The app automatically installs Bing Visual Search and includes code to decrypt cookies saved in other browsers, Rivera said, and it also brings a “free” geolocation web API to the system.
The developer discovered “many” nasty tricks Microsoft integrated in Bing Wallpapers, which include trying to change the browser’s settings and set Edge as the default system browser. If the default browser isn’t Edge, the app will open the default browser after some time asking to enable the previously installed Microsoft Bing Search for Chrome extension.
They are trying so hard to push everybody to linux. The only thing that has kept me using windows is game development tool chains, but even that isn’t gonna be enough to keep me on windows much longer.
If only flight sims and peripherals worked on Linux It’s been the one think keeping me back.
Dual boot and encrypt your Linux drives so windows can’t access them, or run windows in an isolated VM. Only use Windows when you absolutely need to and use Linux for everything else.
That’s the best way to get yourself used to it. I did that with PC gaming. All my servers, my personal laptop, and my personal desktop all run Linux and just the personal desktop has windows dual boot. Now many games run on Linux, so I don’t even boot Windows. It’s been like a year or more since I last touched Windows outside of my work laptop.
And with KDE Plasma desktop, even my non-tech-savy partner had no problem switching. Fedora has a Plasma district that works really well for me.
I left a long time ago while they would entertain my classmates of new features I had been using for 4 years. Everyone thought I was embarrassed when the MS rep told me they had to look at legal consequences before adding features that could be patented by others when I asked why they hadn’t added a menu of WiFi access points, yet I sat there wondering how our open source community built so much and took care of each other in collaboration. I understood they had to be careful to not get sued, but they also thrived in that world for competition rather than selling services.
This doesn’t sound “malware-like”. It sounds like just plain malware.
Or just plain Microsoft.
Haven’t we already categorized windows as malware and Microsoft as a malware company? We really shouldn’t be surprised that they put out another piece of malware. It’s their MO.
I’m not a windows fan boy, in fact I haven’t used one in years, and have no intentions to.
But this is a weird way of thinking about MS shenanigans.
- Hate it or like it, windows update is still an update to your system, to fix security vulnerabilities even. I wish they had implemented it in a user friendly way. But it is NOT a thing that disrupts you with ill intent as you mentioned here.
- That is a task manager running some process. But no indication on what the process is !
- Enabled by default is an horrible design decision no matter who does it. I agree on that. But this is NOT unauthorised access. You signed up for it when you decided to use windows.
Again I don’t like MS. Hate them for their bad decisions, but don’t hate them by misrepresenting them.
(My comment is only about this screenshot posted here)
An example of ill intent on Microsoft’s part: https://mashable.com/article/windows-10-upgrade-snafu-analysis
If you haven’t used windows in years then you might not know how bad it has gotten, but … it’s bad. Windows update is not just for security updates, it’s also there to change users default browser to edge, their search engine to bing, trick them into using onedrive (too bad if the synced files get corrupted), old features get disabled for no good reason, it hijacks other browsers to show messages and change browser settings, …
All those things are definitely not for security, but rather a way for Microsoft managers to meet KPI, for example: they want more users of a new application, so they remove the old way of doing things and boom, their quarterly report looks prettier. And to top it all off Microsoft doesn’t test updates properly anymore in house, so it’s the customers who are life testing that shit. And because those users have to keep updating windows for security, Microsoft has them over a barrel.
When I update my Linux machines, they won’t override MY settings, something that Microsoft notoriously does all the time, changing settings intl their favor. Every time you try to cut the Microsoft bullshit down to a minimum, Microsoft will just try and restore it to it’s “full glory” again.
Yeah, i do consider all Microsoft software to be malware
The good thing is you can disable most of their telemetry crap if you know what you are doing.
Should be opt in to begin with
Why would you download bing wallpaper app anyways? First rule of computers: only install from trusted sources
Most average users consider Microsoft a trusted source, that’s the root cause of a whole lot of crap.
Most average users consider Microsoft a trusted source, that’s the root cause of a whole lot of crap.
I remember when I installed SP3 for XP… On my AMD machine.
Lack of trust in Microsoft started on that fateful day.
“Megacorp learned nothing from Active Desktop being an utter fucking security disaster.” Yeah, no shit. Everything old is new again.
Active Desktop was entirely ahead of its time. Let’s not forget that it was only around a decade later that JIT-compiled JavaScript engines like V8 paved the way for web apps, including the iPhone which at launch only supported third-party apps as web apps.
I’m always surprised at how devious this windows spyware is. 99% of people would probably just accept to share all their data but that’s not good enough; MS has to try and squeeze out every last drop.
Time to break up Microsoft
Best time was a decade ago. Second best time is now. Same with Google, and Apple, auto companies and grocery companies. And…and…and. it’s almost as the free market DOESN’T solve issues it creates them.
Oh, free markets can solve these problems, but we don’t have a free market. These big companies don’t win because they’re the best, they win because they buy the marketshare bribe companies to only support their platforms.
ISPs are a fantastic example here. Starting a new ISP is prohibitively expensive, not because of the physical materials you need, but the permits (which the ISPs lobbied for) and lawsuits w/ existing ISPs. In a proper free market, we’d have a lot more selection than we do.
What you call “free market” I call “crony-capitalism.” In a free market, monopolies only stay monopolies if they continue to be better than the alternatives. In a crony-capitalist market, monopolies continue if they can make enough barriers to prevent competition.
These big companies don’t win because they’re the best, they win because they buy the marketshare bribe companies to only support their platforms.
You’re just describing free market capitalism.
The companies are free to do what they want without government telling them they can’t do XYZ.
In a free market, monopolies only stay monopolies if they continue to be better than the alternatives.
I disagree, because like you say, they can just use their position to harm competitors.
In a crony-capitalist market, monopolies continue if they can make enough barriers to prevent competition.
A crony-capitalist market is just the natural end result of free market capitalism.
Only by regulating the market and not having companies be free to do whatever they want can you have healthy competition and companies that benefit people.
You’re just describing free market capitalism.
I’m really not.
Free market capitalism differs from our current economic system in regulations and taxes, which manipulate normal supply and demand. For example, we subsidize EVs, which makes EVs more attractive than they normally would be, which encourages EV companies to keep prices higher than they normally would. We also subsidize roads, which makes cars more attractive than other modes of transportation. We also levy tariffs, which prioritize locally produced goods and goods from friendly trade partners, and may be unequally levied based on product type to protect certain types of domestic industries.
Free market capitalism does not prevent all regulations. You can still ban price fixing and other forms of collusion w/o violating those underlying principles of non-interference. Companies are not “free to do what they want,” they are restricted from colluding w/ government to get special favors or handouts. A system with a properly separated government and market means the government only steps in if there’s a crime, and the list of possible crimes should be limited and not target specific industries. Companies can still acquire others and whatnot to form conglomerates, but doing so is only profitable if they’re breaking some other type of law so it may trigger an investigation.
Once you allow the government to directly regulate the market, you open the floodgates to cronysism. Regulations disproportionately hurt small companies because large companies can overcome it and use those regulations as a weapon against potential competitors.
Nobody challenges cable companies because cable companies can tie up competitors in court over permitting and whatnot to exhaust whatever investment capital they have on legal fees, so the only real competition possible is government (muni fiber) because they control the permitting or new tech (Starlink, point-to-point wireless) because they can sidestep the permitting. If permitting was substantially easier, we’d see more competition in the ISP space (and probably reuse of existing lines since it’s better to make a deal than run separate lines or lose 100% profit).
The only way, IMO, for regulations to be a net good WRT competition is if government is sensible and untouchable by corporations. I don’t believe that’s feasible, so the next best is to limit the ability of governments to make laws that impact the market so corporations don’t have anything to gain through lobbying.
I disagree. Monopolies are the end state of free market capitalism, and yes the economic system we experience in north America isn’t true capitalism either.
I really disagree, but we haven’t seen anything approaching a truly free market for 100 years or so, so it’s really hard to say.
That said, one of the core functions of government is to break up monopolies to keep the market free.
I think by virtue of the government breaking up monopolies, it cannot be a free market. I do believe the government should make sure that corporations shouldn’t be monopolies however.
Maybe if we’re talking in absolutes, but most of the problems I see in our current market are due to cronyism. People generally hate Comcast (or local cable company of choice) and CenturyLink (or local DSL company of choice), yet it’s incredibly hard to start an ISP due to local regulations and protectionism. Many people don’t like Windows, yet they’re “required” for many computing tasks due to agreements with others in the industry.
Price fixing and other types of collusion go against the principle of a free market, and if that goes on unchecked, I think it’s appropriate for a government entity to step in. However, if a company is merely the preferred provider of a good or service and they’re not colluding or otherwise preventing competition, there’s no reason for a government entity to step in. So someone like Comcast should probably be broken up, but someone like Valve should not. Not all “monopolies” should be broken up, only the ones violating the law.
The issues with google and windows that you are pointing out are the result of corporate welfare and capitalism without regulation. It’s incredibly expensive to start an isp yes. So it should be a nationalized service. MS got to where it was because they buy up competition, and there wasn’t anyone who stepping in earlier to stop it.
Every time I see stuff like this it makes me slightly glad they got laughed out of the smart phone game. Can you imagine if a Microsoft mobile OS became a serious third between Android and iOS? I mean, those two aren’t great by any stretch of the imagination (and are probably doing or planning similar shit), but Microsoft is just going gloves off at this point.
If there was more competition they (probably) wouldn’t be doing this stuff as people would leave.
I was actually a fan of Outlook for Android. Followed system dark mode before it was cool, had real multi account inbox, good wearos app, and other useful features. Then they started inserting Bing search into my long press menu system wide. And also recommending Edge when I clicked links. This kind of horizontal integration is just too baked into the company DNA. They can’t help themselves, even when it actually harms them
Yeah. On my work desktop, our IT people have told us to not use the Outlook program but rather to just go to the website. On my phone, I run it in Vivaldi instead of the app (which is a little jankie, but not as bad as it was running in Chrome or Firefox).
What’s the difference between horizontal and vertical integration? (I know a few business words but usually not enough to be intelligent, this is a genuine question of confusion)
Vertical would be if MS owned the carrier, the manufacturer, the operating system etc. Horizontal applies here where they own many interconnecting parts of the same layer of the market. Search, browser, email, etc, all being used to promote each other at the expense of competitors
While scummy indeed, if you need a desktop application to get yourself new wallpapers, my sympathy only goes so far.
Also not at all surprised the top comment speaks of Linux.
Linux, hating Musk, and Star Trek: the Lemmy trifecta.
I only hate Musk and love Star Trek. Does that mean I’m not a true Lemmy?
Those are rookie numbers. You gotta pump those numbers up.
deleted by creator
I’m up to buy a new computer and I’ve never wanted a Macbook but with all the negative changes Microsoft is making I feel it is the time to make the switch.
Microsoft seems to think that we are the product and harvesting data is the default business model moving forward.
Apple is no better, they just have a better PR team.
Apple is historically better in terms of privacy than Microsoft. From resistance to government data requests to just their posture on data collection, it is an improvement. They rely less than Microsoft on advertisement and service based revenue and more on hardware sales which do not require the same level of invasive collection.
I don’t mean to sing their praises too loudly, but between the two I think Apple is a clear favorite. And couple that with a better, BSD-based, OS and I think you’ve got a winner. Unless of course you include alternate, clearly superior alternatives, like GNU/Linux.
But hardware alone? MacBooks can’t be beat.
May I interest you in Linux?
I’ve considered Linux. I work in IT and I know I could figure it out and adapt to it. The problem is my kids and my wife would also need to use it.
To give you some perspective on my decision making process. My wife (who is of the age where she really should be able to figure tech out.) can’t seem to figure out how to print from her phone and complained about how difficult IOS is compared to Android when we switched a few years ago. My kids run to me for all things tech and I usually have to figure out their problems. I’m always genuinely surprised my teenage son hasn’t made an effort to hack the application which restricts his time and access to his gaming computer (I would be secretly proud of him if he did).
So for my own piece of mind I’ll pay the 2x multiple for Apple hardware just so I don’t have to deal with learning a new OS while my family comes to me for basically every tech issue.
I get your perspective, but wouldn’t everyone involved also have to learn how to deal with macOS? Learning how to deal with Linux isn’t necessarily more complicated
Absolutely, but I’d rather deal with something that has widespread manufacturer and user support.
While I think there is lots of support for Linux, and I could figure it out. I don’t perceive that it is as wide spread as Mac OS.
Long story short I’m paying for the convenience.
Microsoft
sofficial “Bing Wallpaper app”does some nasty, malware-like thingsto WindowsBREAKING: Microsoft is still shitty
deleted by creator
Good thing normies got nothing to hide!
