Is any of this verified? During a previous posting of this it was largely dismissed as propaganda [1]. If someone has reproduced these findings that would be very interesting.

What would be even more interesting would be for someone to intercept the spying data that is being sent back so we know for sure what's being sent.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10053420

Was about to ask for an alternate source too. Last time this was posted, people pointed out this website was not reliable at all. A nice analysis by a well-known security researcher should exist to confirm that.

Here's a nice analysis by a well-known security researcher in response to that article. He could not confirm the results.

https://systemoverlord.com/blog/2015/08/16/so-is-windows-10-...

You can call it a key logger, and I understand why you would object, but sending search terms typed into a search box to a search engine is pretty much what people expect. Ubuntu does it. GNOME does it. Android does it. iOS does it. OS X does it. Windows is very nearly the last one to do it.

Privacy is important, and I don't think either I or David Tomaschik would ever argue otherwise, and there should definitely be an opt-out, but I think there are more serious problems with Windows that would be more worth objecting to than searching the Web from a search box.

> sending search terms typed into a search box to a search engine is pretty much what people expect. Ubuntu does it.

And Canonical has received a barrage of flak for it as a result. I outright stopped using Ubuntu as a result. Users expect the search box on their computer to search their own computer, not bombard them with ads.

> GNOME does it.

By default? Which distro? Last I checked, the GNOME search tool is limited to local objects. Maybe if you've explicitly integrated an online account, but I've yet to encounter that if that's the case.

> Android does it. iOS does it.

These systems aren't nearly as oriented around local file access, so the online-first approach for search (while I personally disagree with it) is not as jarring. Siri and Google Now are specifically marketed for online searches as well.

> OS X does it.

Again, by default? Because I've yet to actually see online results when searching for things in, say, Finder. Not that I wouldn't hold it above Apple to pull such shenanigans, of course; they love fucking over their users for the sake of a "more beautiful" (please) product.

> Windows is very nearly the last one to do it.

Hardly. None of the BSDs (that I know of) do it - even the desktop-oriented ones like PC-BSD. None of the KDE-based GNU/Linux distros (again, that I know of) do it - that category includes Kubuntu, openSUSE, and quite a few others. KDE itself certainly doesn't do it, nor do LXDE or Xfce, last I checked, and nor do the distros which use those particular DEs by default. I'm pretty sure none of the GNOME-based distros do it; in particular, I'd be very surprised if Debian stooped anywhere close to such a level of depravity.

> > OS X does it.

> Again, by default? Because I've yet to actually see online results when searching for things in, say, Finder. Not that I wouldn't hold it above Apple to pull such shenanigans, of course; they love fucking over their users for the sake of a "more beautiful" (please) product.

It's in Spotlight from at least OS X Yosemite.

> > Windows is very nearly the last one to do it.

> Hardly. [...]

These are not consumer-oriented products.

> These are not consumer-oriented products.

PC-BSD certainly is. openSUSE arguably is (while it has quite a few enterprise features, it has plenty of consumer features, too, especially when paired with KDE or GNOME). Kubuntu certainly is. KDE certainly is.

And we haven't even gotten into the other consumer-oriented operating systems that don't compromise privacy to the same degree as Ubuntu+Unity, iOS, Android, or (now) Windows. I haven't even mentioned Linux Mint (with Cinnamon, MATE, KDE, or Xfce), which is certainly consumer-oriented (it sure as hell ain't enterprise-oriented, in my experience). Then there's ElementaryOS, PCLinuxOS, Mepis, Vector, GhostBSD, AmigaOS, RISC OS... the list goes on. Said list goes on even further once you factor in some more experimental - yet still designed to be consumer-oriented - systems, like Haiku and ReactOS. As far as I know, zero entries on this here list have fallen into the trap of siphoning user data by default.

GNOME searches whatever you want it to, but they heavily advertise integration with online sources as a feature. OS X Spotlight does online by default. Finder and Windows Explorer search local files. I said very nearly since, although they're great, BSD, KDE, etc. have very few users.

I'm not arguing that having control over your computer is important. I think people should be using exclusively free software, but it's really hard to sell them on that. Just about the only thing going for it is honesty and consistency. I'm worried that if people start exaggerating issues and get exposed for it, the free software side will lose credibility.

> GNOME searches whatever you want it to, but they heavily advertise integration with online sources as a feature.

Right, and so does KDE (to an extent), but I don't recall either actually using those online sources for searches. Maybe GNOME3's managed to get worse since last time I tried it, however ;)

> OS X Spotlight does online by default.

TIL. I guess I don't use Spotlight enough to notice...

> but it's really hard to sell them on that.

It depends on the approach. I've managed to get quite a few people switched over to openSUSE (for example) on the simple grounds of "your Windows XP machine can't handle Windows 7 very well; here's something better that will save you the cost of a Windows license and the cost of upgrading your machine and won't slow down after a few months of use".

