Hacker News Reader

Comment by sgoody | Hacker News Reader

I'm pretty disappointed by the recent dropping of standards that Google has been doing.

I'm quite a sceptical person and I've never been a fan of any big corp, but Google has been the one that I've trusted my data in the most and that I've been happiest with.

I still trust them with some of my data, but I'm rapidly losing faith in them and in fact I'm starting to think that Microsoft are a more "open" company... and I'd consider myself a one-time Microsoft hater, but I think they've turned things around.

The only reason I'm still with them for email/calendars is that they're just so very very good. But they're privacy policies for GDrive scare me, so I don't use that.

Frankly though, I'm starting to think that my data and services would be better off with Microsoft now...

View on HN

>I'm starting to think that Microsoft are a more "open" company...

I am disappointed too. But why is Microsoft more open? Does Microsoft have an open messaging protocol that I don't know of? Or an open source operating system? Or an open source browser? The last I checked, they were forcing manufacturers to ship computers with locked down bootloaders so you can't install your own operating system.

>But they're privacy policies for GDrive scare me, so I don't use that.

Can you clarify exactly what point in the privacy policy you are talking about?

I thought I'd read somewhere previously that Google claimed rights to be able to do whatever they wanted with your data... I'm looking at that now and it's not clear to me but I may have been wrong about that.

That is pretty much what every cloud storage services writes on their privacy policy. As far as I know, there is nothing special about Google's.

Locked down boot loaders? The spec says you must be able to change it. And you can. Same with Chromebooks (dev switches) and Macs (rEFIt or boot camp). This is about security of the boot process for those who desire it. TPM is a feature just like Chrome's default support for DRM now. Necessary evils or useful security, all depends on who is in control. What makes service lockdown worse is you're not in control if you let someone else run it. Google should have at least given a replacement protocol. Make XMPP better: push the web forward!

You can turn off safe boot only on x86 devices, but not on ARM devices.

> The spec says you must be able to change it.

This is true for x86, ARM has the opposite requirement. Presumably esolyt was referring to the Windows 8 Hardware Certification Requirements: Client and Server Systems[1] which state "On an ARM system, it is forbidden to enable Custom Mode." and "Disabling Secure Boot must not be possible on ARM systems." (page 122) which prevents booting to an OS not signed by Microsoft.

1. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/hh7...

Actually in order to get a "Made for Windows RT" sticker on an ARM device, OEMs must enable "Secure Boot" and disallow changes. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/microsoft-to-lock-out-...

> Does Microsoft have an open messaging protocol that I don't know of?

Even better, they support an standard called SIP. [1]

> Or an open source operating system? Or an open source browser?

They believe in open standards more than open source, although the Azure group very actively supports open source lately

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Session_Initiation_Protocol

> Even better, they support an standard called SIP. [1]

Not in Skype they don't

To be fair they bought skype and haven't really changed it. Which is actually an improvement over the previous company that kept removing things.

I was a Microsoft hater when I was 15, too, but at least Microsoft makes their money by selling Windows, Office and the like rather than by selling my data. So even if their ‘cloud services’ such as Outlook.com are ad-supported in some way, at least they don’t completely rely on that, and I still have the choice whether to use Windows or not – all their services run just fine in Opera on Debian, too.

Google does not sell your data. http://www.google.com/policies/privacy/

No, but they monetize that data in other ways. Some say it's not the same thing, I disagree. Ultimately, it's at your discretion, but they could very easily change that policy.

I'm not sure why you would put all off you eggs in one basket. That is what I took away from your story.

Many times, these big companies are not the best in their offerings for a given service but rely on their brand to push adoption.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com