Guest post by Security update package MS16-023 for Internet Explorer doesn’t only contain security patches, but also a few other things, including: “This update adds functionality to Internet Explorer 11 on some computers that lets users learn about Windows 10 or start an upgrade to Windows 10.”
Ghacks.net writes:
Microsoft does not reveal what this means, or what this has to do with Internet Explorer. According to Woody Leonhard over at Infoworld, the update pushes a banner on Internet Explorer 11’s New Tab Page advertising the company’s new operating system Windows 10.
Unfortunately the ads can’t be uninstalled without uninstalling the whole security update package.
Quote: “Unfortunately the ads can’t be uninstalled without uninstalling the whole security update package.”
How many reasons do users need to ditch that abomination named Internet Explorer?
You’ve been binged again! Enjoy!
How many reasons do users need to ditch that abomination named Windows 10?
There, fixed it for you.
Actually they need a single one reason: the alternative OS they may jump to is able to run *all their apps*.
So with OS X, Linux and ReactOS out of the question, there’s no alternative (except Windows 7, which is going to be killed in a year or so).
Actually that isn’t a good reason.
It’s been 5 week now since I booted in to my Windows 7 installation, I have been using Linux Lite in that time and the Windows software I have wanted to run has ran fine through Wine.
Admittedly it hasn’t been a lot and mostly games which I have run, but all but one has run without a problem and all were just as easy to install and run as they are in Windows.
There is no way in hell I will ever install Windows 10 and sell my soul, so if that is all the problems I will face my Windows days are over.
I am loving this Linux Lite, it’s stable, easy to use and it isn’t Windows 10!
You and me and people reading OSnews are not typical users (my desktop is Linux for some 13 years already). Most computer users just want their damn app and not care about privacy, security and such.
If all you need a “PC” for is the Internet…then why are you using a PC? A Tablet or smartphone would do just as well.
For the rest of us we need Windows because none of the programs we use run on your OS making your OS effectively worthless for us. My A/V capture and DAC interfaces? Do NOT run on Linux. My $1K+ of triple A games? Ditto. Imaging software, business software, i can literally spend hours just listing program after program that does specific tasks that Linux has no functional alternative and cannot run and has nothing even on the horizon to possibly replace it.
I’m sorry, hate me all you want, but Linux is an OS for programmers and those that only surf, if you do not fit into those two teeny tiny demographics? Then Linux is about as useful as DOS in 2016. People buy computers to run software and the complete hostility that the Linux community has built toward proprietary software has made sure that the vast majority of software being written? Will NEVER come to your OS, and without the software we require what good is your OS?
And please do not say “Use a VM” because paying for a copy of Windows just to spend all our time running it in a slower crippled VM helps us…how exactly? We’re still spending all our time in Windows, we are just running it in a lousy environment that makes it slower than on real hardware.
At the end of the day there is a reason why the only competition Windows 10 has is Win 7/8.1 and that is because the software people want don’t work on your OS and will never will. Linux was at 2% a decade ago, it is at 2% now, it’ll be at 2% no matter what MSFT does, because without the software the vast majority use they really has no use for it.
Windows7 will live on a lot longer than a year or so, regardless of how hard Microsoft tries to kill it.
…just as XP is still alive with some 11% of the market (which is more than all versions of Linux and OS X together). But Microsoft is now more aggressive than ever in pushing Windows 10 as a replacement.
No, they don’t need to run all of their apps. They need to choose the best OS and install it, replace the apps they can, and run the few remaining ones under virtual machines until they find suitable replacements.
Adapt. Advance. Move on. That’s why I’m not still running CP/M-80 on a computer with an 8 bit CPU.
Edited 2016-03-13 11:00 UTC
people do not buy computers to run OSes, they buy them to run apps
People don’t buy computers to run apps any more than they buy cameras to use lenses.
They buy computers to write letters, analyze the stock market, send emails, read the news, edit photos, play games, stream music and movies, do taxes, control telescopes, program ham radios, and so forth.
