Comment by dijit

Comment by dijit 4 days ago

17 replies

View on Hacker News

You're missing the point entirely.

The problem isn't that ads can be disabled. The problem is that a paid operating system ships with ads in the first place. Full stop. There's no universe where that's acceptable product design, and the fact that you can disable them (for now, at least) doesn't make it less offensive.

I don't understand why you're going to bat for a trillion-dollar corporation here. Your settings work now. Great. They won't after the next feature update, this is a well-documented pattern. Windows updates routinely re-enable telemetry, Bing integration, and promotional content that users explicitly disabled. You're not configuring your OS, you're fighting it.

The TPM2 requirement is pure planned obsolescence. Millions of perfectly good machines binned because Microsoft decided hardware from 2016 is suddenly "insecure"... whilst the actual benefit is DRM enforcement and remote attestation.

It's a corporate compliance tool, not a security feature.

The Insiders build being referenced had actual web advertisements in search results. That's where this is headed. If you're comfortable defending that trajectory, carry on flipping those settings.

3form 4 days ago

>whilst the actual benefit is DRM enforcement and remote attestation.

This is not highlighted nearly enough. It's very bad.

Reply View 0 replies
blackcatsec 3 days ago

The articles surrounding the insider builds gaining "ads" are from 2024--now 1.5 years ago. So whatever was implemented is in the OS at this point--particularly items that showed up in the "Beta" channel of Windows. There's nothing new or current surrounding new ad placement on Windows except some Copilot items throughout 2025, if you consider copilot an "ad" and not a useful tool similar to Notepad, or Office.

The TPM2 requirement (and kind of by extension the IOMMU requirement, which is the one itself that bit most people) has significantly more benefits than "DRM" or "planned obsolescence". For one, did you know that TPM1.2 didn't include SHA2? Would you be okay relying on SHA1 hashing in 2026 to be used for digital signing? Of course you wouldn't. If I told you today to go generate an X.509 certificate with SHA1 you're going to look at me funny. Did you know it also didn't include ECC? Also much more useful in this day and age for cryptographic speed. There are many other features I don't feel like digging into at the moment, but you get the point.

I would counter that the downstream requirement for the IOMMU (useful for Hypervisor Enforced Code Integrity), in which Windows itself is broken up into "Virtual Trust Levels" (VTL0, VTL1, and I think there are some newer ones now as well); is extremely useful for securing early parts of the platform boot.

Or did we collectively forget about the early rootkit era of Windows XP from 2005-2010 when running with legacy/MBR boot mechanisms?

Establishing a trust boundary as early as possible to force possible attackers into userspace as much as possible (where it can be more easily removed and remediated) is significantly important in modern operating system security--and this goes for any platform: MacOS, Windows, Android, iOS, or Linux.

Apple, Google, and Microsoft have some form of integrity control over their platforms along with dedicated security chips. Short of some exploits, the most common vector to get into Windows' early boot process is to steal or abuse code IHV kernel driver signing certificates; or in some cases, be maliciously issued one from Microsoft (lol, now THAT is indeed a problem, but a tough one).

This is just part of modern platform security at this point so I don't really see the issue.

In addition, TPM2 offers significantly more storage and

Reply View 1 reply
  • user3939382 3 days ago

    > Establishing a trust boundary as early as possible to force possible attackers into userspace as much as possible (where it can be more easily removed and remediated) is significantly important in modern operating system security

    I notice you omitted the BSDs and with OpenBSD in particular I’d argue your point is correct for the majority school of thought but not necessarily most correct whatever that means. Correct for a certain set of priorities.

    Modern OS attack surface is an insane nightmare. The concept of securing it at all is.. idk what it is. OpenBSD default install you run ps you get 12 processes. You can reason about the OS. You focus on you boundary. You don’t admit scenarios where your attacker is poking around usedland. That’s game over on these byzantine OSes we have now. Even better NetBSD where the arch is the security. The SELinux idea makes the best with what we have where you need Linux for driver whatever support. So I’m not disagreeing necessarily but adding context. As far as generating certs users are better off with piv yubikey etc for pki so it’s in their hands, literally

    Reply View 0 replies
jayd16 4 days ago

You paid for windows 11? They basically give it away to end users.

