Microsoft shows off just how much data it’s collecting from Windows 10 users

[Elapo]

Not only can you delay updates, you can change a group policy that forces Windows 10 to ask permission before it downloads the update (which I did).

 

Wutwut, I didn't know that, completely forgot I had access to GP in W10 Pro.

[GoodBytes]

So in some cases, it is free. Isn’t it a bit uncanny to say it’s not free when under certain circumstances it actually is? Sure, 7 or 8.1 may not be free. But we weren’t talking about those OSes, were we?

It is free temporary, as Microsoft will not only make back its money (it sees it like that), but make money, and potentially save it's Mobile platform. That is Microsoft goal.

There is 0 data mining in Windows outside of Bing and anything that uses Bing (Cortana, if enabled). Bind data mining is the same as Google, and Yahoo search engines. That is how they make their money. They collect people, try and figures you out, put your data in categories, and and sale this data to companies as Market Data, which they use to develop their products and know how to market things better to maximize sales, or even get their product to sale.

What Microsoft collects is telemetry data. HUGE difference. Telemetry data has no value in knowing about you, but rather how people uses the OS. This is actually nothing new to Windows. Windows 7 and 8, Microsoft was very public about that this. If you followed Windows 8 development, it was packed with Windows 7 user telemetry data, and explained the direction of some decision they took.

The only difference is that Windows 10 collects a bit more information, and the privacy policy and license agreement no longer requires a team of lawyer to understand it. Now, it is written in laymen term. It is part of Microsoft move to make things more understandable, a move that Apple and Google so far aren't interested in doing (because it also open wholes making harder to defend themselves in court). So now people understand, some of them freak out. I guess the famous say: 'Ignorance is bliss', was in action. In addition, you can't completely opt out (was also hidden and hard to do with Windows 7. Did you do any step to disables? No? Did you see any options? No? Then you were part of it, and didn't know how to disable it).

To be honest my opinion of Microsoft’s opinion hasn’t been worse than now because Microsoft wants to molest the one good product they have by filling it with data mining tools that run without any public face to the user.

I think you forgot some words: rape, terrorize, communist, and violates. I mean, if you are going to dramatize, might as well go all in.

We didn’t ask for this and it’s all the worse that, most of the time, we are in fact paying for such wrongdoings with cash. And besides, there are a lot more opportunities to get away with using Google’s products than there is Microsoft’s without breaking too much of a sweat, and I do feel that Microsoft really is forcing their users’ hands when it comes to the random restarts, BSoDs when you delay updates, anti-privacy practices on behalf of Microsoft, and the looming fact that you have to go miles out of your way to “disable” those invasions and even then you can’t be sure because it’s all proprietary anyway. Then again it is a bit hard to compare an array of web apps to an operating system doing the same thing, so I dunno. You certainly do have less control when your kernel is working against you, I do know that much.

Yes, you did. After people complain none stop on how Microsoft is disconnected from its users. See how people like Windows 7? Telemetry data in action right there. Windows 8 cool features? Telemetry data.

Google is the biggest offender of them all. Any time you use Google service you are being fully tracked. Login or not, doesn't matter. Also, Google expands to all other web site via its ad service, and Google analytical service. The moment you login, Google associate it your name with it. But if you feel that Microsoft collecting how many monitors you have, what GPU you have, and so on, similar to Steam "molests" you, as you claim, but "OK" with Google, I think you have the definition "OK" and "molested" on reverse.

Windows doesn't randomly restarts. If it does, then your system hardware restarting your system due to a circuit failure, or overheating issues (emergency overheating protection which can either shutdown or restart your system, depending on the hardware, and hardware manufacture, and part). As for BSOD, the days of Windows 95 are long gone. BSODs are not normal errors not handled. They are hardware related problem that can't be recovered. Meaning, you have faulty hardware, or a driver causing a hardware fault making the driver unrecoverable, all depending on the error.

"Delay updates" does not cause BSODs as you claim. I think everyone on this forum running Windows 10 will confirm this.

[GoodBytes]

So we’re going to bash Google and then defend Microsoft... okay then. Someone’s taking this a bit too seriously, bringing rape into the discussion of all things

No. You brought Google, saying on how it is better with them. I didn't bash them, that is the truth. Read the full privacy policies and license agreement of ANYTHING you use, and based on that take a decision on whether you want to use the product or not.

[deWaardt]

Can they also see on how many PC's the start menu breaks?

