"Cortana, you're fired!"

Kenrou said:

Kinda like console fanboys in this case the stubbornness for Win7 its a tad unrealistic though, all it takes is installing a simple free program and bye bye metro, literally takes 10s or less. Oh well...

Click to expand...

I install windows all the time on different computers, I don't have the time to mess with it. Stock is what I like.

Confirmation that the Reddit/superuser method of killing Cortana activity still works (from #318).

PKCano has has a walkthrough of her testing/experiments up on the AskWoody site: Does “killing” Cortana really kill Cortana?

This thread has convinced me to upgrade to 8.1....that along with new discovery that version of windows 7 is capped at 16 GB of RAM, and the two new sticks I bought are basically paperweights

Lots of good info here, thanks to all

trentk10 said:

This thread has convinced me to upgrade to 8.1....that along with new discovery that version of windows 7 is capped at 16 GB of RAM, and the two new sticks I bought are basically paperweights

Lots of good info here, thanks to all

Click to expand...

I've got 32gb running on Win7 Pro. Have you got a link for that info? I'd like to read about it

trentk10 must be stuck with the W7 Premium x64 SKU, licensed memory limits here: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical_memory_limits_windows_7

Note that, despite MS's apparent indications to the contrary, it has nothing to do with any physical restriction, it's purely an MS licensing restriction.

I had guessed it would be some sort of version dependent issue, but was still skeptical. I guess I'm lucky that I bought the Pro certain of the OS, as I never researched it beyond lifting the 4gb limit by moving to x64.

Some "progress" coming from MS on the privacy front. http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonk...otix&partner=yahootix&yptr=yahoo#7c6b1cfd3544

They named the next Windows 10 release "Creators Update" (Ahaha).
My favorite part of the article was "This uses your PC's web camera to monitor when you are sat in front of it so it can be automatically locked when you step away."

As computer literate people, we know what that means and why that can be useful, etc. etc.
Que Average Joe upon learning this and interpreting it in the only way he knows how: "Microsoft itself is now watching him and everything he does with his computer and with himself in front of it."

God and Creator's Update?


Can't wait to see how this plays out in Kansas, getting a reaction to this from some average folks I know here will be particularly entertaining.

They interrupted me as soon as I said it with a sarcastic: "It's for our own protection!"
"It's for our own protection!"
They said "They are scanning our 'irises' so that when you try to do anything in the future they will have a data base of our 'ireses'. That's what that is."
Hahaha.

My take on it is that even though Microsoft is not doing anything Google hasn't done, the perception has permeated down to regular users, even though IT guys had us believe that regular users 'don't know, don't care' about this stuff... I second that with a separate experience two weeks ago when I helped someone build a computer (regular guy) he asked me if I could get anything else installed when it came to OS because he said "he's heard things" about Windows 10. I smiled and asked what he heard but he couldn't really pinpoint it. I don't think it occured to Microsoft how 'perception' is just as important as reality when they decided to limit options - even though those options would have been actually used by a small number of us.

So Microsoft itself now *admits* there is a problem. So it's not just some people saying it any more.

I predict they will go all the way by the time 7 and 8 expire in 2020/2023 and unlock on 10 everything that 7/8 can do.

I think you are being optimistic.

Remember, The US is not the only place in the world that uses W10.
They are more interested in what the other countries users are doing than what is going on here.

Let's be honest here, somebody has the intention of using whatever data M$ collects. Whether it be for advertising targeting or maybe surveillance of some type. I don't see them giving up any user freedom as much as I see them just hiding it better.

Yeah....my tinfoil is full on.

Being paranoid is just right thinking when they are watching you. And they are.

The Microsoft Privacy Dashboard
Sign in with your Microsoft account and visit account.microsoft.com/privacy and Microsoft will now provide concise information on your browsing history, search history, location activity, and Cortana’s Notebook.

Click to expand...

concise information on your browsing history, search history, location activity

Click to expand...

This isn't paranoia, this is "concise information" they said they weren't collecting. Data M$ said they wouldn't have, available for your perusal on M$ servers. I don't know how it will play in Kansas, but it doesn't go over real well in my corner of Phoenix.

Two things.
1. Google has done a lot more than Microsoft to compromise our privacy, and for years.
2. None of us complained this much against Google, ever.

Correct? Therefore perception played a big role.
I still believe that if they included (hard to get to) OFF switches (options) - then people who complained the loudest (computer literate people, us) would not have complained as much because we would have felt superior for knowing how to turn this stuff off.

But with no off switches, "computer guys" complained loud, and it got to the little guy.
They should have included (hard to get to) options and there would be no mistakes to admit to today, and only a small number of us would have used those switches anyway, so Microsoft would have won on both counts.

I'm no more a fan of Google than M$. I gave up griping about them years ago because nobody cared. The list of things they now own is staggering, especially from a data collection standpoint.
Some of the stuff in W10 was able to be turned off, just difficult to get to, or "on" by default, and there was a mighty roar from the masses over it. I don't know how long the buying public will maintain it, but there does seem to be a push back on this stuff. God help Google if they do come up in the conversation again, they are completely indefensible on the subject of telemetry/data mining. LOL

They will now in 2017 allow us to disable Windows 10 hardware updates, so they are half way there.
So now: If by 2020/2023 they do not let us choose when updates are applied with no limits on when, then we will ask this legitimate question:

Windows 7/8 + third party Antivirus/Antimalware/Firewall + no (further) OS updates.
vs.
Windows 10



How good is an excellent definition updated software in combo with an excellent third party updated Firewall?
Good enough to intercept ALL threats since I gave up Norton 2003. Norton 2003 did not prevent the last security breach on my system some 14 years ago, which prompted me to research all antivirus/antimalware/firewall options. The ones I chose after 2003 DID intercept attempts, which would have gotten through despite my fully updated operating system.


So what protects us more, an updated OS or an updated (good) Antivirus/antimalware/firewall?
Ideally all of them, but it's not like we're fully exposed out in the open if we don't update the OS but do update the rest of them.

We know how to turn off a lot of privacy issues in Windows 10, it's the mandatory updates, not just telemetry that keep us away from Windows 10.

it's the mandatory updates

Click to expand...

That was the last straw for me, but it was a privacy related issue. The mandatory update took away control over my data that I paid extra for when I "licensed" the Pro version. If the updates were simply nuts and bolts fixes it would still be annoying, but not as annoying. Their "Shut up and bend over" attitude gave me a right royal case of the red a$$ and left me with a $140 coaster that is tied to my motherboard, making it absolutely useless and valueless to me. If I'm still alive and browsing in 2024 it will be on Windows 7. Most of the world doesn't care and M$ will sail blissfully in to the future on a ship made of money but I don't trust them. They lost that and they aren't getting it back. Enough people don't agree with me to keep M$ in business, and that's fine, but I'm not "licensing" another OS from them. Ever.

c627627 said:

Two things.
1. Google has done a lot more than Microsoft to compromise our privacy, and for years.
2. None of us complained this much against Google, ever.

Correct? Therefore perception played a big role.
I still believe that if they included (hard to get to) OFF switches (options) - then people who complained the loudest (computer literate people, us) would not have complained as much because we would have felt superior for knowing how to turn this stuff off.

But with no off switches, "computer guys" complained loud, and it got to the little guy.
They should have included (hard to get to) options and there would be no mistakes to admit to today, and only a small number of us would have used those switches anyway, so Microsoft would have won on both counts.

Click to expand...

Google does not peer at you through your own webcam.

Clarification #1: to point to Google is not an act of exoneration of Microsoft. Just a tale about how important 'perception' is.
The direct implication of that post is that Google is not as bad, whereas my point is that they are both bad, with Google being worse, much worse.

Let's just look at what Google did in the last few months, without even going into the severe intrusions into your sense of privacy that happened before 2016.



Just recently Google dropped its ban on personally-identifiable info in its ad service called DoubleClick. Do you know what that means?
DoubleClick ads that follow you around on the web are now customized based on your name and other information Google knows about you.
This means that Google "can now build a complete portrait of a user by name, based on everything they write in email, every website they visit and the searches they conduct."

It appears that Google recently objected to the conclusion I just reposted for you... But their objection was only to say that Google doesn't "currently" use Gmail keywords to target web ads.
Ahahaha. Currently. So with that out of the way, per Google themselves, everything else remains. And we didn't even dive in to what they did before 2016.


Google's CEO declared: "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."
Yea.
Because privacy under Google is... [complete the conclusion by yourself.]

if you guys install a decent network wide adblocker it blocks all the microsoft phoning home for all devices on your network saves alot of work if you have multiple machines.
a couple examples (i run both on two different networks)
pihole
pfblockerng

I don't use Gmail, so I'm off that hook. I'm on somebody else' hook, but not Google's. LOL And Google's CEO needs to be hit upside the head with a bat. Twice.

You use enough Google products, from Google search to others, Google knows who you are, Google knows what you like.
The big picture here is that we know how to block (a lot of) Microsoft phoning home stuff, but the people who scream the loudest against privacy intrusions are blissfully unaware what Google knows about them though invasion of privacy by Google...

They are both bad, but steps could have been taken by Microsoft to reduce the perception that they are somehow worse than Google.
They are both bad [as far as your privacy goes] but it's amateur hour in Redmond in comparison to what Google has been doing to us for a very long time *without* anyone on the forums here screaming against Google, because they don't realize what Google has been doing.

Microsoft attracted all this negative attention to itself by putting a padlock on options. That started this circle of hate against them.
If they just included hard to get to options, we wouldn't be talking about them. We would just switch it off, and be in the tiny minority of users who do so.
But they locked it up. So it serves them well for doing it that: everyone now thinks they're a privacy-invading monster, bigger than Google. In 2017, even the computer illiterate average users think so.