Ask HN: Is Microsoft preferable, from a privacy point of view, to Google? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Is Microsoft preferable, from a privacy point of view, to Google?

51 pointsllarsson26 comments

In the recent thread about Edge coming to Linux, some users wrote that a Microsoft controlled Chrome-based browser is preferable to over controlled by Google from a privacy point of view.

We know that Google collects vast amounts of data about us through all its services. No question about that.

But depending on which thread one reads, Microsoft may be seen as less privacy-invading than Google or, alternatively, scolded for all the ads, Cortana being creepy, them pushing everyone towards Bing, and requiring internet connectivity for playing simple games that used to come with Windows for free.

So which is it? Is Microsoft preferable to Google from a privacy point of view?

Or is Microsoft just easier to compartmentalize, because if they have your calendar and email, but not your web searches, they have less of a complete view into your life?

View on HN

If Microsoft invented a pill that cures migraine, they would sell it for $$$.

If google invented a pill that cures migraine they would sell it for only $.

---

But 10 years later someone would notice that the pills contain a small device that record everything that happens in your body and sent it to google. At the time the pills were created google had no idea what to do with this data, but now somehow they have become the world's biggest pharma. Nobody knows how...

And when confronted, google would see absolutely no problem with what they have done. They would maybe receive a €10.000 fine in germany and then go on.

Some people would start injecting Google Body devices ™, and someone would publish and article on connecting it to your Google Home device ™, which would become the top story on HN. Famous bio-hsckers would hold TED talks on the subject. MacWorld would for years write articles about apples significantly better solution that will very soon be unveiled. Doctors would warn about the risks, but in 2030 nobody listens to doctors anymore.

(You can see this happening, can't you?)

I feel somewhat more that I'm a customer of Microsoft's and that they've demonstrated (through their shift to open source, through their "Windows Services for Linux") that they're more user oriented.

Google has a long-standing history of pretty much ignoring any and all user feedback; and I don't feel that I'm a customer of theirs, but a data-point to be fed to the advertising agencies who are their actual customers.

From a privacy viewpoint, both are horrendous. But since I'm already an office 365 subscriber, and because of the other reasons I mentioned, I'd give a few more points to Microsoft.

I have shared edge history enabled, but may eventually turn it off or even switch back to firefox. I havent' decided.

Between the Snowden revelations, Google and Facebook I pretty much feel that the privacy ship has sailed.

Google manipulate your data to sell your eyeballs, everywhere.

Microsoft manipulate your data to better design products, and sell your eyeballs in very select space. They don't treat their enterprise customers like their home users, that's for sure. Enterprise have a whole different experience.

Azure, and Microsoft 365 also do a much better job of making compliance so much more simple when initially integrating into your organization. There's almost too many portals for managing everything, but at least you can manage it.

We use both M365/Azure and G-Suite, and if given the choice to keep one, as the poor guy at the top of maintaining both, I'd keep Microsoft in a heartbeat.

There's a third possibility, missing from the question: "Neither of them are ok from a privacy point of view".

Not sure if that's the case here, but it's worth considering.

I think this is the best answer. They can both be pretty horrifying.

A few years ago I might've said Google was the preferable company, back before they got rid of their "don't be evil" mantra. I thought it was such an awesome policy for a company to have and I was incredibly disappointed when they dropped it.

The question uses the word 'preferable'; it very explicitly contrasts a limited set of options. Perhaps neither are okay but that's not what is being asked.

My point is that "neither is preferable" should be considered as well. ;)

I think let's start with comparing what generates money for Google and Microsoft

I think that was easier 5 -10 years ago. Ever since Win 10 - I have been leaning towards the future of Msoft is to try to emulate google with data collection and sales. I do not see Msoft slowing down on the ads they include or the data collection.

Are we comparing the cloud businesses and other things? Or just the money that Win 10 brings in compared to ChromeBooks? Those basically have the same bus model right?

In what ways is Microsoft monetizing data collection and sales? It seems like their primary revenue generation streams are Azure, Office, and Xbox; are you talking about Bing? Something else?

How do you think they decide what to build inside those major product pillars?

not sure if this is towards parent comment..

I have seen ads in Win 10 start menus, and they recently pushed Office web apps auto-installed into Win 10 - it would seam to me they are generating revenue with ads and app installs at the least. certainly they are using cortana data gathered to shore up other projects (maybe in the future)? Win 10 looks to me like straight jealousy of google getting all kinds of data (and being worth big money) in exchange for free products - so it's going that route.

For me it's about comparing Win 10 to ChromeOS for this comparison.

I guess you could look at Bing vs Google search as well, and Edge vs Chrome - they are similar is data collection, ad selling - so the parent comment (to me inferring) that one could compare google being an AD company and Msoft being a software sales/licensing + company is not a good way to decide.. I think it needs to be broken down by the various products.

Both companies have done things to protect consumer data, but they have also done things to abuse it imho.

In regards to O - I think my suggestion currently would be to find alternatives such as Chromium, plugins like adblockers and noscript, and hardware like pihole or whatever.

Both MSfot and Google are collecting data, regardless if they say that they are using currently using it in nefarious ways today or not, they may intend to use it in different ways in the future, or could be compelled to release it one way or another in the future. imho.

I'm GUESSING that M$ may be the better bet but suggest that we should limit our contacts with both. https://www.ecosia.org/search?q=microsoft+privacy+vs+google+... NOTE that I used a privacy friendly engine to do the search!

The "M$" monker was only mildly amusing on Slashdot in the 90's, these days it's plain tedious.

I think it was reasonable up to the end of the SCO trial, considering both their actions with that directly, and the "get the facts"/open source is cancer FUD that they were spreading back then.

But for the last ten years or so I agree it's tedious.

For the sake of discussion, I think it's worth throwing Amazon in the ring.

I started moving away from google services to microsoft ones, for this same reason(and I used to be a google fanboy):

Edge instead of chrome

Outlook online instead of gmail

Ms todo and OneNote instead of keep

OneDrive instead of gdrive

Microsoft has less important data than Google. Most people use Gmail/Google for personal life, maybe MS email/calendars for work life which is not particularly sensitive data.

> Microsoft may be seen as less privacy-invading than Google or, alternatively, scolded for all the ads, Cortana being creepy, them pushing everyone towards Bing, and requiring internet connectivity for playing simple games that used to come with Windows for free.

Showing ads in Windows doesn't mean they're personalized to you or based on any data. Cortana being creepy?? MS wants to push their own search engine, really??

Bigger picture, Microsoft's business model has historically never been reliant on ads. I don't see why they would move into collecting data when they have no need to and there is so much cultural backlash against it.

Microsoft has your desktop data which is probably more personal. Outlook.. your local searches queries.

Microsoft historically works closely with law enforcement. Google works with law enforcement but also tries to limit their access.

Google gives free products away and uses your data to sell to you stuff. Microsoft takes your data and makes products for law enforcement.

Google seems nosey neighbour who will sell photos of you to a newspaper. Microsoft seems like the neighbour who spys on everything you do and would call the fbi.

>Microsoft historically works closely with law enforcement.

Wait, what? You’re talking about the same MS that sued the US government to protect user data?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-microsoft-privacy-idUSKCN...

Yes, the same Microsoft that offers full disk encryption where they send your private key to their servers in case law enforcement wants to decrypt your drive.

Can they help me recover my bitlocker password for a usb drive?

I do not and will never trust either company. If I had to choose a top tech company, I would probably pick Apple, although they do have an ad network and have a lot information about you if you are in their ecosystem. Also stay away from Facebook and Amazon based on privacy. If you really want to go with 100% privacy, you could say goodbye to you all these companies and forget about the convenience and using all their services. For me, I’m trying to stay the hell away from Google. I found it really difficult to get away from Gmail, google voice and Waze.

For me, it’s about transparency. I can see and inspect the raw data that’s sent to Microsoft. I can see only a dumbed down dashboard of what is sent to Google.

How can one do this?

Surveillance capitalism could go away tomorrow and Microsoft would be fine, they do it because everyone else does but it’s not core to their business. Whereas it’s all Google has.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com