Microsoft hits a new low, now pushing 10 via IE

[Executioner]

Sneaks Windows 10 advertising into an Internet Explorer security patch. Man these guys are pushy bastards on shoving 10 down everyone's throats.

The primary purpose of security update MS16-023 for Internet Explorer -- which was released just yesterday -- is, according to support document KB 3139929, to resolve "several reported vulnerabilities" in the browser, including one which "could allow remote code execution if a user views a specially crafted webpage in Internet Explorer".

However, it also states that the security update includes "several nonsecurity-related fixes for Internet Explorer".

Click that link and you’ll be shown some more KB article numbers, including KB 3146449. This is described as "Updated Internet Explorer 11 capabilities to upgrade Windows 8.1 and Windows 7" which naturally starts alarm bells ringing.

Clicking that link reveals that the update "adds functionality to Internet Explorer 11 on some computers that lets users learn about Windows 10 or start an upgrade to Windows 10. Before you install this update, see the Prerequisites section. For more information about Windows 10, see Windows 10".

http://betanews.com/2016/03/09/windows-10-advertising-in-ie-security-patch/#comments

 

[nerp]

Run linux then. get over it.

 

[balloonshark]

This is old news but it pretty much proves why some people don't trust MS anymore. It reminds me of how our government tries to pass a bill that the public doesn't like. Of course the bill doesn't get passed so they get sneaky and break it up into little bite sized chunks and place them in other bills.

 

[C1]

Microsoft (along with many other companies) realize that they need to go to a subscriber/subscription model to survive. Mainly, they need a guaranteed regular (monthly or annual) income to sustain.

Based on what Im experiencing, I think that there are some significant cracks showing up within MS, but what's going on is not entirely confined to MS either.

Mainly, their products are turning to crap. As usual in the software domain, it's simply easier to seemingly give/add more instead of make better as the latter requires creativity which seems to becoming short supply across the board.

Much of what is going on is classic & has been experienced many times before as software developing companies have come & gone.

 

[Elixer]

The real question here is, why is anyone still using IE?

 

[master_shake_]

The real question here is, why is anyone still using IE?

/thread

 

[VirtualLarry]

Is the thing that OP is describing, any different, than the blue square that shows up when you start IE for the first time, saying "Get Windows 10, it's free!"?

 

[Anteaus]

Run linux then. get over it.

Agreed. I'm not opposed to constructive criticism of current MS products, but Windows 10 is out and MS is about moving forward. If you have a specific reason to continuing using Windows, whether it be gaming or professional software, then it's time to simply accept your co-dependent relationship with MS. Alternatively, you can walk away and using one of many viable Linux distros that can do virtually everything you need sans gaming and commercial productivity software.

Ubuntu MATE or Linux Mint are very capable.

 

[Executioner]

Ubuntu MATE or Linux Mint are very capable.

Yep. Already tried Mint and Zorin. Just need to get off of gaming, but I could keep 7 and my old games.

 

[PliotronX]

The real question here is, why is anyone still using IE?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I thought I'd seen somewhere the other day that new Win 10 users might be better off using IE than "The Edge" for security reasons. I'm sure I read that; I just can't remember precisely where I read it.

As for Microsoft, the culture of the behemoth may be slowly changing over time. Whether you blame it on the retirement of Gates, Balmer or others, I can't make anything conclusive from it.

Since M$ is a dominant firm -- no barriers to entry in the market but they have a lock on a large number of PCs and people who use them -- they reap something short of the excess profits of a total monopoly. Someone inform me or correct me: When did we ever hear much of anything for Microsoft taking big quarterly losses on sales?

The "up side" of a monopoly or dominant firm arises from its potential for solid customer support, ability to fund R&D and other factors. But if managers decide to cut this or that program because it's not a "money-maker," you might likely see these pressures develop for a new subscription model of an OS. They'd like to reduce their costs supporting Win 7 as much as possible. If fewer people continue to use Windows 7, they may have to provide "grandfathered" support according to their original promise. But then again, they might be able to do so at a lower cost.

