Of course, as a PC gamer I'm not directly affected... except this
represents another move by Microsoft towards locking down all our
hardware. Sure, any attempt to force this issue on PCs today would
fail... but who knows what might happen in ten years? The idea that
Microsoft might force users to create an Microsoft services user
account just to install the latest copy of Windows onto their computer
seemed outlandish twenty years ago, after all...
Microsoft recently announced a ban for unlicensed XBox accessories and controllers, saying that usage of such might in future prevent you
from using your device. Nominally, this is in reaction to how some
hacked controllers have been used by cheaters to give themselves
unfair advantage, although it is certain that the fact hacked
controllers - via vulnerabilities in the APIs - have previously been
used to bypass DRM and security options.
Still, while Microsoft's reasoning may be legitimate, I find their
actions less so. Sure, disallow hacked controllers to be used online;
it is important to allow a level playing field and, anyway, networked resources can be gated with a user agreement. But I'm far less
sanguine about disallowing the devices entirely, so that even offline
the controllers can't be used. If I want to use a hacked controller
that gives me advantages in my single-player experience, it ought to
be my choice. (And vulnerabilities in the APIs need to be closed by
fixing the underlying problem).
Of course, as a PC gamer I'm not directly affected... except this
represents another move by Microsoft towards locking down all our
hardware. Sure, any attempt to force this issue on PCs today would
fail... but who knows what might happen in ten years? The idea that
Microsoft might force users to create an Microsoft services user
account just to install the latest copy of Windows onto their computer
seemed outlandish twenty years ago, after all...
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 23:15:54 -0500, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Of course, as a PC gamer I'm not directly affected... except thisBut I'm not going to speculate on how evil Microsoft is willing to be, because I have long since learned my lesson that they know no bounds.*
represents another move by Microsoft towards locking down all our
hardware. Sure, any attempt to force this issue on PCs today would
fail... but who knows what might happen in ten years? The idea that
Microsoft might force users to create an Microsoft services user
account just to install the latest copy of Windows onto their computer
seemed outlandish twenty years ago, after all...
There's also the issue of how such devices are often used to improve
accessibility for gamers with disabilities, but that's been covered
elsewhere.
Of course, as a PC gamer I'm not directly affected... except this
represents another move by Microsoft towards locking down all our
hardware. Sure, any attempt to force this issue on PCs today would
fail... but who knows what might happen in ten years? The idea that
Microsoft might force users to create an Microsoft services user
account just to install the latest copy of Windows onto their computer
seemed outlandish twenty years ago, after all...
I've mentioned here a couple of times that real point of the TPM
requirement in Windows 11 isn't ment to improve security in any
meaningful way for most users, but to move one step closer into
turning PCs into Xboxes. However, I'm not sure that day will ever
come. It just requires too much buy in from both hardware
manufacturers and consumers.
I've mentioned here a couple of times that real point of the
TPM requirement in Windows 11 isn't ment to improve security in any >meaningful way for most users, but to move one step closer into turning
PCs into Xboxes. However, I'm not sure that day will ever come. It just >requires too much buy in from both hardware manufacturers and consumers.
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
Of course, as a PC gamer I'm not directly affected... except this
represents another move by Microsoft towards locking down all our
hardware. Sure, any attempt to force this issue on PCs today would
fail... but who knows what might happen in ten years? The idea that
Microsoft might force users to create an Microsoft services user
account just to install the latest copy of Windows onto their computer
seemed outlandish twenty years ago, after all...
I've mentioned here a couple of times that real point of the
TPM requirement in Windows 11 isn't ment to improve security in any meaningful way for most users, but to move one step closer into turning
PCs into Xboxes. However, I'm not sure that day will ever come. It just requires too much buy in from both hardware manufacturers and consumers.
I think Microsoft is hoping that consumers will end up demanding it.
They seem happy living within a walled garden on their iPhones, and don't mind it much on their video game consoles. Microsoft's locked-down
ARM-based tablets could be a bridge to locked-down ARM PCs which will
much more secure than x86 PCs if only because of their obscurity.
That could convince consumers to make the switch to ARM PCs, despite
their issues, and once the platform becomes popular and revealed to be
just as vulnerable to all the 0-day exploits targetting Windows as x86
PCs, it'll be too late.
I don't know if the hardware manufactures will happy to go along with
it though. It concentrates too much power in the hands of Microsoft.
Even companies like Dell and HP should be worrying if there would be a
place for them in locked-down PC world. What would prevent Microsoft becoming like Apple, exclusively making its own hardware for its own software? Enterprise customers don't like be tied to one supplier either
and will resist buying hardware tied to one operating system.
But ARM Windows PCs will be hard sell to both consumers and businesses.
Games won't work, most applications will be slower, various kinds
of peripherals won't work. All of which is a big price to pay for theortically better security and maybe better battery life on laptops.
If you want all that, you can already get a Chromebook. Getting over
the hump to where some games work, most popular applications run just
as fast, and few more peripherals are supported, is going to be difficult.
Locking down x86 PCs seems to be a non-starter. Even if Microsoft and
Intel were to insist on it, I don't think the rest industry would go along with it. Intel promised in 2017 to remove legacy BIOS boot support by
2020 and force everyone to use UEFI booting, but that never happened.
My new 2023 Intel PC can boot MS-DOS just fine. All that's changed is
that now Intel's GPUs don't support it, so you need to use an add-in
AMD or NVidia card.
Without the same locked-down walled-garden environment that exists
on the Xbox also existing on the PC it's not going to practical for
Microsoft to try to lock down peripherial controllers. Just too many
weird input devices being used out there, from point-of-sale barcode
readers to accessibility aids eithat Microsoft would have a hard time justifying breaking compatiblity with. Unless of course, they already
didn't work because of the transition from x86 to ARM PCs.
I am glad for Valve taking care of the xinput emulation with Steam. bestValves solution is excellent, i think the best in existence, thanks also partially to the Steam Controller, problem is it binds you to Steam as intermediate layer, not a big tradeoff though
of all, it is possible to add non steam games to the client and extend
the non xinput support to those games too.
On Sat, 11 Nov 2023 19:15:25 -0000 (UTC), rridge@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
(Ross Ridge) wrote:
I've mentioned here a couple of times that real point of the
TPM requirement in Windows 11 isn't ment to improve security in any >>meaningful way for most users, but to move one step closer into turning
PCs into Xboxes. However, I'm not sure that day will ever come. It just >>requires too much buy in from both hardware manufacturers and consumers.
Microsoft has had the dream of "software as a service" from long
before that term even existed. As far back as the mid 90s, interviews
with Microsoft C-levels had them postulating about how one day they
might sell software similar to "cable TV". They've been moving towards
that dream for decades, and a lot of their seemingly user-hostile
actions have been slow movements in that direction. Very gradually,
they have been building up the infrastructure and planting the idea of >subscription-based software into the psyche of their customers.
Locked-down is a necessary part of that dream; if users have full
access to the hardware and OS, they could bypass the subscription >requirements (or just install a cheaper/free alternative). So open
access has got to go.
They've been boiling this frog very slowly, and the water is now very,
very hot.
Microsoft has done a great job convincing a lot of people that they've >reformed since the bad old days of the early 2000s, when they were
convicted monopolists. But while their methods have become more subtle
and less direct, their goals remain the same.
On Sat, 11 Nov 2023 16:06:01 -0500, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
On Sat, 11 Nov 2023 19:15:25 -0000 (UTC), rridge@csclub.uwaterloo.caMore subtle? YGBK.
(Ross Ridge) wrote:
I've mentioned here a couple of times that real point of the
TPM requirement in Windows 11 isn't ment to improve security in any
meaningful way for most users, but to move one step closer into turning
PCs into Xboxes. However, I'm not sure that day will ever come. It just >>> requires too much buy in from both hardware manufacturers and consumers.
Microsoft has had the dream of "software as a service" from long
before that term even existed. As far back as the mid 90s, interviews
with Microsoft C-levels had them postulating about how one day they
might sell software similar to "cable TV". They've been moving towards
that dream for decades, and a lot of their seemingly user-hostile
actions have been slow movements in that direction. Very gradually,
they have been building up the infrastructure and planting the idea of
subscription-based software into the psyche of their customers.
Locked-down is a necessary part of that dream; if users have full
access to the hardware and OS, they could bypass the subscription
requirements (or just install a cheaper/free alternative). So open
access has got to go.
They've been boiling this frog very slowly, and the water is now very,
very hot.
Microsoft has done a great job convincing a lot of people that they've
reformed since the bad old days of the early 2000s, when they were
convicted monopolists. But while their methods have become more subtle
and less direct, their goals remain the same.
My settings app tries to sell me Microsoft 365 (even though I have it installed through a work account), it also tells me my cloud settings are literally broken ("Wait a bit then, try again") because I shut down
OneDrive, my Samsung phone will only back up photos to OneDrive without a third-party app like Google Photos, and any -and I mean *any*- integrated
OS content-rich feature like Widgets or searching from the Start menu
search bar launches Edge even though I have an alternative default
browser set. It also tells me my machine "doesn't support standard
hardware security" because I have SecureBoot turned off.
WSL 2 searches in the Store turn up Ubuntu, Microsoft customized Linux distros (Pengwin), and little else if you're not willing to scroll a
bunch. Search for "Red Hat Linux;" no Red Hat. You get Pengwin Enterprise
6 and 7, even though that's based on *Debian* (Oh, you mean that distro
that Ubuntu is based on?)
They also try to cram ads into everything. The lock screen, the Weather
app, etc. Due to outcry, especially with the Weather app, *sometimes*
they dial it back. A seach on how to turn any of that off, other than
More subtle? YGBK.
Yellow Green Blue Yellow?
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 08:03:33 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, candycanearter07 wrote:
More subtle? YGBK.
Yellow Green Blue Yellow?
You Gotta Be Kidding.
So, YPBPR*
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 120:15:05 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,210 |
| Messages: | 5,334,422 |