W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Anything not relating to the X-Universe games (general tech talk, other games...) belongs here. Please read the rules before posting.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

Post Reply
User avatar
Terre
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 10483
Joined: Mon, 19. Dec 05, 21:23
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by Terre » Sun, 14. Nov 21, 13:55

It appears the AMD Ryzen L3 cache problem is not quite fixed.

https://www.club386.com/microsofts-kb50 ... che-issue/
Open Rights Group - Is your site being blocked
Electronic Frontier Foundation - Online Censorship
The Linux Foundation - Let’s Encrypt
Check if your Email account has been pwned

User avatar
Chips
Posts: 4873
Joined: Fri, 19. Mar 04, 19:46
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by Chips » Sun, 14. Nov 21, 18:52

BaronVerde wrote:
Sat, 13. Nov 21, 22:32
Yep, but it shows that Windows does bypass the user choice of browser and opens Edge, so the source is no BS. And pls lets keep it civil because it is an interesting discussion and only then a rivalry if we make it one.
Just a quick question - you are aware that the "bypassing user choice" is only related to, for example, the microsoft app provided links to news items within the widgets/apps whatever you want to call it? Sure, it's "bypassing" because it's specified using Edge to open it in the context of using that App to read the news or whatever...

But I don't quite consider it bypassing user choice as the user has chosen to click on said link of an MS App... It's not like you've clicked on any old hyperlink and it ignores the default setting and opens the app.

As for the "its hard to change your default browser setting now..." - unsurprisingly it's the same means as you change for any default app to open filetype. It's a consistent behaviour now for all sorts of "default" (opening image format varieties, media format varieties, web app... ).

I won't hold my breath for the anti-competitive lawsuit with 2 billion dollar fines from the EU as it's a non starter. The old fashioned "MS ships with IE only and the user has no option but to use their Browser within their dominant market segment..." etc etc was entirely different from what's been talked about so far. If people are genuinely up in arms over this but still utilising Google Chrome whereby it tracks and uses web activity to drive advertising at you, then okay.
That was possibkle because windows people usually don't check on their own if the installer actually is what it appears to be (is that even possible ?), Linux gives people the means to do so. People download it and (should instinctively) doubt the source and check it. It needs some learning or at least a how to, but so does driving a car, and nobody questions driving schools.
You can calculate and check file hashes with Windows too - obviously hardly anyone does it. However, one point - where's the hash being revealed; it may make things harder in the world where 3rd party sites host the files for a someone who's offering a DL, and they post on their own site(s) the hash so you can be sure you're downloading *their* file from the 3rd party site - but it doesn't make a download 100% *safe". I mean, one example would be (off the top of my head)

https://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/nl/sec ... a-backdoor

So weird to see something be stretched out over pages. Each to their own :D

BaronVerde
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed, 16. Dec 20, 21:26
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by BaronVerde » Sun, 14. Nov 21, 21:31

@Chips, the hash is of course signed. You can look up the procedure e.g. for debian, but it is straightforward, download hash, download file, download (or get from repository) signature key, check signature of downloaded hash, compare downloaded hash with hash of downloaded file.

Not checking if a system relevant file is what it pretends to be is a nono, at least for me. I never cought malware. I never use a virus scanner. I reject 3rd party installations if they want root rights (nvidia driver was an exception, but these times are over).

As to the user choice of browser, according to the link posted by @terre it was automatable under Win 10, it is not any more under Win 11, and it disappears after updates.

I have absolutely no problem with anyone who accepts MS's menu, no need to get defensive, as this thread is titled "hopeful or ?" I allow myself to execute criticism if it is documented.

Code: Select all

  /l、 
゙(゚、 。 7 
 l、゙ ~ヽ   / 
 じしf_, )ノ 

Vertigo 7
Posts: 3458
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 17:30
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by Vertigo 7 » Sun, 14. Nov 21, 22:05

But do you understand the concepts at play? Me thinks not based on what you've said. If you did, you wouldn't be trying so hard to validate that bs article and wouldn't be claiming you can't install and use a different browser, which yet again has been explained to you that every bowser asks you to set it as the default browser.

