Microsoft’s new Windows prompts try to stop people downloading Chrome(neowin.net)
neowin.net
Microsoft’s new Windows prompts try to stop people downloading Chrome
https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-says-its-own-edge-browser-is-more-trustworthy-than-so-2008-google-chrome/
432 comments
> Linux has been making progress but still isn't a good alternative for the common user unless they have an expert to rely upon when something breaks down
IME "common users" already rely on an expert when their Windows OS breaks down. Not long ago I had to walk my aunt through opening the command prompt in Windows 10 and entering the command to do a full reboot (as opposed to that hybrid shutdown+hibernation) because for some reason i couldn't really figure out from the phone the WiFi stopped working even after shutdown/reboots (she shuts her computer down whenever she isn't using it and she called me after not having connection for days). I remembered reading at some point that normally in Win10 the kernel doesn't shutdown fully but instead hibernates and my guess was that the WiFi driver somehow got in a state that didn't let it work and instead of restarting at reboot it was getting hibernated so i tried to do a full reboot. Which worked, though it could have also been something else that happened to get unstuck after the full reboot - at some other time she also had the entire taskbar get frozen and that would persist normal reboots (via alt+f4 and selecting to reboot) which was also "fixed" by that full reboot (she has the steps and commands to type written in a piece of paper by now :-P).
Not to mention the myriad of issues encountered due to forced updates.
I think that the whole "Windows is good for common users" idea is very outdated nowadays, it might have been the case a decade or so ago, but it certainly isn't anymore.
IME "common users" already rely on an expert when their Windows OS breaks down. Not long ago I had to walk my aunt through opening the command prompt in Windows 10 and entering the command to do a full reboot (as opposed to that hybrid shutdown+hibernation) because for some reason i couldn't really figure out from the phone the WiFi stopped working even after shutdown/reboots (she shuts her computer down whenever she isn't using it and she called me after not having connection for days). I remembered reading at some point that normally in Win10 the kernel doesn't shutdown fully but instead hibernates and my guess was that the WiFi driver somehow got in a state that didn't let it work and instead of restarting at reboot it was getting hibernated so i tried to do a full reboot. Which worked, though it could have also been something else that happened to get unstuck after the full reboot - at some other time she also had the entire taskbar get frozen and that would persist normal reboots (via alt+f4 and selecting to reboot) which was also "fixed" by that full reboot (she has the steps and commands to type written in a piece of paper by now :-P).
Not to mention the myriad of issues encountered due to forced updates.
I think that the whole "Windows is good for common users" idea is very outdated nowadays, it might have been the case a decade or so ago, but it certainly isn't anymore.
My problem with Linux for end users is that Windows and Linux break down differently.
When a Linux update fails (which can happen automatically; for example, Ubuntu 16 reserved a very small boot partition and upgrading it to the latest version leaves it with too little space to keep the normal amount of kernels available), you end up digging through files and configuration and terminal commands. This is different from Windows where you have four buttons to click, and if all of those fail, you either reinstall the entire OS or reverse engineer Microsoft's logic and directory structures.
When Windows fails, the OS usually detects the issue and reverts all the work. Their self repair is excellent. Sure, Windows Update may be broken for a while and the forced restarts make the whole process annoying, but the system still works.
Linux can easily leave the system unbootable while Windows has the necessary recovery options. Boot recovery and System Restore are some features that definitely improve Windows' stability. Timeshift with a CoW filesystem and some GRUB hooks can somewhat replicate the effect, but I haven't seen any distros enable all of those by default yet.
For example: I enabled encryption in the installers of both Ubuntu and Manjaro and hibernation simply didn't work. I managed to make it work with some config tweaks on both, but out of the box my laptop simply shut down and lost all of my work when the battery got low. My laptop also had no sound, stuttery video and no working microphone because of missing drivers for Nvidia, Intel and Realtek chips. Udev rules broke sound every time I unplugged my HDMI drive or let it go to sleep.
Windows sometimes breaks down because of shitty drivers, but I've never seen it happen this severely.
This was probably all related to the manufacturer's decisions about board configuration, drivers, and other proprietary crap, but the end user doesn't care whose fault that is and neither should they.
When a Linux update fails (which can happen automatically; for example, Ubuntu 16 reserved a very small boot partition and upgrading it to the latest version leaves it with too little space to keep the normal amount of kernels available), you end up digging through files and configuration and terminal commands. This is different from Windows where you have four buttons to click, and if all of those fail, you either reinstall the entire OS or reverse engineer Microsoft's logic and directory structures.
When Windows fails, the OS usually detects the issue and reverts all the work. Their self repair is excellent. Sure, Windows Update may be broken for a while and the forced restarts make the whole process annoying, but the system still works.
Linux can easily leave the system unbootable while Windows has the necessary recovery options. Boot recovery and System Restore are some features that definitely improve Windows' stability. Timeshift with a CoW filesystem and some GRUB hooks can somewhat replicate the effect, but I haven't seen any distros enable all of those by default yet.
For example: I enabled encryption in the installers of both Ubuntu and Manjaro and hibernation simply didn't work. I managed to make it work with some config tweaks on both, but out of the box my laptop simply shut down and lost all of my work when the battery got low. My laptop also had no sound, stuttery video and no working microphone because of missing drivers for Nvidia, Intel and Realtek chips. Udev rules broke sound every time I unplugged my HDMI drive or let it go to sleep.
Windows sometimes breaks down because of shitty drivers, but I've never seen it happen this severely.
This was probably all related to the manufacturer's decisions about board configuration, drivers, and other proprietary crap, but the end user doesn't care whose fault that is and neither should they.
The last time i had Linux break after an update was around 2015 with Arch, but that is a rolling distro and during a time when rolling distros weren't as stable as nowadays. Before that it was with Ubuntu in the late 2000s but that was with a full system upgrade that you have to explicitly do manually.
I wouldn't expect a "fixed" version distro to break nowadays because of updates.
Also FWIW openSUSE does provide recovery support[0] as it uses Btrfs snapshots before and after package installations and upgrades (as well as during some other events, including taking a snapshot periodically - these are deleted after a while or if they start taking too much space) and you can roll them back either manually or even boot from a snapshot in case something goes wrong.
I haven't really had a need for it so i can't exactly tell you how useful that would be (or to compare it with Windows since i never used Windows' system restore either), but it does sound like it'd provide the same or at least very similar functionality.
[0] https://doc.opensuse.org/documentation/leap/reference/html/b...
I wouldn't expect a "fixed" version distro to break nowadays because of updates.
Also FWIW openSUSE does provide recovery support[0] as it uses Btrfs snapshots before and after package installations and upgrades (as well as during some other events, including taking a snapshot periodically - these are deleted after a while or if they start taking too much space) and you can roll them back either manually or even boot from a snapshot in case something goes wrong.
I haven't really had a need for it so i can't exactly tell you how useful that would be (or to compare it with Windows since i never used Windows' system restore either), but it does sound like it'd provide the same or at least very similar functionality.
[0] https://doc.opensuse.org/documentation/leap/reference/html/b...
If Windows says "restart" that should always mean a full reboot as far as I know.
I usually disable fast startup, and it sounds like she should disable it too.
Whoever set it up so that you have to reboot to shut down should have realized that the way they were implementing this was a bad idea.
I usually disable fast startup, and it sounds like she should disable it too.
Whoever set it up so that you have to reboot to shut down should have realized that the way they were implementing this was a bad idea.
> If Windows says "restart" that should always mean a full reboot as far as I know.
That is what i expected but it doesn't seem to work that way and i had issues myself with it with other things, like e.g. some older games use the system timer (which is reset at full shutdown) for their animations but if the timer is a large number the animations and movement might break. This wasn't much of an issue back when most PCs were shut down every day as it would reset the timer, but nowadays the timer state persists after reboots - it was what actually prompted me to figure out how to reboot the PC from the command line as that does a full reboot.
It might be a bug that persisted for a long time or some intentional feature, but either way it is something i've experienced on my PCs and for that reason i have a small shortcut that calls 'shutdown' with the parameters for a full reboot.
That is what i expected but it doesn't seem to work that way and i had issues myself with it with other things, like e.g. some older games use the system timer (which is reset at full shutdown) for their animations but if the timer is a large number the animations and movement might break. This wasn't much of an issue back when most PCs were shut down every day as it would reset the timer, but nowadays the timer state persists after reboots - it was what actually prompted me to figure out how to reboot the PC from the command line as that does a full reboot.
It might be a bug that persisted for a long time or some intentional feature, but either way it is something i've experienced on my PCs and for that reason i have a small shortcut that calls 'shutdown' with the parameters for a full reboot.
In my experience the real issue with Linux is that it’s hard to set up. Especially when you have/get an OS preinstalled with Windows, to just using Windows. And that most applications / drivers don’t support it nearly as well.
There are many many distributions. When I started Linux, I first tried Ubuntu because that was recommended to me. Ubuntu is installed with Xfce which looks and basically is clunky and outdated. Setting up WiFi was a PITA because my laptop doesn’t even have an ethernet port, and i couldn’t do much else without wifi. I had to configure some stuff via the command line because there were no settings for it, and install a new trackpad driver. Eventually I gave up Ubuntu because it was too hard to use with my trackpad.
Later on I installed Debian which IMO should be recommended. But i couldn’t properly install regular Debian. After some research I had to install “nonfree” Debian from some confusing site, because my computer needs a nonfree Wifi driver (again, no Ethernet port). Setting up Wifi was an even harder PITA.
At least Debian was usable and had good trackpad support once I set up. Plus I have to admit the graphics are way better than even macOS and Windows. It’s also very noticeably faster than macOS, running the same programs. But actually installing it wasn’t easy.
There are many many distributions. When I started Linux, I first tried Ubuntu because that was recommended to me. Ubuntu is installed with Xfce which looks and basically is clunky and outdated. Setting up WiFi was a PITA because my laptop doesn’t even have an ethernet port, and i couldn’t do much else without wifi. I had to configure some stuff via the command line because there were no settings for it, and install a new trackpad driver. Eventually I gave up Ubuntu because it was too hard to use with my trackpad.
Later on I installed Debian which IMO should be recommended. But i couldn’t properly install regular Debian. After some research I had to install “nonfree” Debian from some confusing site, because my computer needs a nonfree Wifi driver (again, no Ethernet port). Setting up Wifi was an even harder PITA.
At least Debian was usable and had good trackpad support once I set up. Plus I have to admit the graphics are way better than even macOS and Windows. It’s also very noticeably faster than macOS, running the same programs. But actually installing it wasn’t easy.
> Ubuntu is installed with Xfce
Ubuntu's default desktop environment is GNOME (or Unity in some earlier versions). You must be thinking of Xubuntu.
Ubuntu's default desktop environment is GNOME (or Unity in some earlier versions). You must be thinking of Xubuntu.
For the last 10+ years my Debian-install routine for devices is:
- `dd` the latest Debian netinst onto some old, small on-desk USB-stick,
- Insert USB-stick into target device, power on, get to boot-selection screen.
- Hook up my phone via USB to target, set it to USB-tethering mode (To bypass initial (wifi-)firmware issue(s))
- NOW press ENTER in the boot-device selection screen.
- Select Expert mode in the Installer Menu, this enables:
- Selection of "non-free" package source
- Enable backported software
- Select minimal install (get the rest after Ethernet/Wifi Firmware is installed)
- Reboot, still using USB-tethering
- Install needed firmwares: `apt-get install firmware-<TAB><TAB>` (choose correct one, or install many/all)
- (optional, but recommended on devices younger than 2 years: Install backports kernel (currently 5.14): `apt-get install linux-image-amd64/bullseye-backports`
- (Optional, but needed when batadv-meshing with Openwrt master on 5.10: install kernel from debian testing (5.15.x) , with command similar to above ^bullseye^testing (after adding testing source)
- run tasksel, select "Default Desktop", or whatever you were planning to install anyway
That is a "detour" of less than 10 minutes.
- `dd` the latest Debian netinst onto some old, small on-desk USB-stick,
- Insert USB-stick into target device, power on, get to boot-selection screen.
- Hook up my phone via USB to target, set it to USB-tethering mode (To bypass initial (wifi-)firmware issue(s))
- NOW press ENTER in the boot-device selection screen.
- Select Expert mode in the Installer Menu, this enables:
- Selection of "non-free" package source
- Enable backported software
- Select minimal install (get the rest after Ethernet/Wifi Firmware is installed)
- Reboot, still using USB-tethering
- Install needed firmwares: `apt-get install firmware-<TAB><TAB>` (choose correct one, or install many/all)
- (optional, but recommended on devices younger than 2 years: Install backports kernel (currently 5.14): `apt-get install linux-image-amd64/bullseye-backports`
- (Optional, but needed when batadv-meshing with Openwrt master on 5.10: install kernel from debian testing (5.15.x) , with command similar to above ^bullseye^testing (after adding testing source)
- run tasksel, select "Default Desktop", or whatever you were planning to install anyway
That is a "detour" of less than 10 minutes.
Well yeah, but i wouldn't expect a "normal user" to (re)install Windows either, so if they end up with Linux it would be because they either bought a computer with it preinstalled or someone else installed it for them.
> Not long ago I had to walk my aunt through opening the command prompt in Windows 10 and entering the command to do a full reboot (as opposed to that hybrid shutdown+hibernation)
That's unnecessary, reboot will always skip Windows's "Fast Startup". It can be a bit unintuitive because back in the day people used to recommend a full shutdown+boot cycle instead of a reboot as it could fix more issues. But it makes some sense, because generally when you reboot it's either because of an update or issues that probably won't be resolved if the kernel is just hibernated rather than fully restarting.
That's unnecessary, reboot will always skip Windows's "Fast Startup". It can be a bit unintuitive because back in the day people used to recommend a full shutdown+boot cycle instead of a reboot as it could fix more issues. But it makes some sense, because generally when you reboot it's either because of an update or issues that probably won't be resolved if the kernel is just hibernated rather than fully restarting.
As i wrote in another comment this is what i thought too but it doesn't turn out to be the case in practice.
> I think that the whole "Windows is good for common users" idea is very outdated nowadays, it might have been the case a decade or so ago, but it certainly isn't anymore.
I agree with you, but I think that "for common users" pretty much all OSes are interchangeable these days anyways. The biggest headache for most folks isn't the occasional need to resort to an expert (which they'd always have to do), but the unnecessary headache of learning the quirks of a different OS. Easier to just stick with what you know, which is usually Windows.
I agree with you, but I think that "for common users" pretty much all OSes are interchangeable these days anyways. The biggest headache for most folks isn't the occasional need to resort to an expert (which they'd always have to do), but the unnecessary headache of learning the quirks of a different OS. Easier to just stick with what you know, which is usually Windows.
> Back when Edgeium was new and just Chrome but with a lot of Google cruft removed, I actually used Edge instead of Chrome when I was on Windows.
I fell for it too. There was a brief period where you could do a clean Win10 install, log in to the OS with your MS account, and everything just worked and synced in a "this is nice" sort of way. The cynic in me kept thinking "don't fall for it," but it was too convenient.
Now I regret it and the only reason I haven't switched back to local accounts is because I'm not happy with any of the competition either.
I fell for it too. There was a brief period where you could do a clean Win10 install, log in to the OS with your MS account, and everything just worked and synced in a "this is nice" sort of way. The cynic in me kept thinking "don't fall for it," but it was too convenient.
Now I regret it and the only reason I haven't switched back to local accounts is because I'm not happy with any of the competition either.
> macOS only runs on very expensive hardware and doesn't run most programs people need (because the business world is still Windows oriented)
This is an outdated take - it's functionally untrue in most business settings.
Gaming on the other hand, is very much still mostly Windows only.
This is an outdated take - it's functionally untrue in most business settings.
Gaming on the other hand, is very much still mostly Windows only.
> Gaming on the other hand, is very much still mostly Windows only.
I game a lot, I haven't rebooted into Windows in well over a year. Luckily I don't really play games that require stupid DRM/anticheat (although, that is being worked on)
I would probably start playing Apex Legends again if they allowed EAC Linux support. Epic added support, the devs just need to support it -.-
I game a lot, I haven't rebooted into Windows in well over a year. Luckily I don't really play games that require stupid DRM/anticheat (although, that is being worked on)
I would probably start playing Apex Legends again if they allowed EAC Linux support. Epic added support, the devs just need to support it -.-
Steam with proton, proton glorious eggroll, vulkan, lutris, and recent changes to wine have been a godsend for gaming on linux. It's night and day now. Aside from some really old games and newer competitive games (which I don't play regardless of OS), there are very few games that I can't play well in my 200+ steam games library. I often play native games in Windows emulation mode because a lot of linux ports are terrible but proton makes them play much better even though it's running the Windows binaries.
> proton glorious eggroll
what?
what?
It's a version of proton with some of the enhancements that the main proton team either won't or haven't added yet. I haven't looked into whether it's an individual dev doing this on their own or if they are affiliated with the proton team. I run the GE versions of proton because they solve some problems I have in certain games without breaking anything. It's my understanding that the proton devs are from the same team as the wine devs and that they have strict rules about introducing new code that doesn't meet certain standards for wine (i.e. affecting more than just games). The GE builds include some of this code that hasn't been integrated yet "in the right way".
This is all just my understanding from reading various discussions, so may be incorrect in whole or in part.
This is all just my understanding from reading various discussions, so may be incorrect in whole or in part.
https://github.com/GloriousEggroll/proton-ge-custom
An experimental patchset for Wine/Proton. Might help with some newer titles, and Steam gives you the choice per-game to target a specific Proton version.
An experimental patchset for Wine/Proton. Might help with some newer titles, and Steam gives you the choice per-game to target a specific Proton version.
I've had a great experience with Lutris for Linux.
https://lutris.net/
https://lutris.net/
functionally untrue in most business settings
Most business settings have some absolutely critical custom software written in Winforms or something that can't be ported, plus an entire machine of IT personnel and software tools that would be just as costly to convert.
Most business settings have some absolutely critical custom software written in Winforms or something that can't be ported, plus an entire machine of IT personnel and software tools that would be just as costly to convert.
So run it through Parallels. If IT doesn't want to do it that's a different problem, but the Windows on Intel Macs hasn't been a problem for business programs for a while.
Microsoft somewhat already did the work needed to migrate of windows by making Active Directory and Group Policy irrelevant.
With office 365 and intune you can essentially have the same control as traditional AD joined machines actually Intune probably has better management than GPO these days.
The only thing that is still missing for corpo is Intune for Linux and even that isn’t 100% required as long as there will be Intune for Edge on Linux, once you can manage the browser the majority of the controls the organization needs are handled.
With office 365 and intune you can essentially have the same control as traditional AD joined machines actually Intune probably has better management than GPO these days.
The only thing that is still missing for corpo is Intune for Linux and even that isn’t 100% required as long as there will be Intune for Edge on Linux, once you can manage the browser the majority of the controls the organization needs are handled.
“custom software written in Winforms or something that can't be ported”
I haven’t seen any of these in almost a decade. there are specialized use cases that require some specialized software, but for most business operations the software works cross platform or runs from web apps. I used to keep a parallels instance to run MS SQL server for some tasks but we have even transitioned that to a less propriety setup.
I haven’t seen any of these in almost a decade. there are specialized use cases that require some specialized software, but for most business operations the software works cross platform or runs from web apps. I used to keep a parallels instance to run MS SQL server for some tasks but we have even transitioned that to a less propriety setup.
I'd agree if they still had 32-bit support. Nowadays though, even most creatives are getting frustrated by the vicious upgrade cycle and outright refusal to continue support for fairly modern tooling. If by "business" you mean word processing and web browsing, then... yeah. Chromebooks are also a competitor if we're bringing the bar that low.
Honestly, Apple (and Microsoft) should have dropped 32-bit support sooner. The only reason it's such a big issue now is because lazy developers kept building apps that are 32-bit only because "it works fine on 64-bit systems". The same thing happened with the Python 2 -> 3 transition.
A big reason why some people stayed on 32-bit was that 64 bit consumes more memory while providing not much useful in return when your address space doesn't exceed 4GB. In an era when you rarely had machines with this much RAM, 32 bit computing is a perfectly rational choice to maximise the amount of memory available.
That doesn't really fix the paradigm today though. A lot of people (myself included) consider 32-bit support to be essential if they want their device to run everything they want, and I don't really see that going away until there are convenient, performant ways to execute 32-bit code on modern CPUs.
When I installed Catalina, only 6 32-bit apps were flagged. I had already known about one of them and had moved on to a replacement app. I had forgotten about the others and this was just some junk cleanup for me.
[deleted]
Anecdotal but I’ve never had any issue with Linux. Aside from installing Nvidia proprietary drivers when secureboot is enabled. In which case DKMS is broken so I had to enroll a new signing key in MOK and use that to sign the nvidia kernel driver.
If I need to run Windows, I will either use WINE or single GPU pass through to a Windows VM on KVM. Never needed to dual boot. Edge on Linux is great actually, I just don’t like that I can’t disable the listening on avahi ports even though I have disabled avahi. Apparently Edge uses it to mask IP when using WebRTC.
