posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 08:45 AM
It's not Microsofts responsibility to configure individual systems. They make software which has defaults and need to be configured by a professional
for the task at hand. For example, I wouldn't go in remote areas without a backup laptop, spare batteries, solar panels, spare communications devices,
a pendrive with an OS on it I know I can depend on (linux). The defaults are simply chosen based on the users, the majority of users will do fine with
defaults and a minority has to do some configuring. Like someone in a remote area might want to have a very conservative power scheme instead while a
gamer might want to put that to high performance. Someone dealing with confidential information might have to harden their system, if there would be a
hack it shouldn't be blamed on Microsoft but the systems administrator (who usually pass the blame to MS, but not when things go great then it's
because of the systems administrator lol).
It's like buying a car, crashing it because of poor maintenance and then blaming the car maker. While the car maker has said the car needs
maintenance, too bad there was no money for it but then it is unusable, tough luck but that is the way it is. Those in the article didn't know how to
configure what they were using nor knew anybody who could and the encountered problems.
Sure MS could have options during installation which would allow the user to choose between presets like what the use will be, but that would also
give expectations to users and false sense of security even, it would have other problems and it's easier to leave it out and let skilled people do it
per case.
Other OS's can be upgraded over the internet just like Windows so that would be the same for remote areas, in this case I do agree Microsoft should
have made it easier to turn down their free offer. I changed the registry and I never had any problems with the upgrade nagging but editing the
registry is something unknown to novices. I couldn't upgrade even though I have decent hardware, the manufacturer chose not to make drivers for the
chipsets and I'll just have to wait until my next system. Which I don't mind at all, it's better to have a tested and developed OS while MS further
develops the next one. Usually after a servicepack is the best time to switch to the new OS even though MS did do a decent job on 10, better than
previous editions.