When Microsoft can't fix a bug in their software, it gets advertised as a "feature".

8.1 was better from a user perspective because they added back in the standard desktop interface. That being said, I'll stick with Windows 7 for as long as possible. I just hate the obsession with tiles Microsoft has.

Thank you, I was about to download the new windows 10 on my wife's computer cause she doesn't like 8. I will not be doing that now. I'll try to down load windows 7 instead.

Really? Good lord. Skynet is next.

but that's what I am saying. There is no moral code that validates your assumption. It is not in their contract. Perhaps we can't tolerate the future with no moral code, depending only on laws enacted by a government that is a primary violator.

Interesting to know. MS in this part of the world have all but banished them off the market. It's Windows 8, or no OS, here.

What about Windows 8.1? As we speak I have been buying a new machine that, of course, comes with 8.1. I started with a Lenovo and that turned into a steep learning curve regarding Superfish, adware, malware, spyware, bloatware, you name it.

As machines go, I had used IBM/Lenovo for a number of years for an employer and it went well. Then I find that since then, the Chinese bought Lenovo and this spring started marketing machines now loaded with all this crap on it. The State Department has actually banned them from government use, because of the spying.

So back it went to Lenovo and I instead bought a Dell. I have been setting it up over the last couple of days. It has gone much better than the Lenovo, but it still has come with a bunch of adware and added apps that keep popping up etc. Partly because of the learning curve with the Lenovo, this one is in pretty good shape pretty quickly. Antimalware and virus protection has cleaned it up quite well.

So, how much have they started with all this added crap with 8.1? Any advice on things to disable?

+5 to that ^^^

I have been using Debian Linux (parent to Ubuntu Linux) since 2003, and haven't looked back. It's been great to see Linux evolving to become so much more stable and user-friendly over the years. These days, for over 95% of users, there's really no reason to stay on Windows. Even if there are certain specialised "Windows-only" programs you have to run for work, there are ways of getting them to run within Linux.

To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin: Those who are willing to give up privacy for convenience deserve neither privacy nor convenience.

I switched to Linux over 12 years ago and haven't looked back.

The issue isn't what a hacker can/can't do, its the assumption from MS that its okay to have a variety of data collection tools turned on when you purchase/receive the OS.

I've been in IT for 20+ years, I have been MCSE certified, and my company was a Microsoft System Builder and registered solution provider..the assumption thats okay to collect data without your knowing consent (who really reads the license agreements?) is as arrogant as is its obnoxiously invasive.

While its not okay to have those tools there to begin with, had they deployed the OS with those tools turned off by default would have made things more palatable.

Not so Simple solution - Don't ever buy a Microsoft product or ever use their browser. Same for Google.

I also like Ubuntu. Most of the apps I use these days are open-source anyway, and I can run my old games under DOSBOX which is also open source.

But I wish I still had my VAX/VMS system. Now that was stable. None of today's companies make an OS that can go 10 years without rebooting. That seems like a market failure, though maybe the marketplace can still solve it.

Long time Apple user here. Professionally I've worked with Windows, and DOS before that. I also worked with Unix. Given the bad experiences I had with DOS and Windows, from poor performance, freezes (famous "blue screen of death"), and unending security issues, I chose the Mac when it first came out, and I've never regretted it.

In a bizarre twist, the most hackable systems on the market are the wireless home security systems. I have a hard-wired system with a battery backup and cell phone callout, biding my time until the new systems become more secure.

We hear people argue that advertising surveillance is only a substitute for not charging, but there is much more to it. They engage in the same surveillance, selling of personal information, and turning it over government even when you do pay for a product or service. They do what they can get away with.

There is also the question of whether they have revealed all the changes affecting your privacy and your ability to disable them -- even beyond the problem of their manipulating default settings. Google was caught bypassing security settings in its own browser and routinely scans the content of all gmail for advertising purposes and who knows what else. What else is usoft doing?

I read a year or so ago, I think from security expert Bruce Schneier, that W10 security would include a facility for usoft to block installation of programs it doesn't approve. usoft recently announced that W10 home edition would no longer give the owner the option of rejecting "updates". Their idea of "security" seems to be their own, not yours.

The usoft business emphasis is also reportedly changing to the "cloud", in which all your application programs and data are run and stored on their remote servers under their control. Your pc would be no more than an approved appliance mostly operating as an interface to and dependent on their servers.

Say goodbye to Bill Gates' original conception of personal computing with multiple hardware vendors selling personally owned and controlled computers designed to compatible standards and running the software of your choice available from anywhere, for you to do what you want with in the privacy of your own home.

The marketeers have evidently determined that a lot of people will go along with the new Big Brother emphasis, just as they put up with mass privacy violation on the internet. It's a good reason to start exploring linux substitutes, but once personal computing is only used by a minority, the growing statism can be expected to squash that, too, starting with controls on who can use the internet for what.

Really? Thankfully, I don't need one now.

May I suggest you consider Ubuntu? It is a free, Linux based OS, with an adequate GUI. My only problem with it is that there are not as many users so I have to search online when I have a problem rather then call a friend.

The latest fully supported version is 14.04 and is available at: http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Linux-...

The advice for using a new Windows OS used to be to wait at least about a year, or to wait at least until the first Service Pack accumulating fixes in one package (SP!). The advice for W8 has been to wait indefinitely, not because of bugs, but because of the intentional design.

This isn't a matter of fraudulently selling unfinished products. A lot of effort goes into testing and debugging, but they are enormously complex systems and it's inevitable that problems will be found.

It depends on what you are interested in. Once you understand what it is in terms of design changes do you want it at all? At the other extreme, some people begin using beta releases of products because they are interested in getting advances as soon as possible, knowing that the producer has warned that it isn't ready for general use and to expect abnormal problems.

You can still buy new PCs with W7.

I've got W7. It came with the computer. After reading AJ's missive, I'll hold off on 10 as long as possible. The problem is, I'm not very computer literate. If I need a new computer (bound to happen) I'll either get W10 or I'll have to go to Apple. My son is a top engineer/programmer. For the most part, I refrain from bothering him, but it looks like somewhere down the road, it'll be, "Hello Steve? Listen, I've got a problem."

I got my notice to install it just a few days ago. I'm reluctant and will postpone for a while until I get more information.

Bought a new box recently, a quad-core 64-bit thing, and it had W 8.1 pre-installed. Biggest problem was getting it to allow the installation of Ubuntu Linux. Seems the BIOS is set up to prevent, by default, the installation of "spyware".

Windows? We don't need no steenkin' Windows.