Hacker News Reader

Comment by hi-v-rocknroll | Hacker News Reader

Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. You do the math.

Nadella's MSFT isn't Gates's. They haven't been a backstabbing rapscallion for many years.

do people actually believe this?

Maybe I'm just not aware of the evidence. The skullduggery in "Barbarians Led by Bill Gates" looks to be absent these days

Aren't they right now? All I see is similar monopolistic and anticompetitive practices pushed through different product lines.

They're not backstabbing, though, They're completely honest about it: You're the product, and you will be milked as hard as possible.

Nadella's MSFT is plenty underhanded. You only have to look as far as their last two major OS versions. Last four to five if you want to count everything they did to 7-8.1 to get people on 10. But even just on 10 and 11 there's plenty of anti-user nastiness. And more is getting cooked up every day.[0]

[0] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/06/microsoft-removes-do...

ok, how is that different from iOS, ChromeOS, macOS, or Android?

I'm mostly a linux user, but the idea of having to sync with a stupid cloud account to use a commercial OS is kinda how things work these days. Don't you even have to do that dumb stuff for things like Photoshop now?

If so, singling out MSFT as some egregious malcontent for this sounds more like salacious headlines

How is it different? Because MS was not known for this sort of hostility. "Not acting like Google" was a feature.

Right so they reverted from the exception to the norm.

Tech is either leaders or followers. Everyone is doing touchscreen cars or laptops without ports or phones with a bunch of things I didn't want. It's a problem, sure, but saying HTC, Hyundai, or Microsoft, in this instance, is particularly uniquely evil for following a trend sounds pretty hyperbolic

They don't have to be uniquely evil for people to be allowed to call them evil.

And this is MS changing the behaviour of their product over time.

They didn't use to be this evil. Now they are. That's comment worthy.

> I'm mostly a linux user, but the idea of having to sync with a stupid cloud account to use a commercial OS is kinda how things work these days.

Nope. On macOS, iOS and Android I can opt out and stay opted out. Microsoft is being by far the worst of the lot by silently opting people in.

I've opted out of cloud on a laptop of mine for years. No issues.

No other OS employs dark patterns to trick users into upgrading. Plenty of OSes have online accounts that the user is encouraged to use/create, but no other OS forces it. Plenty of other OSes have privacy settings tuned to opt-out, but no other OS has those settings sporadically resetting to the less private defaults. No other major OS runs ads in their app launcher.

Even in cases where other OSes do commonly misbehave, Microsoft puts them to shame. I think I had one popup about storing things on iCloud when I set up this MacBook. My Pixel phone rarely sends notifications about features I might have missed, but it's possible to shut those off with a single switch. But on my Windows laptop, Teams insists on launching in the foreground on every boot and OneDrive slides into my notification drawer on a daily basis.

Two most used OSes on the planet - iOS and Android - force you to create online accounts and do not allow you to fully use your device without online accounts. No one complains about it and instead they praise this as a great feature. Windows does not force you to use the online account to access all the features of your computer, it tries (more and more forcefully) to get you onboard so you get similar backup protection as what you have on your phone but minimally technically savvy users can still create local-only accounts (which is near impossible on the phone OS).

What's missing from iOS and Android if you don't use cloud accounts?

> Windows does not force you to use the online account to access all the features of your computer

With current Windows (11 23h2) you have to know the correct incantation to be able to create a local-only account. Is it technically possible to not have a cloud account? I suppose it still is, just the same as you can technically install it on an older CPU with no TPM. Is it something Joe RandomUser will be able to figure out on his own? I doubt it. So in Windows-land, the situation is much closer to "you can't use your pc at all without a cloud account".

The store and along with that apps?

Windows is far more lenient there, it's a flag in Rufus and you're good. Meanwhile your iPhone becomes a dumb phone if you don't want to make an iCloud account.

Android of course also just let's you install apks.

> your iPhone becomes a dumb phone if you don't want to make an iCloud account.

Fair enough. I wonder if this has changed with the new EU regulations, at least inside the EU.

> No one complains about it and instead they praise this as a great feature.

That's because we have a duopoly in phone operating systems.

> minimally technically savvy users can still create local-only accounts

On Windows 11? Can they still? I tried setting up a windows 11 arm VM recently and I couldn't find a working way to use a local account. Yes there are tutorials, but i think everyone at Microsoft is working overtime to invalidate them all.

> Two most used OSes on the planet - iOS and Android - force you to create online accounts and do not allow you to fully use your device without online accounts.

Last time I checked, AOSP based phones as well as Samsung's and Google's lineup as well as iPhones can be installed without an online account just fine and everything works, the only thing that doesn't work is the Find My stuff, it obviously requires an account on either platforms.

You do need an Internet connection of some sorts during setup though, because iCloud Lock/Samsung Knox was the only way to get theft and robberies under control.

