undefined | Better HN

0 pointscom2kid10y ago0 comments

> Who wanted that for desktop computers or laptops?

Everyone who is switching over to cloud connected OSs on their tablets and smartphones.

Why should I have to reinstall and resetup every new computer? My contacts have been following me around on my phone for 8 years now, why the heck shouldn't they be just as accessible from my PC?

My favorites, they should always be there. Chrome does a great job of this, it is nice that Microsoft has decided to catch up.

Windows 8 had some of this, having wallpapers, theme colors, and OneDrive follow me around already made my computers all seem closer together, now just a little bit more is happening.

There is so much common sense in this. If I schedule an appointment while I am at home for me to leave work early to go pick up my cat from the vet, it should show on my work PC because that damn well makes sense.

All this does is bring Windows fully into the 21st century.

> Windows 7 is still pretty good, and it will probably be the main Microsoft desktop OS for years to come, despite what Microsoft wants.

About 6 hours ago I was apprehensive about Windows 10. Now I'm using it and it is lightening fast and responsive.

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

saiya-jin10y ago· 1 in thread

do you realize, as many others here and everywhere else, do not care a bit about some cloud or anything else? I can install my computers on my own, thank you. the whole discussion about people justifying is a bit ridiculous, to be honest.

why don't you all pro-MS or pro-let's-lose-privacy people don't get a single thing - as per moral standards, any kind of option should be disabled by default (meaning 95% or more people on this planet will never enable it) and you should chose only enable that if you will? It could be the first screen welcoming you on first start of OS, whatever. not even having an option to disable it on cheaper windows is just plain wrong & smells cheap, again in moral sense. As we all know, corporations, any kind, are not high on morality these days. Increasing shareholder value at all costs and similar is the mantra. that google and others are doing it doesn't make it any more right (i have all these things like google one disabled on my phone anyway, at least that's what I like to think :))

As to why we want to not use it, I do believe Mr. Snowden made a point or two in the past.

sqldba10y ago

What irritates me is the language.

We're making a choice based on a button with a one sentence dumbed down description. But what is the full legally binding extent of what we're agreeing to with each click?

Nobody knows. "We share with our partners". What's being shared? Who are the partners? Who are their partners that will also have access? What's being done with it? Am I personally identifiable?

Etc. Even if they wrote a page for each box, which they haven't, it will still be pointless because there is probably some other waiver in the 300 page EULA.

colordrops10y ago· 1 in thread

I agree that these features all make sense but there is no reason for the invididual's data to have to travel hundreds or thousands of miles through third party servers during a synchronization. It should be no harder than pairing two Bluetooth devices together and then the data will move directly between these devices, or at least encrypted through a third party router. The internet was designed to be decentralized but it's not working that way due to business interests.

com2kidOP10y ago

p2p connections don't work when one device is borked!

Computing as an appliance, imagine some day logging into any machine in the world and having it setup just as you like.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse