This kind of stuff never happens overnight. It happens slowly, incrementally, and the people are never mad enough at too much sudden change to be motivated enough to do anything. People should feel good about the imposition of boundaries, and it helps that for the average user, the boundaries often result in a better user experience.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 week ago
Microsoft are smart enough to not piss off and destroy their entire business overnight, so you can count on it never being forced by them.
staph@sopuli.xyz 1 week ago
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 week ago
I don’t think you guys understand that forcing windows to only run approved by Microsoft software would literally break the world as we know it. Microsoft know this. There’s no way around it.
Valmond@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I was responding to this:
Microsoft is smart enough not to piss off every giant corporation
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 week ago
Yeah, and they can’t get rid of “sideloading” without literally killing their entire company because gigantic corporations, where they make the majority of their money, are the ones the most beholden to legacy software that would be blocked if they did. Banks, governments, hospitals, schools…….everything would not be able to function.
Valmond@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Last time I used windows in a big corpo settings, there were so many things pudding off both us Devs but also IT.
Switch out a bad RAM stick? Spend an hour with IT.
Use a software? Spend an hour (or days) with IT
Compile your own software? Believe it or not, spend large amounts of time with IT
Like the compiler on a windows PC can’t work without different windows protection systems gets in the way, repeatedly. And then your executable, or some .d’ll just get wiped off the disk 😐🤷🏼♀️
I don’t think they do it intentionally, but big corpos don’t give a shit about their workers conditions, so if they were to enforce things (with backdoors ofc, so that if needed you can deactivate things, remember the unique installation code for windows like 95 or 98?) the grunts will just have to eat it up. And they would probably not have a much harder time, everything is already locked down hardware wise so they are used to all that jazz.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 week ago
None of your examples at the start I’d that comment make sense or are true.
Also you’re talking about corporate policies for businesses that use windows, not windows itself. Management of devices is one of the biggest reasons why windows is the only real option for big corporations.
Valmond@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Oh I’m very absolutely talking about windows itself, it’s the reason you have go through so many loops to do the tiniest thing.
My point: Microsoft is already doing what you’re supposing they never will.
BTW your first phrase doesn’t make any sense?
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 week ago
Yeah sorry just fixed the autocorrect/complete in first sentence.
Where and how are Microsoft doing this? Where are they removing the ability to “sideload” programs unless the developer is registered with Microsoft?
angband@lemmy.world 1 week ago
pissing off customers never stopped them for decades different versions of office programs ran side by side with no issues. they auto uninstall other versions of office automatically while stopping the install with a big pop up about compatibility issues.
this impacts all businesses using old versions of access programs alongside more new versions of office with newer installers. along with a byzantine licensing model with bizarre “incompatibilities” between the same year versions in different licensing channels, yeah tell me how microsoft won’t piss off corpo and government clients.
they seem to specialize in pissing off corpo and gov clients.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 week ago
Sounds like the businesses you’re talking about have incompetent IT staff.
untorquer@lemmy.world 1 week ago
They certainly wouldn’t roll it out overnight but they’ve had their long term targets on OS as a service since Windows 8 and these things tend to come bundled.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 week ago
Nah, they know their limits. They will keep trying to make an optional locked down OS for regular users a thing, but there will always be a fully “unlocked” version available due to legacy software and the entire worlds reliance on it.
untorquer@lemmy.world 1 week ago
While microsoft also plays in the quarter to quarter economic BS they still have long term planning.
It’s precisely because they have a monopoly on enterprise class software that they could pull this off. That’s why the shift in euro-gov agencies to linux is such a big deal. They’re already have windows insider which requires an azure sub and updates as a service which means they already use the threat of “security risks” to force companies to subscribe to azure.
I’m suggesting that they’re going to do what they’ve said they want to do.
The biggest motivation they have to keep individual licenses OTP is it gets people used to the ecosystem (customer capture) and they’re massively profiting on all of
yourthat data.FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 week ago
Making their is subscription based is not what we’re talking about though. We’re talking about it becoming locked down and only running signed and approved software like Android is going to do.
That fundamentally breaks windows for most of the corporate world. Literally would break the world as we know it lol.