Why would this comment be voted down? Software that tries to mislead and nag the user into taking an action that damages their computer is malware. The only reason Microsoft doesn't forcibly apply the update to all Windows computers without permission is because that would undeniably be malware. But the net effect is the same - Windows 10 is installed without the owner's knowledge or consent. Windows 10 IS malware.
My coworker's home machine upgraded itself to Windows 10 without his consent, and afterwards he couldn't reliably connect to the internet, or do a few other things that he previously could. He eventually restored the machine back to Windows 7 to get it working again. Sounds like "damage" to me.
Consider this: "downtime on all workstations at once, during business hours, regardless of consent, and afterwards, peripherals no longer interface (WHICH IS WHY WE WANTED TO TEMPORARILY KEEP W7 WHILE WORKING ON A FIX)" - but no physical damage to computers, so everything is great and wonderful, right? Right? Nope, that's malware by any other name. Including the overreaction by mgmt: "IT shall repave to Win7 from backups, lockdown and disable WU - we literally cannot afford to catch Windows X again." Everyone loses, just because some schmuck at Redmond had the great idea of an unconsented "up"grade.
Edit: Intentionally forces the system to a state where functionality is unknown (as opposed to breaking the system on purpose). Big honking difference, yeah right. "I just pushed him into the pool, you mean I should have checked if he can swim? Wait, what do you mean 'if he even wanted to?' That's ridiculous, of course he did!" The problem (malware-ness, if you wish) isn't with the upgrade (we would have upgraded in a matter of 6-8 weeks), it's the disregard for consent ("you didn't say 'no' often enough, that's a loud and clear 'yes' to me").
I had to install software (GWX) and keep it updated in order to prevent Microsoft from trying to trick me into installing Windows 10 and nagging me every 10 minutes to "upgrade".
Perhaps not malware, but not a huge leap away from it.
Intent to damage is not an absolute requirement to be malware. The infamous Sony rootkit had no intent to damage. However, it overstepped the bounds of its authority and was capable of damage through gross negligence (as overstepping software often is). Software that forcibly dikes out someone's OS without their permission is malware.
It degrades experience for non-experienced users i.e. people who aren't aware they would strongly prefer some options be turned off if asked in clear enough manner who reasonably didn't expect these changes as the change is a gross departure from established practices. I was never foss partisan before Windows 10 and it's the first time for me to call Microsoft's behavior unethical.