Reply View 7 replies
  • dijit 4 days ago

    Yes, I paid for Windows 11. It came bundled with the £1,900 laptop I bought. The fact that the licence cost is hidden in the hardware price doesn't make it free.

    And even if it were free, which it isn't, that still wouldn't justify ads. Android is free. Linux is free. Neither ships with gambling app promotions in the system UI.

    Microsoft made $20 billion in Windows revenue last year. They're not a scrappy startup looking for alternative monetisation. The ads exist because they can get away with it, not because they need to.

    Reply View 4 replies
    • rmunn 4 days ago

      > The fact that the licence cost is hidden in the hardware price doesn't make it free.

      I appreciate manufacturers who make this obvious. For example, when I bought the Framework laptop I'm using now, the OS choices were preinstalled Windows 11 (default selection), preinstalled Linux (-$150), none/I'll install my own (-$150). Made it clear exactly what I would have been paying for the Windows license if I had chosen Windows.

      Reply View 0 replies
    • Gander5739 4 days ago

      Many variants of Android ship with ads, particularly on cheaper phones. Xiaomi phones for instance.

      Reply View 2 replies
      • dijit 4 days ago

        Let me know when Android base OS has ads in the UI.

        If the largest advertising company on the planet isn’t making it part of the base operating system — then that should tell you something, don’t you think?

        Reply View 1 reply
        • Gander5739 4 days ago

          Does the vanilla OS even run on any phones? To my knowledge a large part of the system functionality is implemented through google play services which isn't open source (and that's presumably why it's not part of the base system).

          Reply View 0 replies
  • somerandomqaguy 4 days ago

    OEM volume pricing is $20 USD or so for system builders like Dell, HP, etc last time I saw it, but that was a long time ago. So technically yes it was purchased if you bought a system, it was just built into the price.

    Reply View 0 replies
  • layer8 4 days ago

    Not really. Only upgrading an existing Windows 10 installation is free.

    Reply View 0 replies
benjiro 4 days ago

> The problem is that a paid operating system ships with ads in the first place.

You never buy a laptop or pre-build? They are often full of ads that are not Microsoft Windows build in but add-on by the OEM.

Now i agree that Ads in your OS that you paid for, is a big nono. I never understood why Microsoft threats Home and Pro as almost the exact same. Sell Home for cheaper and with Ads, but keep the more expensive Pro clean. Microsoft can do that easily because Windows Server is just that ...

But on the Linux front, i have never been happy with the desktop experience. Often a lot of small details are missing, if the DE itself not outright crashes (KDE, master in Plasma/Widget crashes!). And so many other desktop feel like they have been made in the 90s (probably are) and never gotten updated.

And i do not run W11, still on old and very stable W10. There is no reason to upgrade that i see. Did the same with W7, for years after support ended (and by that time W10 was well polished and less buggy).

The problem is, what does Linux Desktop offer me more, then a few annoyances that i can remove after a fresh install? Often a lot more trouble with the need to use the terminal for things, that are ancient in Windows. That is the problem ... With Apple, you can get insane good M-CPU hardware (yes, mem/storage is insane), for the os/desktop switch.

I noticed that often the people who switch to Linux, are more likely to send more time into finetuning their OS, tinkering around, etc... aka people with more time on their hands. But when you get a bit older, you simply want something that works and gives you no trouble. I can literally upgrade my PC here from a NVidia to AMD or visa versa, and it will simply work with the correct full performance drivers. Its that convenience that is the draw to keep using (even ifs a older) Windows.

For now 25 years every few years, i look at upgrading to Linux permanently, install a few distro's and go back. Linus Desktop does not feel like you gain a massive benefit, if that makes sense? Especially not if your like me, who simply rides out Microsoft their bad OS releases. What is the killer features that you say, hey, Linux Desktop is insane good, it has X, Y, Z that Microsoft does not have, its ... That is the issue in my book. Yes, it has no adds but that is like 5 min work on a fresh install, a 2 min job of copy/past a cleanup script to remove the spyware and other crap and your good for year. So again, killer features?

Often a lot of programs that are less developed or stripped down compared to Windows, let alone way too often 90 style feels programs. You can tell its made by developers often, with no GUI / Graphical developers involved lol

I said it a 1000 times but Linux Desktop suffers from a lot of distro redoing the same time over and over again. Resulting in this lag ...