Smart people don’t stick with a problematic or outdated OS just because switching require that they learn some new apps. When I switched to MS-DOS about 30 years ago, it ran about 0% of my CP/M apps. When I switched to OS X about a decade ago, it ran none of my Windows apps. Even when there was an OS X version of a Windows app I used, I looked, and often found, a better app that only ran under OS X.
again, the old fallacy: “people do that and that” and then provide an example of what an OSnews reader would do. OSnews readers are not representative for general population about using their computers.
There was no fallacy because I didn’t present myself as an example of the common man. I am a computer professional who managed to switch OSs multiple times despite relying on an order of magnitude more apps than most people do. I’ve been called on to provide computer support and advice to countless, non-technical family, friends, acquaintances, and coworkers in the 30-some years since I became an engineer, which is how I know what “people do.”
Many consumers have never even bought an app and many more now rely on platform-independent, web-based tools like Gmail, Google Docs, Microsoft’s Office 365, and AutoDesk’s PIXLR Express photo editor. That’s why ‘regular people’ can and do move fluidly between Windows PCs, Macs, and Chromebooks. Many people have replaced their computers altogether with iOS and Android tablets that cannot run a single application that their computers did.
We’re wandering away from what you actually wrote. Sauron asked about “users” and you wrote that “they need a single one reason: the alternative OS they may jump to is able to run *all their apps*.” How did the term “they” come to mean an undefined subset of users which excludes OSNews readers?
of course “they” means the majority of users… and in my experience when an user search for a computer to buy, usually the research goes this way “can it run app X?” or “how well it does run app Y”.
Many is not a majority.
Thank you for clarifying. In my experience, most users are willing to adopt a new OS and apps as long as their functional needs are met. It’s not religion to them; it’s “just a computer.” They don’t care if the app they use to browse the web is called Safari, Chrome, or Edge.
There is no reason to prefer any version of Windows over Windows 10, and MS getting all the WIndows holdouts on one continuously updating version of Windows is frankly, good for everyone. If you think one or two controversial lines of BS in their EULA is worse than the other thousand lines, you are deceiving yourselves.
Windows vs. Linux [Distro of choice] or OSX is a great conversation. Windows vs some other version of Windows is inane – they are all produced and mismanaged by MS. What difference does it really make?
I mean, some of you even whine about how hard it is to update Android, or how updates aren’t available at all. So it’s bad if MS pushes updates, but it’s good if Google does. And do you think Android doesn’t have all the same lines of BS in their proprietary EULA? Get a grip.
Edited 2016-03-11 19:03 UTC
There is no reason to prefer any version of Windows over Windows 10
Bullcrap, several times over.
I have 4 machines here still running XP, 1 with Win 2000 and 1 running Windows 98, not one of them phones home with a buttload of spyware, sorry “telemetry”, and not one of them harasses me by shoving ads in my face!
Plenty of reasons there alone to prefer other versions of Windows other than 10.
Its attitudes like yours that lets them get away with this crap. If nobody ran it, they would soon scrap it!
And if they don’t change their business and revenue models, then no one will run it. The old models don’t work any more.
It’s business. It’s capitalism. If you don’t like it fine (I personally think we can do better), but that’s what it is.
Again, running a different contemporary system that is maintained (unlike Win200 or Win XP – it’s frankly ridiculous that you still run those) would be a perfectly valid way to move forward without putting up with “MS Bullshit” or whatever. Staying on a sinking ship – that’s all you.
Edited 2016-03-11 20:23 UTC
it’s frankly ridiculous that you still run those
Why? Because Microsoft and you say so?
I also still run Amiga OS 3x, BeOS and Atari Basic, non of those try and cram ads down my throat either.
They all still run the software written for them just fine and still do the job they was made to do, just the same as XP, 2K and Win98.
More important, they stay out my face while doing it, are a pleasure to use and don’t try and take control of MY hardware!
It doesn’t matter what you or Microsoft say, it will not make me or a few folk I know install Windows 10, period!
“Telemetry” and invasive ads are solid reasons to prefer an older Windows version
Not having ads sure undermines my security.
