Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

But the upgrade still requires that the user accept the EULA. I agree that the system is hostile to user preference (any reports of a computer behaving in a way the user doesn't expect should be examined, whether the user "should know better" or not) but it's important to get to the bottom of exactly what happened, and sometimes that requires figuring it what the user actually did, not just what they report they did. Anyone who has worked in tech support has this instinct.


Yes, it is necessary to accept EULA.

However, consider it also from the user's POV. The update will download gigabytes of data, will do everything possible to get anything from the user that can pass as "agreement" and then update the software. Then it will reboot machine and present the new EULA.

If the user disagrees with the EULA, it will restore the original system - but not right now. It will take tens of minutes (not everyone has SSD) and during this time, the users is practically locked out of using the computer. If you are small entrepreneur, this is basically time when you cannot work and it's not your fault. Some of these folks cannot afford to wait a hour or so for the system to restore.

And this will be not final - who guaranteed that the windows update will not try again in a few weeks, once Microsoft steps up the campaign again?


I wonder if the EULA is enforceable at all, given the circumstances. "Accept or I'll break your computer for hours" seems like a contract accepted under duress.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: