Valve finally kills the Steam Machine

Was it only a year ago that I was writing about how Valve might not be done with SteamOS? Well, that was then, and this is now, and it turns out that Valve had only disappointment in store for me on the SteamOS front. From PC Gamer Magazine:

Remember Steam Machines? Valve seems to be trying to forget its bid to get everyone playing games on expensive little boxes from Alienware, Asus and the like, as it’s removed the Steam Machines section from Steam. It’s been a while since anyone really talked about the living room PCs, but this looks like the final nail in the coffin.

Steam Machines never really got their big moment. Valve envisioned a new ecosystem following on from Big Picture mode, where people would play PC games in their living room using a Steam Machine, Steam Controller and SteamOS, but the big launch at the end of 2015 only saw a handful of the boxes appear, and none of them exactly tempted people away from their desktops or consoles.

[...]

The Steam Machine launch wasn’t helped by Valve’s second bid for domination of the living room. While their Steam Machine partners were designing their first boxes, Valve was busy making their own device: the Steam Link. It essentially did the same thing: allowing people to play Steam games on their TV, but instead of being a desktop surrogate, the Steam Link was a streaming device. And it was much, much cheaper.

As someone who bought a Steam Link, I guess I shouldn't really be surprised by this, but it's still something of a disappointment. There was a moment in time, during the darkest days of Windows 8 & 10, when it really did look like consumers generally, and gamers in particular, might be needing a viable alternative to Windows, and I was hoping that Valve might put some actual weight behind SteamOS in order to help make that happen. It turns out that Valve really is too busy with SteamVR to care about SteamOS, though, and thus the end arrives.

Of course, we now know that Microsoft's Windows strategy is changing, and the first steps of that new direction are looking remarkably pro-consumer, so the death of Valve's SteamOS initiative isn't likely to have much of a real-world impact. It's not like anybody was using it, after all. Still, even though its time is past, and its purpose might no longer be relevant, it's a little sad to see that the dream of a viable Linux-like gaming environment won't be coming to fruition... in spite of PS4/Orbis having proved that it really can work. C'est la vie.

Farewell, SteamOS. We hardly knew thee.

Windows 10 can still be had for free, weeks after they claimed to have closed the last free-WX loophole

BTW, I've just decided to start abbreviating Windows 10 to "WX," which is both shorter and consistent with GWX branding already used by Microsoft. For brevity and consistency, I'll also be using "W#" for earlier versions (i.e. W7, W8, W8.1), and simply adding the appropriate suffixes for other flavours of WX when needed for clarity (WX-Home, WX-Pro, WX-Core, WX-S, etc.).

It took Microsoft until two full weeks after their Dec. 31st deadline, and change, to finally close the Assistive Technologies loophole, which allowed users to upgrade to WX for free if they were willing to say that they used any kind of Assistive Technology... up to, and including, hot keys. You might thing that the end of the last of the Microsoft's officially free WX offerings would mean the end of stories about how you can still get WX for free.

Well, you would be wrong. Check out the "most relevant" result that Google News returns for "Windows 10."

Yes, that's Forbes, with yet another piece on how WX can still be had for free, now two weeks after the last free WX window was allegedly closed.

Windows 10 was free for a year after launch for anyone who had an older version of Windows. For those who missed this transition period it was possible to get an upgrade right up until the end of 2017, a loophole Microsoft has now closed - although it wasn't much of a loophole, as the company knew all about it.

However there are other ways to upgrade to Windows 10 that don't involve getting the upgrade assistant from the official site.

Yes, apparently this has always worked... meaning that this also isn't much of a loophole, since Microsoft clearly also knows all about it, i.e. working as intended.

It's unclear as to why this works, but if you have a product code for an old version of Windows 7, 8 or 8.1 you should be able to enter this into a copy of Windows 10 and get an activation. You will be given access to the version of Windows 10 that matches the original product key. So Windows 8 Pro will get Windows 10 Pro, while Windows 8 Home will get, you guessed it, Windows 10 Home.

Hmmm.... so it's possible to upgrade from W7-Pro to WX-Pro? It's a shame the GWX app didn't work the same way; I might have been tempted to switch.

Right about now, you might be wondering why Microsoft would still have a WX upgrade left open that's large enough for an auto-truck to drive through? Well, Microsoft themselves are pretty quiet on the issue, but Forbes' Ian Morris has some ideas:

As I pointed out in my article about the closing of the accessibility loophole, I don't think Microsoft really cares about end users getting free upgrades. It makes more money from OEM sales of Windows 10 on new laptops and revenue from corporate users than the slender pickings of home users. Indeed, Microsoft makes more money - and more margin - on selling cloud offerings these days.

Windows isn't a cash cow when it comes to home users, so I suspect there's a lot of give built into the system.

Which makes a lot of sense, actually. It's just a shame that Microsoft are being so disingenuous about it all. I mean, they could easily partner with PC-OEMs to promote new PC sales ("Get the most out of Windows 10 with the latest AMD/Ryzen hardware!"), while also continuing to let tech-savvier users upgrade for free if they still want to... and without the fucking hard sell, this time. Because, honestly, the hard sell of the GWX campaign was a big part of the continued appeal of W7, which culminated in Microsoft simply switching over users who didn't take active steps to avoid the unwanted "upgrade," even after they'd repeatedly refused Microsoft's malware-laden Home version of WX.

Hell, Microsoft even have a better product to give away than they did a few years ago, with more features and (crucially) better privacy protections, and even better privacy tools due to be added to the platform in a couple of months. And if I can also use my W7 Professional license to upgrade to WX-Pro, rather than the gimped Home version, to gain even more features and even better privacy tools... when, that becomes one hell of a sales pitch, doesn't it?

So, what's the problem?

Windows 10 breaches Dutch data protection law

I had a feeling that Microsoft's anti-consumer data collection bullshit wasn't done getting them into trouble with European regulators, but I'll admit that I wasn't expecting the next chapter in that story to come out of the Netherlands.

As reported by ZDNet's David Meyer:

Microsoft breaches the Dutch data protection law in the way it processes the personal data of people using the Windows 10 operating system, the country's data protection agency has said.

On Friday, Dutch data protection authority (DPA) the Autoriteir Persoonsgegevens said that Microsoft doesn't tell Windows 10 Home and Pro users which personal data it collects and why. It also said the firm makes it impossible for users to give their valid consent to their personal data being processed, due to the multiple ways in which that data might subsequently be used.

The data watchdog added that Microsoft "does not clearly inform users that it continuously collects personal data about the usage of apps and web surfing behaviour through its web browser Edge, when the default settings are used".

"It turns out that Microsoft's operating system follows about every step you take on your computer. That results in an intrusive profile of yourself," said Wilbert Tomesen, the regulator's vice-chairman. "What does that mean? Do people know about this, do they want this? Microsoft needs to give users a fair opportunity to decide about this themselves."

The issue, naturally, is telemetry.

While Microsoft offers users an overview of the categories of data that it collects through basic telemetry, it only informs people in a general way, with examples, about the categories of personal data it collects through full telemetry, the regulator said.

"The way Microsoft collects data at the full telemetry level is unpredictable. Microsoft can use the collected data for the various purposes, described in a very general way. Through this combination of purposes and the lack of transparency Microsoft cannot obtain a legal ground, such as consent, for the processing of data," it said.

It's hard to say exactly what effect this will have. When France's data watchdog had issues with Windows 10, Microsoft was able to find a bare-minimum level of compliance which resulted in a closed file, and mostly cosmetic changes to Windows' telemetry, an outcome that they're clearly hoping to replicate (ZDNet's piece quotes Microsoft Windows privacy officer Marisa Rogers as prioritizing compliance with the Dutch data protection law, while sharing "specific concerns with the Dutch DPA about the accuracy of some of its findings and conclusions"), so it could be that very little will actually change this time, either.

But with Windows 10 still struggling to win converts, and signs that Windows 7 users are leaving Windows entirely, for Linux, it's hardly good news for Microsoft that Windows 10's data collection and privacy issues are once again back in the news. They'd clearly hoped that this issue would go away, but since they haven't actually fixed the problem, that may be unlikely.

Hey, Microsoft! Do you want to know what will make this problem go away, completely, and forever? Let people turn the telemetry completely off. If telemetry is opt-in, rather than can't-really-opt-out-but-there's-a-lower-level-of-intrusiveness-available-you-pussies, people will stop complaining about the telemetry system. You might even win some converts amongst dug-in Windows 7 users (no promises, though - those folks have dug in pretty deeply).

Oh, and before I forget.... If you're reading this, then you should be running Spybot's Anti-Beacon, or something similar. Don't forget that Microsoft retconned this telemetry bullshit into Windows 7 and 8/8.1, too, so you should be taking steps to protect your own privacy, regardless of which Windows version you use. Microsoft sure as shit aren't going to.

Microsoft is leaving old bugs unpatched in Windwos 7, and that's a problem

While Windows 7 isn't receiving new features anymore, it is supposed to be receiving security updates until 2020. That's the deal; it is explicitly what "extended support" means. Microsoft, however, does not appear to be living up to their end of the deal. Surprise!

As reported by Liam Tung at ZDNet:

Microsoft is essentially leaving clues for hackers when it patches Windows 10, but not Windows 7, argues [Google's Project Zero researcher Mateusz] Jurczyk.

That's because hackers can use a technique called 'binary diffing' to analyze fixes in a modern product and pinpoint weaknesses in the older product.

The technique lends itself to Windows 7, Windows 8, and Windows 10, which are a perfect example of concurrently supported branches of a single product that share the same core code, but are patched and improved differently. 

As the researcher explains, the ability to use binary diffing is a problem in particular for the security of Windows 7 users, which account for half of all Windows users, because attackers know that Microsoft adds better security and sometimes even bug fixes only to the latest version of Windows.

[...]

One example was the bug CVE-2017-8680, which affected Windows 8.1 and Windows 7, but curiously not Windows 10. Project Zero reported it to Microsoft in May and it was fixed in Microsoft's September Patch Tuesday update.

On discovering the bug, the researcher identified the relevant patch in Windows 10 and realized that Microsoft hadn't backported it to earlier versions.

After running more comparisons between Windows 7 versus Windows 10 and Windows 8.1 versus Windows 10, he found two more vulnerabilities, CVE-2017-8684 and CVE-2017-8685, in the Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 kernels. These were also patched in September.

I know that Microsoft want users to migrate from Windows 7 to 10, but effectively breaking 7 to coerce users into migrating is not OK. We are not talking about new features, here. We are talking about bug fixes and security patches which Windows 7 users are supposed to be receiving, and aren't.

It goes without saying that any bug which was present in Windows 7, 8, and 10 is a long-standing issue which Microsoft should be addressing on all three platform. Instead, they've left this rake lying in the grass, waiting for Google to call them out on it, publicly, before doing anything. Google brought the bug to Microsoft's attention, remember; it's not as if Microsoft didn't know that Google (a competitor, let we forget) knew about this, and their Project Zero team have already proven that they'll call out companies for failing to act on security problems.

Microsoft hadn't managed to find a rake in their own grass for almost a month, but I guess that streak is now over, because they've definitely stepped on this one.

Self-inflicted injury, for the win!

Windows 10 continues to lose Steam

Continuing a tradition that's been going for a while now, Steam's user base continues to run contrary to the overall OS market. Just like last month, while Windows 10 continues to make slow gains in the OS market overall, Steam's users seem to be switching back to Windows 7 at a brisk pace, according to the Steam Survey for the end of September.

Interestingly, all versions of Windows except 64-bit Win7 declined last month. Presumably the shift from Win10 to Win7 would be linked to recent revelations about the way that Windows 10's Game Mode actually breaks games; it's less clear why users would be switching from 64-bit Win8 and 8.1 to 64-bit Win7 now, since none of those Windows versions has changed significantly for years.

The nascent Linux Shift is missing here, too. Why is Ubuntu 16.04 gaining market share, while the newer 17.04 sheds users? Why is Linux slumping overall among gamers, but gaining market share rapidly on a global level?

Part of the answer could lie in the nature of the Steam Survey itself: it's a voluntary survey, whose respondents are basically self-selecting, rather than a random sampling of the overall marketplace (which is what NetMarketShare and StatCounter are doing). Survey sampling bias may well be at play here, and the Steam Survey numbers should always be taken with a grain of salt.

Speaking of Microsoft's anti-consumer bullshit...

We're nearing the end of yet another month, and I guess Windows 10's adoption rate has not improved since the end of July, because Microsoft are scare-mongering again.

From NeoWin:

For the past few months, Microsoft has been touting the security features available to customers using Windows 10, especially with the increase in ransomware attacks. It even vowed to raise the bar for security with the upcoming Fall Creators Update.

Now, the company has published yet another blog post persuading customers to upgrade to the latest version of Windows 10, citing increasing security threats.

Microsoft's blog post apparently includes a handy flowchart of Windows 10's "constantly evolving threat mitigation," just in case you'd missed the point from the text. Apparently, Fear ≈ Windows 10, in Microsoft-logic. The problem for Microsoft is that they've been doing this for months already, without any noticeable result. They're the corporation that cried "wolf." It's all so transparently self-serving that nobody's really listening anymore.

We'll know for sure in another few days, but I'm going on record and predicting yet another month of essentially flat OS market share trendlines, with Windows 10 gaining no more than 1%, all of which will come at the expense of Windows XP and 8/8.1, rather than Windows 7. Place your bets!

Q: How unpopular is Windows 8?

A: So unpopular that AMD won't support it with Radeon driver updates anymore.

From The Guru of 3D:

Yesterday AMD released their Radeon Crimson ReLive Edition Driver v17.7.2 (download), and some of you have asked me if I know where the Windows 8.1 drivers are. That indeed is a fair question, as they are missing.

Earlier on Windows 8.1 32-bit support was already halted, and we as well noticed that there has not been a 8.1 64-bit driver available ever since yesterday either. I just asked AMD to see what is going on there, and it is confirmed that there will no longer be any new Windows 8.1 drivers for Radeon graphics cards. The install base is just too small, and yes you should be moving onwards to Windows 10. Obviously previous driver releases are still available (we have them mirrored here). Here is what we got back from AMD:

"We no longer support Windows 8.1 officially with consumer postings. If users want to use the Windows 7 driver on Windows 8.1 then that is their choice."

That's right: Windows 7 (released in 2009) still has a sufficiently healthy install base, and will keep getting Radeon driver updates for the foreseeable future, but Windows 8.1 (released in 2013) will not. And Windows 8.1 was the "popular" version of Windows 8. That, ladies and germs, is a flop.

On the plus side, AMD's Radeon GPUs were not nearly as popular with gamers during the Windows 8.1 years and NVidia's GeForce series, so there probably aren't too many people affected by this. Whether those users move "onwards" to Windows 10, or roll back to Windows 7 (still supported by AMD, because still popular), will be interesting to see.

Another unforced error

Back during the dark days of GWX, when Microsoft were upgrading people to Windows 10 whether they wanted to switch or not, the fig leaves that they tried cover themselves with, were (a) that Windows 10 would run on basically any PC that could run any version of Windows from XP onward, and (b) that consumers, having switched, would never have to worry about their operating system ever again, because Windows 10 would be supported by Microsoft until the end of time. That was the "deal" -- switch once, and never worry about it again, ever.

You'll never guess what's happened now. Go ahead, try to guess. And if you guessed that Darth Microsoft has altered the deal, again, then give yourself a no-prize, because that's exactly what they've just done for some of those customers.

From The Independent:

A number of PCs have unexpectedly been blocked from receiving future Windows 10 updates.

Unless Microsoft addresses the incompatibility issue, the computers will be obsolete in early 2018.

That would be hugely disappointing for users, who would be forced to purchase new devices.

The issue affects computers built around Intel's Atom Clover Trail processors, reports ZDNet.

The chips feature in entry-level PCs that came out in 2012 or later.

These computers shipped with Windows 8 or Windows 8.1, and Microsoft made Windows 10 available to them as a free update.

Windows 10 is both newer and much easier to use than Windows 8 and 8.1, so upgrading would have been a no-brainer.

Unfortunately, these computers have now been found to be unable to install the Windows 10 Creators Update. 

Psych! Not only did these folks upgrade to Windows 10 only to have the rug pulled out from under them, but now they need all new PCs! Or, maybe, just to wipe their hard drives and reinstall the earlier version of Windows that their "Atom" PCs originally came with. Either way, though, it's a significant loss of time and/or money.

But don't worry -- it gets worse!

To make matters worse, if the owners of these machines had opted to stick with Windows 8 or 8.1 instead of upgrading to Windows 10, they’d continue to receive support through to 1 October 2023, according to Ars Technica.

Oops!

When I first saw this story being reported this morning, I was thinking that it might not get a lot of traction; after all, how many Atom Z2760, Z2520, Z2560 and/or Z2580 PCs were ever sold? Apparently, though, I was wrong, and the fact that there are Windows 10 users whose OS version will stop receiving security updates a full five years before they would have, if they'd just stuck to Windows 8, is grabbing the attention that it deserves.

Por ejemplo, WCCFTech:

Microsoft Brutally Ends Windows 10 Support Early for Some Intel Systems

The biggest selling point of Windows 10, apart from the fact that it was offered for free, was the promise of regular and free future updates. Under the new Windows as a Service (WaaS) model, Microsoft said users will continue to receive security and feature updates for their devices. There will no longer be those annoying notifications telling you that your Windows version is outdated because you will be able to upgrade to the newer versions as soon as they are made available.

What many Windows 10 adopters missed was a small note that this promise of continued support is only valid for the “supported lifetime of the device.” ZDNet now reports that the end of support for some Windows 10 devices has already arrived, just two years after the release of Windows 10.

It cannot be stressed enough, at this point, that this latest black eye for Microsoft did not have to happen. It was only their own greed that saw them pressuring Intel Atom PC owners to adopt Windows 10 when their systems really weren't compatible; and the only reason that Microsoft are cutting support for those same users now is that keeping Windows up-to-date on such underpowered systems has clearly been judged to cost more than it's worth.

Expecting consumers who bought budget PCs five years ago to be willing to buy new PCs now, just to run Windows 10, is just hubris. Microsoft richly deserves the PR black eye that they're taking over this latest unforced error.

UPDATE:

As reported in The Verge, Microsoft have confirmed that Windows 10 builds from Creators Update onwards will not be available for "Clover Trail" Atom systems, but that proud owners of those systems will be able to get security updates for the Anniversary Update until 2023:

“They require additional hardware support to provide the best possible experience when updating to the latest Windows 10 feature update, the Windows 10 Creators Update,” explains a Microsoft spokesperson. “However, these systems are no longer supported by Intel (End of Interactive Support), and without the necessary driver support, they may be incapable of moving to the Windows 10 Creators Update without a potential performance impact.”