 

[abekl]

...Mainly, their products are turning to crap. As usual in the software domain, it's simply easier to seemingly give/add more instead of make better as the latter requires creativity which seems to becoming short supply across the board...

This kind of broad statement doesn't add anything and can't be backed up. For every example of SW turning to crap, I can show you the opposite. And talk about creativity. There are really creative changes coming all the time into the windows world. Just open your eyes.

 

[DigDog]

The real question here is, why is anyone still using IE?

what is IE?

 

[Nashemon]

what is IE?

Internet Exploder.

 

[bradly1101]

Microsoft (along with many other companies) realize that they need to go to a subscriber/subscription model to survive. Mainly, they need a guaranteed regular (monthly or annual) income to sustain.

Based on what Im experiencing, I think that there are some significant cracks showing up within MS, but what's going on is not entirely confined to MS either.

Mainly, their products are turning to crap. As usual in the software domain, it's simply easier to seemingly give/add more instead of make better as the latter requires creativity which seems to becoming short supply across the board.

Much of what is going on is classic & has been experienced many times before as software developing companies have come & gone.

Don't forget that Microsoft bought the rights to "Windows365."

My beef with Microsoft is the discontinuance of Media Center. That was creative!

Sent from my SM-G930T1 using Tapatalk

 

[nerp]

Don't forget that Microsoft bought the rights to "Windows365."

My beef with Microsoft is the discontinuance of Media Center. That was creative!

Sent from my SM-G930T1 using Tapatalk

I still run a Windows 7 machine for MCE but so few people ever used it. It made no sense for them to invest resources and development into something that nobody uses. That's bad business.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Microsoft (along with many other companies) realize that they need to go to a subscriber/subscription model to survive. Mainly, they need a guaranteed regular (monthly or annual) income to sustain.

If you're suggesting the notion that Microsoft would be stupid enough to push a subscription-based model for an operating system, well... they're not that stupid. Attempting to force someone to pay you to use their own computer is a good way to get the boot extremely fast.

 

[JimmiG]

what is IE?

It's a tool that comes pre-installed with Windows to let you download a web browser.

 

[Anteaus]

If you're suggesting the notion that Microsoft would be stupid enough to push a subscription-based model for an operating system, well... they're not that stupid. Attempting to force someone to pay you to use their own computer is a good way to get the boot extremely fast.

1. MS has already announced that Windows 10 would be the last numbered Windows release and that future releases will be incremental and distributed online via "Windows as a service." That directly implies a future subscription model since they admit readily to closing off a revenue stream in the not so distant future that needs to be replaced. Subscription doesn't necessary mean monthly payments. A single, annual payment much how they do with MS Office now is likely more probable. Companies like Adobe have already set the precedent...MS is simply adopting what is already out there.

2. In order to prevent push back, MS has to get Windows 10 into as many households as possible early on in order to start the transition. Do you think offering Windows 10 for free was charity?

Besides, your comment is misleading. We have always been forced to pay to use our computers if you used Windows. What's the difference if I pay $120 up front or $30 per year? Since future Windows releases will be incremental, a subscription model guarantees that users will always have the latest greatest build. It will be a bit more expensive over the long run for the user, but that is one of the key reasons they are doing this.

 

[Nashemon]

1. MS has already announced that Windows 10 would be the last numbered Windows release and that future releases will be incremental and distributed online via "Windows as a service." That directly implies a future subscription model since they admit readily to closing off a revenue stream in the not so distant future that needs to be replaced. Subscription doesn't necessary mean monthly payments. A single, annual payment much how they do with MS Office now is likely more probable. Companies like Adobe have already set the precedent...MS is simply adopting what is already out there.

2. In order to prevent push back, MS has to get Windows 10 into as many households as possible early on in order to start the transition. Do you think offering Windows 10 for free was charity?

Besides, your comment is misleading. We have always been forced to pay to use our computers if you used Windows. What's the difference if I pay $120 up front or $30 per year? Since future Windows releases will be incremental, a subscription model guarantees that users will always have the latest greatest build. It will be a bit more expensive over the long run for the user, but that is one of the key reasons they are doing this.