Least I know now why Win10 & WinStore updates can take hours on a poor internet connection.
What’s sad is, this impertinence and disrespect to the end-user will likely just be completely ignored in main stream tech media
It’ll be largely ignored by the majority of users as well while enterprises will refrain from installing this version of the patch. You’ll have some irritated by it, but for the most part people will ignore it. I’m still uninstalling on average 5 or 6 tool bars from clients’ computers along with the usual raft and trash of PUPs, trojans, and other malware and scumware. Seriously, what’s one more banner?
Can’t wait until they port this “informative” “feature ” to their office software update
Both Google and Microsoft are now pimping their users as mobile billboards.
Lol I can’t help for laugh.
Ads in the patches, “free” versions of Windows 10 that have ads on the lock screen.
Hot mess!
True, Apple will never do anything as tasteless as that ( http://www.geek.com/apple/apple-is-urging-iphone-owners-to-upgrade-… ).
Edited 2016-03-11 03:15 UTC
Nice, pop up in the App Store where you expect to see ads. Not on your lock screen, not in your web browser.
On ALL computers running 10 and I.E. 11 that totally sucks.
Are you implying that google show ads on their lock screen or their *gasp* web browser ? or in their app store ?
Does Google Make Windows 10 or I.E. 11?
For Google almost every app has ads, you get pop up ads in the various browsers that might be included on which ever vendors phone you buy.
By default no ad blocking built in and none coming.
Edited 2016-03-11 03:29 UTC
I would not discuss the economical implications of having an ad-blocking software in your browser for website content owner.
But Apple have been pushing content publisher to use their Apple news platform (with their iAds), and I am suspecting that was one of the reason to include ad blocking in their browser.
Additionally, you are making google responsible for respecting the web standards and for the fault of advertisers who are abusing them.
And as a android phone owner, I can check that on google map, gmail app, inbox, calendar, keep, news app ( if you are not looking at sponsored content ), dialer, there is no ad I can see so far.
Mind you I do not see Google as an angel either ( more something like an angler fish).
But every company is as equally evil in my book ( but have varying qualities of PR department ), my reason for using an android phone was that it was the only one that was reasonably compatible with linux.
Edited 2016-03-11 03:42 UTC
Debating which company is less evil, Microsoft, Google, or Apple, is like trying to figure out which of the three stooges was more handsome.
I always had a weakness for moe’s handsome haircut
You are right. But remember Google doesn’t put ads in their products, they take the info from you in their apps and then sell it to companies that push you the ads.
But I am not putting anyone down for using Android, we just know how they make their money.
Wrong. Google uses your info to increase the likelihood that you click on an ad that they run for somebody else. Only if you click on the ads you give your infos away.
Google main business is keeping your infos for themselves, so that they are the only ones profiting from it.
What you say is some uninformed nonsense only clueless fanboi kids spread.
I also don’t like advertising, but let’s keep our facts straight, shall we?
So they sell ACCESS to your info and not give your info away. And that is different how? LOL.
Ether way they pimp your info to make money. Nothing Fanboi about that.
Actually, they do nothing of the sort. This statement is completely and wholly incorrect.
Google does not sell your information, because that would completely destroy their business. That information is their goose that lays the golden eggs, and selling it to anyone or giving access to it to anyone would be utterly stupid.
What Google actually does is this: “hey, you’ve got something to sell? Great, you give us an ad, and we’ll target it at the right people for you”. At no point does your information end up anywhere except inside Google.
There’s a ton of things to rightfully hate on Google for, but there’s no reason to resort to lies to do so. Let’s keep the hate based on facts.
Ahhhh,so they don’t sell your info they just sell access to your info.
Got it!
Still not quite right. They create products that use the data, but at no point do their customers (that’s the ad buyers, not end users) actually get access to (all of) the data. That’s Google’s proprietary soup. (Customers do get access to some of it in reports form, but not everything.)
Google’s customers get access to products that Google builds based on and using their collected data.
WRONG. Read it again.