For all the railing you've done about spreading misinformation in other threads, you would think you would try better to not to do it yourself.
The Future is Progressive!
rebellionpac.com
Fight white supremacy, fight corporate influence, fight for the rights of all peoples!

User avatar
Terre
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 10483
Joined: Mon, 19. Dec 05, 21:23
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by Terre » Mon, 15. Nov 21, 07:34

Vertigo 7 wrote:
Sun, 14. Nov 21, 22:05
But do you understand the concepts at play? Me thinks not based on what you've said. If you did, you wouldn't be trying so hard to validate that bs article and wouldn't be claiming you can't install and use a different browser, which yet again has been explained to you that every bowser asks you to set it as the default browser.

For all the railing you've done about spreading misinformation in other threads, you would think you would try better to not to do it yourself.
The article is not saying that the user can not use any browser they want, the article is pointing out that MS is breaking it's own protocol, when it comes to apps and widgets, the original blog post should clear this up https://www.ctrl.blog/entry/microsoft-e ... ition.html.
Open Rights Group - Is your site being blocked
Electronic Frontier Foundation - Online Censorship
The Linux Foundation - Let’s Encrypt
Check if your Email account has been pwned

BaronVerde
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed, 16. Dec 20, 21:26
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by BaronVerde » Mon, 15. Nov 21, 09:54

Thank you, that artice clears some things.

So default browser setting was removed from W11, and users must set "individual link associations for https:// and http:// protocols" and html files. "Web experiences" use a protocol "micosoft-edge://" that forces (ignores registry settings or browser associations) into using Edge because they only work with Edge. A work around application "EdgeDeflector" that was about to be incorporated into competitor browsers was excluded as well.

I understand the article puts MS behaviour as an aggressive move to exclude comptetitor browsers and fill the OS with advertisements:
"Microsoft still charges 200 USD for a Windows license while simultaneously filling the operating system with ads and crapware. Weeks before launch, Windows 11 wouldn’t even show the taskbar when it failed to display an advertisement dialog. Just last week, first-party apps and features of Windows 11 stopped working due to an expired encryption certificate."

Code: Select all

  /l、 
゙(゚、 。 7 
 l、゙ ~ヽ   / 
 じしf_, )ノ 

User avatar
Chips
Posts: 4873
Joined: Fri, 19. Mar 04, 19:46
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by Chips » Mon, 15. Nov 21, 15:11

BaronVerde wrote:
Sun, 14. Nov 21, 21:31
As to the user choice of browser, according to the link posted by @terre it was automatable under Win 10, it is not any more under Win 11, and it disappears after updates.

I have absolutely no problem with anyone who accepts MS's menu, no need to get defensive, as this thread is titled "hopeful or ?" I allow myself to execute criticism if it is documented.
Not getting defensive - either I don't get what you're talking about, or wires are completely crossed - i'm not convinced we're referring to same things. From what you just said it sounds like Windows 11 resets the users default browser choice to Edge on every update. It doesn't. I've never set the file associations manually, but checking they're all Chrome based for http/https/html etc (in reference to the link provided above).

Reading again, then if it's that applications could alter the operating system's method of specific application link behaviour, by passing said set defaults to inject a different application, then that (to me) sounds more like nefarious type of behaviour that you'd be dead against? So MS tightening up (removing) that ability isn't surprising... unless this is ONLY applicable to Edge (meaning, there's no ability for any other open with program - such as chrome:// or similar, or if there *is* you can still alter them to open something else instead - which in that specific instance would be a definite no!).

E.g. if creating a "use this specific app to open" link for whatever type of file/application, but something else is able to alter this to open in something else... then isn't that precisely what you're against? Then again, if it's not the same for any other application, then seems a bit unfair to have edge treated special but *shrugs*.

Does all depend if there's a level playing field for "open with this app" type links (e.g. like the ol shortcut where you can specify the exe and params to pass in).

But this feels like its going around in circles endlessly (standard for discussions in this forum!) - so nothing to comment upon further. If other apps can't make "open with X" type link associations it'd be something "unfair", but we're currently a long distance away from the "OMG no user choice!!11!!" originally.
@Chips, the hash is of course signed. You can look up the procedure e.g. for debian, but it is straightforward, download hash, download file, download (or get from repository) signature key, check signature of downloaded hash, compare downloaded hash with hash of downloaded file.
Installers are also signed. I must admit at this point I'm unsure what point you were trying to make - so something terrible, awful, woeful, shocking etc. Sounds fine.

