You can’t get rid of it, you can only hide it: Microsoft imposes controversial Windows Backup on users::Like it or not, the Windows Backup app installed in Windows 10 and Windows 11 is here to stay, with Microsoft calling it a “system component” that can’t be

  • Nindelofocho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    coming soon: Monthly subscription to use windows with the justification that it uses an online service in order to work

    • georgette@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can’t wait for the eventual warning pop-ups and emails, warning me that my onedrive is almost full (70%)

    • Zetta@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly I hope, would be a big boom for Linux which I already use

    • 4am@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Still $129 for the initial license key, too

      • sock@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        what do you mean by this

        do u think a cloud pc (with constant server costs) shouldnt be a monthly fee?

        • Reygle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think this is likely the “new only Windows option” in the not so distant future. I think it shouldn’t exist.

              • OfficerBribe@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Their primary use is enterprise not private consumers. Think of virtualized OS accessible over internet that you can manage/protect and provide for example to some random consultant. Or just provide more powerful PC on low end HW.

                It’s costly though and not sure it ever gained traction because there always were alternatives like Citrix Desktops.

                • Reygle@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Maybe there’s a use case, but I’m anti-cloud and always will be. I struggle to think of a situation I couldn’t do better with in-house (or even air gapped) VMs of my own.

                  Anyone who watches 365 uptime knows that Microsoft’s cloud is a fragile laughing stock. They use a Twitter account because their own status portal is so laughably trash and unreliable. If you don’t believe me I don’t blame you. Here it is.

                  The day I trust any cloud platform (Especially Microsoft) is the day I promise to jump off a cliff.

                  • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Thank you. Exactly. The term “cloud” is just code for “someone else’s computer” and as you say, there’s very little that cannot be done without it. And once you entrust your data to someone else’s hardware, all you really have are assurances and probabilities that what you expect will happen with it becomes what actually happens with it. No guarantees.

                    And you pay for all this, monthly, until the end of time.

                    I don’t blame anyone that wants to go that route, I use a freebie bit of cloud for phone photos myself, but anything of more import, nah. More “cloud” for everyone else, I suppose, because they can have my share.

            • Reygle@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I have a confident guess about what Microsoft runs theirs on… it ain’t Windows.

              • OfficerBribe@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Can’t imagine it being the case, thin clients have existed for a very long time and Cloud PC is nothing revolutionary just an additional offering from Microsoft.

                Not to mention private consumers will not pay subscription for OS that in long run is a lot more expensive and worse HW that they probably already have.

    • BlueBockser@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Probably an unpopular opinion, but I don’t see a problem with subscriptions for commercial software. Fixing bugs and security issues after release is an ongoing effort that costs money, so a one-time purchase isn’t really economically viable in the long run. I honestly wouldn’t feel comfortable using unmaintained software that might contain known but unfixed vulnerabilities.

      • letsgo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Have you checked how much money Microsoft have recently? Their current model doesn’t appear to be a problem for them.

        • BlueBockser@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re arguing a completely different point. Windows isn’t Microsoft’s only product by a long shot, so I don’t see how their money (whatever you mean by that, specifically) is the answer here. Also, every few years there’s a new Windows version which again costs money - almost like a subscription with bigger installments at longer intervals.

      • Nindelofocho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        As someone who advises on and implements software at work that would be sorta ok if these companies charging several thousand a year would actually fix bugs and provide proper support. Zendesk is a pretty big display of this: feature requests lay dormant in their support pages, the only way you can get support is through a chat where the rep will point you to an article you already read most of the time, updates that ever obfuscates settings into a dizzying amount of menus in the admin panel, and so on. All for a minimum of $55 a month per seat if you want email and calling. The issue is costs are sky high for practically no value