as someone who is now fully accustomed to using an ubuntu derivative for my machine, i find this absurd but at the same time, fitting.
one of the most fascinating ideas that got ingrained in the last 50 years was the idea that TV HAD commercials. a 30 minute show would be only 22 minutes while 8 would be reserved for ADS. since the ads were part of the programming, there was no other alternative but to sit through them.
Today, youtube has the same in video ads and people just sit through them. Its not jarring or making them feel uneasy because thats the same thing on TV as well.
Now, microsoft is adopting the same thing, I'd say apple too because i recently after a long time tried an apple device and the music app was pushing HARD to get the music + or something. Plus, app store now has ADS. on a thousand dollar phone. in a first party app.
i remember the stupid reasoning of xiaomi when they started having ads in the system (oh we are just subsidizing cost of phone with ads) that did nothing to help pricing but gave them additional revenue source. fuck them.
i have a moto phone which has stock apps. 0 ads. all apps are uninstallable without any fusss. i dont have google signed in the phone. i have pi-hole at home.
here is my idea. imagine if i buy a mobile in cash and don't connect it to internet, am i really causing any financial harm to anyone? if no then removing ads should not affect anyone also.
"think of the creators" is often talked on youtube ad blocking.
what about microsoft and apple who shove ads on a paid software and a paid device? why should i see ads there? what "benefit" do i gain? same for google ads across the web.
> I'd say apple too because i recently after a long time tried an apple device and the music app was pushing HARD to get the music + or something. Plus, app store now has ADS. on a thousand dollar phone. in a first party app.
I wonder if this is a regional thing. On my old iphone, I've had a few "try music+" or whatever it's called a few times when it came out. Then, on my new iphone, it even sent notifications to try that out, but only like three times. The message was a bit different, though, something along the lines of "you're entitled to 3 free months with your new phone". Whatever. I ignored it, and haven't seen anything since. The Music app doesn't try to sell me anything, either.
>you're entitled to 3 free months with your new phone"
something similar but i don't remember exactly what it was.
on my android, google tries to push hard for "enable play protect". every often on an app update or app install it tries to convince me to press accept. i refuse but they dont refuse to keep trying.
same for other google apps like phone or messages. they want me to opt in for sharing of data.
"You might argue that this is Microsoft’s operating system, or that when using Microsoft’s browser and search engine it’s well within its rights to try and sway people away from Chrome."
"Microsoft’s behaviors here are totally beyond a simple webpage prompt. I shouldn’t have to be dismissing pop-ups that appear on top of my apps and games, or ones that magically appear after I update my copy of Windows."
> What should Windows 11 users do to let Microsoft know that such behaviors are intrusive and offensive?
They'll tell you to use the Feedback Hub, but all of that feedback promptly gets discarded or drowned out in the SNR of overzealous "insiders" acting as free QA for Microsoft praising every horrible decision they make.
Feedback Hub is a black hole: everything that goes in never sees the light again and has no purpose other than training machine learning models (a form of textual Hawking radiation?).
Sadly, it's similar with Apple discussions. "X is not working as described on Ventura and was like that since update to Big Sur" "try restarting your Mac"
The only thing that a user can do is switch OS. Microsfts goal is to extract as much profit as possible. The main factors that oppose enshitification are users leaving (revenue is lost) or regulation (increases costs).
And I think this highlights the real problem. The issue isn't that MS is pulling some nonsense. It's that I can't really vote with my feet and stop using Windows.
> What should Windows 11 users do to let Microsoft know that such behaviors are intrusive and offensive?
Leave it for a proper OS.
It might not be possible for your company issued computers if they don't allow you to use something else[1][2] but for your personnal uses it is fairly easy.
[1] I doubt it would be configured to receive popup ads in that context anyway
[2] Having a toxic work environment is a good reason to change job. I personnally count being forced to use Windows as a toxic env.