If I need to run Windows, I will either use WINE or single GPU pass through to a Windows VM on KVM. Never needed to dual boot. Edge on Linux is great actually, I just don’t like that I can’t disable the listening on avahi ports even though I have disabled avahi. Apparently Edge uses it to mask IP when using WebRTC.
That was a crash course on how to self-disprove one's argument, all in the first sentence. "It works well, except for this extremely common use case that requires arcane knowledge to fix."
It is secure boot specific which I believe is a in theory working but in reality a broken mechanism because of certificate logistics. We could also call it Microsoft Boot at this point. Sure, it will work better in Windows, but it comes at a hidden price.
Also, this won't give you too many benefits aside from convenience to skip one password entry, while any Saas will at some point leverage it against you if it every gets popular. That is basically the gist of secure boot or trusted platform in general right now.
Smartphones are trusted platforms and their software landscape is atrocious and predatory. Trusted platforming would move it in exactly the same direction.
Meanwhile boot viruses have become quite rare, because phishing and extortion is much more profitable.
Also, this won't give you too many benefits aside from convenience to skip one password entry, while any Saas will at some point leverage it against you if it every gets popular. That is basically the gist of secure boot or trusted platform in general right now.
Smartphones are trusted platforms and their software landscape is atrocious and predatory. Trusted platforming would move it in exactly the same direction.
Meanwhile boot viruses have become quite rare, because phishing and extortion is much more profitable.
Or you could just disable SecureBoot. I needed it for a specific use case on my laptop that had sensitive work related information (full disk encryption plus SecureBoot enabled).
> iOS Safari's level as the only browser people should use.
FWIW, iOS doesn't chide you when you download Chrome or Firefox. Of course Apple requires them to use the iOS rendering engine - but that's perhaps a slightly different point.
FWIW, iOS doesn't chide you when you download Chrome or Firefox. Of course Apple requires them to use the iOS rendering engine - but that's perhaps a slightly different point.
macOS does display something when you do, the first time ever. Initially I thought "why don't Apple get called out for that?", but upon reading this article, 1) it's once, and less intrusive, and 2) is not cringey/loaded with an air of smugness or condescension like some of these prompts.
On macOS Safari prompts me to set it as a default browser every time I launch it.
That’s interesting because it doesn’t for me as if Safari 15.1, but Chrome certainly does as of version whatever is the latest (and I use Firefox as my default on this machine).
Most browsers will, or to be more precise: I’ve never met a browser that didn’t request to be the default, but there’s usually a point where they stop asking or else a setting to disable that “feature”.
Most browsers will, or to be more precise: I’ve never met a browser that didn’t request to be the default, but there’s usually a point where they stop asking or else a setting to disable that “feature”.
I always use Firefox and have never seen such a prompt. Do you just close the prompt without answering “no, thank you”? Maybe it is waiting for an answer?
Is it still impossible to set your default browser on iOS? That to me is even more hostile than just having me click an extra button once to download it.
No. You've been able to change the default browser for years.
I don't think so. Didn't a recent software update change this?
Started with iOS 14, so a little over a year ago.
> Of course Apple requires them to use the iOS rendering engine
How is apple allowed to do this? Would MSoft have escaped the legal trouble back then if they had simply insisted that Netscape had to run like IE?
How is apple allowed to do this? Would MSoft have escaped the legal trouble back then if they had simply insisted that Netscape had to run like IE?
Forcing the rendering engine upon a browser manufacturer is just "cost of doing business" on iOS. It does not have as negative consequences as forcing an entire browser upon a user (like Microsoft is doing). Chrome on iOS can still do pretty much everything it wants, including telemetry, sync etc. The users are ensured to get a browser with a rendering engine that is carefully optimized for performance and battery life by the phone manufacturer, so I'd argue the user is actually better off.
> macOS only runs on very expensive hardware and doesn't run most programs people need (because the business world is still Windows oriented)
What programs won't run on macOS that "normal people" are going to need? In my experience most "normal people" use a web browser, the Office suite, and maybe some Adobe programs.
What programs won't run on macOS that "normal people" are going to need? In my experience most "normal people" use a web browser, the Office suite, and maybe some Adobe programs.
games and all gaming related software
Many "normal" people aren't gamers. My mom and my father in law used PCs frequently at home, never played games. My wife doesn't play on her Mac (but she does on her iPad). I am also not a gamer, and I've been heavy microcomputer user (hobbyist and professionally) since 1984 and haven't played many games since my Commodore 64 days. (I know, I'm talking about "old" people. We're still normal.)
No one at my company needs games or gaming related software to do work. I imagine that's true for most companies.
So what are the typical attributes of a normal user? AFAIK, everybody who doesn't need an expert to care for his system, would be capable of installing and running one of the more popular and user friendly Linux distributions.
If you need an expert anyway, it doesn't matter much which OS you use. The only exception I can think of are disabled people, who might rely on very specific software.
If you need an expert anyway, it doesn't matter much which OS you use. The only exception I can think of are disabled people, who might rely on very specific software.
Fwiw, my family has been perfectly happy with various Linux machines.
Most things work with just a browser. Such that my kid's school just gives Chromebooks. They prefer the Ubuntu and Pop os machines, but are fine with any.
The windows machine was ok when we had it, but it did crash more.
I only regret some content creation tools. Used to regret gaming, but steam has come a long way.
Most things work with just a browser. Such that my kid's school just gives Chromebooks. They prefer the Ubuntu and Pop os machines, but are fine with any.
The windows machine was ok when we had it, but it did crash more.
I only regret some content creation tools. Used to regret gaming, but steam has come a long way.
> Then Microsoft started this aggressive, disruptive push to bring it to iOS Safari's level as the only browser people should use.
Counter-point: my dislike of Edge aside (especially since it uses Chromium instead of their own engine, which is lame), Google has made an aggressive, disruptive push to switch people to Chrome for many years now, which itself has made some aggressive, disruptive effects on the web. Is a little friendly "popup" from a competitor in a style all other browsers incorporate really such a bad thing to help keep Google's market dominance in check a bit? I don't think Microsoft or Firefox should just roll over and do nothing while Google pushes Chrome in everyone's face every chance it gets - it seems to have cooled off a bit recently (or maybe that's just due to me switching to DuckDuckGo permanently) but in the very recent past it was still doing so.
> I don't know any good operating systems for normal people anymore. Windows 10 and 11 are hostile
May I ask what makes you think this? Occasional oddities aside, I've found Win10/11 to make for an incredibly pain-free desktop experience. While the upgrade to Windows 11 was a bit of a pain due to all of the weird system requirements - I have the hardware required, but apparently not everything was enabled or set up properly and it took some effort to do so - and the start button location is still taking some getting used to, it mostly Just Works and gets out of my way. I've found it to be the opposite of hostile.
Counter-point: my dislike of Edge aside (especially since it uses Chromium instead of their own engine, which is lame), Google has made an aggressive, disruptive push to switch people to Chrome for many years now, which itself has made some aggressive, disruptive effects on the web. Is a little friendly "popup" from a competitor in a style all other browsers incorporate really such a bad thing to help keep Google's market dominance in check a bit? I don't think Microsoft or Firefox should just roll over and do nothing while Google pushes Chrome in everyone's face every chance it gets - it seems to have cooled off a bit recently (or maybe that's just due to me switching to DuckDuckGo permanently) but in the very recent past it was still doing so.
> I don't know any good operating systems for normal people anymore. Windows 10 and 11 are hostile
May I ask what makes you think this? Occasional oddities aside, I've found Win10/11 to make for an incredibly pain-free desktop experience. While the upgrade to Windows 11 was a bit of a pain due to all of the weird system requirements - I have the hardware required, but apparently not everything was enabled or set up properly and it took some effort to do so - and the start button location is still taking some getting used to, it mostly Just Works and gets out of my way. I've found it to be the opposite of hostile.
> May I ask what makes you think this?
Windows blatantly ignores your preferences and settings to push Microsoft's own products. It started with little popups about Edge and previews of Microsoft Office, but every month the intrusive crap gets worse. Now computers come with some kind of debt scam installed by default into the browser that is VERY hard to get out of without technical knowledge or the help of someone with it.
Firefox had to reverse engineer Microsoft's system twice now to simply allow setting a browser as a default, and Microsoft has said to "patch out" their latest approach. Even still, the default browser won't open when you accidentally click a link to Microsoft's help; that opens in an ms-edge link that Microsoft keeps strictly to themselves. I consider that to be hostile.
Windows blatantly ignores your preferences and settings to push Microsoft's own products. It started with little popups about Edge and previews of Microsoft Office, but every month the intrusive crap gets worse. Now computers come with some kind of debt scam installed by default into the browser that is VERY hard to get out of without technical knowledge or the help of someone with it.
Firefox had to reverse engineer Microsoft's system twice now to simply allow setting a browser as a default, and Microsoft has said to "patch out" their latest approach. Even still, the default browser won't open when you accidentally click a link to Microsoft's help; that opens in an ms-edge link that Microsoft keeps strictly to themselves. I consider that to be hostile.
I don't necessarily think either is a good thing, but Microsoft is being far more aggressive than Google is.
- In Windows 10, they already made it harder to change your default browser. You have to explicitly open the Settings app and go to the relevant page (maybe if you're lucky the app you're using can link you there at least), and then when you try to change your default browser it will try to push you to try Edge.
- In Windows 11, they went even further: you now have to change the default apps separately for every single protocol and file extension, rather than having an option to set an app as default for everything it supports. The concept of a "default web browser" that's easy to understand for the average user no longer exists.
- When Firefox decided to implement a hack to let users directly change their default browser with a single click, Microsoft decided to patch it because "it can be used by malware to hijack your default browser". Which would be a completely reasonable explanation if we ignored the context this is happening in, but they're making their ulterior motive painfully obvious.
- And now, they're going even further by injecting unwanted and unprofessional self-promotion into third-party websites without the user's consent. It's quite different from what Google is doing, because they only suggest you to switch to Chrome when you visit Google Search, they don't try to stop you when you try to download Edge or Firefox from Chrome.
I seriously hope Microsoft gets hit with an antitrust lawsuit again, they completely deserve it. Looks like they haven't learned from last time.
If MS really cared about security as they claim rather than competition, they could very easily implement a popup dialog that shows up when an app tries to change your default browser. Heck, maybe even make it part of UAC for extra security. That way, it would only take two clicks and be also far more secure than whatever they're doing right now.
Also, I'm not entirely sure about this, but I remember reading somewhere that MS is also doing the same on Firefox downloads. While Google may somewhat deserve it (though that doesn't make MS's behavior any less user-hostile), Mozilla definitely doesn't deserve it as Firefox already has a quite low market share.
- In Windows 10, they already made it harder to change your default browser. You have to explicitly open the Settings app and go to the relevant page (maybe if you're lucky the app you're using can link you there at least), and then when you try to change your default browser it will try to push you to try Edge.
- In Windows 11, they went even further: you now have to change the default apps separately for every single protocol and file extension, rather than having an option to set an app as default for everything it supports. The concept of a "default web browser" that's easy to understand for the average user no longer exists.
- When Firefox decided to implement a hack to let users directly change their default browser with a single click, Microsoft decided to patch it because "it can be used by malware to hijack your default browser". Which would be a completely reasonable explanation if we ignored the context this is happening in, but they're making their ulterior motive painfully obvious.
- And now, they're going even further by injecting unwanted and unprofessional self-promotion into third-party websites without the user's consent. It's quite different from what Google is doing, because they only suggest you to switch to Chrome when you visit Google Search, they don't try to stop you when you try to download Edge or Firefox from Chrome.
I seriously hope Microsoft gets hit with an antitrust lawsuit again, they completely deserve it. Looks like they haven't learned from last time.
If MS really cared about security as they claim rather than competition, they could very easily implement a popup dialog that shows up when an app tries to change your default browser. Heck, maybe even make it part of UAC for extra security. That way, it would only take two clicks and be also far more secure than whatever they're doing right now.
Also, I'm not entirely sure about this, but I remember reading somewhere that MS is also doing the same on Firefox downloads. While Google may somewhat deserve it (though that doesn't make MS's behavior any less user-hostile), Mozilla definitely doesn't deserve it as Firefox already has a quite low market share.
I actually only recently switched to Edge and have been enjoying it. Google is not totally innocent in this battle either. At least once a week if not more often when I am in my Gmail, on my Google Calendar, or on the Google search pages I get a little banner in the top right just like the Edge one seen in this article telling me I'd get a better experience if I switched to Chrome and have a similar download style button. And with how prevalent Google's webpages are the majority of the web users will see these adverts if they aren't using Chrome. So I'd argue that Google is not really much better than Microsoft in this regard.
I guess the difference is that Microsoft has an additional avenue to advertise since they control more of the software stack.
The things I have more of a problem with are the dark behaviours for things like changing my default browser. I noticed when I originally would install Google Chrome and it asks if I want to make it my default, the process to do so is more complicated. Chrome can only pop up Windows default application chooser settings dialogue and then you have to manually switch the default browser in there. Microsoft will give multiple messages you have to go through before it sets it as default. Whereas when I recently switched back to Edge they had the same banner asking if I wanted to make Edge default, except when I clicked "yes", that was all. Microsoft was able to directly make that change without having me go through the weird process of switching defaults.
When one company gives themselves artificial advantages over their competitors like this that is when things start to get weird for me. For now I am going to stick with Edge for a bit, but if they continue to do things like implementing "buy now pay later" schemes I'll probably go back to Chrome.
I guess the difference is that Microsoft has an additional avenue to advertise since they control more of the software stack.
The things I have more of a problem with are the dark behaviours for things like changing my default browser. I noticed when I originally would install Google Chrome and it asks if I want to make it my default, the process to do so is more complicated. Chrome can only pop up Windows default application chooser settings dialogue and then you have to manually switch the default browser in there. Microsoft will give multiple messages you have to go through before it sets it as default. Whereas when I recently switched back to Edge they had the same banner asking if I wanted to make Edge default, except when I clicked "yes", that was all. Microsoft was able to directly make that change without having me go through the weird process of switching defaults.
When one company gives themselves artificial advantages over their competitors like this that is when things start to get weird for me. For now I am going to stick with Edge for a bit, but if they continue to do things like implementing "buy now pay later" schemes I'll probably go back to Chrome.
> macOs.... doesn't run most programs people need (because the business world is still Windows oriented)
This is not only not true for many years anymore, it's even got so far that it's almost the opposite now. Most successful businesses nowadays are increasingly led by tech-savvy leaders, because otherwise they wouldn't be successful anymore, and those people make their own software now increasingly better on macOS than Windows for their own selfish reasons because they all run on MacBooks, iPhones and Apple Watches today.
Even Microsoft's own software ironically works MUCH better on macOS than Windows. Try Office on macOS and you'll be surprised how good it is compared to Windows :)
This is not only not true for many years anymore, it's even got so far that it's almost the opposite now. Most successful businesses nowadays are increasingly led by tech-savvy leaders, because otherwise they wouldn't be successful anymore, and those people make their own software now increasingly better on macOS than Windows for their own selfish reasons because they all run on MacBooks, iPhones and Apple Watches today.
Even Microsoft's own software ironically works MUCH better on macOS than Windows. Try Office on macOS and you'll be surprised how good it is compared to Windows :)
>Even Microsoft's own software ironically works MUCH better on macOS than Windows. Try Office on macOS and you'll be surprised how good it is compared to Windows
That has not been my experience (though I wish it were).
Excel on MacOS still feels clunky and has significant performance problems with big files - including crashes.
That has not been my experience (though I wish it were).
Excel on MacOS still feels clunky and has significant performance problems with big files - including crashes.
In my experience excel has gotten significantly better in the last 2-3 years.
Though yes, that accounting sheet that has 2 million blank rows, and some macro trying to access a file in c:\windows\system32 is likely still causing problems... (not kidding)
Though yes, that accounting sheet that has 2 million blank rows, and some macro trying to access a file in c:\windows\system32 is likely still causing problems... (not kidding)
You seem to have ignored the entire class of businesses that don’t “make their own software” at all.
Uh yes? If you don’t make software then obviously you won’t make software for macOS either lol?
Those folks also us macOS, but that was not the poiI tried to make.
Those folks also us macOS, but that was not the poiI tried to make.
I doubt many companies are writing their internal apps to be macOS specific. Likely it's browser based.
> Linux has been making progress but still isn't a good alternative for the common user
For non tech savvy people, Linux can cause problems, but only if they do something weird to their system. Linux, specifically Ubuntu or Mint, untouched, and unaltered is a great out-of-the-box experience.
The key (if turning someone on to Linux for the first time) is to stress that the command line is for power users who want full control of every bit on the system.
It's best to gradually introduce the command line once they're familiar with using the system and are comfortable doing their first (command line) update/upgrade ritual.
For non tech savvy people, Linux can cause problems, but only if they do something weird to their system. Linux, specifically Ubuntu or Mint, untouched, and unaltered is a great out-of-the-box experience.
The key (if turning someone on to Linux for the first time) is to stress that the command line is for power users who want full control of every bit on the system.
It's best to gradually introduce the command line once they're familiar with using the system and are comfortable doing their first (command line) update/upgrade ritual.
I agree, but when you Google "Ubuntu 21 sound not working" you end up here https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SoundTroubleshootingProced... and the first thing you see is tons of shell commands and very outdated GUI controls. This is the vendor documentation, not even a StackExchange forum.
When you Google for "Windows 11 sound not working" the first result I get is https://www.makeuseof.com/fix-no-audio-windows-11/ which is much more user friendly.
The system itself is one part of the problem, and that's the part that has been improving for years. The community providing technical help is another; Linux help forums are often full of technical users advising technical users whereas Windows help threads are usually novice users asking help and getting it in simple terms.
When you Google for "Windows 11 sound not working" the first result I get is https://www.makeuseof.com/fix-no-audio-windows-11/ which is much more user friendly.
The system itself is one part of the problem, and that's the part that has been improving for years. The community providing technical help is another; Linux help forums are often full of technical users advising technical users whereas Windows help threads are usually novice users asking help and getting it in simple terms.
This is actually a good observation. Yes, the Windows results are full of what I would call useless crap (e.g. "make sure you did not mute the speaker!"), but for real newbies that is likely to be useful advice, and much more likely to solve their problem than say digging into alsa.cfg internals (which is highly unlikely to be the source of the problem).
> Linux has been making progress but still isn't a good alternative for the common user unless they have an expert to rely upon when something breaks down
I'd say there are 2 main problems with Linux (for non-techies, etc, etc):
1 - They are not using 'linux', they are using one of the main distros, that can have some big differences between them. That also happens with Android, BUT, people that use a Galaxy S20 will google `S20 how to xyz` without even knowing how Android differs
2 - As mentioned in other comments, setting up can be a pain. Windows have enough drivers that installing it is just a matter of putting the cd/flashdrive and clicking next-next-finish. Some big distros might have sorted that out, but then you go back to problem #1 if they are the ones having to decide on a distro
3 (bonus) - Most people don't actually benefit from having too many choices, specially from things they don't care about. Usually they will choose a smartphone by 'it looks nice, camera is good, the interface is beautiful'.
For me, sounds like this could be improved if instead of recommending Linux, we (tech folks) collectively decided on just one distro to recommend to non-technical people. But I doubt that would be possible
I'd say there are 2 main problems with Linux (for non-techies, etc, etc):
1 - They are not using 'linux', they are using one of the main distros, that can have some big differences between them. That also happens with Android, BUT, people that use a Galaxy S20 will google `S20 how to xyz` without even knowing how Android differs
2 - As mentioned in other comments, setting up can be a pain. Windows have enough drivers that installing it is just a matter of putting the cd/flashdrive and clicking next-next-finish. Some big distros might have sorted that out, but then you go back to problem #1 if they are the ones having to decide on a distro
3 (bonus) - Most people don't actually benefit from having too many choices, specially from things they don't care about. Usually they will choose a smartphone by 'it looks nice, camera is good, the interface is beautiful'.
For me, sounds like this could be improved if instead of recommending Linux, we (tech folks) collectively decided on just one distro to recommend to non-technical people. But I doubt that would be possible
There is only one main problem for linux and it is the catch 22 that most software is still mostly written for windows. I'm not talking about the generic off-the-shelf software like office/paint/browsers which have pretty good alternatives, but the 25+ years of legacy win32 stuff which still runs most businesses and factories. Lets face it nobody wants to re-write that program that Bill wrote in 2001 in Delphi or VB that interfaces to the stamping machine.
I'm a Delphi Developer who moved to NZ in 2005 and several programs are still live and running in UK factories. A tribute to the Win32 sub-system rather than my programming I assure you :-)
I'm a Delphi Developer who moved to NZ in 2005 and several programs are still live and running in UK factories. A tribute to the Win32 sub-system rather than my programming I assure you :-)
oh yeah, sure. My comment was meant for personal/home use. Work is a complete other thing since it adds more restrictions.
Point number two is more the other way around. You plug a device into Linux and it works. You plug it into windows, and it only works once it's downloaded and installed the driver.
But in both cases, actual user interaction required is very little and decreasing with time.
I will admit though, that if something doesn't work immediately with Linux, there's a good chance you won't be able to get it working with Linux.
But in both cases, actual user interaction required is very little and decreasing with time.
I will admit though, that if something doesn't work immediately with Linux, there's a good chance you won't be able to get it working with Linux.