Maybe they could fix that first.

[GoodBytes]

Can they also see on how many PC's the start menu breaks?

Maybe they could fix that first.

They can see what crashes.

So they should. But people still need to report it via the Feedback program in Windows 10. You have to consider the possibility that there is a bug that creates a 'silent crash' (actual term used by developers). Basically a crash that isn't detected. So reporting it will make Microsoft be sure to look into it, especially if they are many people, and perhaps implement additional code via a Windows Update to better monitor the Start Menu from users, to catch the silent crash, and turn it an actual crash for them to analyze and fix.

[deWaardt]

They can see what crashes.

So they should. But people still need to report it via the Feedback program in Windows 10. You have to consider the possibility that there is a bug that creates a 'silent crash' (actual term used by developers). Basically a crash that isn't detected. So reporting it will make Microsoft be sure to look into it, especially if they are many people, and perhaps implement additional code via a Windows Update to better monitor the Start Menu from users, to catch the silent crash, and turn it an actual crash for them to analyze and fix.

I think they kind of have something like that for the start menu.

[LAwLz]

There is 0 data mining in Windows outside of Bing and anything that uses Bing (Cortana, if enabled). Bind data mining is the same as Google, and Yahoo search engines. That is how they make their money. They collect people, try and figures you out, put your data in categories, and and sale this data to companies as Market Data, which they use to develop their products and know how to market things better to maximize sales, or even get their product to sale.

There is quite a bit of non-Bing related "data mining" going on in Windows 10 as well. Saying that it is only related to Bing is very misleading and does not include things such as the incredibly aggressive and forced usage data as well as telemetry data.

 

 

What Microsoft collects is telemetry data. HUGE difference. Telemetry data has no value in knowing about you, but rather how people uses the OS. This is actually nothing new to Windows. Windows 7 and 8, Microsoft was very public about that this. If you followed Windows 8 development, it was packed with Windows 7 user telemetry data, and explained the direction of some decision they took.

Oh when will you shut up and stop repeating that blatant lie? Telemetry data in Windows 7 was OPT-IN! That means users had to go into the settings and enable it for themselves. In Windows 10 it is on by default and it is not possible to disable without using third party hacks.

It was not until very recently (after the launch of Windows 10) that Microsoft enabled telemetry in a Windows 7 update for all users.

 

Again, from Microsoft's own website (updated 2009, slightly before the full release of Windows 7):

 

How does CEIP work?

When you choose to participate in the CEIP, your computer or device automatically sends information to Microsoft about how you use certain products. Information from your computer is combined with other CEIP data to help Microsoft solve problems and to improve the products and features customers use most often.

The way Microsoft used to gather information was completely completely different from what they do now. You really can't compare the two.

[Stuff_]

Indeed.

 

That kind of shit, is exactly why I refuse to downgrade to Windows 10. I'm not going to use a "product" that uses me as the product and I have to fight with to get it to work in a secure manner. Sooner or later, someone is going to crack Microsofts servers, and get a treasure trove of data and IP addresses, etc. Not to mention a MASSIVE distribution point for whatever malware they care to embed in the Windows Update system.

 

The entire thing is one giant vulnerability waiting to happen.

Same will happen at Apple, Google, All ISPs, Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover, etc etc etc. 

 

Because, following your logic, I don't see why it wouldn't get hacked and all the data be flooded out. 

[Trik'Stari]

Same will happen at Apple, Google, All ISPs, Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover, etc etc etc. 

 

Because, following your logic, I don't see why it wouldn't get hacked and all the data be flooded out. 

It's not my logic, it's fact. Nothing on the internet is 100% secure. Everything will eventually get hacked.

[MaxBeast4Z]

I say it's a waste of time upgrading to Windows 10 anyway it is not free you gotta pay after the year is done and the license is like $200

 

I already paid for Windows 8.1 can give me a break

[VAkena]

You’re gonna have to explain that one to me, lol. Granted I did pay for Windows 10 and didn’t get the “free upgrade,” such a general statement that “Windows 10 is not free” is provably false at some level or another.

 

You probably didn't get the GWX (Get Windows 10) because you hadn't fully updated your PC via Windows Update. 