That is my yearly Linux rant hahaha. And yes, i know, W11 is a disaster but i simply wait it out on W10, and see what the future brings when the whole AI hype dies down and Microsoft loses too much customers. I am betting that somebody is going to get scared at MS and we then get a better W12 again.

Reply View 5 replies
  • tracker1 4 days ago

    I've been pretty happy with Pop in general, I did upgrade to COSMIC pre-release about 6 months ago, and although there have been rough edges, less than some of my Win11 experiences. I don't really fiddle that much in practice, I did spend a year with Budgie, but only the first week fiddling. Pop's out of the box is about 90% of what I want, which is better than most.

    I do use a Macbook M1 Air for my personal laptop and have used them for work off and on over the years... I'm currently using a very locked down windows laptop assigned from work. Not having WSL and Docker have held me back a lot though.

    In the end, I do most of my work in Linux anyway... it's where what I work on tends to get deployed and I don't really do much that doesn't work on Linux without issue at this point. Windows, specifically since Win11 has continued to piss me off and I jumped when I saw something that was just too much for me to consider dealing with. I ran insiders for years to get the latest WSL integrations and features. This bit me a few times, but was largely worth it, until it wasn't anymore.

    C# work is paying the bills... would I rather work on Rust or TS, sure... but I am where I am. I'm similar to you in that I looked at Linux every few years, kicked the tires, ran it for a month or a couple weeks and always went back. This time a couple years ago... it stuck. Ironically, my grandmother used Linux much longer than I ever did on her computer that I maintained for her. For her, it just worked, and she didn't need much beyond the browser.

    Reply View 0 replies
  • dijit 4 days ago

    > You never buy a laptop or pre-build? They are often full of ads that are not Microsoft Windows build in but add-on by the OEM.

    This was never acceptable, but we tolerated it because it subsidised the cost of the laptop, OEMs decided the trade-off and you could vote with your wallet for cleaner experiences (often with the same manufacturer).

    Show me the ThinkPad T or X series (or EliteBook, or Precision/Latitude) that shipped with ads and I'll take it as a valid point. Otherwise, it's not valid.

    Reply View 0 replies
  • anon291 4 days ago

    > if the DE itself not outright crashes (KDE, master in Plasma/Widget crashes!). And so many other desktop feel like they have been made in the 90s (probably are) and never gotten updated.

    All modern Linux desktops feel more advanced than the corresponding windows version, IMO. I just installed standard Raspbian on a bunch of Raspi5s, and it feels snappier and more advanced than Windows already.

    Reply View 0 replies
  • ninjagoo 4 days ago

    Switching OSes is a major undertaking for power users, which I assume you are. Less so for someone who uses the browser, email, and plays some games.

    As a power user, there's no point trying out OSes occasionally, unless that's your hobby. Think of it as switching between flying Boeings or Airbuses as a pilot; there's going to be a learning curve that you're going to have to commit to if you want the full benefits. I use the analogy to illustrate the point; OSes as users are definitely not nearly as complex to drive.

    That said, the unstable experiences you're describing are odd. Maybe you're running into some odd edge case because that unstable experience hasn't been the case for mainstream Linux users for a couple of decades.

    Neither is there a need to tinker with the big mainstream distros either. Most are install-and-forget these days and have been so for a while.

    Reply View 0 replies
  • tpxl 4 days ago

    > I noticed that often the people who switch to Linux, are more likely to send more time into finetuning their OS, tinkering around, etc... aka people with more time on their hands. But when you get a bit older, you simply want something that works and gives you no trouble.

    > Yes, it has no adds but that is like 5 min work on a fresh install, a 2 min job of copy/past a cleanup script to remove the spyware and other crap and your good for year. So again, killer features?

    First thing you do after you install windows is fine tune it lol. For what it's worth, I just installed the latest debian on a Minisforum mini PC and it was clean and easy. Everything works out of the box, including bluetooth and gaming (surprisingly well given only has an integrated GPU). Same experience with two of my wifes laptops.

    Now I did have issues with my desktop due to running bleeding edge hardware, but those all got resolved within months on its own and a clean install is now no hassle at all.

    In short, I'm now older and don't have time to tinker with my PCs. That includes reverting whatever bullshit Microsoft decided to foist upon me, so now I run base debian and won't be buying bleeding edge hardware anymore.

    Reply View 0 replies