If you're a user with low experience and all you want is to browse the web Linux actually works quite nicely.
> window snapping is nice
A long time ago, I helped the development of some useful compiz plugins: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-X9bcrJ3TjY .
I abandoned the development when compiz was rewritten in c++, but the next step we planned was to add the choice of some fixed window layouts. Seems very close to what window snapping turned out.
A long time ago, I helped the development of some useful compiz plugins: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-X9bcrJ3TjY .
I abandoned the development when compiz was rewritten in c++, but the next step we planned was to add the choice of some fixed window layouts. Seems very close to what window snapping turned out.
I heard some people having a decent time with Edge in the past with some features implementations. Not that I would use it myself, but I'm firmly convinced these childish plays only ruin whatever good work was done on it. Who on Earth would continue using a browser that has such hostile behavior and dark patterns all over the place e.g., buy-now-pay-later at browser level?
It's so hard to trust Microsoft anyway, I'm glad 11 is such a tranwreck dead on arrival. Makes it easier to discourage people from using it, ever.
It's so hard to trust Microsoft anyway, I'm glad 11 is such a tranwreck dead on arrival. Makes it easier to discourage people from using it, ever.
> Who on Earth would continue using a browser that has such hostile behavior and dark patterns all over the place
Every kind of technology today has clear and visible dark patterns. In the past it was advertisement everywhere and now it is user-hostile design. See any discussion about smart tv, subscription services, webshops, smart devices, phones, apps or any other technology topics and the issue of dark patterns will pop up. It is a race to the bottom, and I can see the rationale by Microsoft. They are doing the same thing as google is, just a slight step further.
If people switch to Apple then third-party browser must use iOS WebKit framework, and reportedly have their performance limited to make safari better in comparison. They could go linux but then people complain about a lack of polish and compatibility with programs/hardware that they use and so return back to either windows or mac.
As a person who have been working with computers for my whole life and used to be quite excited by new technology, it is quite often that I get tempted to become a farmer and leave behind the dark world of technology.
Every kind of technology today has clear and visible dark patterns. In the past it was advertisement everywhere and now it is user-hostile design. See any discussion about smart tv, subscription services, webshops, smart devices, phones, apps or any other technology topics and the issue of dark patterns will pop up. It is a race to the bottom, and I can see the rationale by Microsoft. They are doing the same thing as google is, just a slight step further.
If people switch to Apple then third-party browser must use iOS WebKit framework, and reportedly have their performance limited to make safari better in comparison. They could go linux but then people complain about a lack of polish and compatibility with programs/hardware that they use and so return back to either windows or mac.
As a person who have been working with computers for my whole life and used to be quite excited by new technology, it is quite often that I get tempted to become a farmer and leave behind the dark world of technology.
There is no darkness in the world of FOSS, it's an actual, currently functioning, computing utopian dream.
Let Caeser have his awful stuff. We can all push for fun, and free computing.
Let Caeser have his awful stuff. We can all push for fun, and free computing.
I agree, I honestly feel like the FOSS world is tech's last bastion when it comes to this stuff. There's a lot of bullshit too but it's nowhere near the mass surveilled dark-pattern galore the current tech era is.
SystemD and the Gnome file picker don't look so bad now, do they?
At least Pottering isn't trying to extort loans from me when I start/stop a service.
At least Pottering isn't trying to extort loans from me when I start/stop a service.
The Gnome file picker doesn't look better. It's their competition that looks worse.
> it's an actual, currently functioning, computing utopian dream
False. The FOSS software that I personally use is less useful (on a practical technical level) on average than its technical equivalents.
And beyond my specific tools (which I admit could just be the bad parts of FOSS), FOSS software is near-universally bad (along with almost every other piece of software I've touched - this isn't a condemnation of FOSS, only a pointing out of the fact that it's not good, just better), and nowhere close to a "computing utopian dream". The amount of issues that I've found in open-source software wouldn't fit in a blog post, let alone an HN comment (although if anyone really wants I could provide a sampling).
You can say that some pieces of FOSS are better than their proprietary equivalents in a technical sense, sure - but I've never actually found a single piece of software, FOSS or not, that is anywhere close to "utopian" (or barely even "functioning").
False. The FOSS software that I personally use is less useful (on a practical technical level) on average than its technical equivalents.
And beyond my specific tools (which I admit could just be the bad parts of FOSS), FOSS software is near-universally bad (along with almost every other piece of software I've touched - this isn't a condemnation of FOSS, only a pointing out of the fact that it's not good, just better), and nowhere close to a "computing utopian dream". The amount of issues that I've found in open-source software wouldn't fit in a blog post, let alone an HN comment (although if anyone really wants I could provide a sampling).
You can say that some pieces of FOSS are better than their proprietary equivalents in a technical sense, sure - but I've never actually found a single piece of software, FOSS or not, that is anywhere close to "utopian" (or barely even "functioning").
> but I've never actually found a single piece of software, FOSS or not, that is anywhere close to "utopian" (or barely even "functioning").
Probably because of which fields you work in. But in software development, I'd say it is almost exclusively the case all over the board.
If you work in digital arts, then Blender is probably the best end-user application example I can think of.
Probably because of which fields you work in. But in software development, I'd say it is almost exclusively the case all over the board.
If you work in digital arts, then Blender is probably the best end-user application example I can think of.
Can you specify some specific pieces of software-development software that you consider to be "utopian"?
I'm a software developer and have used the following pieces of software that were very non-utopian: gcc gdb sbcl vim emacs vscode atom tmux bash fish make cmake automake autotools m4 cpython pip mypy pyinstaller firefox gradle ant sbt chisel npm qmk (that is - everything I've touched). I also know that virtually everything related to webdev is just straight-up awful.
I've also used Blender and can testify from personal experience that it's bad.
What else is there?
I'm a software developer and have used the following pieces of software that were very non-utopian: gcc gdb sbcl vim emacs vscode atom tmux bash fish make cmake automake autotools m4 cpython pip mypy pyinstaller firefox gradle ant sbt chisel npm qmk (that is - everything I've touched). I also know that virtually everything related to webdev is just straight-up awful.
I've also used Blender and can testify from personal experience that it's bad.
What else is there?
To clarify, when you say these are "non-utopian", it would help to know what that means to you.
I honestly think blender is a technical marvel that in many cases is better than its proprietary counterparts. The bar is quite high for these kinds of specialised and very expensive software. So, if blender is "bad", then perhaps the bar is set so high, that I don't think I can give a satisfactory answer.
"Utopian" in that there is nothing that could be better or improved is a higher bar than what I had in mind. But, just "better or equal than its proprietary counterparts", I do feel there are examples. Linux itself being a very clear one. There is a reason why it's the most used operating system by a mile (something like 90-98%). More contentiously I would also include it for desktop use. Hmm, perhaps AOSP also.
Out of the many tools you've mentioned, I've used most of them as well, and I don't consider any of them particularly great. But, what are the closed source alternatives that are better?
Perhaps also fish, as I cannot think of a better proprietary shell. Powershell and its windows integration is uaf.
Maybe some of my examples are skewed by the value I place on it not being controlled by corporate interests. That my usage isn't profiled, that I'm not exposed to dark patterns for KPIs at some board meeting.
I honestly think blender is a technical marvel that in many cases is better than its proprietary counterparts. The bar is quite high for these kinds of specialised and very expensive software. So, if blender is "bad", then perhaps the bar is set so high, that I don't think I can give a satisfactory answer.
"Utopian" in that there is nothing that could be better or improved is a higher bar than what I had in mind. But, just "better or equal than its proprietary counterparts", I do feel there are examples. Linux itself being a very clear one. There is a reason why it's the most used operating system by a mile (something like 90-98%). More contentiously I would also include it for desktop use. Hmm, perhaps AOSP also.
Out of the many tools you've mentioned, I've used most of them as well, and I don't consider any of them particularly great. But, what are the closed source alternatives that are better?
Perhaps also fish, as I cannot think of a better proprietary shell. Powershell and its windows integration is uaf.
Maybe some of my examples are skewed by the value I place on it not being controlled by corporate interests. That my usage isn't profiled, that I'm not exposed to dark patterns for KPIs at some board meeting.
> To clarify, when you say these are "non-utopian", it would help to know what that means to you.
I'm using the dictionary definition of "utopian", which is "Of, relating to, describing or having the characteristics of a Utopia." where "utopia" means "An ideally perfect place, especially in its social, political, and moral aspects." - that is, perfect software. Sorry if that wasn't clear - maybe I should have started by clarifying that first.
Now, even allowing for some very small resource cost (I think that it's unrealistic to expect even perfect software to consume no CPU, memory, or disk space), "ideally perfect" software is: low-resource-use, responsive, high-throughput, easy-to-setup, easy-to-learn, easy-to-use, easy-to-understand, ergonomic (efficient from a UI perspective), backward-compatible, forward-compatible, stable, well-documented, extensible (containing a powerful extension language and development environment for that language, and a large API that extensions/scripts can use), introspective, good error messages, easy to compile and develop, robust against internal and external errors, high skill cap, has all of the features that you need, and the largest force-multiplier possible without resorting to AI.
Given that definition, I hope you can see why I don't categorize any programs as being "utopian".
As for Blender - I don't use it frequently (I've just done some hobbyist modeling), but I can still name a few issues: can't open multiple blend-files at once, can't do real-time collaboration on a blend-file, no blend-file versioning, API in Python (which is not a great language, either by itself or for an extension system), no IDE for development of Python extensions in Blender, cmake build system for Blender itself, bad integration of operators into scripting (for decent integration, see Emacs' interactive functions, described more generally at [1]), no hot-patching of Blender code (emacs can hot-patch elisp code as it runs, and elisp makes up the majority of the tool, including almost all of the text-editing functionality - the same applies to Atom and JavaScript), no introspective facilities for Blender itself.
> Linux itself being a very clear one.
I don't believe that this is clearly the case. Linux is only the most used kernel (not OS/userspace) because of its inclusion into Android, and we have little reason to believe that the Android company chose Linux based on its technical merits and not because the only other alternative (Windows NT) required expensive licensing. On the desktop, Windows has a 95% market-share - does that mean that it's a technically superior desktop operating system? In fact, in the server realm, we also don't have any reason to believe that it was chosen for any reason other than the fact that it's free.
> But, what are the closed source alternatives that are better?
In most cases, you're right, there are none. (with a few exceptions: Visual Studio, PyCharm, PowerShell (I don't know what "uaf" means, but I do know that PowerShell's typed nature makes it infinitely better than untyped bash), Allegro/LispWorks, Sublime Text) But, I wasn't trying to say that open-source programs aren't better on average than proprietary programs - just that (a) there are exceptions and (b) everything is bad. That is - "bad", rather than "better" - relative vs. absolutely measurements. When you used "utopian", that's universally accepted to be an absolute standard of measurement, and given the common definition of it (listed above), I don't think that it applies to the vast majority of software.
[1] https://breckyunits.com/user-methods.html
I'm using the dictionary definition of "utopian", which is "Of, relating to, describing or having the characteristics of a Utopia." where "utopia" means "An ideally perfect place, especially in its social, political, and moral aspects." - that is, perfect software. Sorry if that wasn't clear - maybe I should have started by clarifying that first.
Now, even allowing for some very small resource cost (I think that it's unrealistic to expect even perfect software to consume no CPU, memory, or disk space), "ideally perfect" software is: low-resource-use, responsive, high-throughput, easy-to-setup, easy-to-learn, easy-to-use, easy-to-understand, ergonomic (efficient from a UI perspective), backward-compatible, forward-compatible, stable, well-documented, extensible (containing a powerful extension language and development environment for that language, and a large API that extensions/scripts can use), introspective, good error messages, easy to compile and develop, robust against internal and external errors, high skill cap, has all of the features that you need, and the largest force-multiplier possible without resorting to AI.
Given that definition, I hope you can see why I don't categorize any programs as being "utopian".
As for Blender - I don't use it frequently (I've just done some hobbyist modeling), but I can still name a few issues: can't open multiple blend-files at once, can't do real-time collaboration on a blend-file, no blend-file versioning, API in Python (which is not a great language, either by itself or for an extension system), no IDE for development of Python extensions in Blender, cmake build system for Blender itself, bad integration of operators into scripting (for decent integration, see Emacs' interactive functions, described more generally at [1]), no hot-patching of Blender code (emacs can hot-patch elisp code as it runs, and elisp makes up the majority of the tool, including almost all of the text-editing functionality - the same applies to Atom and JavaScript), no introspective facilities for Blender itself.
> Linux itself being a very clear one.
I don't believe that this is clearly the case. Linux is only the most used kernel (not OS/userspace) because of its inclusion into Android, and we have little reason to believe that the Android company chose Linux based on its technical merits and not because the only other alternative (Windows NT) required expensive licensing. On the desktop, Windows has a 95% market-share - does that mean that it's a technically superior desktop operating system? In fact, in the server realm, we also don't have any reason to believe that it was chosen for any reason other than the fact that it's free.
> But, what are the closed source alternatives that are better?
In most cases, you're right, there are none. (with a few exceptions: Visual Studio, PyCharm, PowerShell (I don't know what "uaf" means, but I do know that PowerShell's typed nature makes it infinitely better than untyped bash), Allegro/LispWorks, Sublime Text) But, I wasn't trying to say that open-source programs aren't better on average than proprietary programs - just that (a) there are exceptions and (b) everything is bad. That is - "bad", rather than "better" - relative vs. absolutely measurements. When you used "utopian", that's universally accepted to be an absolute standard of measurement, and given the common definition of it (listed above), I don't think that it applies to the vast majority of software.
[1] https://breckyunits.com/user-methods.html
I see. I did not really follow the literal sense of "utopian". Such a high bar doesn't really exist for software. Just from a philosophical point of view, such a thing can arguably not exist. So I honestly didn't think anyone was actually taking that at face value.
But, to just focus on the arguments you had on Linux. Android is only a drop in the water in terms of Linux kernel usage. And we have every reason to believe they chose Linux based on its technical merits. It actually works pretty well for what an operating system needs to do. The top 500 supercomputers, worth billions (the fastest one alone cost 1 billion) don't pick Linux because it is cheaper. They pick it because it does what it needs to do, fairly decently. The NT kernel has a bag of decades old shit stinking up the place, so that's a no go. And MacOS forked Unix is not licensed to run on anything non-apple branded, not that that would matter, since there would be zero incentive to do so.
The argument presented that there is no open source software that is better than the commercial equivalent, is what I gave counter examples to. Which is demonstrably easy to argue against. Which I have done. You wouldn't want to use anything other than Linux for a supercomputer. AWS and GCP run their systems on Linux.
But, to just focus on the arguments you had on Linux. Android is only a drop in the water in terms of Linux kernel usage. And we have every reason to believe they chose Linux based on its technical merits. It actually works pretty well for what an operating system needs to do. The top 500 supercomputers, worth billions (the fastest one alone cost 1 billion) don't pick Linux because it is cheaper. They pick it because it does what it needs to do, fairly decently. The NT kernel has a bag of decades old shit stinking up the place, so that's a no go. And MacOS forked Unix is not licensed to run on anything non-apple branded, not that that would matter, since there would be zero incentive to do so.
The argument presented that there is no open source software that is better than the commercial equivalent, is what I gave counter examples to. Which is demonstrably easy to argue against. Which I have done. You wouldn't want to use anything other than Linux for a supercomputer. AWS and GCP run their systems on Linux.
I could not agree more. It's almost baffling to see the constant frustration of closed operating systems, and then outright rejecting Linux as an alternative, as if stuck one some preconception that it is bad. I've regularly used all three, and from my point of view, they are not even close to being equal. It's the only platform where I can start my day, and reliably get to work, without any unexpected fuckery wasting half my day.
The only thing that causes a comparatively bad experience on Linux is in part software availability or driver related, neither of which is the fault of the operating system itself.
The only thing that causes a comparatively bad experience on Linux is in part software availability or driver related, neither of which is the fault of the operating system itself.
Agreed. I run KDE on FreeBSD and it's so amazing to have it do what I want, not what some company wants.
I feel the same about a lot of apps in F-Droid now. Sometimes their functionality is not as complete or they're not as polished as their Google Play counterparts. But the ad/crapware and mandatory logins that is included in those apps take away a lot of usability now.
At that point I gladly give up some polish for a 2MB app that is fast and does just what I need over a bloated 100MB app with stupid animations, ads and tracking. My battery loves it too.
I feel the same about a lot of apps in F-Droid now. Sometimes their functionality is not as complete or they're not as polished as their Google Play counterparts. But the ad/crapware and mandatory logins that is included in those apps take away a lot of usability now.
At that point I gladly give up some polish for a 2MB app that is fast and does just what I need over a bloated 100MB app with stupid animations, ads and tracking. My battery loves it too.
Once one company implements a dark pattern, it doesn't take long for other companies to follow suit and claim it's in the spirit of competition.
Instagram's log-in to view anything (even public pages) is everywhere now. If you go to Twitter and click a person's name or click a tweet, you get a log-in pop-up.
Instagram's log-in to view anything (even public pages) is everywhere now. If you go to Twitter and click a person's name or click a tweet, you get a log-in pop-up.
i just don't see the point, from a consumer perspective, in all the major players fighting over who's version of Chromium is the most preferred. I get why the company's care - i just don't get why anyone else does.
Firefox, for all it's modern faults, is the only browser that's actually different in any substantial way.
Firefox, for all it's modern faults, is the only browser that's actually different in any substantial way.
What faults to you find in Firefox, when compared to Chrome?
I switched a year ago and I was emotionally prepared to fight a rough battle with problematic websites, incompatible apps and so on. I was very positively surprised. The only major PITA was the fact that I had to define MIME types for downloadable documents that I wanted to save by default - the usual box "remember this option" was missing for .mkv and the like. So far, this was the only major complaint on my part. Everything else was very positive, especially the containers, no forced Google logins everywhere, the availability of extensions that Google doesn't like (like Ad Nauseam) and so on. I wouldn't go back even if someone paid me (OK let's be honest: I'd do it if I was paid more than €1000 a year).
I switched a year ago and I was emotionally prepared to fight a rough battle with problematic websites, incompatible apps and so on. I was very positively surprised. The only major PITA was the fact that I had to define MIME types for downloadable documents that I wanted to save by default - the usual box "remember this option" was missing for .mkv and the like. So far, this was the only major complaint on my part. Everything else was very positive, especially the containers, no forced Google logins everywhere, the availability of extensions that Google doesn't like (like Ad Nauseam) and so on. I wouldn't go back even if someone paid me (OK let's be honest: I'd do it if I was paid more than €1000 a year).
Breaking Addons to be more compliant with a standard between other browsers - making things like TabTreeStyles not work.
Putting ads in the address bar: https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/7/22715179/firefox-suggest-...
Recording what you type in the address bar: https://today.in-24.com/technology/450296.html
Putting ads on the New Tab Page: https://www.ghacks.net/2018/12/31/firefox-with-ads-on-new-ta...
Randomly installing Addons for people: https://itsfoss.com/firefox-looking-glass-controversy/
Some times installing addons without permission to promote TV Shows: https://gizmodo.com/mozilla-slipped-a-mr-robot-promo-plugin-...
They last 5-6 years, Mozilla has made a number of baffling decisions. And most of their advancements just seem to be very 'me too, me too!' as they chase design decisions made by Google.
Putting ads in the address bar: https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/7/22715179/firefox-suggest-...
Recording what you type in the address bar: https://today.in-24.com/technology/450296.html
Putting ads on the New Tab Page: https://www.ghacks.net/2018/12/31/firefox-with-ads-on-new-ta...
Randomly installing Addons for people: https://itsfoss.com/firefox-looking-glass-controversy/
Some times installing addons without permission to promote TV Shows: https://gizmodo.com/mozilla-slipped-a-mr-robot-promo-plugin-...
They last 5-6 years, Mozilla has made a number of baffling decisions. And most of their advancements just seem to be very 'me too, me too!' as they chase design decisions made by Google.
These are valid complaints; frankly Mozilla hasn't been the steward that I would like for them to be, but I really struggle to understand how these are enough to make someone switch to Chrome. They're all things that make FireFox less better, but surely not worse?
The auto-installed addons thing was a bit of a fiasco (though one which didn't affect me), but things like advertising or extension support are still worlds better in FireFox than on Chrome.
The auto-installed addons thing was a bit of a fiasco (though one which didn't affect me), but things like advertising or extension support are still worlds better in FireFox than on Chrome.
Yeah, I have the same feeling. Chrome feels like a carefully planned campaign of tricks to enter every aspect of your life and make it controlled by Google. Facebook feels like a browser with occasional frantic episodes of random folks having an idea "let's make money on $this" (where $this is so stupid you can't believe it), and the usually it disappears and another person has another equally brilliant idea. Not ideal, but I can live with that, it doesn't even come close to what Google is doing. And each year they go further.
oh i'm not switching to Chrome. FF is still my main driver.
but boy has it made Brave more attractive.
I just feel like Mozilla has a very "Democratic Party" attitude. They do really stupid shit that no one likes and stares you square in the eye and says "what are you gonna do about it - vote for the other guy?" and it's super frustrating.
but boy has it made Brave more attractive.
I just feel like Mozilla has a very "Democratic Party" attitude. They do really stupid shit that no one likes and stares you square in the eye and says "what are you gonna do about it - vote for the other guy?" and it's super frustrating.
Don't forget firing the Servo team and cutting funding / support to MDN while execs. and middle management got a pay rise..
You can turn off all this nonsense. Most of these mis-steps have been mitigated.
Never going back to Chrome - even though I'm forced to use Google apps @ work, and it has noted incompatibilities with FF.
Never going back to Chrome - even though I'm forced to use Google apps @ work, and it has noted incompatibilities with FF.
Firefox's greatest fault is Mozilla. They reinvent the UI every couple years, and seem hell-bent on stripping away power-user features.
They also managed to ruin their privacy-oriented Firefox focus browser on mobile, by making it redirect website links to compatible apps - completely butchering its only use case as a private browser that lets you be online without any permanent sessions
They also managed to ruin their privacy-oriented Firefox focus browser on mobile, by making it redirect website links to compatible apps - completely butchering its only use case as a private browser that lets you be online without any permanent sessions
>by making it redirect website links to compatible apps
You can turn this off
You can turn this off
Perhaps they updated it since, but this wasn't the case on focus two or three months ago. After a lot of googling, I could find other people mentionining the same issue but no solution.
Ultimately I rolled back my installation to a previous build, and have refused to update it since. I'll give the latest build a try on my backup phone.
Ultimately I rolled back my installation to a previous build, and have refused to update it since. I'll give the latest build a try on my backup phone.
> i just don't see the point, from a consumer perspective, in all the major players fighting over who's version of Chromium is the most preferred
I imagine the telemetry is extremely important. Knowing every activity done by every user is valuable to Google, or Microsoft, or whoever gets the chrome feed. Of course this is why I like brave, FireFox, safari and others as there is no similar telemetry.
I imagine the telemetry is extremely important. Knowing every activity done by every user is valuable to Google, or Microsoft, or whoever gets the chrome feed. Of course this is why I like brave, FireFox, safari and others as there is no similar telemetry.
Nice thing about Firefox:
about:telemetry
Full details on what is sent to Mozilla, how it's used, and easy to understand.
Additionally, if you don't like what's being sent, you're still able to disable telemetry.
about:telemetry
Full details on what is sent to Mozilla, how it's used, and easy to understand.
Additionally, if you don't like what's being sent, you're still able to disable telemetry.
Microsoft controls the OS, they already can track activity of any userland program, can't they?
I suppose they can, but that would be a new low to inspect the memory of their competitors processes to monitor traffic. With most chrome traffic SSL, I don’t think they could tell much from the network traffic.
If Microsoft started doing this, it would be a lot of negative attention. Whereas Chrome users haven’t cared about logging stuff for years now.
If Microsoft started doing this, it would be a lot of negative attention. Whereas Chrome users haven’t cared about logging stuff for years now.
>With most chrome traffic SSL, I don’t think they could tell much from the network traffic.
It's encrypted in transit, but it has to be decrypted to be meaningful to the end user and that's where they can eavesdrop, the kernel has full access to user memory and all syscalls, no?
>If Microsoft started doing this, it would be a lot of negative attention
They have a proprietary closed source kernel which can be reverse engineered by very few people outside Microsoft, I think putting a little backdoor there would be less noticeable than showing a message box to every user.
It's encrypted in transit, but it has to be decrypted to be meaningful to the end user and that's where they can eavesdrop, the kernel has full access to user memory and all syscalls, no?
>If Microsoft started doing this, it would be a lot of negative attention
They have a proprietary closed source kernel which can be reverse engineered by very few people outside Microsoft, I think putting a little backdoor there would be less noticeable than showing a message box to every user.
The substantial difference that I experience is that it is incapable of utilizing hardware acceleration for youtube videos using an nvidia graphics card in a linux environment, and that I don't get tab-to-complete search in the bar.
Seems more useful than Chromes search bar which has tab-to-go-to-google-search-and-generate-ad-revenue. At least Firefox has down-to-find-what-I-actually-want-from-my-bookmarks-and-history.
"You shouldn't want that thing that you want."
No.
If I type eba{Tab}query, firefox should search ebay for query. If I have to go to settings once and tick a box to enable this functionality, I will. I won't stop wanting what I want.
No.
If I type eba{Tab}query, firefox should search ebay for query. If I have to go to settings once and tick a box to enable this functionality, I will. I won't stop wanting what I want.
I don't understand, Firefox has this functionality. For example I have it set up so if I type 'y cats' it will search Youtube directly for cats. You can do the same with ebay. Similarly if I type 'yout<tab>cats' it will do the same search. Also, if you like it so much, you can configure Firefox to not put things like bookmarks and history before search results in tab-complete search suggestions. Firefox's address bar is strictly superior as far as I can see. The only thing it's missing vs Chrome is dark patterns.
Firefox search bar is so much superior to other browsers, I don't understand why almost no one points this out. Chrome is so frustrating when it keeps prioritizing search suggestions over history.
1. In Firefox settings, tick "When using the address bar, suggest: Search engines".
2. Find an eBay search engine you like, install it in Firefox.
Now, when you type eba{Tab} Firefox will suggest the search engine you installed, and your continued typing will be as a search in that engine.
I don't use this for eBay, but I do use it for Rust, typing e.g. rust{tab}iterator takes me to the documentation for std::iterator and related entries.
2. Find an eBay search engine you like, install it in Firefox.
Now, when you type eba{Tab} Firefox will suggest the search engine you installed, and your continued typing will be as a search in that engine.
I don't use this for eBay, but I do use it for Rust, typing e.g. rust{tab}iterator takes me to the documentation for std::iterator and related entries.
> Firefox, for all it's modern faults, is the only browser that's actually different in any substantial way.
...Because apparently Safari no longer exists...?
...Because apparently Safari no longer exists...?
And where can I download the current build of Safari for Windows?
They didn't say anything about "...for Windows." They said the only browser.
The topic is about windows 11 and Edge and the discussion continued on alternative that are not chromium based ... for Windows, since this is the topic.
Where does Safari fit in here?
Where does Safari fit in here?
that safari isnt available necessarily puts it into the group of "not different" browsers because of how it's restricted by apple. not knocking it because i really enjoy mobile safari, but it's not different, at least not in ethos.
What use are releases from 2015 today? Or are you just trolling?
Apple fanboys are generally serious, even if they always sound as if they're trolling
I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but I don't think .dmg files do much good on Windows.
> Firefox, for all it's modern faults, is the only browser that's actually different in any substantial way.
as a casual reader, I know this is false.. several HUGE efforts, have failed to gain the eyeballs of readers . repeating that there is only one choice, is not useful or constructive right?
as a casual reader, I know this is false.. several HUGE efforts, have failed to gain the eyeballs of readers . repeating that there is only one choice, is not useful or constructive right?
Which efforts would that be?
Pretty much every other browser is based on Chromium. Some very niche ones on webkit.
Pretty much every other browser is based on Chromium. Some very niche ones on webkit.
I don't think that Otter Browser is based on Chromium.
Orion Browser is proudly based on WebKit.
Maybe those efforts were not as huge as you think they were? I also don't know what you're referring to. I'm not a FF fanboy or anything like that, but I have made my choice and I'm sticking to it so I can divert my mental energy towards other more productive areas.
How many alternative browsers can you name that are not mere forks of Blink or Webkit?
maybe people will look at alternatives:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_browsers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_browsers
> Firefox, for all it's modern faults, is the only browser that's actually different in any substantial way.
That's the thing. I don't WANT a browser that's actually different. The web is a duopoly between Apple and Google, and everything else is a second-class citizen. The era of an "open" web came and went, passing us by as capitalism took over. Firefox offers no meaningful freedom when all the content it's supposed to consume was designed by and for big companies targeting other big companies' products and customers.
Using Firefox introduces a lot of headaches and subjects you to frequent, meaningless UI updates that add partner extensions against your will and show you recommendations that I don't want to see... Mozilla is desperately trying to stay relevant and has introduced a lot more dark patterns than Chrome has, all while adding no value beyond some vague, lackluster appeal to a libre web... too little, too late.
Google, for all its faults, makes a darn good browser. The only downside is that they track my habits. So what? I'm not particularly exciting, and the only real cost I've noticed, beyond needing an ad blocker, is that my Google News feed gets cluttered with shit I don't care about derived from my browsing history. But other than that Chrome is just wonderfully simple and clean compared to the bloated Firefox (and its lookalike clones, Opera and Edge).
That's the thing. I don't WANT a browser that's actually different. The web is a duopoly between Apple and Google, and everything else is a second-class citizen. The era of an "open" web came and went, passing us by as capitalism took over. Firefox offers no meaningful freedom when all the content it's supposed to consume was designed by and for big companies targeting other big companies' products and customers.
Using Firefox introduces a lot of headaches and subjects you to frequent, meaningless UI updates that add partner extensions against your will and show you recommendations that I don't want to see... Mozilla is desperately trying to stay relevant and has introduced a lot more dark patterns than Chrome has, all while adding no value beyond some vague, lackluster appeal to a libre web... too little, too late.
Google, for all its faults, makes a darn good browser. The only downside is that they track my habits. So what? I'm not particularly exciting, and the only real cost I've noticed, beyond needing an ad blocker, is that my Google News feed gets cluttered with shit I don't care about derived from my browsing history. But other than that Chrome is just wonderfully simple and clean compared to the bloated Firefox (and its lookalike clones, Opera and Edge).
This comment reads like you've never lived through a browser monopoly. Sure it's great now, but do you think Google will work as hard and dedicate as much budget if there are two or even worse - just one - viable browser?
Frankly I do miss the IE6 days, when everything just mostly worked. NetCaptor, an IE-based browser using Trident to render pages, had its own ad blocker, tabbed browsing, quicksearch, etc. -- most of the best features of Chrome -- without all the compatibility issues of the browser wars.
Disabling ActiveX and Java (not Javascript) and having Just One Browser made for a remarkably clean and simple experience, the likes of which we haven't seen since.
For all the modern innovations, I don't think the fundamental premise of the web has changed all that much -- hyperlinks, text, and media -- but the user and developer experience has gotten a lot, lot worse over time as more and more money competed for eyeballs.
Edit: As for "work as hard and dedicate as much budget"... I hope they don't! A circa-2000s feature freeze on web browsers would be wonderful. Stop "innovating", i.e., creating trash features that only help huge enterprises selling trash advertising. The web doesn't need to be this complex; we're feature-rich and content-poor as it is. What started as a network for academics and info sharing ended up being a marketer's wet dream and a nightmare for everyone else.
Disabling ActiveX and Java (not Javascript) and having Just One Browser made for a remarkably clean and simple experience, the likes of which we haven't seen since.
For all the modern innovations, I don't think the fundamental premise of the web has changed all that much -- hyperlinks, text, and media -- but the user and developer experience has gotten a lot, lot worse over time as more and more money competed for eyeballs.
Edit: As for "work as hard and dedicate as much budget"... I hope they don't! A circa-2000s feature freeze on web browsers would be wonderful. Stop "innovating", i.e., creating trash features that only help huge enterprises selling trash advertising. The web doesn't need to be this complex; we're feature-rich and content-poor as it is. What started as a network for academics and info sharing ended up being a marketer's wet dream and a nightmare for everyone else.
Sometimes I wish the pace of change would drop way, way back for a few years. If the main browser developers were to all agree to an X year ceasefire where no new features are introduced - only bug fixes and standards clarifications are allowed - I don't necessarily think it would be all that bad for users or developers.
I lived through the tail-end of the Internet Explorer monopoly, and tried to push Firefox with those willing to try it. I don't want an IE 2021 in the form of Chrome with a broken web for other clients.
We wouldn't have that problem if Gecko and Webkit went away and everything was Blink.
If that happened five years ago, everything would be Amp and PNaCl. The diverse ecosystem keeps the Chrome engineers in check.
With < 5% marketshare? It was probably more the publisher (news companies) and marketplace revolts (Facebook) that checked Google, not Mozilla.
I totally agree. Chrome is busy fucking most web standard
> Mozilla ... has introduced a lot more dark patterns than Chrome has
What are you referring to?
What are you referring to?
Stuff like this (not my post): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29416956
I just remember that every time I reopen Firefox (to test it for something), some new annoying thing like Pocket or some other trendy extension I didn't ask for has suddenly appeared. And it's always bugging me with CHECK OUT WHAT WE ADDED popups. I don't CARE about your new features, just let me browse the web and stay outta the way, damn it.
I just remember that every time I reopen Firefox (to test it for something), some new annoying thing like Pocket or some other trendy extension I didn't ask for has suddenly appeared. And it's always bugging me with CHECK OUT WHAT WE ADDED popups. I don't CARE about your new features, just let me browse the web and stay outta the way, damn it.
All of this combined is still less "dark" than Chrome automatically combining Chrome logins with standard Google accounts, and logging you into the browser account whenever you log into your Google account.
To say nothing of things like FLoC, new web APIs that just so happen to be excellent ways to track you, neutering ad blockers, AMP integration, and so on.
To say nothing of things like FLoC, new web APIs that just so happen to be excellent ways to track you, neutering ad blockers, AMP integration, and so on.
> All of this combined is still less "dark" than Chrome automatically combining Chrome logins with standard Google accounts, and logging you into the browser account whenever you log into your Google account.
I actually find that a very useful feature that keeps my settings and logins in sync across multiple computers and accounts.
> To say nothing of things like FLoC, new web APIs that just so happen to be excellent ways to track you
Still falls into the "it just tracks you" category... basically the only major downfall, which isn't a big deal to me. Everyone tracks you these days, and mostly an adblocker negates the effects.
> AMP integration
Yeah, AMP and its ilk (FB Lightning pages, etc.) were good ideas evilly implemented. Good thing AMP is on its way out.
> neutering ad blockers
That would be a big deal if and when it comes to pass (seemingly soon, perhaps?)
The thing is, aside from the ad blockers, most of those supposed downsides have had little to no impact on my user experience, vs the constant hassling of Firefox. I get annoyed every time I open Firefox. Chrome just works and actively makes my life easier with its syncing and auto logins. To you those may be downsides, to me they are helpful and unobtrusive.
I actually find that a very useful feature that keeps my settings and logins in sync across multiple computers and accounts.
> To say nothing of things like FLoC, new web APIs that just so happen to be excellent ways to track you
Still falls into the "it just tracks you" category... basically the only major downfall, which isn't a big deal to me. Everyone tracks you these days, and mostly an adblocker negates the effects.
> AMP integration
Yeah, AMP and its ilk (FB Lightning pages, etc.) were good ideas evilly implemented. Good thing AMP is on its way out.
> neutering ad blockers
That would be a big deal if and when it comes to pass (seemingly soon, perhaps?)
The thing is, aside from the ad blockers, most of those supposed downsides have had little to no impact on my user experience, vs the constant hassling of Firefox. I get annoyed every time I open Firefox. Chrome just works and actively makes my life easier with its syncing and auto logins. To you those may be downsides, to me they are helpful and unobtrusive.
A dark pattern is trying to trick the user, with hard to find close, boxes, pre-checked subscriptions, or other misleading user interface patterns. Looking through your linked comment, I don't see any examples of these? Details:
The first point there is changing the API for their add-ons, which they did for performance, maintainability, and security reasons. No dark pattern there.
On Firefox Suggest (points 2 and 3), are you saying it is a dark pattern because their messaging when you enable the feature is not clear about what's happening? What's wrong with the messaging and how would you like it to be better?
With ads on the new tab page, I don't see what is a dark pattern about it? Or are you just saying that you don't like ads and wish Firefox would find another source of revenue?
With the Mr. Robot extension (points 5 and 6), I think it was a dumb choice, but again I don't see how it's a dark pattern?
The first point there is changing the API for their add-ons, which they did for performance, maintainability, and security reasons. No dark pattern there.
On Firefox Suggest (points 2 and 3), are you saying it is a dark pattern because their messaging when you enable the feature is not clear about what's happening? What's wrong with the messaging and how would you like it to be better?
With ads on the new tab page, I don't see what is a dark pattern about it? Or are you just saying that you don't like ads and wish Firefox would find another source of revenue?
With the Mr. Robot extension (points 5 and 6), I think it was a dumb choice, but again I don't see how it's a dark pattern?
I'd argue that presenting partner extensions as though they were a user-friendly feature is a dark pattern in and of itself. "Check out this shiny new feature you'll love!" Oh wait, it's just more Firefox spam. Stop wasting my time.
If the semantics bother you, feel free to call it something else... an anti-feature, perhaps.
Every time I open Firefox it's different, and annoying in some new way. It's really gone downhill in the last decade.
If the semantics bother you, feel free to call it something else... an anti-feature, perhaps.
Every time I open Firefox it's different, and annoying in some new way. It's really gone downhill in the last decade.
That's not a dark pattern, it's just obnoxious advertising garbage. Which is still bad, but a different thing.
FWIW this is also one of my least favorite things about FF. What the fuck is the point of unobtrusive background auto-updating if you're also going to annoy me with ads every single time you do it?
FWIW this is also one of my least favorite things about FF. What the fuck is the point of unobtrusive background auto-updating if you're also going to annoy me with ads every single time you do it?
YMMV, but people talk about these ads firefox is throwing around and I just don't see them. Did I accidentally turn a knob or something and it's just carried with me through years of Firefox Sync'ing?
Yeah, there are a bunch of ways to turn them off if you're a frequent user. But as a fresh install, you get bombarded with all sorts of useless recommendations and ads. It reminds me of the MSN start page.
I see the fresh installs often because I only use Firefox to test occasional browser bugs (it's always Firefox), and then delete it a few weeks later when I no longer need it, then reinstall it later when I need to test it again. Every time it gets more annoying.
I see the fresh installs often because I only use Firefox to test occasional browser bugs (it's always Firefox), and then delete it a few weeks later when I no longer need it, then reinstall it later when I need to test it again. Every time it gets more annoying.
Most updates at least open and focus a tab about what updated. I'm not sure I've ever cared what it said or needed to know any of the info on those, in years of that happening. Some updates also like to pop up messages or bug me to use crap like Pocket or their revolutionary (LOL) new color theming. Possibly there's a way to stop it, but I only use FF on my Windows gaming machine these days, so it's not a big deal.
> unobtrusive background auto-updating
On that same point, whenever something starts failing to work on firefox (on Windows or Linux), I have come realize that it's probably an "unobtrusive auto-update" that is causing it. Sure enough, closing and restarting firefox gives me a new tab showing what was just "unobtrusively auto-updated", and whatever was broken is now working again.
I don't think they know what "unobtrusive" means.
Having said that, even with the previous complaints it's still much better than the privacy problems with chrome, at least in my opinion.
On that same point, whenever something starts failing to work on firefox (on Windows or Linux), I have come realize that it's probably an "unobtrusive auto-update" that is causing it. Sure enough, closing and restarting firefox gives me a new tab showing what was just "unobtrusively auto-updated", and whatever was broken is now working again.
I don't think they know what "unobtrusive" means.
Having said that, even with the previous complaints it's still much better than the privacy problems with chrome, at least in my opinion.
My biggest gripe with Chrome isn’t so much its tracking (though that’s not great either) but rather that for Google, efficiency is a ghost of an afterthought and all engineer time goes into pumping out shiny new web features to woo devs.
Only OS maintainers seem to give two hoots about efficiency… Google and Mozilla see no issue with turning your laptop into a battery destroying space heater, and the impact of Google’s part in this is outsize with every other app being built with Electron.
Only OS maintainers seem to give two hoots about efficiency… Google and Mozilla see no issue with turning your laptop into a battery destroying space heater, and the impact of Google’s part in this is outsize with every other app being built with Electron.
Is this really still an issue? Even Chromebooks, ironically, have long enough battery lives for daily use. Phones seem to work OK. Despite inefficiencies, the hardware is still miles ahead of the of average user's software needs these days.
Windows releases always alternates between horrible and good enough. 11 will fester on some machines for a while like 8, Vista and ME did. Enterprise will stick to 10, and anyone who cares enough to fight dark patterns every time Windows update runs. 12 will likely be good enough for everyone to upgrade. 14 (they'll skip #13) will be garbo, 15 will be ok. Sun goes up, sun goes down.
Windows 10 was a horrible release. With the passage of time, it has become just about usable (although not really in my opinion). When it came out, though, it had an immense amount of bloatware (candy crush), idiotic auto-updating, sample-your-DNA levels of spyware, Cortana rubbish, identical settings in two places, and a whole host of other unpleasantness. All for what, the dark theme? I fucking despised Windows 10. This myth of alternate-releases-good died with Windows 10. Heck, Windows 8.1, with it's full screen start menu, was still a better release in my opinion.
IMO Vista was better than people give it credit for. ME and 8 were the truly bad releases (I used both, ME is super unstable and 8’s UI is a total mess).
Vista was fine except for all the OEMs installing it on $300 Office Depot shitboxes. I still miss being able to have My Computer as a menu across the top of my desktop.
Vista ran positively well on decent hardware.
On a relatively recent (at the time) processor and ideally more than 1GB of RAM and it was absolutely fine.