No, just on every damned web page I visit, anywhere.
Google didn’t put the ads there. Webmasters put google ads on their pages to make a few bucks. Quite a difference.
No difference. Google is the ad provider. Google collects and analyzes said data, then sells it. Does it matter who put it there? The result is identical in the end and, in many ways, they are responsible for the cancer of advertising that has infected the internet in the first place. I don’t argue that the blame is shared with the webmasters, but they are still to blame for it to a large degree.
Apple is plastering ads all over iOS. They force entire unremovable applications on all iOS users just to push ads. They put fullscreen ads in the music player and their application store, they put ads in the notification center, and so on.
Android, on the other hand, has nothing of the sort.
So tell me then, how do I remove Google Maps from Android when it came with the phone? How, precisely, do I remove the Google Now app? I know what you’re going to say: “just root the device.” You know what I’d say to that? “Just jailbreak your iDevice.” Same difference.
And as for ads in Apple Apps… well, the only time I ever saw an Apple Music ad was, *gasp*, when I clicked on the Apple Music tab in the music player. No shit. I clicked on it, and I didn’t have Apple Music, so naturally a message came up to this effect and to start my trial. Incredible! How dare they show me information that I asked for! I’ve yet to see any ads for iPhones in the App Store either, though I’ve heard a lot about them of course. I don’t disbelieve the people who saw them, just saying I haven’t yet. Perhaps they took them down.
And, while we’re at it, I’ve never yet seen any app whatsoever put an ad in my notification center on iOS. Android, on the other hand… let’s just say it was a nasty shock when I saw that for the first time. And on iOS you know what I can do? Tell an app “No!” On Android an app will get notification permission by default and telling it no is a pain in the ass.
So, honest effort in skewing the facts. I commend you. Do better.
In Android, you can disable apps without rooting/jailbreaking.
Google Maps is an ordinary app, that you can disable as any other. There are other apps that react to the same intents, like Here Maps or Sygic, so they can be used as drop-in replacements.
It is easy to disable Google Now. It even asks you if you want to use it, and you are free to say No. Actually, I disabled it, because Google Now doesn’t crawl Gapps accounts (obviously), so the info it provides is not useful at all (weather, step counter and some info from the web). The good news is, that you can gain about extra day of battery use by disabling Google Now
I’ve never seen ads in Google apps on Android, period. Third party apps that you installed can put whatever they want into notification shade, but you can prevent them from doing that – just long press the notification. (And yes, putting the ads into the notification is limited Play Store rules* – so where did you get that app?).
*- qoute: “System level notifications may only be used for an app’s integral features, such as an airline app that notifies users of special deals, or a game that notifies users of in-game promotions.”
Disable != remove. Please learn to read.
Why do you want to remove it? This is not a desktop system.
You cannot really remove it because, drumroll – the same instance of /system is not only for normal use, but also for recovery. It is supposed to be back, when you factory reset the phone. It is made that way, so ordinary user can easily restore their phone into factory mint condition, without flashing over USB and whatnot.
The only other way would be to have the original firmware twice, once for use, once for recovery, taking twice as much space in flash. Exactly, like Windows does that.
Therefore, it is better to be able to disable the app. The system then behaves as if it was not installed anyway.
The system partition is read only & fixed in size. Disabling an app in android uninstalls all updates from the writable data partition & prevents the system version from being executed/loaded.
Why is this an important distinction for you? I don’t see it as much different than marking the file as deleted on the writable portion of an overlay filesystem or even deleting the filesystem reference without overwritting the data on a more traditional filesystem… Plus, many phones support rooting by design & you can delete the files if there’s a reason to.
They should have mentioned it…
Just like 8 and 8.1, Windows 10 is real disaster in many aspects. One thing is certain – Windows 7 is here to stay for a long long time just like XP before it.
Technically not a disaster, but i think a lot of users were burned by windows 8, and the fact that is still has some split personality issue and some “work in progress” aspect won’t give users more confidence.
