Which? calls for compensation for users hit by Windows 10 woes Champion of consumer rights and closer of customer email services Which? has taken a hobnailed boot to Microsoft's beleaguered Windows 10 operating system with research that will make for unpleasant reading at Redmond. A latest survey of more than 1,100 UK users comes after Which? gave Microsoft a kicking back in 2016. One …
I wouldn't mind much.
But it's not. It's regular wholesale replacement of the entire OS.
April even managed to screw up my user folders. They added a new UI to move them, which screwed up the existing UI that I'd already used to relocate them onto another drive.
So now I have two "My Documents", and applications are very confused about which one to use...
well, 'Which?' has apparently documented a number of 'bad update' cases, particularly those in which money changed hands to get the computer back up and running again.
This sounds like "a good start" at forcing Micro-shaft to "JUST STOP IT" with the forced updates.
I still don't know why they're doing 'forced updates' like that. Why so much smugness/arrogance/hubris to FORCE us to COMPLY with their WHIMS ???
Hey Micro-shaft - whatever happened to "The CUSTOMER is ALWAYS RIGHT" ???
"I still don't know why they're doing 'forced updates' like that."
Because otherwise they get slated for everyone never installing patches and getting pwnd by every bit of malware that comes along.
Think back to the days when everyone ran Windows XP and most people/companies didn't patch, and Microsoft got their (deserved) reputation for having terrible security. That's what they're trying to avoid, by making sure everyone is running the latest security patches.
They've probably over-reacted, but at least now you know why.
I agree. They had a terrible rep and had to do something about it. The problem is that the marketing droids have turned it into "security updates and new features" which actually means "security updates and fucking with existing features you like to make them worse".
I'm no fan of the knee-jerk anti MS brigade, but in this case they have a point. (CURSES!!)
Windows 10 is the last version of Windows, and Microsoft wants to keep polishing the turd and convince you it's a brand new OS with every major update.
Traditional OS releases every 3 to 5 years with service packs in between, are too 'old fashioned' for the millennials' taste.
Even emulating Apple's OSX release cycle and pricing scheme would have been more palatable.
The only thing that will make MS sit up and take notice of it's (Windows) customers is that they start losing them. Losing money will do it.
That said, since they seem determined to move to being a "cloud and services" business, and have suddenly decided to "love" open source and Linux, could it just be that they have simply lost interest in Windows - not making enough money - and are preparing to abandon it?
Interesting times.
I've just resurrected Windows 2000 in order to run an old version of QuickBooks as I had no interest in paying the SaaS tax for the latest version just in order to produce some accounts for a small charitable group.
The only reason for having a recent version of Windows is in order to run recent versions of applications. If the applications are "in the cloud", then what would you particularly want Windows for? Would you want to pay a regular subscription for software that simply enabled you to access other software?
There is still a small category of applications that need precision pointing, large screens and/or local processing power, but the primary purpose of Windows - to provide a stable platform for a wide range of local application software - is much diminished. The issue for Microsoft is whether they concentrate on an increasingly niche market for which Windows is appropriate, or whether Windows effectively becomes another Android or iOS. They've pretty much failed at the latter and don't seem ready to accept the former.
MS already know that Windows is becoming less important. Their focus now is Office 365 and Azure for IaaS.
Try Office 365 in a web browser. Certainly good enough for most day to day tasks. Web version of Outlook is better than the full client in many respects (folder search when filing especially). Only thing missing for me is the ability to duplicate calendar items as I need that for my timesheet.
Really? Not if you are trying to use outlook without a broadband connection direct onto the main backbone it isnt... far too slow. Frankly I also object to MS and the NSA having direct access to all my emails ... especially the work ones with confidential data in them
"Stable" as in "APIs maintain near-perfect backwards compatibility"
And to be completely fair, Windows 7 and Windows 10 are also very stable as in "Don't crash and recover nicely if you do".
The problem with Win10 is the incessant forced feature upgrades, which break/move/ruin existing installs and features.
"Surely you jest about the stability of windows? Experience tend to point in the direction of instability especially with the latest offering."