You didn't know that in Windows 10 until the news hit that disabling Cortana doesn't prevent that. Hell, I've never even seen Cortana since I'm in Dragon land (perhaps that's on the positive side for once) and I would've never thought the Start menu search isn't local only. Can I opt-out ? Nope. I can on Ubuntu, Android and iOS though.

It's really not that hard to opt out. The search is just a default program, and you can replace it with whatever you want, like Classic Shell.

You could argue as others have that there should be a default search which is local only, but why is it so important that everyone uses Microsoft's default programs rather than the millions of third party programs available? There seems to be a double standard where people say that it's important that Microsoft not push its own software over alternatives but also that Microsoft's default programs should fit every need of every user.

There's plenty that Microsoft does wrong, but providing a search that uses their search engine while allowing users to install whatever search they like is not so bad. You are already contacting their servers for updates and other things. Having to install an alternative search is really no worse than having to install a web browser. Now you might say that the menu is basic functionality but the browser is not, but what's really the difference?

The issue I see with it is transparency about it. If an user updates from Win7/8 who didn't have this explicit functionality, it doesn't know that it sends the queries online, nor is he immediately shown how to easily opt-out. I mean, where's a section in Control panel that's titled "Windows 7/Classic mode" ? FFS, I'd pay for that Service pack or edition.

At least now we know why they're offering the update for free.

It says "Search Windows and the web" right on the search box and displays web results. You don't have to pay for an alternative. When Windows 8 came out 3 years ago, lots of alternative start menus became available. If you haven't found out about them in that time, you probably don't care, but maybe they could be featured in the Windows Store or something like that under customization.

Yes, it does. A fictitious list presented as fact does not contribute to the discussion. We know that Win 10 transmits lots of data to various hosts, and their recent privacy policy outlines a plausible, yet vague description of what is being sent. It is quite possibly deliberately incomplete/vague, and legitimate account of what is being sent would contribute greatly.

As for being safe and maintaining privacy, it is well established that the solution is to move to an open system.

>Does this even need to be verified ?

Of course not. We should make blind, fear-based assumptions about businesses and reject the "rudder of rationality", so that we can be blown about by the winds of whatever viral fearmongering hits the top of our feeds for the day!!

Errrrr, are you saying that if someone is making up random accusations which are not true, we should treat them the same as facts?

Well, seeing that 80 MB every 15 minutes is over 35 Tb/s (at only 50 million Win 10 users [1]), and 12 Tb/s was the reigning speed record...

[1] http://www.winbeta.org/news/there-are-now-over-50-million-pe...

No, that's actually 0.8 Mb/s

Yes, per person. At 50 million users, you need a 35 Tbps pipe to take in all that data.

That can conceivably be split across multiple datacenters in multiple countries - something which Microsoft almost certainly has access to.

Even breaking it across multiple datacenters you're still hardpressed to do those speeds over a short period (weeks), let alone constantly over time [1]. My point was the physics in the parent don't work.

1. http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2015/07/windows-10-launch-hug...

Shit, that may just have changed my opinion on this. Is the first one really correct? Anything we type on a PC anywhere? So if I open up tor and load a site it's basically useless because any url I type in tor will go to ms anyways? WTF? Each and every one of those is completely unacceptable.

Anyone know about any good unix distros that wont be too much of a culture shock to someone who has used windows his entire life?

KDE is the closest to windows. Start with Chakra[1] or KaOS [2] if you want it to "just work" (both are Arch-based). If you want to tinker, go Manjaro KDE.

If you want to have to earn back every single piece of hardware in your computer, and end up becoming a Linux superhero when you're done, install Gentoo.

If you're concerned about privacy or rights, avoid Ubuntu and Redhat distros, as they have a history of exploiting both users and the free software licenses they purport to honor.

The most software-compatible is Debian, but games/steamOS run on all x86-based distributions.

1. http://chakraos.org/

2. http://kaosx.us/

I ran Chakra for a while -- although it's been a few years -- and wouldn't recommend them to people looking to switch from Windows. Unfortunately they weren't careful enough with their rolling updates and they would intermittently break installed applications, including at one point smb. So one day I could connect to Windows shares, the next day I couldn't.

If it's been more than a year since you've used a distribution, your opinion, positive or negative, is likely innacurate. The Linux community iterates at an order of magnitude faster then the windows or Mac ecosystem. The Chakra of today is far smoother than the ones a few years back.

True. I wasn't clear, but it was more a criticism of the project's management, which iterates far more slowly. But still, that's why I mentioned it had been a few years -- so anybody could dismiss my experience as they wished.

fwiw though I took a quick look at their -stable forums (http://chakraos.org/forum/viewforum.php?id=32) and there are several recent threads related to updates breaking things. I realize that will to some extent be a problem on any platform, but it seems disproportional on Chakra.

And in any case, that probably makes it a poor recommendation for Linux novices switching from Windows.

fair enough. then switch to KaOS. :)

Or Kubuntu if you like to get help from then now abundant Ubuntu/Debian "how to" stuff on internet.