It's reputation for instability was heavily due to early NVIDIA WDDM drivers being utterly crashtastic - this is something that did eventually get resolved. At the time I had an ATI card and it was perfectly stable.
On a relatively recent (at the time) processor and ideally more than 1GB of RAM and it was absolutely fine.
It's reputation for instability was heavily due to early NVIDIA WDDM drivers being utterly crashtastic - this is something that did eventually get resolved. At the time I had an ATI card and it was perfectly stable.
It was teeth-grindingly bad even on 2GB of RAM.
No, it wasn't. At least in my experience, Vista with 2 GB of RAM was dog slow on a mechanical hard drive. So slow, that I eventually replaced it with Linux and got my start into Linux in the first place.
If you could ignore the UI, 8 was actually a great OS underneath...which is why 8.1 was pretty solid, they fixed the UI
Re: Candy Crush - technically, those icons on the start menu were served up via XML tile specifications, and it wasn't installed until you clicked.
Source: Over the years, an app I had my hand in was on one of the rotations.
Source: Over the years, an app I had my hand in was on one of the rotations.
Doesn't matter. It'd be one thing if I was talking about some cheap Chinese Android phone, but I'm not. It's Windows. It's supposed to be the pinnacle of Microsoft. If not, atleast something with a modicum of integrity. But seems Microsoft disagrees with that.
I don't care how they technically implement the icons. It's my start menu, and not their billboard. If they want ad space, they better set up a monthly payment to my account.
My experience with 11 is that is just like 10 but with bad UI changes. 11 is stable and runs everything I need.
I think 11 is more about changing hardware requirements, requiring a TPM. The UI garbage seems more like an opportunity to try new things, they'll figure out that people don't like these new things.
I think 11 is more about changing hardware requirements, requiring a TPM. The UI garbage seems more like an opportunity to try new things, they'll figure out that people don't like these new things.
> people don't like these new things
I personally don't like the lack of old things. Namely being able to drag to the taskbar. That's baked into a lot of my workflows, and I can't believe they removed such a useful feature.
I personally don't like the lack of old things. Namely being able to drag to the taskbar. That's baked into a lot of my workflows, and I can't believe they removed such a useful feature.
IMO it all went down the toilet with 10 and I don't see the next "good" release ever happening again.
8 and 8.1 were the last death throes of decent design, and then they started making a mess of everything in Windows 10. Not only didn't they reverse it with Windows 11, they doubled down on it when they had a perfect chance to rebrand with a "back to the classics" comeback to Windows 7-like UI without backlash.
Their trajectory is locked in. Barring a miracle and re-prioritising on their users, "good" Windows releases are dead forever. Looking forward to the LGR Retrospective on "Windows 7, the last good version of Windows" in about 10 years time.
8 and 8.1 were the last death throes of decent design, and then they started making a mess of everything in Windows 10. Not only didn't they reverse it with Windows 11, they doubled down on it when they had a perfect chance to rebrand with a "back to the classics" comeback to Windows 7-like UI without backlash.
Their trajectory is locked in. Barring a miracle and re-prioritising on their users, "good" Windows releases are dead forever. Looking forward to the LGR Retrospective on "Windows 7, the last good version of Windows" in about 10 years time.
I'm convinced there's an alternate universe where Windows 9 brought all the improvements of Windows 10 without treating the user like a contemptible moron.
I'm struggling to think of any improvements since Win7. The only thing that might qualify is WSL, but that's still experimental and buggy (yes, I know some people have had success with it, anyway).
IIRC Win7 was the one that started installing most drivers without any user effort, which was really nice. It also bloated minimum disk size to many times that of XP (or a very full-fat Linux install, so the drivers can't be the reason, since that also includes tons of drivers) but if you had the space, it was worth the trade-off.
IIRC Win7 was the one that started installing most drivers without any user effort, which was really nice. It also bloated minimum disk size to many times that of XP (or a very full-fat Linux install, so the drivers can't be the reason, since that also includes tons of drivers) but if you had the space, it was worth the trade-off.
Amen. I'm pretty sure 7 is the last Windows ill ever feel happy about installing.
I think that it's really sad that I will mostly agree with you.
Yeah, I think actually 11 is just a testing ground for 12.
Exactly. Like Vista was laying the table for 7.
It just occurred to me that I avoided Vista entirely by buying a Mac in 2007 (before moving back to Windows for Win7), and in 2020 I bought another Mac, which will allow me to avoid Windows 11.
Talk about timing...
Talk about timing...
Outside of requiring a newer PC I don't think Win11 is a trainwreck at all, I was auto-upgraded to it a few weeks ago and it's been fine. Auto HDR is neat for games and there's been a UI refresh, other than that it's basically Windows 10.
> I was auto-upgraded to it a few weeks ago
The train wreck starts there. Who wants a system that auto upgrades itself without the user permission?
The train wreck starts there. Who wants a system that auto upgrades itself without the user permission?
That, and most of the rest of the parent comment, made me believe the post was a joke.
This has certainly NOT been my experience. Windows 11 update is sitting in the download queue with it asking/trying to sell the update to me for a while.
I want auto updates for security patches, please.
Good for you, there should be a checkbox so I don't have to suffer for your preferences.
I agree with parent, most non-technical people don't want to be system admin for their OS, so MS taking over is not really a bad deal. All my computers are IT managed and I have never had any update issues, so maybe there is some special sauce there via group policy. I have instructed them to section off my work PCs so they never update unless I tell them to, and it works. I get months and months of uptime till I take the reboot hit and do the updates.
The special sauce is probably WSUS, which allows them to control the update process for everyone and determine which updates they get and which they don't. Additionally, the WSUS channel for updates is behind Microsoft's normal updates, which allows for them to prevent problematic updates from reaching WSUS servers in the first place. Of course, home users get none of this.
I personally believe it is arrogance to say that non-technical users shouldn't be allowed to control their own PCs. And besides, a lot of users of PCs at home are technical. So I strenuously disagree with you.
I personally believe it is arrogance to say that non-technical users shouldn't be allowed to control their own PCs. And besides, a lot of users of PCs at home are technical. So I strenuously disagree with you.
Your arguing against something I didn't say. You can disagree with me, but you can't put words in my mouth. I didn't say or imply "shouldn't be allowed" or anything similar.
Since my comment was along the lines of "people should get a choice", if you did not intend to argue against that then one wonders what the point of your post was.
I mean, look at your language: "MS taking over is really not a big deal". How am I supposed to have interpreted that?
I mean, look at your language: "MS taking over is really not a big deal". How am I supposed to have interpreted that?
There is, just turn off Windows Updates.
It isn't so straight forward if you aren't in the know on special tooling like O&O ShutUp 10 to accomplish it for you. Even then it'll get reset after updating and you'll have to fix it again. There is no "don't ever update unless I tell you to" checkbox, there is only the option to pause them for a limited time.
Windows is actively user hostile when it comes to updates.
Windows is actively user hostile when it comes to updates.
Use Windows Pro and Group Policy Editor. There isn't a checkbox there but a radio box that allows you to configure update behaviour in detail. Never had an issue with it during all upgrades.
And if Windows Home users should be able to disable automatic updates is debatable.
And if Windows Home users should be able to disable automatic updates is debatable.
[deleted]
I don't think it is debatable. Users should have control over their own computers.
Ubuntu update notification allows the user to optionally see details of updates: https://www.addictivetips.com/app/uploads/2021/01/ubuntu-upd...
From there you can see what is being update and what the update does. You can even choose not to install one update or another or even not update a system component or another.
So, if you're afraid a new LO version may break compatibility with documents you work on but GNOME updates will improve usability, you can disable one specific update. Very simple and user friendly. For users who don't know, understand or don't care, they will simply click update.
Canonical is also planning to use snaps for some desktop or core components so they can have security updates automatically installed in the background. This is a somewhat polemic topic, but I understand their rationale: some people simply choose never to update because they have been burned by bad past experiences. Of course, the more advanced user can still disable it.
From there you can see what is being update and what the update does. You can even choose not to install one update or another or even not update a system component or another.
So, if you're afraid a new LO version may break compatibility with documents you work on but GNOME updates will improve usability, you can disable one specific update. Very simple and user friendly. For users who don't know, understand or don't care, they will simply click update.
Canonical is also planning to use snaps for some desktop or core components so they can have security updates automatically installed in the background. This is a somewhat polemic topic, but I understand their rationale: some people simply choose never to update because they have been burned by bad past experiences. Of course, the more advanced user can still disable it.
Security patches != system upgrade = broken of existing installations and reset any custom configurations
It did offer user permission, it was an icon in my taskbar that prompted for it. I didn't go out of my way to do it though.
Technically that's a flaw of Windows 10, maybe they fixed it in 11 :)
"requiring a newer PC" is a bit of an understatement - Windows 11 is the first version that will actively refuse to run unless the hardware meets its "compatibility" requirements, and from what I heard, it's quite picky...
Older Windows versions required a particular amount of RAM to install, which was a check that could be disabled from the install media. That said, I do agree that Windows 11 is on a new level when it comes to this.
There are pretty easy to use workarounds -such as rufus, though that may change.
I used the rufus work-around to install it, and I'm nervous that it'll die after an update for that reason.
Aside from that, and a couple of UI annoyances (the placement of the start button and the re-arrangement of the start menu) I'm happy enough with Windows 11 that it will be a bummer for me if I have to go back.
For me it's little things like the way the context menu is cleaned up -but the old one is still available, and the file manager is similarly cleaned up. I also like that WSL is better than it was on Windows 10 (running gui apps are now an option without grafting a separate and half-assed X implementation ).
So yeah, I'd say "trainwreck" is a hyperbole -especially for anyone who had to use Windows 8!
Aside from that, and a couple of UI annoyances (the placement of the start button and the re-arrangement of the start menu) I'm happy enough with Windows 11 that it will be a bummer for me if I have to go back.
For me it's little things like the way the context menu is cleaned up -but the old one is still available, and the file manager is similarly cleaned up. I also like that WSL is better than it was on Windows 10 (running gui apps are now an option without grafting a separate and half-assed X implementation ).
So yeah, I'd say "trainwreck" is a hyperbole -especially for anyone who had to use Windows 8!
Win11 is a wreck just because they effectively made it non-installable on 5 out of 6 PCs.
Prime majority of users don't upgrade BIOS, or don't even know what it is.
11 will be a short lived release just because of that, and them not only needing to backpedal, but to entice users into biting into a new bait, as all what is actually good in Win11 been kind of mentally displaced by the fiasco.
A supposedly sucks less Win11.1 will not do it to attract more users. A completely new release is coming.
Prime majority of users don't upgrade BIOS, or don't even know what it is.
11 will be a short lived release just because of that, and them not only needing to backpedal, but to entice users into biting into a new bait, as all what is actually good in Win11 been kind of mentally displaced by the fiasco.
A supposedly sucks less Win11.1 will not do it to attract more users. A completely new release is coming.
While my laptop definitely got more unstable after being upgraded (might be better with a clean install), I could never put it on my actual gaming machine, because I play VR and right now it is a coin flip if VR just won't work for you at all.
> it's basically Windows 10.
It's crippled compared to Win10.
It's crippled compared to Win10.
Every windows since 7 has been a train wreck by my standards. The amount of times I've had a system update just clear my windows profile is objectively abysmal and yet every HN thread someone will go and defend them.
No one cares about HDR. How about some decent data retention?
I get better frame rates in Linux running wine than I do in windows 10 since the 2020 updates.
No one cares about HDR. How about some decent data retention?
I get better frame rates in Linux running wine than I do in windows 10 since the 2020 updates.
What the hell are you doing with your Windows profiles. I've admin'd many Windows machines and have a Windows install AND a VM windows install and have literally never had a problem with windows profile. Have you at least attempted to debug the issue, or can you point to a issue report you have filed?
This is someone who uses linux for 99.99% of all computing things, so its not like I'm a Windows shill
This is someone who uses linux for 99.99% of all computing things, so its not like I'm a Windows shill
They might mean things like having all their file type associations wiped out because feature updates insist on doing that, rather than literally having their profile destroyed.
Then again, I've seen Windows do weirder things.
Then again, I've seen Windows do weirder things.
Both.
Provide issue links
Here you go:
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/update...
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/update...
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/window...
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/window...
and numerous others.
Why does it happen? I have no idea, and probably Microsoft doesn't either. Nevertheless, it means the update process is broken. After such a case you may feel like you have the alternative of either running unsecure system or losing your data, so you may even consider the first option. Except you can't unless you pay for the Enterprise version.
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/update...
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/update...
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/window...
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/window...
and numerous others.
Why does it happen? I have no idea, and probably Microsoft doesn't either. Nevertheless, it means the update process is broken. After such a case you may feel like you have the alternative of either running unsecure system or losing your data, so you may even consider the first option. Except you can't unless you pay for the Enterprise version.
I just accept that 10 is buggy at this point and have no desire for an even buggier/jankier 11.
Current bugs: - every MS app store app has the windows image preview program icon, despite following every guide I could find to fix this.
- sometimes WiFi just dies, and won't come back until I disable the card, full reboot, then enable it (Intel 6 chipset AFAIK, so not some noname brand)
- explorer randomly dies when switching virtual desktops and then comes back. I've had this one 3 machines now and I've no clue why.
Current bugs: - every MS app store app has the windows image preview program icon, despite following every guide I could find to fix this.
- sometimes WiFi just dies, and won't come back until I disable the card, full reboot, then enable it (Intel 6 chipset AFAIK, so not some noname brand)
- explorer randomly dies when switching virtual desktops and then comes back. I've had this one 3 machines now and I've no clue why.
>- explorer randomly dies when switching virtual desktops and then comes back. I've had this one 3 machines now and I've no clue why.
Were you using an Nvidia graphics card and did you right click on the left box of explorer where the quick access toolbar is? This is a common issue with Nvidias context menu in that situation.
Were you using an Nvidia graphics card and did you right click on the left box of explorer where the quick access toolbar is? This is a common issue with Nvidias context menu in that situation.
Nvidia card....not sure about the rest, this has happened with the shortcuts at least.
it's a longstanding problem with the NVidia CPL Context Menu Extension.
Filing an issue report? Against Windows? Are you joking?
Unfortunately true. Microsoft support these days, even the paid support, is a complete trainwreck. We had cause to open 2 separate tickets for two separate issues lately. One of them was clearly a bug, has a community forum issue about it with oodles of data provided, and nearly a month in to the ticket I'm still getting 'try this configuration' style bullshit from some low-level tech. I would expect that for free, but for paid support?
The other issue is being handled by the DBA but it sounds like he's getting a similar treatment.
The other issue is being handled by the DBA but it sounds like he's getting a similar treatment.
In my previous job, I have seen windows support cases escalated to somebody who know how to do kernel debugging.
I have no idea how much did that cost, but this level of support does exist.
Run two upgrades in a row..see how it goes for you. I ran insider edition for years and that's a pretty common scenario when doing updates. And that's not even the legit bugs that have occured as well.
I've done this for dozens of computers. I have not seen this issue.
Not saying that there aren’t issues, but the fact that billions of people use Windows and don’t routinely have their profiles wiped out with every update points to a specific issue with your setup; not a systemic Windows problem.
Oy vey. You're objectively incorrect. It's definitely a Microsoft issue. They use the old OS upgrade procedure to do quarterly updates now which means if it finds a Users directory it will rename it to Users.old and make a new one. However if it does two upgrades in a row in the background without telling you the old Users.old will be deleted from your disk.
Now all it would take them is a second to check the sizes of both and not remove the one with actual data but ya know that would be a actual useful feature.
And before you complain about to me about my "setup"... The scenario I described above is entirely common in IT departments the world over.
Now please stop blaming victims and start blaming the people that have the power to change things.
Now all it would take them is a second to check the sizes of both and not remove the one with actual data but ya know that would be a actual useful feature.
And before you complain about to me about my "setup"... The scenario I described above is entirely common in IT departments the world over.
Now please stop blaming victims and start blaming the people that have the power to change things.
citation needed
I just upgraded to Windows 10 21H2 last week, after upgrading to 21H1 a couple weeks ago. I'm looking at my C:\ drive with hidden files viewable and there is no "Users.old" or "Windows.old" folders.
This is on Windows 10 Pro using my personal Microsoft account, but the PC is managed through Intune so I can access corporate resources.
What I'm saying is, to use your own words, "you're objectively incorrect."
I just upgraded to Windows 10 21H2 last week, after upgrading to 21H1 a couple weeks ago. I'm looking at my C:\ drive with hidden files viewable and there is no "Users.old" or "Windows.old" folders.
This is on Windows 10 Pro using my personal Microsoft account, but the PC is managed through Intune so I can access corporate resources.
What I'm saying is, to use your own words, "you're objectively incorrect."
Not every windows update generates them but it is still possible to hit two in a row that do when you update old installs of 10 from 2020 that have precached an incremental update. I'm not writing a research paper here. If you want citations you can put on your research hat and find them yourself.
I've never heard of this -- I've just tried googling and I can't find anything about automatically deleted, or even created, "Users.old" folder (I realise you might not have got the name exactly right).
Sometimes individual user directories get moved if they are corrupted, but they still aren't in my experience deleted.
Sometimes individual user directories get moved if they are corrupted, but they still aren't in my experience deleted.
For large proportions of people a misbehaving operating system is just "how computers work" and it would be like complaining that water is wet.
There’s a huge difference between “I need to reboot to fix some wonky thing” and “all my data gets deleted every time there’s a Windows update”. People would very much notice the latter as being a problem.
People defend Windows because they don't have the same experience as you. I don't either. Windows is a rock solid OS that I use at work and it just works. For instance, the machine I'm typing this on has a 250 day uptime, my second W10 box next to it has a 460 day uptime. I use them every day to get stuff done. I work in biotech, not in s/w dev land, and my computer is IT managed (so maybe they're doing something special). I don't ever fiddle with the OS, registry or whatever and I usually can find a PortableApps option for stuff that I need to use.
You use vastly fewer things than I do on my daily driver. I'm not complaining about stability. I still maintain windows boxes for work and yes I get uptimes measured in years. In fact I used to be a windows fanboy.
The issue is really that the front end experience has gone to shit and that windows boxes are inherently zero day hackable at random. With gaming there's memory leaks out the ass. When doing updates windows regularly ignores and resets settings. Not everyone wants to use defaults and not everyone has time to edit group policy settings every time there's a changes. Your IT team is definitely 100% debloating your system before imaging.
I'm over here coding, running vms, setting up ssh tunnels, streaming, recording video, playing music, doing teleconferencing and all manner of other nonsense. So yes my standards are a little out there.
But frankly I don't think windows should be able to be HIPAA certified because I don't believe it's possible to secure it. And trust me that's my job.
The workers at my job that use Chromebooks are by far the most secure in our entire IT stack.
The issue is really that the front end experience has gone to shit and that windows boxes are inherently zero day hackable at random. With gaming there's memory leaks out the ass. When doing updates windows regularly ignores and resets settings. Not everyone wants to use defaults and not everyone has time to edit group policy settings every time there's a changes. Your IT team is definitely 100% debloating your system before imaging.
I'm over here coding, running vms, setting up ssh tunnels, streaming, recording video, playing music, doing teleconferencing and all manner of other nonsense. So yes my standards are a little out there.
But frankly I don't think windows should be able to be HIPAA certified because I don't believe it's possible to secure it. And trust me that's my job.
The workers at my job that use Chromebooks are by far the most secure in our entire IT stack.
My one guilty pleasure as a Linux user, was using my work laptop that was managed by the IT team. It was the only way I could ever use Windows 10 and describe the experience as "pleasant". I guess the almost complete lack of forced reboots/update installations and stupid junk on the default install contributed to the experience.
I still used a Start Menu replacer. That was one thing I wouldn't want to give up.
I still used a Start Menu replacer. That was one thing I wouldn't want to give up.
I've stopped using VSCode and have started using VSCodium instead. Also, I dropped Chrome and Firefox in favor of Brave. Microsoft and Google both are evil.
You might want to look deeper into Brave, I'm not convinced they're not evil in their own way.
Personally, I'm looking into Vivaldi; though I haven't switched over yet.
Personally, I'm looking into Vivaldi; though I haven't switched over yet.
Edge almost got me to switch to using Windows with WSL. No joke. Windows was looking good with the new WSL2 on the way and a browser that wasn't sucking. Edge was enticing as Firefox has been going downhill for years (still is, and I still can't find a replacement. Vivaldi was close, but is closed source and has some serious UI lag issues on Android). I, an avid opensource user and believer, was considering a switch back (I like gaming too, so that would have been a nice boost to ease of game play). I let time slip before I made the change and well, I'm glad I did. I would have run Windows for about 6 months just to move back after some "updates."
> Who on Earth would continue using a browser that has such hostile behavior and dark patterns all over the place e.g., buy-now-pay-later at browser level?
Almost every single person that I can think of in my life does not give a shit about an edge reminder. The one that does doesn't use Windows anyway.
Hackernew is a unique audience.
Almost every single person that I can think of in my life does not give a shit about an edge reminder. The one that does doesn't use Windows anyway.
Hackernew is a unique audience.
Agreed. Have you tried using google products without a google browser? It's _worse_. Much much more annoying.
I’m waiting for MS to implement an feature where they mirror side-by-side in Edge whatever you are doing in another inferior browser.
Edge isn't a bad browser now, but that's a testament to the underlying Chromium.
It still crashes way too much for me to use as my primary browser, and I only keep it because it is a better PDF reader than Chrome and I've not had time to find a replacement.
It still crashes way too much for me to use as my primary browser, and I only keep it because it is a better PDF reader than Chrome and I've not had time to find a replacement.
Agreed, I don't plan to ever install it.
How is this any different than what google does in google app?
They are both bad.
Phone OSes got/get away with it because they came out of the gate doing it. MS and Apple have been trying to convert their PC OSes into the same thing ever since. They're envious of Chrome OS. "Compatibility", "standards based" and "open platform" used to be badges of honor. In my opinion, MS and Google would be better off sticking to being open, because if everyone is forced to chose between walled gardens, Apple is going to beat them both every single time.
I've been using Firefox as my browser on my Android phone for something like six or seven years now (I guess I'm weird). I don't recall any hard pushes to switch to Chrome. Using a non-Blink browser there is probably rare enough that making people switch isn't worth it.
The websites don't seem to want to support Firefox, so Google definitely isn't blameless, but we should probably at least blame them correctly.
The websites don't seem to want to support Firefox, so Google definitely isn't blameless, but we should probably at least blame them correctly.
Oh snap, I misread the original comment and went off on the wrong rant, they didn't even mention phones :/
I use FF on Android too. Android is better than others. I have Chrome disabled on my phone and there are some things that just won't open without it. It won't let me shut off the "Play Protect" nag every single time I install or update something from F-Droid. I've accidentally turned it on countless times. But it is the least worst of the mainstream mobile OSes.
I use FF on Android too. Android is better than others. I have Chrome disabled on my phone and there are some things that just won't open without it. It won't let me shut off the "Play Protect" nag every single time I install or update something from F-Droid. I've accidentally turned it on countless times. But it is the least worst of the mainstream mobile OSes.
Try the Samsung Internet Browser.. It will give you the benefits of Chromium but with a better user interface.
How so?
Where did they imply it was different?
One was already found guilty of abusing their OS near-monopoly on desktop.
Based on recent Firefox post, HN seems to agree firefox is going down the wrong path and not worth using; but that google and microsoft are evil. They do seem to agree that semicolons are good.
"Microsoft Edge runs on the same technology as Chrome, with the added trust of Microsoft."
They named their user tracking, telemetry, and "Buy Now, Pay Later" add-ons "trust"? That's really Orwellian.
They named their user tracking, telemetry, and "Buy Now, Pay Later" add-ons "trust"? That's really Orwellian.
"WAR IS PEACE"
"FREEDOM IS SLAVERY"
"IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH"
"TRACKING IS SAFETY"
"CHOICE IS DEFAULT"
"FREEDOM IS SLAVERY"
"IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH"
"TRACKING IS SAFETY"
"CHOICE IS DEFAULT"
Literally 1984 /s
But really I feel like people jump to the antiauthoritarian rhetoric really quickly nowadays. I know your making a joke, but damn if I'm not worried we're kind of normalizing the concept
But really I feel like people jump to the antiauthoritarian rhetoric really quickly nowadays. I know your making a joke, but damn if I'm not worried we're kind of normalizing the concept
I'm struggling to understand how that quote could be anything but satire
Google's has been bashed so consistently on privacy issues on mainstream media that non-techies often associate them with creepy data collection.
Microsoft hasn't been in the news as much, at least not regarding privacy matters. They're often seen by the public as the solid company behind trusted products like Office and Windows.
Microsoft hasn't been in the news as much, at least not regarding privacy matters. They're often seen by the public as the solid company behind trusted products like Office and Windows.
> Microsoft hasn't been in the news as much, at least not regarding privacy matters.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12305598
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9976298
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10053352
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10144733
...and many more.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12305598
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9976298
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10053352
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10144733
...and many more.
You're proving my point. The sources you linked are the eff, a techie's personal blog, arstechnica, and forbes. With the exception of forbes they're all tech niches.
Now look at mainstream media. CNN alone has 230K results for google privacy [0]. How many results for microsoft privacy? 16k [1]
[0]: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Acnn.com%20google%20pr...
[1]: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Acnn.com+microsoft+pri...
Now look at mainstream media. CNN alone has 230K results for google privacy [0]. How many results for microsoft privacy? 16k [1]
[0]: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Acnn.com%20google%20pr...
[1]: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Acnn.com+microsoft+pri...
I chuckled a bit upon seeing those links but quickly realized that DDG gets its results from Bing and Altavista isn't around anymore.
However clean, possibly less bubbled browser, gets number over twice larger on the second link.
However clean, possibly less bubbled browser, gets number over twice larger on the second link.
You're being intentionally obtuse. Google is a search engine product and a company. Microsoft is just a company. It stands to reason more people would search for the former.
The same search for bing has 5000 results.
Lol who searches for bing info on Google? Seriously?
Good lord. This is a search of the articles on the website cnn.com using Google search. It’s not Google Trends.
> Google's has been bashed so consistently on privacy issues on mainstream media that non-techies often associate them with creepy data collection
What? Every non-tech person I see is happily running Google Chrome and has never even considered Firefox. Hell, I think most still think Google is one of the "good guys".
Non-tech people still trust Google much more than Microsoft. Microsoft is bad, but they haven't made your data their core business just yet.
What? Every non-tech person I see is happily running Google Chrome and has never even considered Firefox. Hell, I think most still think Google is one of the "good guys".
Non-tech people still trust Google much more than Microsoft. Microsoft is bad, but they haven't made your data their core business just yet.
>Non-tech people still trust Google much more than Microsoft. Microsoft is bad, but they haven't made your data their core business just yet.
That's pretty interesting claim, what makes you think so?
That's pretty interesting claim, what makes you think so?
There is nothing interesting or crazy about my statement. Microsoft sells software and services and has done so for the past 35 years. They started getting interested in people data recently but it is not their CORE business. How is this controversial?
I never heard non-tech people talking about whether they trust MS or Google more, like seriously :D
HN is on the fore-front of this Google bashing. Just look at this comment on another HN thread about "buy now, pay later". Here's the comment [1] which justifies MS actions:
> Maintaining browsers has become a significant undertaking, so complex that only well-funded corporate interests can afford to keep one patched and up-to-date with the latest web standards. It surpassed operating system complexity. It surpassed pretty much everything else too. So we can forget about it ever being truly "free" (and free from ads) unless we simplify the web somehow. I also don't think we're going to go back in time and start cutting features out of browsers. So that isn't going to happen
Google develops Chromium and Google gets constantly bashed for selling ads. MS modifies Chromium and adds their own branding and sell ads. MS is just trying to cover their development cost.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29354937
> Maintaining browsers has become a significant undertaking, so complex that only well-funded corporate interests can afford to keep one patched and up-to-date with the latest web standards. It surpassed operating system complexity. It surpassed pretty much everything else too. So we can forget about it ever being truly "free" (and free from ads) unless we simplify the web somehow. I also don't think we're going to go back in time and start cutting features out of browsers. So that isn't going to happen
Google develops Chromium and Google gets constantly bashed for selling ads. MS modifies Chromium and adds their own branding and sell ads. MS is just trying to cover their development cost.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29354937
These are multi billion dollar companies that siphon money from all sorts of avenues powered by people’s ability to use the web. It is in their interest to develop these browsers. But they don’t have to syphon even more money from people by doing so. I don’t agree with your assessment.
It alludes to the hypocrisy in the claim:
> "with the added trust of Microsoft"
Hijacking a competitor's page demonstrates that Microsoft lacks integrity and cannot be trusted
> "with the added trust of Microsoft"
Hijacking a competitor's page demonstrates that Microsoft lacks integrity and cannot be trusted
The definition of trust that security professionals use is that A trusts B if B has some way to do something bad to A. A can stop trusting B by taking steps to eliminate the ability of B to harm A.
So, the statement "Microsoft Edge runs on the same technology as Chrome, with the added trust of Microsoft" actually means "Microsoft Edge runs on the same technology as Chrome, with the added ability for Microsoft to screw you over".
So, the statement "Microsoft Edge runs on the same technology as Chrome, with the added trust of Microsoft" actually means "Microsoft Edge runs on the same technology as Chrome, with the added ability for Microsoft to screw you over".
> I hate saving money,’ said no one ever. Microsoft Edge is the best browser for online shopping.
I hate having Microsoft scan my online shopping carts so they can collect data and hijack affiliate commissions. Do they think we're dumb?
I hate having Microsoft scan my online shopping carts so they can collect data and hijack affiliate commissions. Do they think we're dumb?
Someone in their marketing run a survey of which brand is more trusted and they are playing on that card. The question would be did the survey cover both consumers and enterprise users as I think the answers to these would be different.
Microsoft has had a good few years of building up their reputation after their self inflicted blemishes from the IE integration fiasco as well as their EEE mode of operation.
Now they are throwing away their good will with smarmy tactics --why? for some short term gains?
They were passing Google reputation-wise, of late, but these moves undercut their work of the last few years.
It seems they see Google, FB, even Apple, etc., eating this cake (using market to undercut competition) and can't stand the temptation. I can only hope the DOJ will find some will to take on tech and do something about their behavior, but I am not holding my breath.
If only companies would have principles they could stand on and we could count on.
Now they are throwing away their good will with smarmy tactics --why? for some short term gains?
They were passing Google reputation-wise, of late, but these moves undercut their work of the last few years.
It seems they see Google, FB, even Apple, etc., eating this cake (using market to undercut competition) and can't stand the temptation. I can only hope the DOJ will find some will to take on tech and do something about their behavior, but I am not holding my breath.
If only companies would have principles they could stand on and we could count on.
I noticed the same thing. However, I trust MS less now than in the 90’s.
Back then, I felt like the owner of my machine. Sure they had bad things like IE but I could just ignore it.
Now, it restarts itself and installs updates despite me specifically trying to stop it.
It’s a shame really because I really enjoyed Win 10 and even Bing doesn’t suck completely.
Thank goodness for competition and the new M1 laptops! Now Apple just needs to launch a good search engine and get Numbers to where Excel is and I can wave goodbye to both MS and Google.
Back then, I felt like the owner of my machine. Sure they had bad things like IE but I could just ignore it.
Now, it restarts itself and installs updates despite me specifically trying to stop it.
It’s a shame really because I really enjoyed Win 10 and even Bing doesn’t suck completely.
Thank goodness for competition and the new M1 laptops! Now Apple just needs to launch a good search engine and get Numbers to where Excel is and I can wave goodbye to both MS and Google.
I trust Apple more than Microsoft, but if you want to feel like you own the machine Apple is much worse.
This is true on the iPhone, but I feel ownership of my Mac. It's just a unix box. I turned off tpm and have skhd and yabai installed, which is close enough to DWM/i3 for me. I wish they'd offer better out of box support for X, but this is honestly good enough
Hmm where do you get that from? I own a 2003 iMac G4 and do not feel Apple owning it 1%. And my latest iPhone can work without any Apple services if I choose so (I don't because they are actually great). If I am locked in the Apple eco-system it is by choice, not by design.
Really? I've never had a Mac, but I have all the other gadgets and I love them. Would it interrupt a running process to restart itself?
I've had Python scripts (ML, data analysis) running locally overnight on Windows, only to come back to a restarted computer. Not fun.
I've had Python scripts (ML, data analysis) running locally overnight on Windows, only to come back to a restarted computer. Not fun.
> Now they are throwing away their good will with smarmy tactics --why? for some short term gains?
I mean... if you're paid to increase the usage of X, do you really care about long-term reputation, if you'll be five companies away by then?
I mean... if you're paid to increase the usage of X, do you really care about long-term reputation, if you'll be five companies away by then?
My personal theory is that they see Apple brazenly pushing anti-competitive features with their browser such as disallowing extensions on anything but Safari and they realize that they can't be called out themselves unless the corrupt courts are willing to call out their darling Apple as well.
> Microsoft has had a good few years of building up their reputation after their self inflicted blemishes from the IE integration fiasco as well as their EEE mode of operation.
Microsoft never changed. There was never a "new Microsoft". Only a new strategy with the same goals as ever: anti competitive behavior, bullying "partners", and what not. Just because they made this or that opensource changes nothing to the nature of that company. Windows 11 is basically just adware at that point.
Microsoft never changed. There was never a "new Microsoft". Only a new strategy with the same goals as ever: anti competitive behavior, bullying "partners", and what not. Just because they made this or that opensource changes nothing to the nature of that company. Windows 11 is basically just adware at that point.
I don’t contest that characterization; however, they did try to rehabilitate their brand, and, I think they did. So why go through that effort and throw it away?
To circle back to your point, I now feel Google’s Don’t be evil was a deke, a fake and was all about building reputation which they leveraged for market share.
To circle back to your point, I now feel Google’s Don’t be evil was a deke, a fake and was all about building reputation which they leveraged for market share.
Microsoft was never good at being consistent. It's an organization defined by corporate politics and infighting. Just because the Edge or the Windows UI department are user hostile doesn't mean that this is a wider trend in the company. Conversely, the vscode or the Azure departments doing good things doesn't mean the rest of the company behaves that way.
And what is good will worth these days? What does that get them?
> “‘I hate saving money,’ said no one ever. Microsoft Edge is the best browser for online shopping.”
This is really cringe
This is really cringe
I don’t like this new form of writing, I’m not sure what it’s called. It’s not just informal, it’s cringy.
I especially hate funny error messages as they just frustrate me. It’s ok when Reddit has a funny image because they can’t show my video game forum, but it’s infuriating when Microsoft shows a “whoops, what happened” when it just failed to sync the last 30 minutes of my work document.
I especially hate funny error messages as they just frustrate me. It’s ok when Reddit has a funny image because they can’t show my video game forum, but it’s infuriating when Microsoft shows a “whoops, what happened” when it just failed to sync the last 30 minutes of my work document.
"OOPSIE WOOPSIE!! Uwu We made a fucky wucky!! A wittle fucko boingo! The code monkeys at our headquarters are working VEWY HAWD to fix this!"
From what I've seen of Edge, it should be the project managers working vewy hawd to fix things, not the developers.
At least this tone accurately conveys the seriousness of the average dev team and is more fun than “this error has been sent to an unmonitored Slack channel, if you want to scream into the void here’s a link to our community forums.”
I would rather have a message of “we piped this error to /dev/null and will ignore it until someone important manually brings it to our attention” than whatever this is.
I also don’t think it reflects the dev team tone as it seems so fake fun and probably means the dev team is in terror of saying the wrong thing. I’d rather see the localization resource bundle value than whatever this is.
It’s about as honest as the Costco greeter in Idiocracy saying “Welcome…I love you.”
I also don’t think it reflects the dev team tone as it seems so fake fun and probably means the dev team is in terror of saying the wrong thing. I’d rather see the localization resource bundle value than whatever this is.
It’s about as honest as the Costco greeter in Idiocracy saying “Welcome…I love you.”
Oh shit, corporate Twitter is going to adopt this kind of meme language in 5 years or so. Not even Idiocracy went that far.
I call it “fellow kids writing“. It feels really patronizing when used in a serious context.
On the opposite, I started using Discord recently and they manage their funny tone very well, but it is used consistently through the application. And it stays informative.
On the opposite, I started using Discord recently and they manage their funny tone very well, but it is used consistently through the application. And it stays informative.
Maybe it's a generation gap, but I've seen this in other places. I got a text message from my student loan servicer - It "needs 2know if U wish 2stay in Autopay". I thought it was spam, but it's real. Do Gen Zers really think this is okay, or am I getting too old
> Do Gen Zers really think this is okay
No, we don't think this is OK. It looks ridiculous.
Remember that "textspeak" is just shorthand used to save keystrokes. I haven't seen anyone unironically use "2" instead of "to" since the days of flip phones -- on a smartphone keyboard, it's harder to type the number 2 than the word "to" because you have to switch to the numeral keyboard and then back.
Writing "u" instead of "you" is less common than it used to be, though some people still do it sometimes. But capitalizing the U is absurd -- remember, the whole point of shorthand is to save a small number of keystrokes, so you wouldn't waste keystrokes on unnecessary capitalization.
Any kind of shorthand like this looks ridiculous and out-of-place in a professional context, like a text message from a corporation. It signifies that you don't care enough to type out the whole message, which comes across as relaxed and casual between friends but as lazy and unprofessional in a form letter.
If I received a message liked this, I would immediately think it was written by some middle-aged manager who is trying to be "cool" and "relate to the kids." But a poor imitation of low-effort texting shorthand doesn't come across as "cool" at all; it's just silly and disrespectful. It gives the distinct impression that the whoever wrote the message thinks of me as "just a kid" rather than a normal, adult peer; as if I don't deserve the dignity of a normal, professional message.
No, we don't think this is OK. It looks ridiculous.
Remember that "textspeak" is just shorthand used to save keystrokes. I haven't seen anyone unironically use "2" instead of "to" since the days of flip phones -- on a smartphone keyboard, it's harder to type the number 2 than the word "to" because you have to switch to the numeral keyboard and then back.
Writing "u" instead of "you" is less common than it used to be, though some people still do it sometimes. But capitalizing the U is absurd -- remember, the whole point of shorthand is to save a small number of keystrokes, so you wouldn't waste keystrokes on unnecessary capitalization.
Any kind of shorthand like this looks ridiculous and out-of-place in a professional context, like a text message from a corporation. It signifies that you don't care enough to type out the whole message, which comes across as relaxed and casual between friends but as lazy and unprofessional in a form letter.
If I received a message liked this, I would immediately think it was written by some middle-aged manager who is trying to be "cool" and "relate to the kids." But a poor imitation of low-effort texting shorthand doesn't come across as "cool" at all; it's just silly and disrespectful. It gives the distinct impression that the whoever wrote the message thinks of me as "just a kid" rather than a normal, adult peer; as if I don't deserve the dignity of a normal, professional message.
Would the words have been over 160 characters?
The 160 character limit is an ancient relic of 2008 (unlike Chrome)
The 160 limit per message segment is absolutely still a thing, but when you receive a message >160 characters your phone stitches the segments back together for you so you don't notice.
Why this matters: SMS delivery is usually priced per message segment. Going over the 160 limit ~doubles the cost to deliver the text.
(Source: I am the CEO of a company which sends millions of text messages and avoiding 2 segment messages saves us thousands each month!)
All that said, the text from the above commenter's loan servicer is unprofessional nonsense regardless of its length.
Why this matters: SMS delivery is usually priced per message segment. Going over the 160 limit ~doubles the cost to deliver the text.
(Source: I am the CEO of a company which sends millions of text messages and avoiding 2 segment messages saves us thousands each month!)
All that said, the text from the above commenter's loan servicer is unprofessional nonsense regardless of its length.
> I am the CEO of a company which sends millions of text messages and avoiding 2 segment messages saves us thousands each month!
How much is each customer worth to you?
Which is worse for your business - all your customers getting a cringey needs 2know if U wish 2stay in Autopay text and thinking that your entire business is unprofessional, or spending an extra $0.001 per customer per month to send them a message that reads F0rmatFunction can automatically pay your bill each month, but we need your approval. Change your mind? Cancellation is easy, just text "No" to this number. Respond "OK" to enable auto-pay! I'd rather get the latter for sure!
Sure, it's good to let those generating the messages know where the threshold is. Concise communication is best, sometimes you can be equally professional and just pick a different synonym or structure, and save the company some money. But sacrificing quality of a $20/mo service to save $0.001 per customer seems unwise, even if it adds up to a thousand-dollar bill.
How much is each customer worth to you?
Which is worse for your business - all your customers getting a cringey needs 2know if U wish 2stay in Autopay text and thinking that your entire business is unprofessional, or spending an extra $0.001 per customer per month to send them a message that reads F0rmatFunction can automatically pay your bill each month, but we need your approval. Change your mind? Cancellation is easy, just text "No" to this number. Respond "OK" to enable auto-pay! I'd rather get the latter for sure!
Sure, it's good to let those generating the messages know where the threshold is. Concise communication is best, sometimes you can be equally professional and just pick a different synonym or structure, and save the company some money. But sacrificing quality of a $20/mo service to save $0.001 per customer seems unwise, even if it adds up to a thousand-dollar bill.
You are a executive, you could work really hard and find new lines of business, talk to customers and understand their needs to craft better offerings, or find another firm to form a strategic partnership with. But you won't, you'll just say "Start using 2day in the text messages, we will save 500k a year!" and move on to a new company in 18 months.
I'm pretty sure that longer messages still generate multiple "packets" or whatever you want to call them on the backend. Which is important if you're paying per packet. It's just that every modern phone knows how to collect and stitch them together into a single displayed message. That's why phones still display the number of messages being generated when you type in longer ones. For instance, mine starts showing "10/1", then after another character "9/1", eventually to "0/1" and then "145/2".
Some providers didn't support concatenated SMS until mid 2010s at least. Lots of software in financial institutions is old. And providers charge more for concatenated SMS still.
gen Zers know it's stupid, but have the ability to cope with reality and just go on with their business, instead of obstinately pretending to be 'baffled' by something that's been in common usage for twenty years, then complainging about it on the internet.
you're thinking really hard about paying your student loans now, so it worked. who doesn't understand what's going on? doesn't sound like it's your loan-servicer, to me.
you're thinking really hard about paying your student loans now, so it worked. who doesn't understand what's going on? doesn't sound like it's your loan-servicer, to me.