Your experience must be limited to old and crappy hardware then 'cause stability hasn't been a serious issue for any OS in the last 10 years. Kids today don't know what instability is...
QuickBooks 2000 runs perfectly well on Windows 7 64-bit, as does Quicken '97; installing them however is something of a challenge, involving manually identifying and copying a bunch of supporting files from a working copy on XP or earlier. I've been using all 3 for years and have no plans (or need) to change them since they do their respective jobs extremely well.
Hope that helps.
"could it just be that they have simply lost interest in Windows - not making enough money - and are preparing to abandon it?"
Quite the reverse based on what they are up to recently. You can now run Linux apps under Windows 10 and on Server 2019 without a Linux kernel. Embrace then replace.
"The only thing that will make MS sit up and take notice of it's (Windows) customers is that they start losing them. Losing money will do it."
You'd think so in a NORMAL world. And, as far as new computer sales go, this is probably ALREADY happening. Micro-shaft does not care about losing money right now. They have way too much 'spare capital' to do whatever THEY want. And it appears to be a LONG GAME strategy, which means they're driving "the masses" in a direction THEY want, because THEY CAN.
Think about the purchase of GitHub. Think about how developers "moving to Linux" has prompted them to "Embrace Extend Extinguish" a kind of 'linux clone' subsystem that runs in Win-10-nic. None of this is a coincidence, I'm sure of it.
In a normal world, they would care VERY much about losing customers, and do what they could to try and WIN THEM BACK. But they're not. They're smugly, arrogantly, even DEFIANTLY moving off in whatever direction they *FEEL* is right, DAMN the customers, full speed ahead.
Unfortunate, because in the 90's, I really liked what they were doing.
Not abandoning... more like 'reshaping' Windows, similar to the transition from Office to Office 365.
The monetization comes from subscriptions and/or ad delivery, not selling a new box of the same software every few years.
What I can see Microsoft abandoning is its alliance, or at least its dependence on, Intel. By cozying up to Qualcomm.
Since Microsoft have apparently restructured ( others here will TBH know much more about this than I) and become much less Windows focussed it's clearly a yes.
So many ordinary users use their smart phones to do TwitBook and Google to search, with Amazon to shop that consumer PCs are a diminishing market. Most home users don't much need a computer, they are content consumers, not producers. School kids and students need a home computer. Beyond that it's business. And none of these markets are going to replace machines as often as they used to. And frankly, why should they. Several years back we reached peak upgrade. Very few users have computing needs that exceed the capacity of a machine made after about 2010.
@Terry 6
Succinct summary of what you've commented:
These days, you could easily get by a day** without touching a single Microsoft product or service. And you wouldn't be missing anything. Back in the late 1990s to early-mid 2000s, this wasn't the case. Kids these days do not understand that dark, helpless era; they think Xbox, Minecraft, Github, a jeans-wearing CEO and a hipster minimalistic window tile corporate logo make Microsoft a palatable company.
**Unless your workplace forces Office and Exchange/Outlook on you.
The problem is, no one actually listens and addresses anything anymore. Put this in front of a Microsoft executive and expect to get the Zuckerberg treatment: A lawyered and different answer, to every question asked!
Take Microsoft recently: calling out Facebook for human-rights 'data' abuses... WTF?
Its like the whole of Silly 'con' Valley have bought into Jobian reality-distortion-field economics. Deny it. PR it. Throw money at conferences / journos and by sheer will create the perception you want people to swallow!
"Its like the whole of Silly 'con' Valley have bought into Jobian reality-distortion-field economics."
The problem is that it worked very well for Jobs, well except for the whole cancer thing, and made Apple a very very very profitable company. So naturally other evil companies are trying to emulate that success.
"Need to show a loss"
Well, all it would take is for one small business to get hit with a fine from HMRC for late filing of a Tax return and you have a loss allright.
OR an author to lose a 500,000 word manuscript that was due for publication.
Time spent fixing the issues can be taken into consideration IF that time would have been spent earning money.