> Windows does not force you to use the online account to access all the features of your computer

Unless you know about the OOBE\BYPASSNRO trick, you literally cannot proceed in setting up Windows 11 at all.

There's an easier Windows online bypass. Just log in with "no@thankyou.com" and any password; it will tell you the account is disabled before dropping you to local account creation.

That domain isn't even owned by Microsoft - it's owned by Citibank.

Just what on earth are the beancounters smoking over there in Redmond?

It's because it's not magic, someone has a microsoft account named no@thankyou.com that has enough sign in attempts to be disabled. I bet you could also do any other email address that people commonly use as a fake.

I’d disagree with “doesn’t force you” if it’s getting harder and harder. If I have to look up how to run a new install without an online account (just setting up without network doesn’t work any more), then that’s near enough forcing in my book.

Patently untrue. Both iOS and Android allow you to skip setting up an Apple ID or Google account. The only way you are not allowed to fully use your device is the app stores which require accounts. It's still a phone, you can still sideload apps on Android, or install them on iOS through some sort of device management schemery.

However, on Windows, Microsoft is removing every workaround they can find to create a local-only account. It used to be a skip button. Then it used to be unplugging the network cord. For a while it was a magic email address. I believe that trick no longer works, although it did for me the last time I set up a new Windows install. But now, as far as I know, there is no way to create a local account during setup, you have to create an account, then convert it to a local account later.

And that still leaves dark pattern upgrades, OS-level third party ads, privacy nightmares, and unmatched first party ads. MSFT is not the good guy in the ecosystem. Never has been. They're not illegally curbstomping their competition anymore, sure, they've redirected their energy at enshittifying their OS.

Your first comment: M$ is not evil!

Your second comment: OK, M$ is evil but look at those other evils...

MSFT used to be exceptionally evil. Halloween documents, how they screwed IBM with OS/2, their fake pen windows demo to kill Go corp, SCO trials, the skullduggery with Netscape and the antitrust case.

They pillaged and burned the competition in the 80s and 90s, legendary stuff.

Now what? They have a cloud login like everyone else?

Well ok!

They used their ill-gotten market dominance to turn the desktop personal computer into a dystopian spyware machine for which the primary function is to serve ads and drive MS engagement. I struggle to think of any entity in the modern world that has subverted the potential of the information age more profoundly than Microsoft, they are a pox on mankind and a net loss to humanity

Mac and Linux user here. Linux is of course what you make it, but Mac forces no cloud account, contains no freemium apps at install, has no advertisement built in, and respects choices around voice assistants (looking at sneaking copilot into every facet, which is an issue for enterprise.)

MS is undeniably the bad one of the 3 currently.

You can use an Android phone without a Google account, and sideload apps without the app store.

I was incredibly disgusted to learn that to open a HEIC image on Windows, I would have to download an officially sponsored extension from the Microsoft Store that costs $1. Like.. wow; what's next? Pay to play for other new media formats that come out? At $1, it can't even be netting them a useful amount of revenue, at the cost of appearing more user hostile and eroding more trust.

> Pay to play for other new media formats that come out?

Not just for new ones.

https://apps.microsoft.com/detail/9nblggh2j19w?rtc=1&hl=en-u...

This is likely a result of HEIC being under patent and requiring licensing. I'd guess Microsoft doesn't want to foot the entire bill for something only of use to a possibly small subset of users.

Good to know! I hadn't considered that.

This is such a tired trope that should have died in the early 2010s.

Those who don't like their direction should just switch to a different OS.

Cloud integration brings features which customers want. Customers still can't even be trusted to back up their own data. Customers don't want to upgrade their OS because they don't fully value the huge number of advancements that come with major revisions.

I got something like 7-10 licenses for windows 7 via a student program when I was in undergrad. Literally haven't paid for a single windows license in over a decade because the upgrades are free and transferable to new hardware in many cases.

This is not the outcome one would expect if msft was anti-user. Think about it.

> they don't fully value the huge number of advancements that come with major revisions.

More spyware? Reduced hardware support for no good reason in case of Windows 11?

> I got something like 7-10 licenses for windows 7 via a student program when I was in undergrad. Literally haven't paid for a single windows license in over a decade because the upgrades are free and transferable to new hardware in many cases.

Not anymore. Now that you will have to pay for the OS, maybe you will think your consumer rights more. It wasn't a charity.

MSFT has never been as bad and evil as they are now. Ads everywhere as just one example and they base their ads on your conversations in their messaging apps.

Yeah right.

They may not be strong arming OEMs any more, so they spy on their users and force upgrade them now.

I get a full screen ad for windows 11 on my windows 10 pc at least once per week when i boot. With the mouse conveniently positioned on 'upgrade now'.

And say, is anyone sure they stopped strong arming OEMs?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com