Is this acceptable to Windows 8 users and why?

[MS Bob 11]

The Windows 8 End User License Agreement (EULA) - you know that document that no one reads and just clicks "I accept" and Next - it says in bold specifically: "Microsoft may remove an app from your devices at any time, for any reason". I think this only applies to Metro-style/WinRT apps and obviously not to regular Win32/Desktop apps. Now I don't know what Apple does with iOS and what policies Android market place has, they may be having a similar clause in the EULA but I think this is not acceptable. Just because Apple or Google do it, "Microsoft must also" is also not an excuse. Tommorrow if you purchased an app or downloaded a free one while it is still free or cheap, no one but you should have the right to erase it from your device. If some legal or copyright dispute occurs between the app developer, Microsoft and another third party, the user should not have his purchased or downloaded app taken away from him under any circumstances.

What is the opinion of Neowinians on this matter? :) Maybe if enough users raise their concerns with this so MS removes this clause from the EULA, Windows 8 will be an even better product. One that leaves the user in control of his apps.

[Muhammad Farrukh]

I scrolled through that Window, although quickly, I didn't come across this text.

Might be that I missed it

[Xerxes]

It's more to get rid of rogue apps then anything else I think. Both Google and Apple have exercised this when a rogue app managed to get into their respective markets and users downloaded it (not realizing the app was malicious) and soon as Apple/Google discovered it they hit the "kill switch" and removed the app from any devices it was installed on. Granted it can also be abused and to be honest I'm not that comformtable MS/Apple/Google having the right to remote uninstall any app from my device(s) but I can understand why they did it.

EDIT: I can totally understand how this would be completely unacceptable for a power user, however, for your average Joe who doesn't think and just clicks this would be another security layer for them.

[The_Observer]

It's more to get rid of rogue apps then anything else I think. Both Google and Apple have exercised this when a rogue app managed to get into their respective markets and users downloaded it (not realizing the app was malicious) and soon as Apple/Google discovered it they hit the "kill switch" and removed the app from any devices it was installed on. Granted it can also be abused and to be honest I'm not that comformtable MS/Apple/Google having the right to remote uninstall any app from my device(s) but I can understand why they did it.

EDIT: I can totally understand how this would be completely unacceptable for a power user, however, for your average Joe who doesn't think and just clicks this would be another security layer for them.

While i can understand this, i cant allow it.

[FMH]

But that rule makes sense for everybody! Even WP7 can do it. If an App has virus, malware or spyware, and is hurting the user. Microsoft will remove that app.

I don't see how anyone can be against this? And as for abusing this power, I don't think you can give me a single instance when it was abused. If the abuse it, they would have several lawsuits to pay for, and it would also be a federal offence.

[~Johnny]

I think iOS & Windows Phone have similar policies.

It's really are ONLY for apps that come from the Windows Marketplace and start doing something they really shouldn't, like start destroying things or messing up computers (which shouldn't be possibly, but it's a precaution). I don't see the problem with it.

[MikeChipshop Member]

Old news. Most Smart Phones do this as matter-of-course. It also only applies to apps not other software you've installed.

[efjay]

Goodness, people are just coming up with all sorts of BS to bash Windows 8 with. As if this isn't done elsewhere, but somehow as soon as its Microsoft its the end of privacy as we know it. Amazing.

[Southern Patriot]

But that rule makes sense for everybody! Even WP7 can do it. If an App has virus, malware or spyware, and is hurting the user. Microsoft will remove that app.

I think the issue is with the phrase "at any time for any reason". The way it is worded, they could remove an app simply because they have an issue with the developer, or simply because it competes with one of their own apps.

[Tomoko]

It's more to get rid of rogue apps then anything else I think.

What could possibly go wrong? Oh wait...

http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/30/microsoft-accidentally-tags-chrome-as-malware/

[greenwizard88]

Mountain Lion will do this too... at the end of the year, the only OS that doesn't have this ability is going to be Linux (desktop linux, not android)

[SliceOfLife]

A special opt-out for power users would be nice in this case but I doubt that will happen.

[FMH]

I think the issue is with the phrase "at any time for any reason". The way it is worded, they could remove an app simply because they have an issue with the developer, or simply because it competes with one of their own apps.

But wouldn't that bring an anti-trust attack on Microsoft? I highly doubt something like this would happen.

[threetonesun]

It's pretty common these days. IIRC, this is also true of books on the Kindle (or was true, it's possible Amazon changed their position).

You license it, you don't own it, don't forget that.

[FMH]

A special opt-out for power users would be nice in this case but I doubt that will happen.

That feature is called "switch-off WiFi". :p

[Southern Patriot]

You license it, you don't own it, don't forget that.