For us mere plebs/mortals/ordinary people, MS could not give a F***. In many cases I think that they'd rather we went away and didn't bother them again. Well, IMHO, Windows 10 from a consumer POV seems hell bent of driving users to other platforms so... you make your own mind up.
Yet again last month, I had to tell a family member "I don't do Windows 10" when asked for help because MS in their 'wisdom' (sic) had screwed up their computer with an update. sigh.
" ... OR an author to lose a 500,000 word manuscript that was due for publication"
So that's what happened to George Martin's next Thrones novel.
The rewritten version has an army of robotic, faceless, rapacious monsters that cannot be killed gradually being forced back beyond The Wall until they are returned to confinement in the Tomb of the Undead, in Redmond.
Windows is Coming
"UK tort law starts with having to show a "loss", and your time is worth .... nothing." --- JimmyPage
But, if you can't fix it yourself, and you pay someone to fix it for you, I think* their time is worth something, and you might well be able to claim that having to pay them is a 'loss' you might expect to be at least partially reimbursed.
Perhaps, by making the updates compulsory, MS have increased their exposure to such claims?
*IANALBIPOOTI
@JimmyPage
Lots of people have not just lost time. If the Win 10 update screw up stops you working / reduces effectiveness then it costs money - e.g. borked PC so cannot use webcam to record bondage session and burn DVD for your punter, so cash is lost.
(There may be more family friendly use cases)
I got a desperate call from a blind friend who uses screen reading software to use his PC. After the update his onboard sound was borked (still is) and that was a massive deal to him. Without sound his PC was nothing more than an expensive room heater. I had to order him a cheap usb soundcard to plug in as I dont live nearby and couldnt install a PCI card. The PC is a Zoostorm and the onboard was nothing out of the ordinary just a Realtek HD so you would have thought MS would have checkecd that before release to the general public.
MS should realise that some people rely on their computers for far more significant things than business. To my mate it is his lifeline aginst loneliness. He lives his life in total darkness, not something most of us could cope with, and to lose that because someone did not invest a bit of time to ensure their product was fit for purpose is extremely hard on vulnerable people like him.
"MS should realise that some people rely on their computers for far more significant things than business"
Twenty years ago I used to say that if Bill Gates had to be in Intensive Care and rely—absolutely rely—upon a computer-controlled device to keep him alive, he'd shit himself if he thought its OS was any version of Windows.
And to anyone who's technically familiar with OSs and high-uptime servers, I'd ask the same thing today. If your life absolutely depended upon a given machine continuing to function and do its job—if it stopped working for more than 60 seconds, you would die—would you in all honesty trust a Windows OS or a *ix one?
It's my shrewd suspicion that whatever folks might say, there isn't a single techie working for Microsoft who, if their life really was the stake, would choose Windows over *ix.
"It's my shrewd suspicion that whatever folks might say, there isn't a single techie working for Microsoft who, if their life really was the stake, would choose Windows over *ix."
What a great question. I had to stop and think about it, but not for long. My answer was Linux. Supporting Microsoft products is my bread and butter and I don't go in for bashing them 'just because, but I feel on this one you're right.
"...A plane only takes about 5 seconds to come down from kilometers up to a couple meters below ground level..."
Aeroplanes don't fall out of the sky like that. Even unpowered they will glide. For that kind of descent you'd need to be in a powered dive.
This post has been deleted by its author
"And to anyone who's technically familiar with OSs and high-uptime servers, I'd ask the same thing today. If your life absolutely depended upon a given machine continuing to function and do its job—if it stopped working for more than 60 seconds, you would die—would you in all honesty trust a Windows OS or a *ix one?"
Of course not. Oh, you meant that to be a one or the other question?
I also would not trust x86 hardware, non-ECC memory, non-redundant power supplies, anything socketed, etc. There are ways to make software and hardware reliable enough to trust your life with them. Those methods are *extremely* expensive, not just in the hardware chosen, but in the specification process, the design process, testing, verification, etc.
I'm no Windows fanboi (stubbornly running Win 7 here!) but the life-support provision isn't a realistic comparasion.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