And to think I entered the thread to say I've had no issues with Windows 11 so far, but had managed to install it with brain switched off and not checked for potential issues people with my sort of setup have experienced - so lucky or whatever. What a time sink that post turned out to be >.<

BaronVerde
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed, 16. Dec 20, 21:26
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by BaronVerde » Mon, 15. Nov 21, 16:33

Here's another article writing what happens, and it confirms that settings made by the user are ignored or set back:
https://www.theverge.com/22714629/windo ... me-firefox

"Microsoft seems to have become especially aggressive in pushing its own apps over the apps that had been installed as defaults before the upgrade. In other words, Edge suddenly became your default browser."
after update from 10 to 11. Trying it the tedious way file-type by file-type, the write like the other s did:
"Interestingly, if you install Chrome or Firefox, you won’t see them as choices.".
I can't check it, is this incorrect ? Can you disprove it ?

For me, this fits right in with TPM (which is also a content- and DRM control unit, there is the same scheme again), limited processor support (only new models, intel before AMD), and now forcing browsers. No, an OS taking control over my browsing is not a security breach. How so ? If I need to watch RT or some such I switch to a user with low privileges. Again, I switch, that's the user space sandbox my OS of choice offers, and it is hard to break out, impossible if services and local access aren't available.
So, seriously, it's quite in contrary, anything that takes control from me can be abused to foist some undocumented feature on me. That's what MS does, as we have learnt once again here. Imo, the OS shall refrain from browsing for me, or even track and guide me in my behaviour and thus influence my "web experience".

Is stuffing people with ads and "web experience" and trying to keep them from avoiding ok ? I think, not. I don't have a problem with someone being indifferent or even inviting and accepting it, it is there choice. It is rather you guys having a problem with criticism, isn't it ;-)

Edit: @chips, "installers are signed", it is probably a key that is signed, because checking a signature on the whole installer (GB size ?) would take quite some time. I mean, a long time if there is a somewhat relevant key involved. Or has windows a different methods than public-key for decryption ? Do people actually use that feature ?

Code: Select all

  /l、 
゙(゚、 。 7 
 l、゙ ~ヽ   / 
 じしf_, )ノ 

BaronVerde
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed, 16. Dec 20, 21:26
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by BaronVerde » Mon, 15. Nov 21, 16:50

Another question:

What is actually the point of updating from 10 to 11, other than MS threatening to end support in ~5 years ?

Why would one spend time and maybe money (idk, read it costs 200 bucks, but maybe an upgrade is cheaper or else customers run away) on the 11 instead of 10 ?

Cheers
gb

Code: Select all

  /l、 
゙(゚、 。 7 
 l、゙ ~ヽ   / 
 じしf_, )ノ 

pjknibbs
Posts: 41359
Joined: Wed, 6. Nov 02, 20:31
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by pjknibbs » Mon, 15. Nov 21, 17:10

BaronVerde wrote:
Mon, 15. Nov 21, 16:50
Why would one spend time and maybe money (idk, read it costs 200 bucks, but maybe an upgrade is cheaper or else customers run away) on the 11 instead of 10 ?
An upgrade from 10 to 11 costs nothing. As in free. Nada. Nothing. I have no idea where you're seeing this $200 figure.

BaronVerde
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed, 16. Dec 20, 21:26
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by BaronVerde » Mon, 15. Nov 21, 17:14

"What costs Windows 11" random link:
https://www.techadvisor.com/news/window ... 1-3805403/
... up to 220pounds/200$

.. and yes, as I said, I expected the update to be somewhat cheaper. But peole depend on MS's goodwill and that the offer will last. No such problems with a free OS (agenda, tata :-)).

So, why would you switch from 10 to 11, Gav ?

Edit: btw., can you take your Windows 11 license to a new PC without an extra cost ? OEM not, I think, full license maybe ?

