt to one of the new stupid windows programs or re-write (or find someone capable to re-write) from scratch this piece of code.

 

jaclaz

[TELVM]

China Bans Windows 8 From Government PCs

 

Now this is excessive.

 

Everyone should be free to run retarded operating systems, if that's their wish.

[jaclaz]

 

Everyone should be free to run retarded operating systems, if that's their wish.

 

Well, seemingly the China government wish is to NOT buy Windows 8 for their own use.

It's not like they are prohibiting anyone in China from having one, they have simply decided to not buy Windows 8 based PC's among Governement supplies.

 

jaclaz

[JorgeA]

 

You have not clear (or you do not like ) the spirit of the word "freedom" as Stallman uses it.

 

Thanks jaclaz, you explain it very well.

 

I guess that in your situation it's out of the question to keep using that program after it goes EOS? (What can there be left to fix in a program that's already been out for two decades?)

 

Anyway, it's remarkable that they supported a DOS-type application this far into the 21st century. We (you) would definitely prefer to have it supported forever, and that would be ideal. But to use operating systems as an example, in practice I observe that it's the proprietary (Windows) OSes that get maintained and supported for a decade or longer, whereas in the case of the "FOSS" OSes (Linux) users get pushed out the door after a couple of years. So in that sense I get to use what I like -- and enjoy support for it -- for longer by using the commercial OS. Not forever, of course, but for a longer time, which makes my work environment that much more stable, running with fewer major disruptions.

 

I don't have direct experience with how this works with particular applications (OpenOffice/LibreOffice vs. Microsoft Office, for example), but I wouldn't be surprised to find out that it works much the same as with OSes: older versions of the "free" suites enjoy no support at all from the developers and users are on their own. In contrast, Microsoft supported Office 2003 until just last month. LibreOffice releases are supported for a whopping nine months and then you have to either go searching for someone who will maintain it afterward, or else install the new release. Talk about the upgrade treadmill!!

 

To my mind, that's not freedom, but actually a heavier bondage to the developers' desires.

 

--JorgeA

[Flasche]

Thanks jaclaz, you explain it very well.

 

I guess that in your situation it's out of the question to keep using that program after it goes EOS? (What can there be left to fix in a program that's already been out for two decades?)

 

Anyway, it's remarkable that they supported a DOS-type application this far into the 21st century. We (you) would definitely prefer to have it supported forever, and that would be ideal. But to use operating systems as an example, in practice I observe that it's the proprietary (Windows) OSes that get maintained and supported for a decade or longer, whereas in the case of the "FOSS" OSes (Linux) users get pushed out the door after a couple of years. So in that sense I get to use what I like -- and enjoy support for it -- for longer by using the commercial OS. Not forever, of course, but for a longer time, which makes my work environment that much more stable, running with fewer major disruptions.

 

I don't have direct experience with how this works with particular applications (OpenOffice/LibreOffice vs. Microsoft Office, for example), but I wouldn't be surprised to find out that it works much the same as with OSes: older versions of the "free" suites enjoy no support at all from the developers and users are on their own. In contrast, Microsoft supported Office 2003 until just last month. LibreOffice releases are supported for a whopping nine months and then you have to either go searching for someone who will maintain it afterward, or else install the new release. Talk about the upgrade treadmill!!

 

To my mind, that's not freedom, but actually a heavier bondage to the developers' desires.

 

--JorgeA

 

 

That is the issue with Linux. The support cycles are so d@mn fast (for the OS "distros", and the software). Personally I am making the jump from Linux, to BSD (except for Whonix this linux distro is too good). I'll be particularly moving to Open BSD.

Edited May 21, 2014 by Flasche

[Tripredacus]

This seems an odd thing, at least something I haven't heard of. Microsoft decides not to fix an IE8 zero-day vulnerabiliity.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05/22/ie_8_zero_day_dumped_after_7_months_redmond_says_harden_up/

[JorgeA]

This seems an odd thing, at least something I haven't heard of. Microsoft decides not to fix an IE8 zero-day vulnerabiliity.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05/22/ie_8_zero_day_dumped_after_7_months_redmond_says_harden_up/

 

Sounds like a less-than subtle way to force people to move off IE8 (the last version that works on XP -- hint, hint).

 

Telling people to change their IE settings to alert for ActiveX controls isn't going to help anything if the user has no way of knowing beforehand whether the ActiveX control he's being asked to allow or refuse is actually a threat. And to install and properly use EMET requires a combination of (1) patience, (2) computing expertise, and (3) sheer luck that countless people will lack.

 

As someone points out in the comments, Microsoft is (perhaps for the first time) choosing to break a promise to support a given product on a current OS: IE8 works on Vista and Win7, neither of which is anywhere near EOS. That's potentially very bad news as it could become a habit, unless they get taken to task by their customers.

 

--JorgeA

[JorgeA]

 

That is the issue with Linux. The support cycles are so d@mn fast (for the OS "distros", and the software). Personally I am making the jump from Linux, to BSD (except for Whonix this linux distro is too good). I'll be particularly moving to Open BSD.

 

 

I checked out Whonix and it sounds interesting, if a bit of a challenge to get up and running. Thanks for the scoop.

 

Have you tried Tails, and if so, how does the experience compare to Whonix?

 

--JorgeA