Microsoft says it will be offering the older Windows 10 Anniversary Update to Intel Clover Trail devices instead, and the company “will provide security updates to these specific devices running the Windows 10 Anniversary Update until January of 2023.” This date aligns with the original Windows 8.1 extended support period, which means that these older devices will still be supported with security updates but no new Windows 10 features.

Well, at least those affected aren't being told to buy new PCs anymore.

To be clear, this was the absolute minimum that Microsoft owed to Atom PC owners, after fucking them over. I don't expect that this will be the end of the matter, though, given that Microsoft are already fighting multiple class-action lawsuits over their overly-aggressive Get Windows 10 campaign, and now have to admit that the "optional" offer that users couldn't refuse also included promises that MS not only haven't kept, but had no intention of keeping. If nothing else, businesses that were looking at switching to Windows 10 will now have to reassess their hardware, and ask how much of it will still be supported with the latest Windows 10 builds in five years' time; if the cost of switching to Windows 10 has to include the cost of replacing all their PCs sooner than previously planned, you can expect more businesses to delay switching for as long as possible.

Microsoft is doing what they can to control the damage, but make no mistake: the damage is already done.

No, Windows 10 S doesn't "deserve a chance."

Oy, vey.

From Napier Lopez at TNW:

Windows 10 S gets a bad rap, in part, because of Windows RT. That OS could only run touch-friendly ‘Metro’ apps – which further had to be compatible with ARM processors.

There’s nothing wrong with that in principle, but it meant developers had to write completely new apps for an OS they weren’t sure would have any legs. It was a kind of self fulfilling prophecy: Developers didn’t make Windows RT apps because nobody would use Windows RT. Which of course became true, because nobody would make apps for it.

Windows 10 S, on the other hand, has the crucial difference that it can run most of the old-school apps – known as Win32 programs – you’re already using. At a basic level, all developers have to do is repackage the apps to make them available on the Windows Store.

Wow, that sounds really great! Just one little problem... it's mostly bullshit.

Windows 10 S only runs programs that have been installed from the Windows Store, and the Win32 programs that you're already using cannot be installed from the Windows Store. The developers of those programs might choose to use the Project Centennial Desktop App Bridge (PCDAB) to port those programs over to the Windows Store, so that you can purchase them again through Microsoft, with Microsoft taking a cut of the proceeds, but it is developers who must do this; consumers cannot PCDAB their own apps. Unless and until that happens, the software "you're already using" simply will not work with Microsoft's gimped OS.

This is the defining quality of Windows 10 S. It is the thing which sets it apart from vanilla Windows 10, and from every other iteration of Windows.... except for Windows RT, of course. Which means that Win10 S's bad rap is entirely deserved, for the simple reason that it really is Windows RT Redux. The only difference is that Microsoft is using security-based scare tactics to sell 10 S, instead of relying on the short-lived "touch" fad that was the driving force behind Windows RT... and Windows 8, which was its fuller-featured cousin.

Yet again, I find myself unsure whether this is a falsehood (i.e. the result of simple ignorance or incompetence), or a lie (i.e. the result of intentional deception). Either way, though, Mr. Lopez should be ashamed of himself. This is not hair-splitting; it is quite literally the most important thing that a consumer will want to consider, when weighing the decision to buy (or not to buy) a machine with Windows 10 S installed, and TNW couldn't be bothered to get it right. Excelsior!

I can hardly wait to see how many other lazy, ignorant hacks pick up this piece of apologist tripe, and run it verbatim, without bothering to check any of its facts.

Is Microsoft secretly planning an "Advanced" version of Windows 10?

From Forbes:

Windows 10 is incredibly clever, and we're only just starting to see the benefits of all these platforms running the same kernel. We're also starting to see problems.

For a business upgrading to Windows 10 isn't without its concerns. For one thing there's the ongoing issue of Microsoft's telemetry. Now I'm not personally someone who worries about this, and you can turn it off, but it's not entirely business friendly. Then there's the issue of adverts popping up in Windows 10 and the fact that Microsoft thinks it's cool to stuff new installs with Candy Crush. These are not business compatible notions, in my view.

So, the leak suggests that Microsoft will bring in something called "Windows 10 Pro for Workstations" although it might actually be called "Windows Pro for Advanced PCs" which will help Microsoft move away from the stigma of Windows 10.

[...]

So will it help? Probably actually. Windows 10 is great and offers a lot to home users. I can see why businesses might not be so keen. Some of that is perhaps based on things that aren't really a big problem, and some will be legitimate concerns (like employees wasting time on Candy Crush, data security) that Windows for Workstations might address.

Like a lot of things, sometimes the answer is to do a bit of PR on the problem and hope it goes away. Microsoft needs to win over businesses to Windows 10 or it's sitting on a ticking support timebomb, and we have recently seen how older versions of Windows work out in business.

There are a couple of things about this article that I found interesting. The first thing that leaped out at me was "the stigma of Windows 10," which is presented as a baseline assumption, unworthy of discussion or debate. Apparently, Microsoft's Windows 10 problems, and the stagnant adoption that has resulted, is no longer something that needs to be explained.

More important, though, is the breathtaking cynicism of those last couple of paragraphs, and their assumption that Windows 10's problems are essentially nothing more than a PR matter. In a typical move from the apologist playbook, serious personal privacy and data collection issues are dismissed as being on the same level as "employees wasting time on Candy Crush," before the writer moves on to assert that a simple name change will solve all of Windows 10's issues - the implicit assumption being that Windows 10 has no real issues, only perceived ones.

The problems with that assumption are legion, but let's start with the obvious one: Windows 10 is already a re-brand, an attempt by Microsoft to put as much distance as possible between the current version of the OS and the disastrously unpopular Windows 8, without ditching the Windows name entirely. To have to re-brand their attempt to re-brand Windows just adds another version number to the list of consecutive failed Windows versions, something which is unlikely to make the newest version seem more appealing.

Added to that, Windows 10 already suffers from a certain amount of SKU confusion, with multiple different versions and very little to differentiate between them except price, especially for enterprise customers. Adding several more SKUs to that list, even if they're replacing ones that are already available, does nothing to relieve the confusion.

And then there's the really big problem, namely that the new Pro for Advanced PC verison includes several performance enhancements, but doesn't appear to touch on Windows 10's problematic areas at all: personal privacy, data collection, advertising, and Microsoft-sponsored bloatware (like, yes, Candy Crush) are not on the leaked list of improvements. This makes sense only if you assume that Windows 10 has no real issues, only perceived ones that can be addressed with a name change, but it ignores the reality: Windows 10 has real issues, non-trivial ones that users are prefectly right to be upset about, and changing the name without first addressing any of those problems doesn't move the ball forward in any way at all.

What the Forbes article advocates is basically the same thing that Microsoft already did when re-releasing Windows 8 as Windows 10 with a new browser and some UI upgrades. Sure, Microsoft fixed some superficial things about Windows 8, but they totally ignored the core of the consumer discontent that made Win8 one of their least popular OS releases ever. Yes, people wanted their start menus and desktops back, but what they wanted even more was for Microsoft to quit trying to monitor and monetize their every action. Microsoft, clearly believing that this was more a PR matter than anything else, have already changed the packaging, but not what's in the package, and are now apparently plotting in secret to repeat that same action, while expecting the result to change.

That is why Windows 10 is in the process of failing to launch. Windows 10 doesn't just have PR problems, although Microsoft have had their fair share of those, also. Windows 10 has real issues, areas of reasonable and serious concern that Microsoft's apologists are still refusing to take seriously, in part because Microsoft themselves refuse to properly acknowledge and address them. Giving yet another new name to yet another new version of the same turd doesn't change that, no matter how much polish is applied to the turd.

Also... Windows 10's telemetry can't be turned off. Not without third party software, or a registry edit (and then some). I don't know whether this is a case of genuine ignorance, or one of intentional misinformation, but either way, it's factually wrong. Shame on you, Ian Morris, for not being either better informed about such an important subject, or more honest about it. He does start by saying that he doesn't much care about the issue, but he clearly knew that it was enough of an issue to have spent time contemptuously dismissing it, so that's hardly an adequate excuse.

Also... holy fuck, are Microsoft serious about that name? "Windows Pro for Advanced PCs?" What, Microsoft couldn't come up with something longer, and even more unwieldy? What does its acronym even work out to? WPFAPCs? Even if Windows 10's problems were purely of a PR nature, if Redmond's PR department can't do any better than WPFAPCs, then they're in some serious shit.

#failuretolaunch

"S" is for sucks - Windows 10 S gets roasted by reviewers.

This is the part where I'm supposed to say that I hate saying, "I told you so," but I'd be lying. For one thing, I actually love saying that. Also, I told you so.

From ZDNet:

Microsoft debuted its first true laptop last week, and the reviews were overwhelmingly positive, even downright effusive.

For the hardware, that is.

Microsoft chose to debut a new edition of Windows with the Surface Laptop, and the same reviewers who loved its elegant design and performance were almost uniformly scathing in their rejection of the brand-new Windows 10 S.

And rightly so. Whoever made the decision to debut Windows 10 S on this particular piece of hardware was not thinking clearly. This is an ultralight premium laptop, sold at a premium price. It competes with devices like the MacBook Air, Dell's XPS 13, and HP's Envy x360 [and] starts at $1000 and the highest-spec configuration costs a hefty $2200. If you're willing to pay that price, you want to run the full range of Windows software.

By contrast, the machines that will ultimately form the installed base for Windows 10 S are low-cost PCs designed for use in classrooms, managed by professional IT staff. [...] The mismatch between the hardware and software could not have been more profound, and the reaction from reviewers could not have been more predictable.

Windows 10 S represents Microsoft's truest vision of Windows 10, with users wedded to the UWP and the Windows Store, utterly dependent on Microsoft for everything. It's not a new vision; Windows 8 was exactly this same package, and pretty much everybody hated it then, too.

With their Surface Laptops, Microsoft has apparently made a really decent piece of hardware, and then loaded it with a gimped OS that proves, beyond any doubt whatsoever, not only that MS have absolutely no understanding of what makes Google's Chromebooks so popular, but also that MS have zero understanding of what's kept Windows at 90% or more of the PC OS market for decades.

(Here's a hint: it's got absolutely nothing to do with the walled garden storefronts, in either case.)


GG, Microsoft. GG.

Better slowly. than not at all...

From the notes on Windows 7 update KB2952664 [emphasis added]:

This update performs diagnostics on the Windows systems that participate in the Windows Customer Experience Improvement Program. The diagnostics evaluate the compatibility status of the Windows ecosystem, and help Microsoft to ensure application and device compatibility for all updates to Windows. There is no GWX or upgrade functionality contained in this update.

Well, well, well. It seems that they do learn, after all. Slowly, to be sure, and at some great cost, but they do seem to be finally getting the message.

Other good news? This month's security updates also include further patches for the exploit employed by WannaCry, and were released to Windows XP concurrently with Windows 7, 8, and 8.1, and for free, rather than after several months' delay of trying to sell expensive extended support packages to XP customers. So I guess they learned that lesson, too.

It's nice to see tacit acknowledgement from Microsoft that they and their Windows 7 users don't still have the same relationship of trust and good will that existed just two years ago, but it's also a clear sign of how seriously that relationship has deteriorated. How badly must Microsoft have fucked this up, that a note promising a clean update, i.e. with no upgrade bullshit, is even necessary? How many Windows 7 users do you think will avoid installing these updates anyway, just to be "safe?" How many of them still have Windows Update turned off completely, thanks to Microsoft's GWX abuses?

Microsoft have a long, long way to go, yet, to get back into their customers' good graces. Considering that they haven't yet actually apologized for all the bullshit they've pulled in the last couple of years, it's fair to say that you haven't even really started to make their way back. They do seem to be thinking about it, though; I just hope they learn the real lesson of their XBO-X failure, though, and start working to earn redemption before it's too late, and not after.

Still flatlined

It's the first day of a new month, which means that it's time to check Microsoft is progressing on their mission to lure PC users to Windows 10. Redmond spent most of the month touting the various new features in the Creators Update (the rollout of which is going Just Fine, thank-you), while boasting of having crossed the 500M active devices mark for their new OS, and their apologists have spent the last couple of weeks using the WannaCry outbreak to scare-monger on Windows 10's behalf, but the real question, as always, is: how will actual Windows 7 users react to all of this? Is Win10 finally enticing enough as a package to lure them away? Or was WannaCry finally a scary enough threat to push them over?

Well, according to the latest data from NetMarketShare, the answers would seem to be negative.

