Michael Horowitz takes on the Win10 FUD and hits the New York Times

Topic

New Reply

Well done, spot on. Computerworld.
[See the full post at: Michael Horowitz takes on the Win10 FUD and hits the New York Times]

Reply | Quote

Replies

Incredibly exhaustive article. Also, after reading this, I’m even less inclined to “upgrade” from W7 to W10. And I even learned about some more reasons why an “ugrade” might go wrong, which says a lot about Microsoft, since I’ve been reading Woody’s wall-to-wall coverage about this since the beginning.

Reply | Quote

Michael Horowitz wrote a great rebuttal to the “New York Times” article concerning the Windows 10 upgrade process!! As Woody wrote, Michael was “spot on” in his critique.

Reply | Quote

Well done article. Touched on every issue re: the W10 upgrade issues, its associated malware and took the Times to woodshed as well.

Reply | Quote

Very good article, but now he’s on Microsoft’s hit list.

Reply | Quote

SWAT squads form a line to the right…

Reply | Quote

Excellent, comprehensive dismantling of The Times’ article. Sad to see how low their journalistic standards have sunk, at least on this topic. Well done, Mr. Horowitz!

Reply | Quote

Good article with all the important issues addressed.
In relation to drive imaging before upgrading, I have always liked Drive Snapshot but I have never remembered how I found it, as the developer’s site is not well-known. It was Steve Gibson who introduced me to it many years ago! Steve Gibson always favours lean and simple tools and this is how Drive Sbapshot works. Fantastic tool and not very expensive. And Michael Horowitz proposed tool is great too, StorageCraft Shadow Protect, although more suitable to be used by professionals working in enterprises, probably the best of its kind for the last few years. Both tools are not free, so many people would prefer other tools for that reason.

Reply | Quote

Excellent article where I heard myself repeatedly whispering “exactly”. Fresh air, clear words, a comment of truth which obviously is not only opposite to NYT’s article but to a branch of technology which together with Microsoft misleads the users in what Win10 exactly is, exactly means, exactly fits or not as an upgrade.
Grapes for wine when wrath is pointed out with such honesty.

Reply | Quote

Now that Horowitz has held the New York Times’ lazy work up to the light, maybe the Wall Street Journal will get on the case, since they like to pick on the Grey Lady. But so far as the mainstream business press goes, Forbes got there first.

We’ll know we’re there when the WSJ runs an “expose” pointing out that Microsoft’s claims of rapid adoption of Win10 are misleading shareholders insofar as they are based on tricking and deceiving users.

There are other related issues of full and honest disclosure. Counting those users who accept the Win10 upgrade only so they can roll back to Win7 or another earlier software misrepresents the Win10 adoption rate. This is not very different from past accounting scandals where companies pulled various tricks so they could book sales before conventional accounting rules would permit them to do so.

Reply | Quote