No I really thought it was spam!
> I’m not sure what it’s called.
I call it "meme speak". It's the style of writing used on meme image captions or in tweets designed to generate the most number of shares and "likes".
I call it "meme speak". It's the style of writing used on meme image captions or in tweets designed to generate the most number of shares and "likes".
It sounds like a 2010 rage comic. Only thing missing is that guy eating cereal.
Microsoft has been doing that for years, the blue screen of death contained an emoticon starting around Windows 7.
following in sad mac's footsteps ... decades after.
It sounds like the sales prompt I was forced to use in my telesales job in 2003.
That browser is so 2008! Do you know what’s new? Microsoft Edge.
Newer is not always better... if only Microsoft (and the rest of Big Tech) would go back to 2008 or even earlier, when they were far less controlling.
Browsers detecting specific sites and acting differently on them, unless specifically requested to do so by the user, should be prohibited. Ditto for operating systems detecting specific applications. There needs to be a word for the equivalent of net neutrality, but applied to software and environments in general.
Newer is not always better... if only Microsoft (and the rest of Big Tech) would go back to 2008 or even earlier, when they were far less controlling.
Browsers detecting specific sites and acting differently on them, unless specifically requested to do so by the user, should be prohibited. Ditto for operating systems detecting specific applications. There needs to be a word for the equivalent of net neutrality, but applied to software and environments in general.
Back in 2008 MS had a lawsuit punishment against them active.
MS in 1997 or so was doing shenanigans like crash Explorer if you attempted to download Netscape (Firefox predecessor) they got sued by the EU and lost.
The lawsuit terms expired recently and Microsoft is doing exact same shit they got sued for the first time, I guess they are testing to see for how long they can get away with thsi shit before they get sued again.
MS in 1997 or so was doing shenanigans like crash Explorer if you attempted to download Netscape (Firefox predecessor) they got sued by the EU and lost.
The lawsuit terms expired recently and Microsoft is doing exact same shit they got sued for the first time, I guess they are testing to see for how long they can get away with thsi shit before they get sued again.
like crash Explorer if you attempted to download Netscape
Do you have a source for that? I remember them being sued and losing simply because they bundled the browser with the OS, but don't recall any sort of the "detect user attempting to use competing browsers and kill them" mentality that they now have.
Do you have a source for that? I remember them being sued and losing simply because they bundled the browser with the OS, but don't recall any sort of the "detect user attempting to use competing browsers and kill them" mentality that they now have.
Humorously, using tools built into Windows 10 and 11 now, you can open a PowerShell window, type winget install Google.Chrome, and never open Edge once if you don't want to.
That is exactly what I love about Windows 11 particularly. I don't have to deal the abdominations like Microsoft News, just a winget away. Don't like Edge?
winget uninstall -e "Microsoft.Edge"i look at advancements like this in Windows and think it's really cool.
But after spending so many years, especially in the late 90s and early 2000s, getting shit from a bunch of khaki wearing, corporate butt kissing MSCE types about how Linux is "get what you pay for" and constantly mocking that all this "free software can't do anything"
and then sitting back and watching Linux empowering cloud computing, Unix/Linux being the basis of all our mobile devices, being the base for most IoT, watching the explosion of Docker and tons of other toolsets all initially rooted in the Unix/Linux ecosystem, watching Unix/Linux become a tool that developers heavily relied on either Linux on the server or Linux/MacOS on the desktop/laptop...
watching Microsoft do things like making Notepad use Unix EOL characters, supporting MS SQL on Linux hosts, expanding PowerShell to perform all kinds of tasks easily done by Unix/Linux for over a decade, creating a knock off of apt and yum with "win-get", making it super easy to install a whole Linux ecosystem within Windows itself, doing everything they can to make using GIT on windows, an easy experience, and so forth and so on..
and i just can't help being figuratively stick up my middle finger. Not just to MS as a company but to all the clowns that mocked Linux and Unix guys for literally 20 some odd years. Not just peers and co-workers, but managers, upper level managers all the way to CTOs who reluctantly realized Linix solutions were a better fit in some areas and were won over by lower management.
At this juncture - i don't even particularly like desktop computing, no matter the flavor. It's all frustrating in their own ways - including my precious Linux.
But F* windows and F** windows people in IT. The whole lot of em
But after spending so many years, especially in the late 90s and early 2000s, getting shit from a bunch of khaki wearing, corporate butt kissing MSCE types about how Linux is "get what you pay for" and constantly mocking that all this "free software can't do anything"
and then sitting back and watching Linux empowering cloud computing, Unix/Linux being the basis of all our mobile devices, being the base for most IoT, watching the explosion of Docker and tons of other toolsets all initially rooted in the Unix/Linux ecosystem, watching Unix/Linux become a tool that developers heavily relied on either Linux on the server or Linux/MacOS on the desktop/laptop...
watching Microsoft do things like making Notepad use Unix EOL characters, supporting MS SQL on Linux hosts, expanding PowerShell to perform all kinds of tasks easily done by Unix/Linux for over a decade, creating a knock off of apt and yum with "win-get", making it super easy to install a whole Linux ecosystem within Windows itself, doing everything they can to make using GIT on windows, an easy experience, and so forth and so on..
and i just can't help being figuratively stick up my middle finger. Not just to MS as a company but to all the clowns that mocked Linux and Unix guys for literally 20 some odd years. Not just peers and co-workers, but managers, upper level managers all the way to CTOs who reluctantly realized Linix solutions were a better fit in some areas and were won over by lower management.
At this juncture - i don't even particularly like desktop computing, no matter the flavor. It's all frustrating in their own ways - including my precious Linux.
But F* windows and F** windows people in IT. The whole lot of em
> "watching Microsoft do things like making Notepad use Unix EOL characters"
A system which still pretends you're talking through a teletype, a system where it would make sense to use both CR and LF together and individually to move the cursor accross or down or both, shuns it.
Windows never did mandate it, applications can use any line ending they like, but used it as a convention for backwards compatability with DOS which was backwards compatible with CP/M. CRLF is the standard in SMTP, POP, IMAP and HTTP.
To watch Linux fanatics:
1) identify Linux with Unix, for "superiority by association".
2) personally identify with the use of LF as a newline indicator in text(!)
3) fantasise that Microsoft's use of CRLF is inexplicable, inferior, dictatorial and in some way objectively wrong, while Linux's parroting of Unix is superior, amazing and in some way objectively correct.
4) Ignore that the American Standards Institute draft of control characters from 1963 had only CRLF newlines, and Multics from 1964 didn't go with the standard when it could have.
5) personally feel superior and vindicated that Microsoft's basic text editor changed newline terminators...
6) ... a program they don't even use ...
7) ... while in the same breath complaining about how everything should be like Linux and they've said so for years, but now it is that way it's also bad; "fuck you fuck everyone I was here before it was cool, I was angry that you didn't do it my way and now I'm angry that you are doing it my way".
8) while ignoring the elephant in the room that the "everything as text" OS with tools that "do one thing well" is completely incapable of handling both styles of line endings.
Is just a ridiculous situation.
> "doing everything they can to make using GIT on windows, an easy experience, and so forth and so on.."
What a terrible company, doing things to make users lives easier. Imagine if all the standard Linux tools could just handle common line endings. Python does, which demonstrates it's totally possible and mostly a non-issue. It could have been made to completely go away, but instead has become a source of Ego and Pride for the Linux fanatic, thinking people who use tools that deal with complexity and present it simply are inferior, instead of thinking that those tools are desirable and superior.
A system which still pretends you're talking through a teletype, a system where it would make sense to use both CR and LF together and individually to move the cursor accross or down or both, shuns it.
Windows never did mandate it, applications can use any line ending they like, but used it as a convention for backwards compatability with DOS which was backwards compatible with CP/M. CRLF is the standard in SMTP, POP, IMAP and HTTP.
To watch Linux fanatics:
1) identify Linux with Unix, for "superiority by association".
2) personally identify with the use of LF as a newline indicator in text(!)
3) fantasise that Microsoft's use of CRLF is inexplicable, inferior, dictatorial and in some way objectively wrong, while Linux's parroting of Unix is superior, amazing and in some way objectively correct.
4) Ignore that the American Standards Institute draft of control characters from 1963 had only CRLF newlines, and Multics from 1964 didn't go with the standard when it could have.
5) personally feel superior and vindicated that Microsoft's basic text editor changed newline terminators...
6) ... a program they don't even use ...
7) ... while in the same breath complaining about how everything should be like Linux and they've said so for years, but now it is that way it's also bad; "fuck you fuck everyone I was here before it was cool, I was angry that you didn't do it my way and now I'm angry that you are doing it my way".
8) while ignoring the elephant in the room that the "everything as text" OS with tools that "do one thing well" is completely incapable of handling both styles of line endings.
Is just a ridiculous situation.
> "doing everything they can to make using GIT on windows, an easy experience, and so forth and so on.."
What a terrible company, doing things to make users lives easier. Imagine if all the standard Linux tools could just handle common line endings. Python does, which demonstrates it's totally possible and mostly a non-issue. It could have been made to completely go away, but instead has become a source of Ego and Pride for the Linux fanatic, thinking people who use tools that deal with complexity and present it simply are inferior, instead of thinking that those tools are desirable and superior.
Also, CRLF makes sense when you think of the origin: CR moves to the next line and LF moves to the start of the next line.
And doesn't mac use a third scheme - CR?
\n MeAnS NewLiNe
> and i just can't help being figuratively stick up my middle finger.
My personal opinion on WSL and other "Linux integration" tech in a nutshell. We MADE this world. How dare they try to domesticate it! How dare they take our ladders, pulling them up right after they are done building their monopolies!
> At this juncture - i don't even particularly like desktop computing, no matter the flavor. It's all frustrating in their own ways - including my precious Linux.
I don't even want to see a Year of the Linux Desktop any more. It's a dumpster fire. Serenity OS and Haiku deserve their own Year of the "X" Desktop far more than we do. The Linux can keep its Century of the Linux Server trophy instead. And it's not a consolation prize, but a real achievement.
My personal opinion on WSL and other "Linux integration" tech in a nutshell. We MADE this world. How dare they try to domesticate it! How dare they take our ladders, pulling them up right after they are done building their monopolies!
> At this juncture - i don't even particularly like desktop computing, no matter the flavor. It's all frustrating in their own ways - including my precious Linux.
I don't even want to see a Year of the Linux Desktop any more. It's a dumpster fire. Serenity OS and Haiku deserve their own Year of the "X" Desktop far more than we do. The Linux can keep its Century of the Linux Server trophy instead. And it's not a consolation prize, but a real achievement.
I couldn't agree with you more.
I was thoroughly in the "screw Microsoft" camp until about 2018, when I thought they were on the way to redeeming themselves.
Unfortunately they've continued their prior "hatefully corporate ++" behavior. I bestow this term on companies like Oracle & SCO (remember them?). At this stage in my career, I have regularly been in a position to send a significant portion of comapny expenditure toward Microsoft. I won't be in future, and when I reach CTO/CIO I will continue to advocate for more open and fair solutions for my company.
I was thoroughly in the "screw Microsoft" camp until about 2018, when I thought they were on the way to redeeming themselves.
Unfortunately they've continued their prior "hatefully corporate ++" behavior. I bestow this term on companies like Oracle & SCO (remember them?). At this stage in my career, I have regularly been in a position to send a significant portion of comapny expenditure toward Microsoft. I won't be in future, and when I reach CTO/CIO I will continue to advocate for more open and fair solutions for my company.
Great post until:
> But F* windows and F* windows people in IT. The whole lot of em
Maybe leave the late 90s.
> But F* windows and F* windows people in IT. The whole lot of em
Maybe leave the late 90s.
maybe Windows guys should. "look at all this cool stuff Windows can do, that the stuff i was mocking could do 20 years ago".
The way Windows people talk about all the "revolutionary" stuff Windows can do, like just piss off.
This is like the jocks bullying kids for wearing Metallica shirts or NIN shirts freshman year only to act like the biggest fans 2-3 years later.
It's like Star Trek fans getting mocked for decades, just so people who never cared in the first place can tell people who've been fans for 20-30+ years they aren't "real fans" (and banning them from communities for daring to have a critical opinion) b/c they don't gobble up every piece of shit Abrams or Kurtzman puts out.
There's just this trend of people swinging down and then when said thing becomes mainstream, they act like they've been down since day one. the important lesson is that they're cool and smart and in-tune, no matter what.
The way Windows people talk about all the "revolutionary" stuff Windows can do, like just piss off.
This is like the jocks bullying kids for wearing Metallica shirts or NIN shirts freshman year only to act like the biggest fans 2-3 years later.
It's like Star Trek fans getting mocked for decades, just so people who never cared in the first place can tell people who've been fans for 20-30+ years they aren't "real fans" (and banning them from communities for daring to have a critical opinion) b/c they don't gobble up every piece of shit Abrams or Kurtzman puts out.
There's just this trend of people swinging down and then when said thing becomes mainstream, they act like they've been down since day one. the important lesson is that they're cool and smart and in-tune, no matter what.
there's a lotta people that use windows but you're imagining they're all the same as the people you hate. That's hate.
people that accept the default choices in life are always the ones swinging at people who don't and it remains true even when what was once is obscure all of a sudden has cultural/business momentum to escape that relative obscurity.
sorry, are you suggesting I'm oppressing (swinging) you just because I want my OS install to be easy or idk play games or just because I'm not really into OSes and prefer to focus on other stuff?
Just to make you mad, I am going to compile this application written in an open source MS language and run it on Linux. Every day.
And F* shitty Linux users with stupid names, horrid and unsecure desktop, and irrelevant topics.
True enlightenment is realizing that the Every OS Sucks song is, and always has been, right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPRvc2UMeMI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPRvc2UMeMI
Can winget also uninstall the Microsoft Store and all their spyware/telemetry/advertising BS?
I think so, yes
A future update will block other browsers from opening start menu or widget links.[1]
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29251210
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29251210
You could do that almost 10 years ago with chocolatey the exactly same way, here is one liner
iwr https://chocolatey.org/install.ps1 | iex; cinst googlechromeAnd how did you get chocolatey on that new install? I'm guessing that the vast majority of users opened IE and downloaded it through that browser.
"iwr https://chocolatey.org/install.ps1 | iex" installs chocolatey without having to open IE
I see. That's why my comment was worded so carefully: though I'm sure one _could_ install chocolatey from the Windows CLI, a tiny minority ever would do so.
But that's for introducing me to the iwr command. I don't use Windows often, but it's good to know what tools are available in the rare instances that I need to. Now I need a mnemonic to remember it... "I Want Real (curl)"
But that's for introducing me to the iwr command. I don't use Windows often, but it's good to know what tools are available in the rare instances that I need to. Now I need a mnemonic to remember it... "I Want Real (curl)"
Invoke Web Request is another good one, considering iwr is just an alias for the PowerShell cmdlet Invoke-WebRequest.
C:\Windows\System32\curl.exe exists if you want real curl. (or just run curl from a command prompt. curl in powershell is an alias for iwr.
Its 5 years outdated tho, better use this, always up to date:
https://community.chocolatey.org/packages/curl
https://community.chocolatey.org/packages/curl
This has been doable since Windows has had network connectivity, winget is just the latest way on the pile. Albeit probably the easiest yet. TFTP, FTP, SFTP, SCP, Powershell HTTP(S), curl (giving you a copy of all the prior methods), winget. That's all of the ways I can think of without getting too "make your own program"-y like VBA and whatnot.
In particular I remember utilizing the FTP method to get Firefox (avoiding IE) was all the rage in the XP era.
In particular I remember utilizing the FTP method to get Firefox (avoiding IE) was all the rage in the XP era.
Additional ideas for Edge's PMs: silently corrupt Chrome's binary at download time, and mark the website and the binary as dangerous.
Better, use Youtube tactic and slow down the chrome processes by setting their priority lower, but make it look like it has normal one.
"Windows ain't done 'till Chrome don't run (fast)"
Windows can force Chrome to use software rendering for "stability" reasons.
I, for one, would love to see the two face off in a lawsuit that costs millions and saps the attention and focus of both sides for years on end.
How about just creating an icon with the Chrome logo that opens Edge?
How about a friendly reminder about best practices. A very innocent statement, don't mean no harm by it. Just helping out a friend.
"Did you know that personal files can disappear just like that, just like that? Oh, I just noticed you are downloading Chrome. By the way, you sure those backups are working? You have backups, right? Just saying."
"Did you know that personal files can disappear just like that, just like that? Oh, I just noticed you are downloading Chrome. By the way, you sure those backups are working? You have backups, right? Just saying."
I bet that many people would not notice that they are actually using Edge.
That would probably be a trademark violation?
Microsoft could sandbox chrome and add some (costly) extra checks to systems calls for advanced security.
[deleted]
Debian 11 with Firefox for me. Firefox does need some tuning like opting out of any studies and telemetry. Verified with tshark until it really doesn't prefetch all previously visited sites and bookmarks. Some sites are able to request infinite invisible visits somehow but it's stoppable and Firefox at least gives the user the freedom to do something about it.
I hope Margrethe Vestager is paying attention, this bullshit is getting egregious. Microsoft not only deserve a fine, but a thorough breaking up into multiple separate entities.
I mean they were already thoroughly whipped and fined, forced to add a browser choice window, then made to pay a fine again after this browser choice window 'accidentally' didn't work anymore. Time for another fine? I mean I have no clue where that money ends up at, I like to think it goes into IT subsidies, but still.
>Time for another fine?
Sure! I mean it's working so well at changing corporate behavior, why would we want to stop now?
Things like this are why I advocate for Corporate Jail time and a Corporate Death Penalty.
Sure! I mean it's working so well at changing corporate behavior, why would we want to stop now?
Things like this are why I advocate for Corporate Jail time and a Corporate Death Penalty.
If the fines are more regular and serious, they will mould corporate behaviour ( e.g. see GDPR). If MS get fined a couple of billion each for this Edge crap, and for bundling Edge and Teams into Windows 11, they might think again and take another decade before trying again.
But as i said, the best solution is to break them up. Split them into Azure; Windows+enterprise software à la AD; Exchange, etc., Office365; Surface.
But as i said, the best solution is to break them up. Split them into Azure; Windows+enterprise software à la AD; Exchange, etc., Office365; Surface.
Really? What does Google deserve when it nags me about switching to chrome whenever I use any of their pages from a browser that's not chrome?
Whataboutism. Google probably also deserves this treatment, but we're talking about Microsoft.
It's not whataboutism, it's pointing out that Microsoft is not the only actor using such tactics. Everyone should be treated the same.
> Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in "what about…?") is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy, which attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving the argument.
Let's look at your post again:
> Really? What does Google deserve when it nags me about switching to chrome whenever I use any of their pages from a browser that's not chrome?
If that isn't whataboutism, then you really ought to work on better phrasing your thoughts.
Microsoft is doing bad thing. That Google is also doing bad thing is irrelevant to the discussion about Microsoft doing bad thing.
Let's look at your post again:
> Really? What does Google deserve when it nags me about switching to chrome whenever I use any of their pages from a browser that's not chrome?
If that isn't whataboutism, then you really ought to work on better phrasing your thoughts.
Microsoft is doing bad thing. That Google is also doing bad thing is irrelevant to the discussion about Microsoft doing bad thing.
Microsoft can probably argue that they worked very hard to no longer be a monopolist, and as such can't be fined any longer.
I'm sure it's in direct response to the popups you get from Google telling you the site works best with chrome when you visit any of their properties with edge or Firefox.
I distinctly remember Microsoft getting into an anti-trust case[0] over things much more benign than what they're doing right now.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
Same in Europe. €561 million fine in 2013: "Antitrust: Commission fines Microsoft for non-compliance with browser choice commitments" [0]
I'm wondering if it's still a business case for Microsoft despite being sued.
[0]: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_13_...
I'm wondering if it's still a business case for Microsoft despite being sued.
[0]: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_13_...
It's a shame the Linux is still "not there" to be a good replacement for Windows. I keep trying but having stupid issues all time, like my laptop is identified as a mobile device when connected to a Bluetooth multipoint headset so I can't connect to my phone and laptop in the same time :(
Scaling is awful and unfortunately simply there are no good drivers for certain hardware.
Windows 11 is awful, I went back to 10 within a week - screen flickering, stupid scrolling issues etc.
Windows 11 is awful, I went back to 10 within a week - screen flickering, stupid scrolling issues etc.
Drivers for certain hardware is still a huge issue. I have hardware that I just won’t attempt to install Linux on because devs don’t think exotic setups (like Intel integrated graphics AND an nvidia GPU) are worth supporting.
But everything else seems to be much improved lately. I’ve got Ubuntu running on my laptop and it works with my Magic Trackpad (including gestures), 4k display with fractional scaling, and 1080p low-dpi display simultaneously. I wasn’t sure they would ever get there. Everything pretty much works.
The App Store is still garbage and the whole Snap concept seems to work much worse overall than Flatpack. But I have faith they will get their act together eventually.
