My criticism was not meant to be derision. It was genuine curiosity to ask how up-to-date you have tried to be. "Privacy issues" still seems like every other comment about Windows 10 here on HN and elsewhere like Ars Technica and The Verge. It's a very repetitive refrain at this point (y'all are quite a vocal minority).

It's also a criticism that I'm having an increasingly hard time understanding or sympathizing with, because the privacy tools in Windows 10 do continue to get better and more transparent with each update. I am starting to wonder if this criticism is simply the easiest excuse available (because it will always be hard to 100% satisfy a tinfoil hat that "there are no magic hidden NSA bugs"; I read Slashdot for long enough to know how deep that rabbit hole sometimes goes), and that there is no actual way to satisfy this criticism, it will just continue to haunt every time Windows 10 is even remotely brought up in conversation for the rest of time.

Apple was able to create exactly two checkboxes in the system settings:

1. Allow telemetry 2. Allow sharing telemetry data with third-parties.

There was no need to "improve privacy tools". There is simply an option to not send anything. You don't need to research "what's new in this version". One checkbox, done, forever. The result is verifiable on the firewall.

I'm sure, that if Microsoft did the same, including respecting the setting, everyone would be happy wrt telemetry.

And then we could discuss forced updates.

The privacy options started as one drop-down with only three choices, one of which was unavailable to choose for non-Enterprise consumers, which is nearly the same number of options as the checkboxes you reference. Some complained that wasn't enough options so now there's a half-dozen checkboxes.

The telemetry Windows 10 didn't allow you to opt-out of at launch was the same telemetry every version of Windows since Vista (including 7) have not allowed you to opt-out of (including Windows Error Reporting, which even Windows XP had a stripped down version of that). There's a bit more of it in 10, but it's not like it magically appeared overnight...

Now there's half-dozen or so checkmarks, all in one spot, with a lot of information (and links to a lot more information) on a lot of detail as to what each checkmark includes (and what is impacted by turning it off). It's overkill compared to Apple's "one checkbox", but a lot of voices shouted they wanted a lot more information and a lot more ability to pick and choose.

The same people that trust Apple to just have one checkbox and be done with it, are some of the same people that want 100-page documents with specifics from Microsoft and why we've come to this page full of checkboxes and tons of stuff to read impasse. This is part of why I'm getting cynical about privacy complaints and feel like this discussion isn't going anywhere productive.

The problem wasn't enough options (though not enough transparency still is). The problem is the one option that anyone wants and is still not available: do not send anything. Zilch. Nada. Nothing. Null. Radio silence. As if the computer wasn't even connected to the Internet. I don't believe it is a difficult concept to understand, except for those that do not want to understand. (the Enterprise version exclusive option is not that either. The "Security" level still collects and sends data).

Meanwhile, all the new options look like convoluted way to not change anything, but being able to demonstrate to regulators and PR, that something is being done. An effort for show, do not care about the result.

The reason, why Apple can do one checkbox and everyone is happy, but there is a higher standard for Microsoft is very simple: Apple has demonstrated, that they can be trusted, while Microsoft has demonstrated exact opposite. Dragging their feet doesn't exactly help. Even Canonical when they did their misstep with Amazon, had a lot to do to repair their reputation. But they honestly tried; Microsoft didn't start yet.

But Apple's "one checkbox" doesn't even act like you want. It still sends quite a lot of data back to Apple for various reasons.

It silences telemetry, but not the other services, I know: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14490293 (scroll to cca middle).

Still, silencing a Mac on the network is way easier than silencing a Win 10 machine. It is not only the telemetry and the visibility into which process does what, but also the control over updates and persistence of your rules. Silent updates that change or misinterpret your settings (firewall rules bound to executable version, then updating this executable and applying default rules instead of yours are definitely not my favorite experience) significantly increase the time and effort needed, compared to other systems.