Windows 10 will soon block non-Store apps https://www.engadg

>>59177332
So happy I ditched that train wreck of an OS.

>The feature is disabled by default

Anyways, even if it was enabled by default it's just bringing it up to the standard of literally every other OS on the market

Even Linux requires a root password to install any applications

>>59177332
It's disabled by default, shit for brains. Kill yourself, you dumb fucking shit stain.

>>59177358
>>59177376
>disabled by default
Kek, until a future update makes it mandatory, 'cause that's how they roll.

eventually, it won't be disabled by default
it helps that people have been conditioned in the last decade to accept centralized app store systems, so the change won't be met with as much push back as it should

>>59177358
as a local user, you can run whatever binary you want on Linux, you just can't install a package for the whole system

>>59177435
>even if it was enabled by default it's just bringing it up to the standard of literally every other OS on the market

Learn to fucking read, dipshit.

>>59177453
As if most users do that instead of sudo apt-get or a package manager

>>59177358
>>59177376
>>59177489
>wincucks will defend this

Do people shill for windows as a job here? Or is it just contrarian trolling?

I could see. maybe, an argument to be made that this option just protects the rest of us from retards becoming parts of criminal-botnets.

>>59177435
Yes, surely Microsoft will just make it impossible to install thousands of old games, old copies of their own and other companies' expensive software like Visio, Photoshop, and Visual Studio, in-house software that millions of businesses rely on, medical software that doctors rely on, and who knows what else, after spending considerable resources for the past 20 years ensuring that all of this old software continues to run on the latest version of Windows.

>>59177546
This is /v/ level trolling

>>59177332
What the fuck is he talking about?

I use OS X on my laptop and I can install whatever the fuck I want?

File: crying.jpg (68KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 700x700px

Well fug hopefully GOG stays alive.

>This winds up killing GOG but keeps fucking steam alive

FUUUUUUUUUUUU

>Block
But OSX just has you open them in the finder and acknowledge a warning before you can open them from the dock.

MS won't do that, there's millions of in-house enterprise shit that are just some binary. You'll get a warning at most, just like Windows does now with downloaded installers.

>>59177358
>Even Linux requires a root password to install any applications
Bullshit, you can run anything you want and you can install anything you want into your home directory.

>>59177358
chmod +x binary && ./binary
If you are picky, ln -s binary /usr/local/bin/binary

>>59177660
>But OSX just has you open them in the finder and acknowledge a warning before you can open them from the dock.
Well considering what the Microsoft developer notes are saying, Microsoft will go a step above and actively BLOCK everything, doesn't even give you a warning and there is no way around unless you use the enterprise edition of Windows

>>59177644
i'm assuming you just have to click a radiobutton
unless you actually can't run non-store apps and theres no setting to disable it, in which case lol

>>59177611

thank you. Anyone who honestly belives this is a brain dead retarded baby.

File: 4L_1LbVrmqm.jpg (39KB, 361x361px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 361x361px

>>59177358
Guess what UAC is.

>>59177644

Apparently, this:

> Third-party apps not purchased via Mac App Store may appear as Installed

>Apple just released the Mac App Store, and with it came one very unfortunate feature. It was well-intentioned, but poorly executed, and it ends up being an "attractive nuisance," meaning that it's something that you're really better off ignoring: third-party apps not purchased via the Mac App Store may appear as "Installed" there, leading to unrealistic expectations of what you can do with Apple's latest service.

>Here's a quick overview of how the Mac App Store works, in case you haven't tried it: 1) you search for an app, 2) when you find an app you want, you click on the button showing "Free" or "Buy" with the price listed, 3) the button changes to "Installing" while the the app is downloaded to your Applications folder and 4) the button changes to "Installed" when the app is fully installed.

>The problem is that the Mac App Store also recognizes apps that you have purchased outside of the Mac App Store if the version of the app matches the Mac App Store version exactly, using something called the "Bundle ID." For example, if you noticed that the Mac App Store showed iPhoto as "Installed," even though you bought it through the boxed iLife set, but the Mac App Store did not notice that you already have Pages installed, it may be because you haven't installed the latest iWork update.

>>59177566

Don't think they do this as a job, just poo-in-the-loos defending their shitty choice.

how would they do that?
updates?
why do people update?

>>59177831
>why do people update?
How about security fixes.

I thought Windows users use essentially no applications from that store?

>>59177719

Or /g/ Witness, since one of their dogmas states that every company is bad and everything they do is for user harm, no matter what.