Some of the great articles revealing this stuff:
http://www.infoworld.com/article/29...s-kb-3068708-3022345-3075249-and-3080149.html
The writer of this article was trying to quell some of the fears (unsuccessfully, I might add). Microsoft is paying shill mags and spinning angry media outlets in other countries to lower the shouting and jeering.
Great response in the comments section:
Shame on you for downplaying Microsoft's complete lack of transparency about these updates. Here are pure and simple facts about the updates:
* They are listed for download in Windows Update even if you have explicitly opted out of the CEIP
* They will download and install without even asking *even if you have opted out of the CEIP* if you have told Windows to "Install updates automatically" which is the default and "(recommended)" option, and that most likely used by the average consumer
* Their purpose is intentionally obscured in the update names (they are all hidden under the completely opaque name "Update for Windows 7 for x64-based systems", or similar
* Their purpose is intentionally obscured in the update descriptions, which make no mention of the CEIP or data gathering, and misleadingly claim them only to be updates "to resolve issues in Windows" (which is actually a flat-out lie, given that these updates do not resolve a single "issue")
* They are marked and starred as "Recommended updates"
* Looking in Windows Update, these updates are in no way -- other than clicking the link to open Knowbase or manually Googling the KB number one at a time for every update -- differentiated from other optional updates which customers might strongly *want* to install, such as for example KB3078667 which resolves memory leaks. Both the naming and description are identical for an update that fixes issues damaging to the user experience, and an update whose sole purpose is to gather more information from a customer *even if they have already opted out of that information-gathering process*
* These updates will, even if hidden, repeatedly un-hide themselves again in the hopes that in a future round of updates you will accidentally install them, despite having both opted out of the CEIP *and* explicitly hidden the updates
In a word, Microsoft's actions here are disgusting. They clearly run contrary to their customers desires, and even if you consider pre-installed customers to have received the software free (they didn't, but that's a discussion for another day) these are paying customers in many cases.
I have myself bought multiple copies of Windows 7 at retail, all prior to the introduction of this expanded and intentionally invasive and misleading program. I am now endlessly forced to locate and hide these updates, all so that I can continue to access updates I do actually need such as that fixing the memory leak noted above. The product I purchased has been measurably damaged and my time wasted by this anti-customer behavior on Microsoft's part.
And given your strong suggestion in the headline and subhead (which is all half your readers will ever read of this article) that concern over these updates is unwarranted and that Microsoft's actions and the updates themselves are of little importance, I can only regard you as complicit in their actions.
But then, should I have expected any different from a site which uses Gigya, an equally invasive commenting engine which forces me to provide read/write access to my social networking contacts and public / private profile information, even just to leave a simple comment? I suppose not, because frankly you are just as bad. (Enjoy my Yahoo spambucket account: I never use it for anything but distasteful sites like yours who believe you have a right to my information -- which you do not. It contains no real contacts, and no real profile information.)
Again, I say for shame, and rest assured that I shall not be returning to InfoWorld again and advising others to avoid your site as well.