Code: Select all

  /l、 
゙(゚、 。 7 
 l、゙ ~ヽ   / 
 じしf_, )ノ 

pjknibbs
Posts: 41359
Joined: Wed, 6. Nov 02, 20:31
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by pjknibbs » Mon, 15. Nov 21, 17:52

Your own link says:

"Free upgrade for Windows 10 PCs between now and mid-2022"

User avatar
Terre
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 10483
Joined: Mon, 19. Dec 05, 21:23
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by Terre » Mon, 15. Nov 21, 20:13

A little light reading, of the up and coming fixes, including `BSOD`is back.

https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insid ... -channels/

This bit made me laugh, "we fixed an issue where OS functionality could be improperly redirected when microsoft-edge: links are invoked,".
Open Rights Group - Is your site being blocked
Electronic Frontier Foundation - Online Censorship
The Linux Foundation - Let’s Encrypt
Check if your Email account has been pwned

Vertigo 7
Posts: 3458
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 17:30
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by Vertigo 7 » Mon, 15. Nov 21, 22:12

BaronVerde wrote:
Mon, 15. Nov 21, 17:14
Edit: btw., can you take your Windows 11 license to a new PC without an extra cost ? OEM not, I think, full license maybe ?
yep
The Future is Progressive!
rebellionpac.com
Fight white supremacy, fight corporate influence, fight for the rights of all peoples!

Vertigo 7
Posts: 3458
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 17:30
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by Vertigo 7 » Mon, 15. Nov 21, 22:15

Terre wrote:
Mon, 15. Nov 21, 07:34
Vertigo 7 wrote:
Sun, 14. Nov 21, 22:05
But do you understand the concepts at play? Me thinks not based on what you've said. If you did, you wouldn't be trying so hard to validate that bs article and wouldn't be claiming you can't install and use a different browser, which yet again has been explained to you that every bowser asks you to set it as the default browser.

For all the railing you've done about spreading misinformation in other threads, you would think you would try better to not to do it yourself.
The article is not saying that the user can not use any browser they want, the article is pointing out that MS is breaking it's own protocol, when it comes to apps and widgets, the original blog post should clear this up https://www.ctrl.blog/entry/microsoft-e ... ition.html.
A) that's not a protocol, its a URI call that's an alias for the edge executable. Think about it for a minute. The executable is designed to take certain command line arguments to enable or disable certain visual features of Edge. How would forcing that alias over to another browser handle those arguments that are likely only written into edge as specified? and seriously, for the thousandth time, why would a user invoke the alias that has edge in the name and get pissed that something else doesn't open? If I typed in telnet:// and f'n notepad opened or whatever, I'd be massively pissed. I'd expect an alias that has the name of the specific application it's associated to to open that specific application. Just like shortcut icons on a desktop or in the start menu.

B) I didn't say the article said that. Baron did, however.
The Future is Progressive!
rebellionpac.com
Fight white supremacy, fight corporate influence, fight for the rights of all peoples!

BaronVerde
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed, 16. Dec 20, 21:26
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by BaronVerde » Mon, 15. Nov 21, 22:54