This was the picture at the end of March:

and this is how things look at the end of April:

with this as the 6-month trend line:

It looks to me like Windows 7 has ticked back up again, reversing all of its previous month's loss, while Windows 10 gained slightly as well, mostly at the expense of Windows 8.1 and Windows XP. The changes are very slight, though, and the overall trend is still pretty damn flat.

So, what does this mean? Well, early reports about WannaCry had inaccurately pegged WinXP as the major vector for transmission, so it's probably no surprise that WinXP's share of the market dropped again this month; Win8.1 also dropped again, which isn't a surprise, either, considering that 8.1 was massively unpopular, and also considering that 8.1 and 10 are basically the same OS, anyway; the slightly older Windows 8 is still holding steady, though, which I find little odd.

The other winner this month is MacOS 10.12, posting a healthy 0.38% gain; the increasingly relevant "Other" category (a.k.a. Google's ChromeOS) dropped 0.17%, a reversal of the previous month's gain that can probably be chalked up to noisy data, one way or the other. Linux also dropped again very slightly -- while that change (-0.1%) also wouldn't normally be large enough for significance, the fact that it's the 3rd such change in a row can't be ignored.

Overall, we seem to have Windows 10 posting just enough of a gain for Microsoft to declare victory and stay the course on their most unpopular practices for another month, even as Windows 7 becomes ever more entrenched as the top PC OS. The much-predicted imminent mass migration of businesses to Windows 10 is still not showing up in the market share data, which isn't much of a surprise. Basically, it's another month of stagnation, with Windows 10 continuing to fail in its goals, even as users of XP and 8.1 migrate to the latest versions of both Windows and MacOS.

All that remains is to see how the tech media react.

Most secure Windows evah...

Do you remember Microsoft telling everybody that they needed to upgrade to Windows 10 as soon as possible, because security? Do you remember them saying, over and over again, that Windows 10 was the most secure OS ever made, and that Windows 7 was a leaky sieve by comparison? Well, about that, here's the thing, funny story... it's bullshit. Surprise!

From Express.co.uk:

Windows users are being urged to update their PCs immediately after a serious vulnerability was discovered over the weekend.

The shocking flaw in this popular operating system was found by researchers working for Google's Project Zero cyber-security operation with them calling it is the worst Windows remote code in recent memory.

The bug could allow hackers to take over any PC simply by sending an infected email, instant message or by getting the user to click on a link in their web browser.

Tavis Ormandy, a vulnerability researcher at Google who discovered the bug, said in a tweet "This is crazy bad."

To show how serious the problem is, Microsoft has immediately pushed out a major security update which is available to all users now.

[...]

Anyone using Windows 8, 8.1, 10 and Windows Server operating systems are affected by the bug and should now check for the security update.

Yes, that's right, this "crazy bad" vulnerability has been part of Windows since Windows 8, and is only being found and patched now. In other news, it seems that Windows 8 and Windows 10 really are the same operating system, just with different UIs. Still on Windows 7? No worries, brah, you're still good.

On the plus side, Microsoft did work quite quickly to patch this one, something which Mr. Ormandy praised them for, but that doesn't alter the basic fact that 1) there is no such thing as perfect security, and 2) even if there were such a thing, Windows 10 is not that thing.

Microsoft re-issues "zombie" patch KB3150513... for the tenth time!

I love InfoWorld's tagline for this article:

It won't die! Microsoft is pushing its 10th refresh of the hated 'upgrade enabling' patch to every version of Windows

That's right, it's baaaack!

Microsoft has issued the KB 3150513 patch 10 times in the past year. Each time it appears without notification or warning: There’s no entry on the Windows Update list or Windows 10 Update list, but it pushed out the Automatic Update chute nonetheless.

It's being pushed onto Windows 7, 8, 8.1, Windows 10 1511, and now 1607 systems. You don’t want it.

[...] I discussed this topic last month, and as best I can tell, nothing has changed. As AskWoody Lounger abbodi86 summarized:

Both KB 2952664 and KB 3150513 are only needed for upgrading to Windows 10; they have nothing useful for current Windows 7 users (well, except providing Microsoft with Appraiser statistics)

If you want to upgrade your current system to Windows 10 Creators Update, you might want to consider installing the patch. If you don’t, there are better ways to waste your time.

Don’t bother hiding it. History has shown that it’ll only appear again. Ignore it and maybe it’ll go away.

They just won't take an effing hint, will they?

Here's the thing; people that haven't switched yet aren't just procrastinating. It's not like we don't know that Windows 10 is available, or that we can still upgrade for free if we want to, or that Microsoft would really, really like us to switch. We've chosen to stay with our existing operating systems; in fact, given how hard Microsoft were pushing Windows 10 during the latter part of the official GWX campaign, most of us had to take active steps to avoid being switched in spite of our clearly and repeatedly expressed preference on the matter.

We don't want Windows 10. We don't care that you're still giving it away; we already know, for a fact, that the shit ain't really free. And every time you "helpfully" re-add an update that we've already refused multiple times to our Update queues, disregarding our clearly and repeatedly expressed choices in the process, it just makes us even less likely to switch... ever. It further erodes the little trust and goodwill that we might still be harbouring; after all, how do you trust somebody, or feel good about somebody, when they clearly refuse to respect anything that you tell them?

Look, I get it. Microsoft's strategic plans don't work unless they can push Windows 10 adoption to a tipping point, a share of the market large enough that the adoption rate inspires others to also adopt their new OS, and inspires developers to develop natively for the Universal Windows Platform as a result. Microsoft need that, badly. I get it. I just don't give a shit.

Allow me to turn the data collection off completely, allow me to turn Cortana off completely, allow me to (simply & easily) turn the advertising off completely, and for fuck's sake, stop pushing me. Start showing some respect, and maybe, maybe, we can talk. Short of that, though, Microsoft are out of luck... until 2020 at the very least, unless my current PC literally melts down in the meantime, something which shows no sign of being anywhere near happening.

In the meantime, I'm leaving Never10 installed, and if you're wanting Microsoft's "helpful" upgrading app to stop pestering you to change operating systems, then so should you.

How to keep Windows 7 (or 8)

We've all been seeing those "helpful" reminders that Windows 10 is still basically free (in spite of the GWX campaign having officially ended nine months ago) on tech blogs of all kinds for months, but I think that this may be the first article I've seen which helpfully reminds people that staying with Windows 7 or 8.1 is still an option, too.