> It might not be possible for your company issued computers if they don't allow you to use something else[1][2] but for your personnal [sic] uses it is fairly easy.
It's not that easy, unless you're willing to make a bunch of sacrifices for the sake of using a different OS. Windows is by far the dominant desktop OS, and there's a lot of software people need and want to use that's available only for it.
It used to be that way, but now Linux has really good application compatibility. You can run the majority of apps using wine/proton, and ironically old hardware tends to be better supported in Linux.
> You can run the majority of apps using wine/proton
I've heard that, but I'm skeptical. I'm assuming "most apps" don't include MS Office. How much wrestling is involved? Can you just run a Windows installer and have it work? Do updates break things?
> there's a lot of software people need and want to use
This is mostly a mindset issue.
A bit more than 2 decades ago I would have said you would have pried photoshop from my cold dead hands.
Then I got fed up by a lot of things in this ecosystem, and I left it completely. I may not have access to the same applications, but I have access to decent applications that allows me to get the job done. And it applies to a very broad range of domains.
There are a few exceptions of course, but rarely ones you encounter in a non professionnal setting. In these very few and rare use cases there are options:
1. wine if it works would be the preferred one
2. accessing an app running on a windows through rdp, either as a full desktop or as a standalone window.[1] OK granted you are still using windows in that case, in the background, but you can do that only sporadically by launching a cloud windows vm instance for the small amount of time in a year you definitely need that dirty OS for personnal use.
Obviously YMMV but the barrier is mostly psychological imho.
[1] I think there was a project to facilitate that for office, adobe applications called winapps, see the different active forks here:
Microsoft is enrained in industrial and businesses because of legacy. Example is that number of industrial sensors need an application to configure their operating parameters, Often they only run on Windows OS. The need to run legacy prevents moving to an different OS
IT is often engrained in Microsoft's environments. It is by no means easy to walk away from Microsoft unless it is personal computing.
At least now at work, I was given a research ticket to find out which legacy Windows OS applications are viable to run in WINE. And how viable it would be move our main product application away from Windows.
PS. You have to pay me to engage with Microsoft and run Windows OS.
If a user can't switch to another OS, you can run Windows Server. I run that in my home lab when I have to use a Windows based OS for certain scenarios.
What should Windows 11 users do to let Microsoft know that such behaviors are intrusive and offensive?
Downgrade to Windows 10.
If enough users did this, they might realise that people still want to use Windows, but without the user-hostility, so will be more incentivised to change things back to how they were instead of just squeezing harder on what remains of their userbase.
> > What should Windows 11 users do to let Microsoft know that such behaviors are intrusive and offensive?
> Downgrade to Windows 10.
Windows 10 introduced things that would have been (and were) deemed unacceptable by people who care about things like this at the time, too. You could have said all this about Windows 8 or Windows 10 with a retreat to Windows 7 being the prescription. Many people did.
The only message a move like this sends is that if Microsoft moves slowly enough, people will accept basically anything as 'the less user-hostile alternative'.
Well, you paid (one way or another) to license Windows, which allows you to use applications on it including web browsers.
They are deliberately interfering with your choice of using someone else's web browser, and they are doing so for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with the functional considerations of their product.
In a normal world this would attract legal scrutiny given their history (and in the EU, does).
The Google behaviour you're talking about is using a typically free service as a marketing channel. That is to me not quite in the same category.
If there was evidence that Google was arbitrarily hobbling non-Chrome browsers when using Google's online products (and I am in no way saying there isn't!!) then _that_ would be comparable, I think?
For starters, Windows is an operating system, not a website contained in browser. There are many differences in usage, privacy, security, etc.
Also, unlike a website or browser, if you got fed up and decide to leave, then changing the OS can range from challenging to practically impossible (outside your control).
Windows, the Lada of operating systems. I had to try and get my wife's laptop working with the VPN the other day. Worked fine on Mac and Linux, but on Windows, I had to uninstall a load of drivers and then do a registry hack. What a pile of shite.
