I live in a snowy climate and we did just fine before the invention of wireless starters. My car does not have one and we manage just fine.

That is a great QoL, but let’s not pretend this is necessary.

Yes, but we have had remote start without the internet for decades. It’s nothing but a cash grab. That’s what people are upset about here I think.

They took a feature that did not require the internet, then made it require the internet, for literally no purpose except:

But until, companies will push these hardware subscriptions because it nets them more money.

It’s one thing to withhold a feature. It’s another thing to overcomplicate a feature for the purpose of withholding it.

There is no need for the internet to use remote start

deleted by creator

Man, if “Microsoft is actively trying to take control of my hardware and prevent me from deciding how it is used” and “Linux has a learning curve and lacks market dominance to get hardware manufacturers to play with them sometimes” seem like equivalent circumstances to you, there is no number of iterations to this back and forth that are going to arrive at any common ground between you and I. I can only say good day to you.

Your statement suggest that if Windows is “trying to work against you” then Linux is “trying to work for you”.

That’s literally not what I said, nor what I implied. If you want to interpret it that way it’s your choice, but I’m not going to defend a statement I didn’t make and didn’t try to make.

You don’t escape that problem entirely in Linux, it just takes different forms. Proprietary vendor Linux hardware drivers would be a perfect example.

I feel like you aren’t distinguishing between “problem exists” and “problem exists because the makers of my OS want it to exist.”

So why hack Windows to make it do what you want?

I literally said this was NOT the question.

I’m skeptical that irrevocably tying the two together is the only or best technological solution to wanting it in the search box.

It’s because Linux isn’t actually trying to work against you, even if it may feel that way to a noobie at first. Guaranteed this requirement exists to make Recall impossible to uninstall, and for no other reason.

The question isn’t “why take the time to hack windows” it’s “why keep supporting a company that requires you to undo so much of the product just to maintain control and privacy with your own hardware, and which actively seeks to sabotage attempts to do so.”

how the fuck could they have possibly done things in a way that makes explorer tabs depend on recall?

It’s very clearly an intentional move to keep it installed.

And as if it’s entirely reasonable for the maker of your OS to intentionally work against your ability to control your own hardware and what runs on it.

There is still the perception that it’s too cheap to be good in many cases. I’ve run into this fairly recently. It’s stupid, but it exists, and sometimes it exists in the people making the decisions.

Yes. The thing to remember is in many cases you aren’t explaining for the person you are debating with or answering a question for. You are doing it for others who may read the conversation.

I’ve had things brought to light in online discussion change my mind or educate me many times. When I see someone claim these conversations are useless or a waste of time, I just think they are really setting weird criteria for what constitutes a waste of time.

Sure, sometimes I ain’t got no time for that, but other times I do, and I figure the same is true for many others as well.

That was a joy to read.

I’m sorry to tell you I am one of those people, as is my family. Every so often I have a moment of clarity about it, but it doesn’t last long.

I can’t tell you how much humor I found in this response to that comment. 😁

Let me just say I love an effing Payday. And recently I discovered this, which is kinda like a Payday if the center part was hollwed out into a tube and filled with peanut butter. So damn delicious.

Meta: The company whose products you use when you absolutely, positively, don’t give a shit that they are the worst example of the worst nightmare of a consumer-hostile, privacy-invading, you-are-the-product, tech company. Yes, even worse than Microsoft.

Not offended, just seemed like you thought I was excusing it. I’m not - just acknowledging it. 🙂

Dude, we’re on the same side in this, I just know what some battles have already been lost.

Fair point!

Right there with you, but there’s no legal expectation of privacy in public, so it’s futile to complain about on that basis. Especially when ring doorbell cams are everywhere already. So the silver lining is a security robot won’t do this.