From PC Advisor:

Windows 10 was a free upgrade for Windows 7 and 8 users, but not a mandatory one. In case you're still struggling, here's how to stop the Windows 10 upgrade notifications and run Windows 7 or 8 forever.

Microsoft's free Windows 10 upgrade offer is now over. This should mean an end to those annoying uprade notifications. Or does it? We suspect the nagging won't cease one bit: Microsoft will simply want to you pay to upgrade to Windows 10 - Windows 10 home costs £99.99 and Windows 10 Pro costs £189.99.

Fear not, though as there are a few ways you can disable the upgrade and stay on Windows 7 or 8 forever. We won't go into all the reasons why you might not want to upgrade: those are covered in our Should I upgrade to Windows 10? feature.

Hmmm.... almost sounds like the GWX campaign left a seriously bad taste in consumers' mouths, doesn't it? 

PC Advisor then go on to discuss some familiar options, like Never10 (which I've used and highly recommend) or GWX Control Panel (which I'm less familiar with, but which looks to be more in-depth). They also have this helpful reminder:

Recently there has been a lot of confusion about when Windows 7 will cease to be supported. The table below clears this up: Windows 7 will be supported until 2020, and Windows 8 until 2023. You must have the specified updates or service packs installed, though. On Microsoft's Windows Lifecycle page, you'll also find the updated table showing that Windows 7 and 8.1 sales (to OEMs) ceased on 31 October 2016.

They also, however, include one bit of information which isn't quite accurate:

Do note that Windows 10 is now the only option for new PCs, as Microsoft has stopped OEM sales of Windows 7 Pro and Windows 8.1 to PC makers on 31 October. OEMs can still sell any licences they may have in stock, but once they run out it will be Windows 10 or Windows 10. Retail sales of Windows 7 ceased years back, and until now the only way to get a new PC with Windows 7 was from a manufacturer such as HP and Dell. Now, you won't find any PCs or laptops which offer a choice of Windows version when you first turn them on.

While there's no doubt that Microsoft intends for this to be the sitch, they haven't quite succeeded at taking Win7 off the market completely... at least, not yet. Lenovo, for one, apparently stockpiled Windows 7 licences while they could, and are still introducing new and refreshed models that come with the older OS installed, and some quick Googling will turn up other options, too, in both laptop and desktop form-factors, especially if you're just willing to buy a refurbished PC that can easily last until 2020, Moore's Law not being a thing anymore.

And there's one more option for folks that are determined to never switch to Windows 10: Linux. LaptopNinja makes the case for changing OSes entirely:

I know despite the posts about how great Linux is and why I like it, many of you are probably still hesitant to try Linux. I understand. I remember years ago when I first heard about it, even I was slow to try it at first. After all, Windows just worked. Everything I needed Windows would do, so why bother trying something else that may or may not work for me. Of course, back then, Linux was quite different from what it is today.

Over the years, Linux has evolved to become one of the most powerful operating systems in the world. In addition to computers, did you know that it powers a wide range of devices including routers, switches, your smartphones and even your televisions. That’s right, when your fancy television boots up chances are its running a customized version of Linux. Most web servers today are powered by Linux as well, including the one that is serving this site out to you.

As you can see, Linux is more popular than it ever has been. But, it has failed to capture a huge share of the personal computer market. That market is consistently dominated today by Windows 10 followed behind it by Apple’s Mac line of machines. However, that doesn’t mean that it isn’t a great desktop operating system. In fact, it is one of the best out there. Most people just don’t realize it. After all, Linux doesn’t have a million dollar marketing budget to tell us how good it is.

Instead, it relies on people like me to drill it into your heads about how great it is and why you should try it. So today, I wanted to give you ten reasons you should try Linux today so you can begin your journey towards free computing and a life of not having to answer to Microsoft or Apple for your computer needs.

Just remember that "Never 10ers" still have lots of options, when it comes to exercising their fundamental consumers' right of choice. Microsoft don't have the right to dictate to you which OS you'll run on any PC that you've bought, or what other software you'll run under that OS, or where you'll buy your software from. Much to their chagrin, I'm sure.

Users fix Windows 7 & 8.1 updates again, after Microsoft deliberately breaks them [UPDATED!]

In the absence of TRON, it seems the users can, and will, fight for themselves.

From BleepingComputer:

GitHub user Zeffy has created a patch that removes a limitation that Microsoft imposed on users of 7th generation processors, a limit that prevents users from receiving Windows updates if they still use Windows 7 and 8.1.

This limitation was delivered through Windows Update KB4012218 (March 2017 Patch Tuesday) and has made many owners of Intel Kaby Lake and AMD Bristol Ridge CPUs very angry last week, as they weren't able to install any Windows updates.

[...] When the April 2017 Patch Tuesday came around last week, GitHub user Zeffy finally had the chance to test four batch scripts he created in March, after the release of KB4012218.

His scripts worked as intended by patching Windows DLL files, skipping the CPU version check, and delivering updates to Windows 7 and 8.1 computers running 7th generation CPUs.

Huzzah! Now users of PCs with 7th generation processors can run whatever software they fucking well please on them, which is as it should be. Microsoft does not have the right to tell you how you'll use the PCs that you own, and the fact that they've now failed to do so gives me feelings of satisfaction.

My hat is off to you, Zeffy! Today, you are a hero.

UPDATE!

It looks like this development is starting to gain some more much-deserved attention, like this piece from ExtremeTech:

It should be hard for Microsoft to make any more mistakes with its Windows 10 push, but it keeps finding new ways. After nagging everyone incessantly about upgrading, updating computers without asking, and making Windows 10 patches mandatory, Microsoft has started disallowing Windows 7 and 8.1 updates on machines running the latest hardware. One developer has had enough, and is releasing a patch to help users get around this artificial blockade.

The unofficial patch from a developer calling him or herself ‘Zeffy’ on GitHub targets those running very new CPUs on older versions of Windows. Windows 7 and 8 are still supported with updates, but Microsoft has started blocking non-security updates for systems that run Intel 7th-Generation Kaby Lake processors, AMD “Bristol Ridge” Rizen chips, or the Qualcomm 8996 (Snapdragon 820 and 821) SoC.