Windows 7 really was the last good Windows release. After that we got the hideous Metro redesign, then all the telemetry and shoving of Edge etc. down our throats.
Remember when you got really excited for new Windows releases? Remember when Windows asked politely to activate automatic updates and assured you "No information is collected that can be used to identify you or contact you"?
I still worry that the Wachowski's were right when they wrote that line in The Matrix about the peak of human civilisation.
I actually think its about connectedness. We're too overconnected for our own good, the connections are shallow and manipulative and that connectedness is exploited by the powerful to connect more of us further in ways. Downward spiral of dystopian future ensues...
For the controlling corporations instead of employee's you have exploitees and the rest of humanity are the exploited.
In fact just before I wrote this I felt bad about reading a different forums post of a stranger complaining they got a cream pie thrown in their face and then finding out later it showed up on Tik-Tok. I too have too many shallow meaningless connections which can be used against me... even if its empathy for a stranger affected by some dipshit wanting likes for their social media account. And all that's with some level of anonymity - I didn't even watch the video. Telemetry is way more evil and calculated and directable...
I do think the Internet peaked in the early 2000s. Things started to take a downward turn as social networks like Facebook and Twitter really took off and simple recommendations started being replaced by algorithms and endless scrolling to encourage nonstop consumption. The limited hardware and network speeds prevented some of that from being possible.
We're definitely overconnected these days. I think it'd be a net positive for humanity if the centralized social networks and mega services died.
Aside from some some odd duplication in the system UI (they have like three different "control panels" with overlapping functionality), Windows 10/11 are not such a bad UX. As long as you actively op-out of all the BS they keep adding on daily basis, of course.
Somewhere in the last decade, Microsoft realized that it would be better for them to give away free upgrades to Windows for existing licensed customers so that they would have an larger pool of users that they could upsell services to and target with ads.
At this point, I'd like to return to the days of paying $129 for a Windows upgrade if it meant ripping all this junk out of my OS. Windows 11 feels pretty snappy to me, there's lots of stuff I like in it - but every week, every day brings a further encroachment into my user experience with this nonsense. Edge has already completed its character arc from upstart browser to beloved alernative and to bloated annoyance.
> At this point, I'd like to return to the days of paying $129 for a Windows upgrade if it meant ripping all this junk out of my OS.
Once this software gets written and demonstrably makes money, it will never get un-written. The more likely outcome is that if Microsoft thinks you (the market) are willing to go back to paying $129 for Windows, then you will pay $129 AND they keep the notifications, junkware and malware.
Go to settings / Privacy and Security / Ad Privacy.
By default, you give permission to:
a) mine your history and provide it to websites / ad services
b) mine your use within a website and provide it to ad services.
c) feed telemetry back to ad services.
So much for consent. You need to manually opt-out of settings you didn't even realize were there.
This seems like very recent addition. I didn't initially see it in settings but I noticed Chrome wanted to update (I normally use Firefox). After updating there actually was a popup telling about the settings Ad Privacy with option to open the settings page. While it being opt-out setting is not great at least they did have decadency to inform me about the change which often is not the case. I forgot to take a screenshot but it did look like following: https://www.ghacks.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/new-ads-pr...
> Microsoft has even forced people into Edge after a Windows Update
Doing on-site work, I will sometimes process a queued Windows update on several machines. I don't always see these "Hey Baby..." efforts universally. They'll appear on some systems but not others.
Uneven deployment would be a good method to hamper crowdsourced detection. And it would invite to that-forum-guy to gaslight someone who reports it in a thread.
We are halfway down the slippery slope on this stuff. Ads are starting to pop up inside the apps we already pay for, operating systems, and even in, say, point-of-sale devices begging for tips.
It's not about ads being 'the only source of revenue for our business' anymore, it's about "product managers" being able to dominate the UX and development conversations by convincing organizations like MSFT that they can contribute additional value/revenue by using preexisting customers as expansion opportunities.