[Trik'Stari]

If it’s of enough interest, that is. I doubt anyone would be interested in hacking my personal server, but it certainly is hackable. It’s worth noting that the security of some places is worse than others – for instance, there was an counterterrorist hacking group that targeted websites at random, and was very successful when it came to sites like the PokéCommunity, who ran custom software. A lot of people say that running a closed-source + custom-made gamut (like Microsoft does) is safer but all it does is shove the vulnerabilities under the rug.

I feel like hacking a distribution source that will give you access to roughly 200 million (relatively defenseless) users (200 million devices, whatever) is a fairly big, juicy target.

[Stuff_]

It's not my logic, it's fact. Nothing on the internet is 100% secure. Everything will eventually get hacked.

No, not everything will eventually. You can make the claim that everything has a chance, but chance doesn't equate to guarantee. You cannot guarantee something will be hacked. 

[Trik'Stari]

No, not everything will eventually. You can make the claim that everything has a chance, but chance doesn't equate to guarantee. You cannot guarantee something will be hacked. 

True, but that only makes the guarantee of security through obscurity. The more popular something is, the more likely it is to get hacked. And Windows 10 looks to be pretty damned popular.

[Stuff_]

True, but that only makes the guarantee of security through obscurity. The more popular something is, the more likely it is to get hacked. And Windows 10 looks to be pretty damned popular.

The one fallacy your logic hold is, why has Google never had a (significant) data breach? 

[Stuff_]

“Significant” your argument is moot right there. They’ve had data breaches as you subtly admit.

What? Significance is completely relevant. If a company was hacked, and was able to mitigate well enough, the hacker would only get a fraction of information (maybe less than 100 customer information). That is way better than if they were able to get all the information Target leaked, or all the crap Sony has been through with it's customers, or the OPM hack where millions of extremely sensitive information were gathered.

 

(None of this has happened to Google thus far).

 

They've likely had some extremely minor issues where it's not even relevant. And I promise you they have a couple million attempts at running exploits through their servers every single day. Significance of the breach is relevant. 

[vanished]

What? Significance is completely relevant. If a company was hacked, and was able to mitigate well enough, the hacker would only get a fraction of information (maybe less than 100 customer information). That is way better than if they were able to get all the information Target leaked, or all the crap Sony has been through with it's customers, or the OPM hack where millions of extremely sensitive information were gathered.

 

(None of this has happened to Google thus far).

 

They've likely had some extremely minor issues where it's not even relevant. And I promise you they have a couple million attempts at running exploits through their servers every single day. Significance of the breach is relevant. 

So when you said "Google never had a (significant) data breach?" are you throwing that "significant" in there just to cover yourself in the even that they actually had small breach(es) you were unaware of, or have they actually never had any breach of any size?  AFAIK they've never leaked anything, but I could be wrong.  Still, I feel like even a small breach of them would be big news...

[GoodBytes]

I have to agree with Stuff.

If a hacker compromises a company servers, but only access the web site server, without access to any database, and no access to write/modify any files, only read silly php/css/html files, then who cares? The "hacker" didn't actually breach anything as they are accessible pages via the web browser, you just connected to the server, and where able to view the full list of files. While technically it is a breached, it not one anyone cares about.

So the significance of breach is everything. I'll be REALLY surprised if Google and Microsoft aren't being attacked hourly. Imagine the press coverage the hacker will get if he.she is able to breach either companies server. It would be HUGE for them.

[online_olympian]

Why is it free? nothing is free... I remain highly dubious about windows 10.. 

[vanished]

Why is it free? nothing is free... I remain highly dubious about windows 10.. 

 

It's free because they want as many people to be using it as possible.  Why that is exactly, I supposed we'll never know 100% for sure.  Perhaps it is something as logical and innocent as wanting to make sure everyone is up-to-date security-wise, has the latest features, and so they don't have to worry about trying to maintain older platforms & the compatibility problems that can cause.  Perhaps it is something else...

[Stuff_]

So when you said "Google never had a (significant) data breach?" are you throwing that "significant" in there just to cover yourself in the even that they actually had small breach(es) you were unaware of, or have they actually never had any breach of any size?  AFAIK they've never leaked anything, but I could be wrong.  Still, I feel like even a small breach of them would be big news...

I said "significant" because I guess that word is a bit subjective. Some people think any type of unauthorized access could be significant. But as far as information security goes, there's always going to be a level of plausibility where someone will be able to exploit a vulnerability of some kind. 

 

 

I have to agree with Stuff.

If a hacker compromises a company servers, but only access the web site server, without access to any database, and no access to write/modify any files, only read silly php/css/html files, then who cares? The "hacker" didn't actually breach anything as they are accessible pages via the web browser, you just connected to the server, and where able to view the full list of files. While technically it is a breached, it not one anyone cares about.

So the significance of breach is everything. I'll be REALLY surprised if Google and Microsoft aren't being attacked hourly. Imagine the press coverage the hacker will get if he.she is able to breach either companies server. It would be HUGE for them.

I worked at a medical school as an information security analyst, and even we had attacks pretty frequently. Rarely did something come out of it. It's all medical records and extremely sensitive information, so I can see why hackers choose it as a spot to try. Mostly it comes from China and Russia (of course).

[LAwLz]

It's free because they want as many people to be using it as possible.  Why that is exactly, I supposed we'll never know 100% for sure.  Perhaps it is something as logical and innocent as wanting to make sure everyone is up-to-date security-wise, has the latest features, and so they don't have to worry about trying to maintain older platforms & the compatibility problems that can cause.  Perhaps it is something else...

No, it's not because they just want everyone to be up to date security wise. They are trying to move Windows from a one time fee into a platform where you constantly spend money. Kind of like with Android and iOS. You get the OS for free, but there is a constant stream of money leaving your wallet through services like the app stores and subscriptions to music streaming, videos, online storage and other such content, as well as through ads.

That's why they keep talking about "Windows as a service". They don't want you to pay 99 dollars once and then enjoy Windows for like 5 years. They want to get a piece every time you use your computer (buy a program from the store, use a program with an ad in it and so on).

With that strategy, having a big user base is the key to success. Microsoft are currently not making any money from Windows 7 users since they don't have access to things such as stores. Bringing those users over to Windows 10 unlocks additional revenue potential.

 

On top of all that, Microsoft are trying to do CPR to their dying mobile platform. The handful of diehard Microsoft fanboys on this site might try and convince you differently, but the Windows phone platform has been a colossal failure. Third party support is extremely poor and first party support does not really have that good track record either. By making it so that Windows Phone apps can run on regular Windows, Microsoft are trying to use their monopoly on the desktop side to inflate the target audience. A developer might not be interested in developing an app for 2.6% of the smartphone market, but if the app can run on 2.6% of smartphones and a huge chunk of the desktop market then it might actually be worth it for the developer.

 

That's the reason why Windows 10 is currently a free upgrade, and why they are being so extremely aggressive with making people upgrade. It's not because they want to do a good deed and protect their customers. It's because they are trying to change business model.

 

Supporting old software does not have anything to do with it either. The support period of older Windows versions have already been announced. Microsoft will have to continue fixing issues for those versions no matter if the marketshare for those versions are 50% or 5%.

[xgn]

ALL OF THAT DATA IS ANONYMOUS

 

It's not like they can see the pictures that you view in the Photos app. They can just see how many people opened the app, it's analytics .

Nsa can spy on you're pc whenever they like. They have to pass it in congress acording to Obama. But thats bullshit they do it anyway. If they catch Snowden they will kill him.

[vanished]

*snip*

 

Thanks for filling in the "perhaps it is something else" for me

[GoodBytes]

GoodBytes and the other handful of diehard Microsoft fanboys on this site might try and convince you differently, but the Windows phone platform has been a colossal failure.

Colossal failure? No. Failure Yes. Blackberry is a colossal failure.

I never said that Windows Phone is a good choice, and I have never recommended one to anyone. I only said that I am interesting in getting one. That because I have it for free, I don't care about the apps, I know myself what I care and don't care about, I have done extensive research, and I know that the downsides of the device doesn't affect me. Beyond that, I will not recommend the Windows Phone, not unless the OS is more polished, and the app problem is solved. If current trend continues by developer, which you cannot deny has a growing interest (keep in mind that despite the name, and what you think, Universal Apps aren't universal out of the window. The dev needs to actually make a mobile version of the app. For instance, the latest version of Netflix, is only available on PC, not on mobile, despite being a Universal App). There might be a chance of having the core apps by the time the "Surface Phone" comes out, but even then. Everyone has its own "core apps", so definitely a big disclaimer.

And I also don't like how you put my name, thinking you know me, when you clearly don't.

Otherwise, I would have hit the Like button on your post.

As mentioned it is all about getting the Store rolling, with movie rental/purchase, Music purchase, subscription service, and, well, apps.