Vertigo 7 wrote:
Mon, 15. Nov 21, 22:15
A) that's not a protocol,
Yes, it is a protocol. Edge implemenst a set of rules how to process it. We don't know how exactly they look like.
Vertigo 7 wrote:
Mon, 15. Nov 21, 22:15
its a URI call that's an alias for the edge executable.
An alias replces a command with another, often used to create shortcuts to complex options passed to a command. This doesn't happen here. Something aside from Edge intercepts the settings, and redirects them to edge. It is not an alias on command line level.
Vertigo 7 wrote:
Mon, 15. Nov 21, 22:15
Think about it for a minute. The executable is designed to take certain command line arguments to enable or disable certain visual features of Edge. How would forcing that alias over to another browser handle those arguments that are likely only written into edge as specified?
It is not an alias like in "alias astring anotherstring". Normally, it would just be a design error to suppress parametrisation of user programs, but here it is abuse. First of all the microsoft-ege:// protocol(sic) is meant to distribute "web experience" and collect data from user behaviour. There is no functionality gained for users, this could be done with https://, too, without any downsides for the user. Apart from any browser supporting https://.., and that's the reason, to exclude competition. Edge probably makes, after extracting some info, internally https:// out of it anyway before forwarding it. Second, the MS protocol is undocumented, other browsers will have to run after MS. Thirdly, a deflector to keep MS from intercepting it, can better be blocked (which happens). I can go on and on reciting the texts, but you may want to read them on your own.
Vertigo 7 wrote:
Mon, 15. Nov 21, 22:15
and seriously, for the thousandth time, why would a user invoke the alias that has edge in the name and get pissed that something else doesn't open?
Othe way round, a user wants to invoke something that is not intercepted by MS, but is kept from doinf so and led to MS's "web experience". Just can't avoid being exposed to the constant stream of ads. I don't want my PC to behave that way, I consider it near criminal.
Vertigo 7 wrote:
Mon, 15. Nov 21, 22:15
If I typed in telnet:// and f'n notepad opened or whatever, I'd be massively pissed.
Telnet doesn't feed you with ads all day long.
Vertigo 7 wrote:
Mon, 15. Nov 21, 22:15
I'd expect an alias that has the name of the specific application it's associated to to open that specific application. Just like shortcut icons on a desktop or in the start menu.
But if I changed the association to an application, I want the new application to take over. The OS won't let me (maybe with some gymnastics, but that's shabby).
Vertigo 7 wrote:
Mon, 15. Nov 21, 22:15
B) I didn't say the article said that. Baron did, however.
I did say MS forces the edge browser, I relativated that it is made rather complicated. First is that's true for the bombardment with "web experience", the latter for the rest.

Again, I have no problem with people submitting to that behaviour, but an alternative should be pointed out. This is not the Windows fanboy/girl/other thread, it's the "hopeful or ?" thread, and I allow me some criticism.

Let's stay civil.

Ok, back to my Linux From Scratch.

Edit: Oh, by the way, why did you switch to Windows 11, vertigo ?

Code: Select all

  /l、 
゙(゚、 。 7 
 l、゙ ~ヽ   / 
 じしf_, )ノ 

Vertigo 7
Posts: 3458
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 17:30
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by Vertigo 7 » Tue, 16. Nov 21, 00:04

yes yes. MS is evil. you're right. whatever you say. :roll:
The Future is Progressive!
rebellionpac.com
Fight white supremacy, fight corporate influence, fight for the rights of all peoples!

User avatar
Terre
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 10483
Joined: Mon, 19. Dec 05, 21:23
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by Terre » Tue, 16. Nov 21, 07:27

"A Universal Resource Identifier (URI) is a member of this universal set of names in registered name spaces and addresses referring to registered protocols or name spaces."

https://www.w3.org/Addressing/URL/uri-spec.html
Open Rights Group - Is your site being blocked
Electronic Frontier Foundation - Online Censorship
The Linux Foundation - Let’s Encrypt
Check if your Email account has been pwned

Vertigo 7
Posts: 3458
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 17:30
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by Vertigo 7 » Tue, 16. Nov 21, 07:41

Said that in so many words at least half a dozen times now. Thanks.
The Future is Progressive!
rebellionpac.com
Fight white supremacy, fight corporate influence, fight for the rights of all peoples!

BaronVerde
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed, 16. Dec 20, 21:26
x4

Re: W11 HOPEFULL OR ?

Post by BaronVerde » Tue, 16. Nov 21, 15:25

You said an URI is an alias for an executable.

Emotet is back:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/emotet-on ... e-is-back/

While phishing is an issue on all OSs, executing a file sent via email is not as simple as a click on Linux (or Mac), because its execution right must be set by the user and files are not executed by their ending.

Arguably, a user should be knowledgeable enough to do that, and to be aware of the consequences, which could be that their data is messed up if they do the "pls. save the attached file, chmod +x it, execute it", or better yet "sudo chmod +xs" . Ofc, a user who is not aware should not be given the right to execute commands as root, e.g. via sudo or su, would be my argumentation. Just like a root user must be aware that one command can destroy a system.
Last edited by BaronVerde on Tue, 16. Nov 21, 15:47, edited 4 times in total.

Code: Select all

  /l、 
゙(゚、 。 7 
 l、゙ ~ヽ   / 
 じしf_, )ノ 

Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic English”