If you are a UX designer especially, fight back – otherwise this downward pressure to squeeze water out of a rock will simply end with users jumping ship. I'm already transitioning to Jitsi because Zoom pulled this shit.
The popups are awful but I'm surprised they are happening on games. I wonder if that is unintentional. I would become very hardened into not doing whatever a popup asked of me if it interrupted full screen games like that.
I build my own PC and bought a new license for Windows Professional and it still is filled with adware and other MS bullshit. Like what does "professional" even mean?
If I ignore my disgust at having these delivered by the OS, they don't look much worse than Google's attempts to get me to use Chrome whenever I open their products in Firefox.
Just opening google.com reliably gives me a "Google recommends using Chrome" popup in the corner, and on some kind of timer you get the same popups in Google Drive and most of the other google products.
The browser wars are alive and well, just not in the way I want them to be.
I haven't had a single ad on any of my Apple stuff other than a free trial of apple news for 3 months which I declined and was never asked again. Where are you seeing that?
Windows 11 popups and "reminders" are absolutely out of control. I miss the times of Bill Gates, honestly, when Windows UX was not this horrible and someone actually cared.
> I got a Windows Notification the other day while playing a game telling me about a "Grand prize giveaway"
By my exp, I'd wager it was a third party using Windows' baked-in nag system, via Chrome.
That is, you've got a bit of crapware in Chrome that is sending notifications and Chrome cheerfully forwards them to Windows. I see this on customer systems with some regularity.
Degrading a user's experience seems to be one place where MS and Google are happy to cooperate.
Yeah Microsoft Rewards is super annoying, and I'm not sure who even actually engages with it. But if you want to use windows you can remove MS rewards from your account and the notifications stop [1].
IMO "you can turn that off" is absolutely not an acceptable answer to this stuff. It's my computer and it shouldn't be doing anything that I didn't specifically tell it to do. And that's not even to mention how often these setting are reset, or new "settings" added
Yes, I mean all advertisement, with exceptions like being able advertise on a business's own premises or upon explicit request like signing up for a newsletter (on purpose, not due to dark pattern fuckery). But no jamming third party advertisements everywhere imaginable or first party advertisement into products that aren't just ads.
Honestly, I'd take a slightly different tack: ban all advertising except that which focuses on product features (like a lot of old-timey ads did), and then have strong enforcement of penalties for false advertising. Then limit innovation in delivery to places where it's both not intrusive and already established (e.g. media publications, etc).
The manipulation and excessive proliferation has to stop, but I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with a business being able to reach out to tell people about what they're selling. There just needs to be strong regulation to speak for other interests in society.
Advertising is a multi-billion dollar industry who spends millions yearly on figuring out how to manipulate us into buying things we don't need. The average person has no chance against this manipulation.
Banning all advertising would also destroy many small businesses. Interstate billboards are a nuisance, no doubt, but I can’t tell you how many roadside markets, small restaurants, etc I’ve visited while traveling that I’d never have known about otherwise.
So what? Society should be structured for the benefit of the people rather than corporations, which are only useful to the extent that they benefit people. We don't need or want all possible businesses, just the ones that are sufficiently useful without being too harmful.
Funny, billboards have been banned here in Maine for decades, and small businesses do very very well in this tourist driven economy. Meanwhile you cross the border to new hampshire and are immediately pestered with garbage advertising that provides no benefit to your life.
There’s a difference between a destination and a waypoint.
If I’m driving through, say, Georgia, I’m not there as a tourist, I’m desperately trying to get away from it, probably via the interstate.
But I’d rather stop at an interesting restaurant that I spot via a billboard than whatever fast food chain happens to be camping out at the next interchange.
Funny, because the billboards I see always seem to be for places like McDonalds, not the hole in the wall, niche place where you get an awesome plate of food for $10, because they can't compete with the fast food industry for billboard space.