Also, avoid the problem of "privacity" with normal Ubuntu, as not use Canonical desktop stuff.

If you read up on Jonathan Riddell's (and the FSF and SFLC's) spat with the Ubuntu Community Council [1], you wouldn't touch Kubuntu with a 10-foot pole.

1. https://lwn.net/Articles/645973/

> Anyone know about any good unix distros that wont be too much of a culture shock to someone who has used windows his entire life?

Try openSUSE:

* UI is designed to be very familiar to Windows users, with a Windows-looking taskbar complete with start menu and system tray (if you pick KDE, Xfce, or LXDE for your desktop environment; GNOME is a bit... well, out there).

* openSUSE ships with YaST, which provides rather extensive graphical system-wide configuration. It's arguably the closest thing to a proper and fully-featured Windows-style Control Panel you'll find in the GNU/Linux world. Thanks to YaST, it's pretty rare that you'll ever need to touch the command line for the vast majority of tasks.

* If you're running in an Active Directory environment, openSUSE's builtin support for joining AD domains is abso-fucking-lutely phenomenal; the YaST-based configuration blows even Windows out of the water, let alone other GNU/Linux distros.

* Pretty stable (openSUSE is the testbed for SUSE Enterprise) without being totally behind the times like Debian Stable tends to be.

I've set it up on the formerly-XP-running machines of multiple elderly, computer-illiterate people with effectively zero issues (other than one user complaining about the default desktop background; I showed him how to change it, and he since managed to figure out how to set up his own without further intervention on my part). If computer-illiterate old people can figure it out, I'm confident that someone who knows that Hacker News even exists can figure it out ;)

I think the one I would most recommend for a newbie is Linux Mint. I don't feel strongly about this. If you don't like it, try something else. But expect some migrating pains regardless; you're used to Windows's warts, now you need to get used to another operating system's warts.

I guess I am not a linux newbi. I know my way around a unix box I just haven't used it as my primary work station ever. So things like compatibility with all the popular stuff comes into play.

If you're familiar with the command line, then the only OS I like personally is Arch Linux. You start with nothing more than a Bash shell (seriously, it doesn't even have an installer), install your OS onto a disk with a couple commands, and then install whatever software you want. I install the XFCE desktop environment and Firefox, and go from there. Arch doesn't try to babysit you or do things for you; you will be editing lots of plaintext config files from the shell. But it almost never breaks, because it only does what you explicitly tell it to. Very simple OS, great package management, cutting edge software, wonderful documentation.

To be clear, I do NOT recommend it for folks who don't want a learning curve. But once you've over that curve, it is a haven from shitty operating systems.

I second this. I used Arch for around four years and it was a wonderful experience.

Funnily enough, I recently switched back to Windows from Arch. Linux's ecosystem was just too depressing for me. Windows 10 makes me sad though because it had the potential to be great were it not for all the privacy issues.

That sounds exactly like what I was looking for. Thanks! I'll have a look.

Make sure to check out the Arch Wiki[1]. If you use DuckDuckGo you can easily search it using !AW.

[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Main_page

It was my first Linux distro 8 years ago, and it's still the only operating system I can stand today. Again, it has a big learning curve, but I love it :) Hope it goes well for you.

ElementaryOS is the closest to OSX you will find. It's based off Ubuntu/Debian too.

No one has verified this. Sorry, but this list is just fearmongering. It would be good if we could focus on the facts here. There's a real issue here and it helps to be honest.

Sounds too crazy to believe. If true, I think I would be forced to stop using windows all together.

If you haven't stopped yet, this won't change anything.

Edit: bury me if you want, it doesn't make what I say any less true.

I've never heard of MS key-logging everything you type and broadcasting it to their servers. If that were true, I would 100% not use windows. I only use my windows box for steam games and that's mostly for dota2 these days which has a linux client.

I don't know why you would assume to know me so well.

If you are seriously claiming ignorance to everything Microsoft has done since Palladium [1], Maybe you have a leg to stand on. But you seem like a smart guy, who has probably seen all the controversies (even if just with the Xbox One), so I think my original statement stands.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next-Generation_Secure_Computi...

are you using google or facebook? might want to consider dropping those, too.

It's expected for Internet-based services that make their living on advertising. It is not expected for my operating system.

No to facebook and I'm working towards moving away from gmail. Still using google search though for now.

>-If you type anywhere in Windows a name of some movie, Windows will start indexing all your media files after a while and will send it to MS after 30 minutes of your inactivity.

This one really hard to believe. All the others are kind of believable.

>-After 15 minutes of your inactivity or when screensaver is on, network activity ramps up and everything else is being sent to MS.

But what is everything else?

Call me naive, but some of these, especially the first, seem borderline illegal and I doubt that even in their greediest hour Microsoft would dare to implement this shit. If this is true, I'm sure they could be sued on quite a monumental scale.

That's a security nightmare.