I am guessing the only way people will be migrating to windows 10 would be when buying new PC/laptop
I’ve seen malware that isn’t as nasty as these continuing pushes by Microsoft. Honestly, I laughed at the first article I saw accusing MS of malware-like behavior. I thought it an over-reaction. Now I’m laughing again, this time at myself. How naive I was.
The burning question in my mind is: just what the hell is in this new operating system that they want to push so badly? This behavior not only goes beyond all previous lengths by Microsoft, but all previous lengths that I know of from any operating system vendor. What is going on? I can’t shake the feeling that there’s a piece of the puzzle that we’re all missing which would explain all of this.
I don’t think there’s much of a mystery here. They have (finally) woken up to the fact that this may be their last chance to lever their existing user base into their new vision. Hence the smell of desperation.
The new vision is “control”. With Windows 10, they completely control the OS update process, meaning they can force changes on users whether they like it or not. They also want to have access to your data, and the only way they can get it in bulk (since they’ve lost so much time v. Google), is to sign everyone into automatic “cloud” backups.
Except for work situations where there is no choice, I will be steering 100% clear of Windows 10 (and anything that follows).
You and me both. And even in my work situation I’ll be steering clear of it, since we’re dealing with software that doesn’t run properly on it. Yay for WSUS. It’s hell to manage, but it keeps this crap out… for now.
Count me in also. All of my Windows machines will be running Windows 7 with zero chance of being “updated” to Windows 10. I refuse to be victim to Microsofts new abusive and scumbag behavior. I’m not willing to give Microsoft unlimited access to everything, having every bit of my privacy & control over MY property sacrificed just for a free copy of Windows.
Just spent an hour editing the registry to stop this forced upgrade on a couple computers…can only hope it works. It’s a nasty forced upgrade that you can’t even task manager end task out of. You’re only given the choice of upgrade NOW (it’s 4PM on a Friday afternoon) or the next 5 days. I’m the IT guy for a small business and while roughly half have already upgraded (with a few minor problems, mostly I’ve had to create new accounts and copy over data from the old account, or driver issues) I’m on vacation for a week and am incensed that Microsoft has put me in this no @#$&! no-win situation. It’s cross my fingers, hope and pray things don’t crap out in my absence over the next week.
Edited 2016-03-11 22:20 UTC
As a long time Linux user (switched with the advent of product activation when Windows XP was released) I am appalled that Microsoft thinks that it has the right to push ads to users desktops just because it gave away its buggy OS for free and without a choice. I hope users hang onto Windows 7 in droves!
It was not also a “free giveaway” it was a “free” update if you already had an existing, paid, windows license.
Microsoft really wants to have it both ways here; still maintain their traditional revenue from software licenses, while trying to tap into the revenue stream models of Google/Facebook.
Not surprising, after all, copying other people’s ideas/models seems to be about the only constant in Microsoft’s 40 yr corporate culture history. Makes Bill Gates original “anti copy” manifesto the more hypocritical and ironic.
They got to make the money somewhere.
So does everyone else.
If they’re so hard up for revenue, they shouldn’t have made Windows 10 free for Win7 and 8 users.
Then maybe they should’ve made Windows 10 something that was attractive to people so that they would *want* to upgrade to it, and therefore pay for it. It worked for Windows 7 and it worked for XP.
Unfortunately this isn’t the case and not that many people actually want it. As a result, it has to be shoved down people’s throats for free, and the people *still* don’t want it.
Perhaps it was a consequence of this “security update” or something else but one of my elderly friend called couple of days ago with the issue that “after Windows started to update itself and it took longer, I went to nearby store and when I came back ,there was a greeting on the screen :Welcome to Windows 10. What do I do now?”
Went over and verified that all the programs still worked and told that well now its done and you have one thing less to worry about – actively trying to refuse the proposal to install Windows 10.
Since 2003, thousands of clients worldwide have trusted ACS Data Recovery.ACS Data Recovery has been helping clients recover lost data from hard drives and RAID arrays since 2003
https://acsdata.com
Edited 2016-03-14 10:50 UTC