No, there shouldn't be a law, unless you intend to outlaw in-app advertising entirely, which will make a lot of people sad that there are no free smartphone games anymore, but okay.
Oh no, not the scammy casino games targeting children with advertising. What will we do without them? Some people might even be able to charge money for games without advertising instead!
The easiest way is to stop using Windows. Either Microsoft sees decrease in users and rolls back ads; or its keeps pushing on and makes things even worse. Either way, you no longer see the ads.
> The easiest way is to stop using Windows. Either Microsoft sees decrease in users and rolls back ads; or its keeps pushing on and makes things even worse. Either way, you no longer see the ads.
That's only easy if I have infinite time to take up a big personal IT migration project, which I don't. I've got other stuff that's much more important. So does everyone else. Which is why market solutions to stuff like this don't work.
The market doesn't solve for best or even good, it solves for "not so crappy you don't buy it."
(modulo assumptions based on your being a reader of this site) - installing a dual boot linux on your existing Windows machine will take you a couple of hours.
> (modulo assumptions based on your being a reader of this site) - installing a dual boot linux on your existing Windows machine will take you a couple of hours.
Doing a fresh install of something is like the smallest, most insignificant amount of work involved when doing a migration.
99% of the needed time will be solving dozens of problems like "can I get my P-touch label maker working with Linux," and if can I, does the solution actually meet my needs?
I'm grateful that I don't need any Window Programs though there are issues such as when my kid wants to play Minecraft Education Edition, but it's usually a windows VM for those rare occasions.
You look at Windows Notifications? I don't because they're worthless. I disabled widgets. I don't use Edge. Marketing and other BS is hardly on my radar anymore and my Windows 11 experience is a good one.
I have completely turned off notifications in Windows because I think they're worthless and recently Windows itself has started ignoring that setting and sending me ads through notifications.
Virtually infinite noise. While I hate setting up Windows while I feel they are the owner of my physical device (e.g. cannot start the device if I don't know how to proceed with the hidden option of not having a Microsoft account), this is a practice that every vendor is having nowadays with some little differences. It is time to add real pressure to these vendors.
The pressure should take into account the power in the hands of these vendors: it is not the same if Google is using dark patterns than if they are used by a small site. Both are wrong but big tech has a completely different advantage.
Yeah. If Microsoft owns my account, they own the OS, they essentially own my PC. At which point do they become culpable to litigation on behalf of their users? If I’m a hacker, my defense would be this - Microsoft sent me a suggestion pop up that I clicked on, got infected with a virus, anything past that is Microsoft’s inability to protect my PC, my person, and others from malicious errant code.
Remember, so many of them don't even use Windows itself. They're so unabashedly removed from the actual user experience that I doubt anyone working with them can change their minds.
> I am just saddened employees inside don't comment/protest at the UI/UX/managers.
You're saddened by the wrong thing. Most employees have little to no power to change anything. Protest is a kind of insubordination that would likely do no good and lead to personal hardship and little else.
The only people with power in a company are the owners and their designated employee-agents (executive managers). Even in a heavily unionized company, employee power doesn't extend much beyond influencing pay and working conditions.
372 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 325 ms ] threadone of the most fascinating ideas that got ingrained in the last 50 years was the idea that TV HAD commercials. a 30 minute show would be only 22 minutes while 8 would be reserved for ADS. since the ads were part of the programming, there was no other alternative but to sit through them.
Today, youtube has the same in video ads and people just sit through them. Its not jarring or making them feel uneasy because thats the same thing on TV as well.
Now, microsoft is adopting the same thing, I'd say apple too because i recently after a long time tried an apple device and the music app was pushing HARD to get the music + or something. Plus, app store now has ADS. on a thousand dollar phone. in a first party app.
i remember the stupid reasoning of xiaomi when they started having ads in the system (oh we are just subsidizing cost of phone with ads) that did nothing to help pricing but gave them additional revenue source. fuck them.
i have a moto phone which has stock apps. 0 ads. all apps are uninstallable without any fusss. i dont have google signed in the phone. i have pi-hole at home.
here is my idea. imagine if i buy a mobile in cash and don't connect it to internet, am i really causing any financial harm to anyone? if no then removing ads should not affect anyone also.
"think of the creators" is often talked on youtube ad blocking.
what about microsoft and apple who shove ads on a paid software and a paid device? why should i see ads there? what "benefit" do i gain? same for google ads across the web.
not to talk about tracking
I wonder if this is a regional thing. On my old iphone, I've had a few "try music+" or whatever it's called a few times when it came out. Then, on my new iphone, it even sent notifications to try that out, but only like three times. The message was a bit different, though, something along the lines of "you're entitled to 3 free months with your new phone". Whatever. I ignored it, and haven't seen anything since. The Music app doesn't try to sell me anything, either.
something similar but i don't remember exactly what it was.
on my android, google tries to push hard for "enable play protect". every often on an app update or app install it tries to convince me to press accept. i refuse but they dont refuse to keep trying.
same for other google apps like phone or messages. they want me to opt in for sharing of data.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37320786
"Microsoft’s behaviors here are totally beyond a simple webpage prompt. I shouldn’t have to be dismissing pop-ups that appear on top of my apps and games, or ones that magically appear after I update my copy of Windows."
Windows 11 is doing what it was programmed to do: https://youtu.be/Ag1AKIl_2GM?t=57
Sadly, this kind of user-hostile behavior is increasingly common and a form of enshitification (https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-platforms-cory-doctorow/) of the operating system.
What should Windows 11 users do to let Microsoft know that such behaviors are intrusive and offensive?
They'll tell you to use the Feedback Hub, but all of that feedback promptly gets discarded or drowned out in the SNR of overzealous "insiders" acting as free QA for Microsoft praising every horrible decision they make.
We've been in this world long enough, and we should be smarter about understanding that.
Leave it for a proper OS.
It might not be possible for your company issued computers if they don't allow you to use something else[1][2] but for your personnal uses it is fairly easy.
[1] I doubt it would be configured to receive popup ads in that context anyway [2] Having a toxic work environment is a good reason to change job. I personnally count being forced to use Windows as a toxic env.
> It might not be possible for your company issued computers if they don't allow you to use something else[1][2] but for your personnal [sic] uses it is fairly easy.
It's not that easy, unless you're willing to make a bunch of sacrifices for the sake of using a different OS. Windows is by far the dominant desktop OS, and there's a lot of software people need and want to use that's available only for it.
I've heard that, but I'm skeptical. I'm assuming "most apps" don't include MS Office. How much wrestling is involved? Can you just run a Windows installer and have it work? Do updates break things?
This is mostly a mindset issue.
A bit more than 2 decades ago I would have said you would have pried photoshop from my cold dead hands.
Then I got fed up by a lot of things in this ecosystem, and I left it completely. I may not have access to the same applications, but I have access to decent applications that allows me to get the job done. And it applies to a very broad range of domains.
There are a few exceptions of course, but rarely ones you encounter in a non professionnal setting. In these very few and rare use cases there are options:
1. wine if it works would be the preferred one 2. accessing an app running on a windows through rdp, either as a full desktop or as a standalone window.[1] OK granted you are still using windows in that case, in the background, but you can do that only sporadically by launching a cloud windows vm instance for the small amount of time in a year you definitely need that dirty OS for personnal use.
Obviously YMMV but the barrier is mostly psychological imho.
[1] I think there was a project to facilitate that for office, adobe applications called winapps, see the different active forks here:
https://techgaun.github.io/active-forks/index.html#Fmstrat/w...
there is also this: https://github.com/ne0YT/Linux-Subsystem-for-Windows_Seamles...
The Steam Deck has shown that there are no essential technical barriers to rendering the Windows operating system irrelevant.