Ah, conspiracists...

 

[Anteaus]

Ah, conspiracists...

Conjecture based on current market trends and facts as delivered by the principle company. Do you debate that the market in general is moving toward a subscription model?

Very few major applications these days don't require either online activation, a network license, or a local license (dongle). They are virtually all subscription models where there is an initial purchase then maintenance payments. For home use, it is usually just some sort of monthly, annual, or bi-annual fee.

Windows 10 will not be subscription based, but the future is up in the air. It might be partially conspiratorial, but these views weren't formed in a vacuum. Fifteen years ago, who would have thought that over 95 percent of PC software would be delivered digitally today? You think people who are used to paying for Netflix, Xbox Live, PSN, or World of Warcraft worry much about making an annual payment to MS? It's just one more thing and MS knows that.

From a business perspective, subscription based Windows is a way of killing the legacy OS market and forcing people to use whatever is the latest. MS is tired of battling the legacies of its older products just to sell the newest one.

I disagree that it is conspiratorial. I do agree that it sounds a bit far fetched, but it is well reasoned if far reaching.

 

[balloonshark]

MS should just make Windows 10 free and earn their money by selling games, apps, music, movies/rentals, cloud storage and services, etc.

Or if they do charge a monthly fee give some of the above as free benefits for renting 10. Sort of like Amazon does with Prime.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Using the browser nobody uses to push the OS nobody wants. Brilliant.

 

[chucky2]

snip

Besides, your comment is misleading. We have always been forced to pay to use our computers if you used Windows. What's the difference if I pay $120 up front or $30 per year? Since future Windows releases will be incremental, a subscription model guarantees that users will always have the latest greatest build. It will be a bit more expensive over the long run for the user, but that is one of the key reasons they are doing this.

The difference is 1.) once i buy my $120 copy of Windows, the price doesn't change at MicroSofts whim, and 2.) in 4 years, my OS is paid for, I'm done paying M$.

 

[SparkyJJO]

1. MS has already announced that Windows 10 would be the last numbered Windows release and that future releases will be incremental and distributed online via "Windows as a service." That directly implies a future subscription model since they admit readily to closing off a revenue stream in the not so distant future that needs to be replaced. Subscription doesn't necessary mean monthly payments. A single, annual payment much how they do with MS Office now is likely more probable. Companies like Adobe have already set the precedent...MS is simply adopting what is already out there.

2. In order to prevent push back, MS has to get Windows 10 into as many households as possible early on in order to start the transition. Do you think offering Windows 10 for free was charity?

Besides, your comment is misleading. We have always been forced to pay to use our computers if you used Windows. What's the difference if I pay $120 up front or $30 per year? Since future Windows releases will be incremental, a subscription model guarantees that users will always have the latest greatest build. It will be a bit more expensive over the long run for the user, but that is one of the key reasons they are doing this.

My comment is not misleading.

As with most anything, in order for you to use it you have to buy it first (the entire freakin' PC to start with). However, once you have bought your computer with Windows (or Mac OS for that matter), you never have to pay anybody a penny again to use the system. Sure, some software APPLICATIONS may require a subscription to continue use, but 1) that's just the application, not the entire computer and 2) not paying the subscription doesn't effectively lock you out of your data, just that program.

What you're suggesting is Microsoft would charge a recurring fee just to use your computer to read your email or access your pictures or whatever.

Do you REALLY think that would fly, and do you REALLY think that they'd attempt that?

While Microsoft, Adobe, etc have subscription packages available for other software packages such as Creative Suite or Office, you can also still buy a full blown license. It isn't "subscription or nothing."

Also, Microsoft specifically said with this Windows 10 free upgrade that there were NO fees or anything later. And they are still selling Windows 10 just as they had always sold previous versions.

All evidence and reason points to them not doing a subscription-based model for the operating system. The only place that has ever been mentioned is from conspiracy theorists.