While you license the OS from Microsoft, you license your apps from their developers. Microsoft really should have no say in the matter. MSE, for example, has repeatedly flagged apps I use as malicious or "hacking tools", even though I know they are perfectly safe.

[Colin McGregor]

If i install an app and MS finds out that theres something wrong with it before i see it on some website by all means take it off. I guess i just dont own a neowin tinfoil hat like alot of people do.

[+LogicalApex MVC]

This is a really scary future from the perspective of computing. Microsoft, and other companies, are racing us toward a future where the computer is an appliance. As such, they will get to dictate what we can and can't do on our own computers, in a way that has never occurred in the past. The general sentiment in this thread is "well it is there to protect us" really misses the point. It really shows that we are sadly in a society where people are no longer capable of really understanding issues placed before them.

I agree with the OP that this is more likely only going to affect Metro apps since they are distributed through the App Store, but the future that Microsoft wants is the app store model. This means we're looking at a computing future where the RIAA can convince Microsoft that UTorrent is bad, for instance, and have it unilaterally uninstalled from every PC worldwide. We are looking at a future where Microsoft will be able to levy restrictions on what types of apps we can have, period.

It is a sad and scary shift in computing for us, but it will be welcomed without complaints. As you see in this thread, users welcome the change because it protects them from viruses...

[Memphis]

This is a really scary future from the perspective of computing. Microsoft, and other companies, are racing us toward a future where the computer is an appliance. As such, they will get to dictate what we can and can't do on our own computers, in a way that has never occurred in the past. The general sentiment in this thread is "well it is there to protect us" really misses the point. It really shows that we are sadly in a society where people are no longer capable of really understanding issues placed before them.

I agree with the OP that this is more likely only going to affect Metro apps since they are distributed through the App Store, but the future that Microsoft wants is the app store model. This means we're looking at a computing future where the RIAA can convince Microsoft that UTorrent is bad, for instance, and have it unilaterally uninstalled from every PC worldwide. We are looking at a future where Microsoft will be able to levy restrictions on what types of apps we can have, period.

It is a sad and scary shift in computing for us, but it will be welcomed without complaints. As you see in this thread, users welcome the change because it protects them from viruses...

Everyone in support of this, imagine when your DESKTOP PC requires a boot loader hack or unlock tool and that you must go through all sorts of hoops trying to root your pc to use unapproved software. This is indeed a scary future.

[DClark]

Obviously if you are okay with MS approving/disapproving apps in their marketplace, you should have no problem for MS owning up to their mistake of making available a malicious app on their marketplace by removing said app.

[Argi]

Why would you want to opt out of removing a malicious app from your PC? It's reasonable to assume that that's the only case when it'd be used.

[mak123]

It's more to get rid of rogue apps then anything else I think. Both Google and Apple have exercised this when a rogue app managed to get into their respective markets and users downloaded it (not realizing the app was malicious) and soon as Apple/Google discovered it they hit the "kill switch" and removed the app from any devices it was installed on. Granted it can also be abused and to be honest I'm not that comformtable MS/Apple/Google having the right to remote uninstall any app from my device(s) but I can understand why they did it.

EDIT: I can totally understand how this would be completely unacceptable for a power user, however, for your average Joe who doesn't think and just clicks this would be another security layer for them.

so, only i always prefer Linux....

[Memphis]

Obviously if you are okay with MS approving/disapproving apps in their marketplace, you should have no problem for MS owning up to their mistake of making available a malicious app on their marketplace by removing said app.

I am not ok with a closed app store either. In windows 9, it wouldn't surprised me if software had to be signed like drivers and the main method of delivery is the app store with sideloading not being for the average person.

[Ryster]

Obviously if you are okay with MS approving/disapproving apps in their marketplace, you should have no problem for MS owning up to their mistake of making available a malicious app on their marketplace by removing said app.

This ^

Don't forget that this "feature" is only for apps provided by Microsoft through their store, nothing else. The only time MS would remove an app is if something was discovered wrong with it after it had already been approved. They're not just going to start arbitrarily uninstalling apps for other reasons, they'd be sued to high heaven if they did.

Everyone in support of this, imagine when your DESKTOP PC requires a boot loader hack or unlock tool and that you must go through all sorts of hoops trying to root your pc to use unapproved software. This is indeed a scary future.

The last time I checked, a "boot loader hack" or an "unlock tool" were not metro apps, therefore have absolutely nothing to do with this policy in Microsoft's EULA. Go ahead and take off that tinfoil hat now.

[FalseAgent]

wait, aren't people supposed to be used to this already? Apple and Google both already do this, and i'm sure with Google touting 850k activations a day, everyone here owns either a iOS/ Android device. Which means you guys here have already accepted similar terms of service from the Android marketplace and iTunes App Store.

Windows 8 is only just following suit, but of course, people need to find things to complain about, because this is Microsoft.