This is good work, and it should be done.
IT is often engrained in Microsoft's environments. It is by no means easy to walk away from Microsoft unless it is personal computing.
At least now at work, I was given a research ticket to find out which legacy Windows OS applications are viable to run in WINE. And how viable it would be move our main product application away from Windows.
PS. You have to pay me to engage with Microsoft and run Windows OS.
Downgrade to Windows 10.
If enough users did this, they might realise that people still want to use Windows, but without the user-hostility, so will be more incentivised to change things back to how they were instead of just squeezing harder on what remains of their userbase.
> Downgrade to Windows 10.
Windows 10 introduced things that would have been (and were) deemed unacceptable by people who care about things like this at the time, too. You could have said all this about Windows 8 or Windows 10 with a retreat to Windows 7 being the prescription. Many people did.
The only message a move like this sends is that if Microsoft moves slowly enough, people will accept basically anything as 'the less user-hostile alternative'.
Just cross selling their products using the medium they own.
They are deliberately interfering with your choice of using someone else's web browser, and they are doing so for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with the functional considerations of their product.
In a normal world this would attract legal scrutiny given their history (and in the EU, does).
The Google behaviour you're talking about is using a typically free service as a marketing channel. That is to me not quite in the same category.
If there was evidence that Google was arbitrarily hobbling non-Chrome browsers when using Google's online products (and I am in no way saying there isn't!!) then _that_ would be comparable, I think?
Hobbled Firefox on YouTube via ShadowDOM and polyfill? Hobbled internet explorer on windows mobile for both YouTube and google maps.
Google on iOS and android does the same shitty nonsense as Microsoft here.
For starters, Windows is an operating system, not a website contained in browser. There are many differences in usage, privacy, security, etc.
Also, unlike a website or browser, if you got fed up and decide to leave, then changing the OS can range from challenging to practically impossible (outside your control).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YbYdfaD0oA
I actually think its about connectedness. We're too overconnected for our own good, the connections are shallow and manipulative and that connectedness is exploited by the powerful to connect more of us further in ways. Downward spiral of dystopian future ensues...
For the controlling corporations instead of employee's you have exploitees and the rest of humanity are the exploited.
In fact just before I wrote this I felt bad about reading a different forums post of a stranger complaining they got a cream pie thrown in their face and then finding out later it showed up on Tik-Tok. I too have too many shallow meaningless connections which can be used against me... even if its empathy for a stranger affected by some dipshit wanting likes for their social media account. And all that's with some level of anonymity - I didn't even watch the video. Telemetry is way more evil and calculated and directable...
We're definitely overconnected these days. I think it'd be a net positive for humanity if the centralized social networks and mega services died.
At this point, I'd like to return to the days of paying $129 for a Windows upgrade if it meant ripping all this junk out of my OS. Windows 11 feels pretty snappy to me, there's lots of stuff I like in it - but every week, every day brings a further encroachment into my user experience with this nonsense. Edge has already completed its character arc from upstart browser to beloved alernative and to bloated annoyance.
Once this software gets written and demonstrably makes money, it will never get un-written. The more likely outcome is that if Microsoft thinks you (the market) are willing to go back to paying $129 for Windows, then you will pay $129 AND they keep the notifications, junkware and malware.
Go to settings / Privacy and Security / Ad Privacy.
By default, you give permission to: a) mine your history and provide it to websites / ad services b) mine your use within a website and provide it to ad services. c) feed telemetry back to ad services.
So much for consent. You need to manually opt-out of settings you didn't even realize were there.
Doing on-site work, I will sometimes process a queued Windows update on several machines. I don't always see these "Hey Baby..." efforts universally. They'll appear on some systems but not others.
Uneven deployment would be a good method to hamper crowdsourced detection. And it would invite to that-forum-guy to gaslight someone who reports it in a thread.