But everything else seems to be much improved lately. I’ve got Ubuntu running on my laptop and it works with my Magic Trackpad (including gestures), 4k display with fractional scaling, and 1080p low-dpi display simultaneously. I wasn’t sure they would ever get there. Everything pretty much works.
The App Store is still garbage and the whole Snap concept seems to work much worse overall than Flatpack. But I have faith they will get their act together eventually.
I don't know about Ubuntu but on Opensuse, Nvidia Optimus (Nvidia + integrated intel) works fine after installing the official Nvidia drivers and setting suse-prime to the desired mode.
I agree. Linux Desktop still has all the same basic usability problems it did in the 90s. In some ways it is even worse since it has massively overcomplicated a lot of its subsystems.
Still, I foresee a future where the pain of Linux Desktop for me will be outweighed by the pain of continuing to use Windows. Which is sad. Linux Desktop will have won not on its merits, but because Microsoft just decided it didn't want to make a Desktop OS anymore.
If I get extremely lucky, it's possible Haiku will take off in the meantime and implement some of the things I'm still waiting on for it to be a decent desktop for my uses, but I'm not holding my breath.
Still, I foresee a future where the pain of Linux Desktop for me will be outweighed by the pain of continuing to use Windows. Which is sad. Linux Desktop will have won not on its merits, but because Microsoft just decided it didn't want to make a Desktop OS anymore.
If I get extremely lucky, it's possible Haiku will take off in the meantime and implement some of the things I'm still waiting on for it to be a decent desktop for my uses, but I'm not holding my breath.
I would imagine surely there’s a distro that is just as functional as what you’re imagining Haiku will be one day right? The main issue I find with Linux is app support but that would be worse again with Haiku. What sort of usability issues would you expect to run into with something like Mint? Btw not saying Haiku isn’t cool, it absolutely is. But I see it being a long way behind even the Linux desktop.
> I would imagine surely there’s a distro that is just as functional as what you’re imagining Haiku will be one day right?
You can imagine it all you want, like most things that are pure fantasy.
> The main issue I find with Linux is app support but that would be worse again with Haiku.
There are other issues that I consider important. Things like how application management works, coherency of the platform, stability of ABIs, simplicity of the platform, non-bloatedness, lack of fashion-oriented design, etc.
You can imagine it all you want, like most things that are pure fantasy.
> The main issue I find with Linux is app support but that would be worse again with Haiku.
There are other issues that I consider important. Things like how application management works, coherency of the platform, stability of ABIs, simplicity of the platform, non-bloatedness, lack of fashion-oriented design, etc.
This is a pretty uncharitable interpretation of my comment. I currently don’t even use Linux on desktop (though I have in the past). Like I said, Haiku is very cool, and I love the idea behind it and Serenity, but in terms of what is closer to a useable desktop, I think it is still a while off, and will always suffer from app support (if that isn’t as important to you as it is to me that’s fine).
I do agree though that all of the Linux distros that are aimed at being minimalist aren’t simple (e.g Arch).
Though there are some like Puppy Linux which I think have quite cool ideas around it.
Please refrain from projecting whatever ideas you have around “Linux desktop people” onto me.
I do agree though that all of the Linux distros that are aimed at being minimalist aren’t simple (e.g Arch).
Though there are some like Puppy Linux which I think have quite cool ideas around it.
Please refrain from projecting whatever ideas you have around “Linux desktop people” onto me.
Yes, Haiku would be awesome! The UI is great, it's highly functional. We'll have the same problems re hardware :(
Ok, so I don’t condone this behavior by Microsoft or Google, but I do use edge at work since we are a Microsoft heavy company with Sharepoint, teams, outlook, and all that. If we were using Google I’d surely use Chrome, but edge bakes in your Microsoft work profile to the browser and when searching on Bing you can find documents on your internal network easily. I also like the fact that edge supports vertical tabs out of the box.
So here’s my defense of Microsoft taking these steps:
* Google promotes Chrome on YouTube, search, and gmail. Strategically Microsoft needs a message to counter the pop ups on Google sites that are leading to the Chrome download page. It would be much more annoying if you saw this message every time you visited YouTube or Google. The author presents it as the case of someone actively seeking to download Chrome but they could have been lead to the download page from another Google property.
* Many people don’t know that both edge and Chrome use the same engine. When my company mandated edge, people reflexively complained even though they don’t lose anything in terms of speed, extensions or compatibility. For many people knowing that edge has the same browser engine is informative - most non geeks won’t keep up with that.
* if you are working at a Microsoft company, your data is already in the hands of Microsoft and your employer so there’s little privacy to be lost by continuing with edge, but by switching to chrome you bring a 3rd party into the mix.
So here’s my defense of Microsoft taking these steps:
* Google promotes Chrome on YouTube, search, and gmail. Strategically Microsoft needs a message to counter the pop ups on Google sites that are leading to the Chrome download page. It would be much more annoying if you saw this message every time you visited YouTube or Google. The author presents it as the case of someone actively seeking to download Chrome but they could have been lead to the download page from another Google property.
* Many people don’t know that both edge and Chrome use the same engine. When my company mandated edge, people reflexively complained even though they don’t lose anything in terms of speed, extensions or compatibility. For many people knowing that edge has the same browser engine is informative - most non geeks won’t keep up with that.
* if you are working at a Microsoft company, your data is already in the hands of Microsoft and your employer so there’s little privacy to be lost by continuing with edge, but by switching to chrome you bring a 3rd party into the mix.
* you could argue a lesser version of this for all windows users with the integrations that Microsoft has been pushing.> Google promotes Chrome on YouTube, search, and gmail. Strategically Microsoft needs a message to counter the pop ups on Google sites that are leading to the Chrome download page
You know what I say to that? Tough cookies. Websites and OSes have different responsibilities to their users -- if MS wants to use shady cross-promotion tactics like Google, they should provide web services that justify the annoyance and do their cross-promotion there.
Why are we making computers harder to use for the everyman? It's such a grossly short-sighted decision that will only serve to further the divide between an increasingly mobile-oriented consumer class and a primarily desktop-oriented professional class.
You know what I say to that? Tough cookies. Websites and OSes have different responsibilities to their users -- if MS wants to use shady cross-promotion tactics like Google, they should provide web services that justify the annoyance and do their cross-promotion there.
Why are we making computers harder to use for the everyman? It's such a grossly short-sighted decision that will only serve to further the divide between an increasingly mobile-oriented consumer class and a primarily desktop-oriented professional class.
> if MS wants to use shady cross-promotion tactics like Google, they should provide web services that justify the annoyance and do their cross-promotion there
So to have a successful browser you need to invest to have a visitor count rivaling the largest search engine, video platform, and online mail combined? I think that’s a very large hill to climb even for Microsoft. Your statement leads to only a Chrome hegemony. In terms of sites with Google’s reach, maybe Facebook could make their own browser but that’s about it.
So to have a successful browser you need to invest to have a visitor count rivaling the largest search engine, video platform, and online mail combined? I think that’s a very large hill to climb even for Microsoft. Your statement leads to only a Chrome hegemony. In terms of sites with Google’s reach, maybe Facebook could make their own browser but that’s about it.
I do find it silly - but have never liked how Google promoted their browser on their properties (with factually incorrect speed and efficiency claims - which seem to work since plenty of people here parrot them whenever possible.)
I see Google prompting users to download Chrome on Google.com similar behaviour to Microsoft using Windows 95 to push Internet Explorer.
I see Google prompting users to download Chrome on Google.com similar behaviour to Microsoft using Windows 95 to push Internet Explorer.
"these other people are acting shitty so its totally ok for us to do it" - quick way to identify ass holes. We shouldn't always race to the bottom under the guise of "we have to do it to stay competitive". You don't have to do it, you're just an ass hole.
- not talking about gp specifically. Just folks who make those sorts of decisions off such busted premises.
- not talking about gp specifically. Just folks who make those sorts of decisions off such busted premises.
yeah, but instead of removing those banners and supporting ad-blocking and filtering, microsoft chooses to add more pop-ups and banners.
indeed this is the added trust of msft.
indeed this is the added trust of msft.
This is an excellent example of violating implied trust. What is implied trust? I expect my software to do what I tell it to do, without any additional, unexpected behaviors, especially those that do not serve my interests.
Microsoft violated that trust. This means that they value their interests above my own. They are demonstrably untrustworthy. Again, btw.
Microsoft violated that trust. This means that they value their interests above my own. They are demonstrably untrustworthy. Again, btw.
I just bought my ~55 year old mother an HP laptop. It was completely strange how difficult it was to install Chrome on Windows 11. I couldn't run the MSI installer for Chrome and found out that by default the OS was in something called "S mode" which I had to disable by doing an odd series of steps via the Microsoft store. After finally installing, I got all the weird pop-ups that the articles mentions suggesting in various ploys that Edge was the superior browser. It was also made difficult to convenience the OS that I wanted Chrome as the default browser, it required changing several preference options. I then found that there was no way to disable Edge, as you can some other Windows applications. By using the SysInternals tool Autoruns I found that Edge had at least half a dozen means of persistence / continued execution by launching updaters and background processes doing unknown tasks.
Gotta keep the kids off of windows don't want them to be trapped by Microsoft ecosystem one day
The laptops I give to my kids have always had Linux (Ubuntu) pre-loaded onto them. To my kids, these are just what normal computers look like. The school uses Chromebooks and Macs so far as I know, my kids have never seen Windows.
Google used same tactics to grow Chrome market share. Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
I hate that saying, usually because both the game and the players are utterly trash. Which is the case here, by the way.
I think it is totally ok to hate the player too.
"Should I show up any speck of decency? No, the game lets me get away with it anyway, so who cares" - Approximately everyone who uses that saying unironically.
If the only environment where someone will not be an asshole is an environment that punishes assholery, they are an asshole.
If the only environment where someone will not be an asshole is an environment that punishes assholery, they are an asshole.
What is an example of Google using a similar tactic to grow Chrome market share?
[deleted]
I’ve watched this kind of stuff unfold for several years and this is where I think we went wrong: we allowed software to become “free” or “cheap” when it used to be $300, without acknowledging that this stuff still basically costs $300 to make!!
So now, every stupid thing has to be completely free just to be considered by any consumer, and every software maker has to beg, badger and berate users over and over to get them to try things and download things and sign up for things, all because we collectively forgot that we could have just paid them 40 bucks and moved on.
You used to have to pay for operating systems, and for a while it actually became more expensive (e.g. macOS was $99 but went up to $129 to everyone’s surprise before becoming “free”). You definitely used to pay through the nose for apps but you got a lot for that money. Mobile devices are largely responsible for the 99-cent-ification of software, most of which is now “free” with “in-app purchases” which is ironic since these “cheap” replacements sometimes cost hundreds of dollars more if you actually add up all the recurring in-app purchases they contain. And, of course, subscriptions.
So great, Windows is “free” now and web browsers no longer cost money like Netscape did but instead we get all this crap in our faces. Personally, I think we have lost a lot and we desperately need to re-learn how to pay, once, for software, again.
So now, every stupid thing has to be completely free just to be considered by any consumer, and every software maker has to beg, badger and berate users over and over to get them to try things and download things and sign up for things, all because we collectively forgot that we could have just paid them 40 bucks and moved on.
You used to have to pay for operating systems, and for a while it actually became more expensive (e.g. macOS was $99 but went up to $129 to everyone’s surprise before becoming “free”). You definitely used to pay through the nose for apps but you got a lot for that money. Mobile devices are largely responsible for the 99-cent-ification of software, most of which is now “free” with “in-app purchases” which is ironic since these “cheap” replacements sometimes cost hundreds of dollars more if you actually add up all the recurring in-app purchases they contain. And, of course, subscriptions.
So great, Windows is “free” now and web browsers no longer cost money like Netscape did but instead we get all this crap in our faces. Personally, I think we have lost a lot and we desperately need to re-learn how to pay, once, for software, again.
As pointed out by the original Neowin article [0], Google has been abusing its power for years in basically the same way. Two wrongs don't make a right, but Google is far from the "good guy" here.
[0] https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-says-its-own-edge-brow...
[0] https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-says-its-own-edge-brow...
That dialog is only on Google websites, I'm not sure how that is abusing its power as you can choose not to use Google products (hard but doable). Regardless Microsoft are already doing that to push Edge as well, try going to microsoft.com using a non-Edge browser and you'll see a banner appear. But this goes much further and actively bakes those prompts into the OS and browser, you wonder how far they'll take it?
> with the added trust of Microsoft
lolololol
Does someone on their marketing team actually believe that?
lolololol
Does someone on their marketing team actually believe that?
Operating systems are getting ever more user hostile, even though their main reason to exist is moving more and more in the direction of being there to run a single application: the browser, with ChromeOs being the current representative of that trend.
I'll shed a small tear for the people that are still forced to use Windows, but Google is at least as bad with this in pushing Chrome at the expense of other browsers.
And users are caught in the middle. OS vendors should STFU, stop pushing their services, ban telemetry and other invasive stuff and put the user centric. Fat chance of that happening any day soon though, after all, the only reason that users exist in the first place is to be ripped of or squeezed like so many lemons until the last penny has been forced out of their pockets.
I'll shed a small tear for the people that are still forced to use Windows, but Google is at least as bad with this in pushing Chrome at the expense of other browsers.
And users are caught in the middle. OS vendors should STFU, stop pushing their services, ban telemetry and other invasive stuff and put the user centric. Fat chance of that happening any day soon though, after all, the only reason that users exist in the first place is to be ripped of or squeezed like so many lemons until the last penny has been forced out of their pockets.
I'm really having issues with Microsoft now. It just seems to be one dark pattern after another in Windows 11.
They're not wrong about it being based on on the same renderer as Chrome, but that's about as far as it goes.
The worst thing is that Apple and Google do the same dark patterns and no one seems to care about them. For some reason, Microsoft didn't learn from the early 00s any lessons on how to do this kind of thing with any subtlety.
I have a Mac laptop and iPad, an Android phone, and I now run Linux on my PC and haven't booted into Windows 10 since May (checks uptime...). I don't think I have any reason to use Windows at home any more. The changes in Windows 11 are even more unappetizing. It feels like Windows Me, or Vista. The version no one asked for.
They're not wrong about it being based on on the same renderer as Chrome, but that's about as far as it goes.
The worst thing is that Apple and Google do the same dark patterns and no one seems to care about them. For some reason, Microsoft didn't learn from the early 00s any lessons on how to do this kind of thing with any subtlety.
I have a Mac laptop and iPad, an Android phone, and I now run Linux on my PC and haven't booted into Windows 10 since May (checks uptime...). I don't think I have any reason to use Windows at home any more. The changes in Windows 11 are even more unappetizing. It feels like Windows Me, or Vista. The version no one asked for.
It's interesting how many people here rationalise the trash that Windows 11 is by thinking that Microsoft is purposefully trying things out for Windows 12 which will be much better again. As if Microsoft would actually produce trash on purpose and piss off lots of their remaining customers with some optimistic big picture in mind. Nah, the truth is they actually think it's a great OS which is really the scary thing in this entire thing. You'd think one day they'd manage to hire at least one good UX person from their competitors to clean up the trash Windows has been for years now but they keep thinking they can do it themselves with the same people who have already been doing the same trash for way too long.
Does anyone know if they're displaying similar popups on the Firefox download page?
Firefox' market share is low enough that I'd be surprised if Microsoft wasted even one developer hour implementing this for Firefox downloads.
Well, its almost as high as Edges market share
"Almost as high" is a strange way to put it since its popularity has been dropping steadily over the last decade. And Edge market share is only going up.
Now that Firefox is no longer in the top 3 (in the Western market, further down world-wide), we can expect it to lose relevance even more quickly. Especially since Mozilla leadership has studiously avoided any effort to differentiate themselves from from Google/Chrome. They missed a huge chance to become The Privacy Browser that puts users in control of their web experience when Google and Facebook recently got all that bad press about privacy violations and monopolistic behavior.
Now that Firefox is no longer in the top 3 (in the Western market, further down world-wide), we can expect it to lose relevance even more quickly. Especially since Mozilla leadership has studiously avoided any effort to differentiate themselves from from Google/Chrome. They missed a huge chance to become The Privacy Browser that puts users in control of their web experience when Google and Facebook recently got all that bad press about privacy violations and monopolistic behavior.
An Edge's worth of desktop browser usage share of users are searching for different browsers is why it wouldn't even be worth an hour of dev time to show the message?
The point GP made was Firefox was worth targeting not that Firefox is going to be more popular the Edge.
The point GP made was Firefox was worth targeting not that Firefox is going to be more popular the Edge.
eh. google.com pops up a nearly identical box when using edge. seems like a bit of a nonstory. is it anti-competitive because its on a microsoft OS? hardly seems like consumers are being harmed.
Every feature update they try to get you to reset your browser preferences. And sometimes it'll say "oops! Something went wrong and we had to reset your browser preferences."
"Microsoft Edge runs on the same technology as Chrome, with the added trust of Microsoft."
Hmmm, can I trust you to not put your own ads onto competitors websites?
That is beyond f'd up. Will they never learn?
Hmmm, can I trust you to not put your own ads onto competitors websites?
That is beyond f'd up. Will they never learn?
I mean they pretty much learned that they can get away with this and their only repercussions will be an HN post, a Reddit post, a few tech blogspam articles, and an EFF doomsday email blast cringier than the ads.
I mean this entire thread is a bunch of very angry people screaming to the void and self-congratulatory people stoking their own superiority complex for having the most common opinion in the HN echo chamber.
The days of “tech people” being ambassadors and having any influence over the direction of B2C software is over.
I mean this entire thread is a bunch of very angry people screaming to the void and self-congratulatory people stoking their own superiority complex for having the most common opinion in the HN echo chamber.
The days of “tech people” being ambassadors and having any influence over the direction of B2C software is over.
"With the added trust of Microsoft"
You must be borderline and delusional if you work at microsoft and have the guts of thinking that the company deserves even the tiniest amount of trust
You must be borderline and delusional if you work at microsoft and have the guts of thinking that the company deserves even the tiniest amount of trust
Welcome to the new Microsoft. Same as the old Microsoft.
This is becoming a joke... Along with the tricks hiding firefox from search results, the inclusion of buy-now-pay-later schemes, Microsoft is well on its way proving to us why we shouldn't trust them being a major player on the browser market. A fact they have proven to us once before of course.
I really thought they were on a good path when Ballmer stepped down but this is old Microsoft all over again.
I really thought they were on a good path when Ballmer stepped down but this is old Microsoft all over again.
This brings back memories of their 1990s shenanigans. I guess expecting ethical behaviour from them was always a pipe dream.
Sabotaging Windows95 so that it would fake a crash on DR-DOS was a real high water mark.
Just a friendly reminder that whenever I open gmail from Edge, then it asks me about using Chrome too
Why would anyone prefer Chrome over Edge? I mostly use Firefox but also Edge as the secondary browser on the Windows machine. It's the same engine but better UI (e.g. vertical tabs), both are equally proprietary.
I could have sworn this started years ago, albeit with different messaging.
Quite tacky really. Would be interesting to see if that is effective. It seems like it's a one time hit as you download Chrome and annoying enough for people to mark it.
It actively refuses to download Chrome since Windows Server 2016. The fastest bypass I do is by first downloading Firefox and then download Chrome from Firefox.
For people complaining about "Evilz M$"--isnt this roughly the same strategy Chrome used?
My question is: Do you see these prompts when downloading Firefox?
My question is: Do you see these prompts when downloading Firefox?
It adds a banner at the top of the search results :
“ There's no need to download a new web browser. Microsoft recommends using Microsoft Edge for a fast, secure, and modern web experience that can help save you time and money. Try now”
Even more bizarrely it puts Opera as the top result, at least here in the UK.
“ There's no need to download a new web browser. Microsoft recommends using Microsoft Edge for a fast, secure, and modern web experience that can help save you time and money. Try now”
Even more bizarrely it puts Opera as the top result, at least here in the UK.
I’m not sure what you mean- Chrome never tried to prevent me from downloading any other browser.
They should have a popup saying "Try Firefox", then I'll believe it's based on a genuine concern for their users.
It is a somewhat silly game, but I like it anyway. It is just good entertainment.
It's annoying, and kind of sad, how bad Microsoft pushes Edge.
[deleted]
Download Firefox.
Url changed from https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/2/22813733/microsoft-window..., which points to this.
Then Microsoft started this aggressive, disruptive push to bring it to iOS Safari's level as the only browser people should use.
I don't know any good operating systems for normal people anymore. Windows 10 and 11 are hostile, macOS only runs on very expensive hardware and doesn't run most programs people need (because the business world is still Windows oriented) and Linux has been making progress but still isn't a good alternative for the common user unless they have an expert to rely upon when something breaks down. ChromeOS doesn't run on most devices (it can, but the images aren't available) and I wouldn't recommend a Google-oriented OS to most people anyway, if they can avoid it; Android is bad enough already.
I miss the Windows 7 days. The Win10/11 kernel may have seen loads of improvements, the UI and basic behaviour has only been regressing for many years now. The Windows 11 window snapping is nice but it doesn't excuse the aggressive spyware that comes with the OS, and neither does it excuse this antitrust lawsuit in waiting.