this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2025
669 points (98.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

43290 readers
693 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

Microsoft are smart enough to not piss off every giant corporation and destroy their entire business overnight, so you can count on it never being forced by them.

[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They certainly wouldn't roll it out overnight but they've had their long term targets on OS as a service since Windows 8 and these things tend to come bundled.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Nah, they know their limits. They will keep trying to make an optional locked down OS for regular users a thing, but there will always be a fully “unlocked” version available due to legacy software and the entire worlds reliance on it.

[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

While microsoft also plays in the quarter to quarter economic BS they still have long term planning.

It's precisely because they have a monopoly on enterprise class software that they could pull this off. That's why the shift in euro-gov agencies to linux is such a big deal.

MS already has updates as a "free" service and windows insider which requires a paid azure sub which means they already use the threat of "security risks" to force companies to subscribe to azure, which is in effect equivalent to a sub to the OS.

I'm suggesting that they're going to do what they've said they want to do. Just maybe on the longer term or in a novel way.

The biggest motivation they have to keep individual licenses OTP is it gets people used to the ecosystem (customer capture) and they're massively profiting on all of ~~your~~ that data.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Making their OS subscription based is not what we’re talking about though. We’re talking about it becoming locked down and only running signed and approved software like Android is going to do.

That fundamentally breaks windows for most of the corporate world. Literally would break the world as we know it lol.

[–] staph@sopuli.xyz 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This kind of stuff never happens overnight. It happens slowly, incrementally, and the people are never mad enough at too much sudden change to be motivated enough to do anything. People should feel good about the imposition of boundaries, and it helps that for the average user, the boundaries often result in a better user experience.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don’t think you guys understand that forcing windows to only run approved by Microsoft software would literally break the world as we know it. Microsoft know this. There’s no way around it.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I was responding to this:

Microsoft is smart enough not to piss off every giant corporation

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, and they can’t get rid of “sideloading” without literally killing their entire company because gigantic corporations, where they make the majority of their money, are the ones the most beholden to legacy software that would be blocked if they did. Banks, governments, hospitals, schools…….everything would not be able to function.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Well I think you're moving the goalpoast a little here 😅, but believe me, they already do, lots of soft that doesn't get around the windows defender.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Last time I used windows in a big corpo settings, there were so many things pudding off both us Devs but also IT.

Switch out a bad RAM stick? Spend an hour with IT.

Use a software? Spend an hour (or days) with IT

Compile your own software? Believe it or not, spend large amounts of time with IT

Like the compiler on a windows PC can't work without different windows protection systems gets in the way, repeatedly. And then your executable, or some .d'll just get wiped off the disk 😐🤷🏼‍♀️

I don't think they do it intentionally, but big corpos don't give a shit about their workers conditions, so if they were to enforce things (with backdoors ofc, so that if needed you can deactivate things, remember the unique installation code for windows like 95 or 98?) the grunts will just have to eat it up. And they would probably not have a much harder time, everything is already locked down hardware wise so they are used to all that jazz.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

None of your examples at the start of that comment make sense or are true.

Also you’re talking about corporate policies for businesses that use windows, not windows itself. Management of devices is one of the biggest reasons why windows is the only real option for big corporations.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oh I'm very absolutely talking about windows itself, it's the reason you have go through so many loops to do the tiniest thing.

My point: Microsoft is already doing what you're supposing they never will.

BTW your first phrase doesn't make any sense?

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 points 1 day ago

Yeah sorry just fixed the autocorrect/complete in first sentence.

Where and how are Microsoft doing this? Where are they removing the ability to “sideload” programs unless the developer is registered with Microsoft?

[–] angband@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

pissing off customers never stopped them for decades different versions of office programs ran side by side with no issues. they auto uninstall other versions of office automatically while stopping the install with a big pop up about compatibility issues.

this impacts all businesses using old versions of access programs alongside more new versions of office with newer installers. along with a byzantine licensing model with bizarre "incompatibilities" between the same year versions in different licensing channels, yeah tell me how microsoft won't piss off corpo and government clients.

they seem to specialize in pissing off corpo and gov clients.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 0 points 2 days ago

Sounds like the businesses you're talking about have incompetent IT staff.