[...] The Zeffy patch goes after a change Microsoft introduced in March that identifies the system’s CPU. As the changelog explained at the time, the patch “Enabled detection of processor generation and hardware support when PC tries to scan or download updates through Windows Update.” Zeffy is very clear on his dislike for Windows 10 when he calls this “essentially a giant middle finger to anyone who dare not ‘upgrade’ to the steaming pile of garbage known as Windows 10.”

Well said, Zeffy. Well said.

Enterprises expected to wait 3-4 years before upgrading to Windows 10

For those keeping track, that's slightly later than the end of Windows 7's extended support period, and right about the end of Windows 8's mainstream support period.

From WindowsReport:

Microsoft’s latest release, Windows 10, has been out for a while now. When first released, it got off to a great start, recording massive installation numbers in a relatively short period of time. This had a lot to do with the fact that the company offered the operating system as a free upgrade to anyone who had previously purchased Windows 7 or Windows 8/8.1.

[...]

As far as personal computers and normal users go, studies show that most of them had no problem in quickly making up their minds about which OS version they preferred and wanted to use. Having that information early one allowed them to quickly upgrade. Others might not have wanted to upgrade but were caught in the middle of one anyway. Now, Microsoft is looking at the business sector as the next in line to receive a mass deployment of the OS.

[...]

In the aftermath of extensive research, it was concluded that most companies and enterprises plan on upgrading to Windows 10 somewhere along the lines of three to four years from now. There are also many companies looking to upgrade sooner, as soon as 12 months.

Given how aggressively Microsoft have pushed users to adopt Windows 10, and how bullish their predictions of Enterprise adoption have been for the past several months, I think it's safe to say that this isn't the news that Microsoft was hoping for. With Windows 10's growth stalled for months, and even going backwards in the last couple of months' market share numbers, Microsoft needs for Enterprises to adopt Windows 10 now, not wait until they can't get any updates at all for Windows 7 anymore, but it's pretty clear that Windows 7 users are dug in for the duration, and that would appear to apply to businesses as well as individuals.

I can't wait for the new market share numbers to hit at the start of April. It'll be fascinating to see if any businesses have started to make the switch, or if everyone is waiting for someone else to jump first.

Windows 7 & 8 now blocking older AMD processors, too, not just Ryzen.

Are we really surprised?

From InfoWorld:

I reported earlier this morning that we're seeing "Unsupported hardware" and "Windows could not search for new updates" messages from people who are running Windows 7 and 8.1 on Intel Kaby Lake and AMD Rizen-based computers. It's part of Microsoft's long-threatened ban on Win7 and 8.1 updates for newer seventh-generation processors.

Now there's a report of similar blockages on an older AMD A6-8570 processor. It isn't clear if there's a bug in the detection logic, or if Microsoft's going to block Win7 and 8.1 updates on some older sixth-generation processors.

The report comes from poster The Heretic on [H]ardForum:

Well it isn't just the Ryzen that's going to get whacked. I came into work this AM to look at one of the system's I'd re-imaged with Win7 Pro and started downloading updates to it as I left yesterday. I was greeted with Microsoft's gotcha.

The screen he posts clearly says the block took place on an AMD Pro A6-8570 system.

[...]

AMD's product page for the AMD Pro A6-8570 clearly states that this is an older, sixth-generation chip.

I know that one should always hesitate to ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by incompetence, but when you consider just how much anti-consumer bullshit Microsoft has pulled in their efforts to force Windows 7 & 8 users to switch to Windows 10, I honestly think that we can just assume that this is deliberate on Microsoft's part. AMD really did a deal with the devil, when they agreed to let Microsoft lock their silicon to the products of Microsoft's choosing, and they should really be rethinking that decision, if they're not already.

Vulkan takes a step forwards

Kronos Group's new, cross-platform API has had something of an up-and-down week. It was just days ago that they announced that multi-GPU support for Windows would be restricted to Windows 10 only, but not restricted on Linux, MacOS, or other platforms, a decision which had people scratching their heads. Today, though, comes the news that at least one high-profile game has decided to port their game from DirectX to to Vulkan, rather than move to DirectX 12.

From PCGamesN:

In a forum post over on the programming forums for Star Citizen, director of graphics engineering Ali Brown has announced that Star Citizen will now use Khronos’ Vulkan API, rather than switching to the latest edition of DirectX. While the development team had previously stated their desire to support DX12, Vulkan is “a more logical rendering API” which will benefit all users.

One of the main reasons Brown gives for not supporting DX12 is that “it doesn't force our users to upgrade to Windows 10” and means that Star Citizen can be developed with “a single graphics API that could be used on all Windows 7, 8, 10 & Linux.” As Star Citizen is targeted to be a multiplatform PC title, using Vulkan makes a lot more sense than having to spend a large amount of time reworking the game just to work on Linux.

[...]

According to Brown, DX12 “would only be considered if we found it gave us a specific and substantial advantage over Vulkan,” and even then the APIs “aren't that different.” If anything is subject to change, you can be certain the boffins over at Cloud Imperium Games will let their legion of pilots know.

This is pretty much exactly what Kronos Group are hoping for. Game development, generally, has been trending in a cross-platform direction, with an increasing number of new games showing up on every platform, rather than being restricted to just one. A cross-platform API should make that easier, since the entire game doesn't need to be reworked nearly as extensively for each new port. At least, that's the theory.

That was also the theory behind OpenGL, though, and OpenGL never did manage to grow into an effective competitor for DirectX on Windows... which is the same as saying that it never really penetrated the PC gaming space. Even the Unity engine supports both DirectX and OpenGL: DirectX for PC and XBox, and OpenGL for everyone else. In order to really compete in PC Gaming, Vulkan will need to be seen as preferable to DirectX 12 for at least some PC releases.

The list of games with Vulkan support is still quite short, with id's Doom being the highest-profile example so far, so every high-profile new release that adopts the API contributes to its credibility. The Star Citizen announcement is exactly the kind of good PR that Vulkan needs, coming at a time when they can really use it, and their extensive communication throughout the development process should make an excellent showcase for the ease with which the switch to Vulkan is accomplished... or an excellent cautionary tale, if it goes badly. So, you know, no pressure.

It's still very early days for both Vulkan and DirectX 12, and we'll see which one takes flight more quickly. DirectX 12's success is likely to be directly tied to Windows 10's rate of adoption, something which seems to have stalled; it remains to be seen whether Kronos Group can capitalize on that opportunity.