It's not about ads being 'the only source of revenue for our business' anymore, it's about "product managers" being able to dominate the UX and development conversations by convincing organizations like MSFT that they can contribute additional value/revenue by using preexisting customers as expansion opportunities.
If you are a UX designer especially, fight back – otherwise this downward pressure to squeeze water out of a rock will simply end with users jumping ship. I'm already transitioning to Jitsi because Zoom pulled this shit.
I build my own PC and bought a new license for Windows Professional and it still is filled with adware and other MS bullshit. Like what does "professional" even mean?
Steve Jobs said it best: they have no taste.
Just opening google.com reliably gives me a "Google recommends using Chrome" popup in the corner, and on some kind of timer you get the same popups in Google Drive and most of the other google products.
The browser wars are alive and well, just not in the way I want them to be.
All big companies do it.
Nope, not malware. Just Windows.
https://i.imgur.com/xVstzqc.png
https://www.reddit.com/r/microsoft/comments/15u6gx8/windows_...
By my exp, I'd wager it was a third party using Windows' baked-in nag system, via Chrome.
That is, you've got a bit of crapware in Chrome that is sending notifications and Chrome cheerfully forwards them to Windows. I see this on customer systems with some regularity.
Degrading a user's experience seems to be one place where MS and Google are happy to cooperate.
https://promos.microsoftrewards.com/US/en/SS/88/rules
Edit: Chrome isn’t even installed, I use Firefox.
[1] https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/how-to-opt-out-of-...
Cool. I appreciate you solving the mystery.
> Nope, not malware. Just Windows.
Yeah, I got one the other day promoting some game or game studio.
Honestly, there outta be a law. We don't need this kind of "innovation."
Apple does it. Canonical does it. Windows does it. Google does it (kinda a duh, I agree). Stop this madness.
The manipulation and excessive proliferation has to stop, but I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with a business being able to reach out to tell people about what they're selling. There just needs to be strong regulation to speak for other interests in society.
The legality of puffery is ridiculous.
Advertising is a multi-billion dollar industry who spends millions yearly on figuring out how to manipulate us into buying things we don't need. The average person has no chance against this manipulation.
So yes, burn it all to the ground.
If I’m driving through, say, Georgia, I’m not there as a tourist, I’m desperately trying to get away from it, probably via the interstate.
But I’d rather stop at an interesting restaurant that I spot via a billboard than whatever fast food chain happens to be camping out at the next interchange.
That's only easy if I have infinite time to take up a big personal IT migration project, which I don't. I've got other stuff that's much more important. So does everyone else. Which is why market solutions to stuff like this don't work.
The market doesn't solve for best or even good, it solves for "not so crappy you don't buy it."
2 <<< ∞
Doing a fresh install of something is like the smallest, most insignificant amount of work involved when doing a migration.
99% of the needed time will be solving dozens of problems like "can I get my P-touch label maker working with Linux," and if can I, does the solution actually meet my needs?
That's awfully hard to do when my employer requires that I use Windows.
So, it was indeed malware.
The pressure should take into account the power in the hands of these vendors: it is not the same if Google is using dark patterns than if they are used by a small site. Both are wrong but big tech has a completely different advantage.
But I reckon most will tag along all the way into the cloud, and lose ownership of their own content.
- Do most employees think and accept this is ethical for the longterm of the IT?
- Do they not think it is destroying the reputation?
- Do the employees not think if they later found a browser or other OS - such behavious is immoral from both economic and technological perspective?
Remember, so many of them don't even use Windows itself. They're so unabashedly removed from the actual user experience that I doubt anyone working with them can change their minds.
You're saddened by the wrong thing. Most employees have little to no power to change anything. Protest is a kind of insubordination that would likely do no good and lead to personal hardship and little else.
The only people with power in a company are the owners and their designated employee-agents (executive managers). Even in a heavily unionized company, employee power doesn't extend much beyond influencing pay and working conditions.
Ain't happening, y'all. Time to grow up.