Open up the Windows 10 Technical Preview (Build 9926), and you'll probably notice something aboutthe new hybrid Start menu/screen: under Places, there are three links: File Explorer, Documents, and Settings.
Wait a minute -- Settings? Click on Settings, and the new Windows 10 Settings menu pops up. It's clean, with big, touch-friendly icons and simple descriptions, and it looks similar to the PC settings menu in Windows 8. But the PC settings menu in Windows 8 was hidden in the Charms bar (Charms > Settings > Change PC settings), and this new Settings menu is right there on the Start screen.
The new Settings menu looks like a mash-up of Windows 8's PC settings menu (most of the actual PC settings can be found under the System tab) and the more old-school Control Panel. So, it appears that Microsoft is trying to make a user-friendly menu that can help people find and change settings without having to dive into the Control Panel.
But it also appears that perhaps Microsoft is trying to get rid of the Control Panel altogether: While many of the settings in the new Settings menu can also be changed in the Control Panel (if you know where to look), not all of them can. For example, Windows Update is completely gone from the Control Panel -- it now exists only in the Update & recovery section of the new Settings menu. And several of the privacy settings (such as app permissions for webcams and microphones) never existed in the Control Panel to begin with.
Here's a deeper look at each of the sections in the new Settings menu:
As you can see, the new Settings menu is still a work in progress, and the Control Panel is still a major feature in Windows 10. But that may not be the case when the final version of the new operating system drops. Keep checking back -- we'll be updating each of these pieces as Microsoft releases new preview builds.
Everything you need to know about picking up Apple's first smartwatch.
James Martin/CNET
The Apple Watch is now official. Apple CEO Tim Cook filled in the missing details on the company's first smartwatch at press event in San Francisco. So when can you pick one up? Here's everything you need to know about getting your hands on an Apple Watch.
When
The Apple Watch will be available for pre-order beginning on April 10. A few weeks later on April 24 it will be available online and in-store for purchase. The watch will be offered in three models. Apple Watch Sport, Apple Watch and Apple Watch Edition. Each model can be had in two different sizes: a smaller version (38mm) and a larger one (42mm).
Price
The Apple Watch Sport will be available in silver or space gray at $349 for the 38mm size and $399 for the 42mm model. The Apple Watch with a steel case starts at $549 for the 38mm and goes up to $1,049, depending on the band. The 42mm model is available for $50 more at $599. The Apple Watch Edition, which features an 18-karat gold case, starts at $10,000.
In the UK, the Apple Watch Sport will cost £299 for the 38mm size and £339 for 42mm. The Apple Watch will be available starting at £479 (38mm) and £519 (42mm), the Apple Watch Edition starts at £8,000 (38mm) and £12,000 (42mm).
In Australia, prices for the Sport come in at AU$499 (38mm), Watch starts at AU$799 (38mm), and Edition at AU$14,000 (38mm).
Where
The Apple Watch can be preordered from Apple's online store on April 10. It wasn't announced if we will be seeing the watch hit retailers like Best Buy. The Apple Watch will initially be available available in the US, UK, Australia, Canada, China, Japan, Hong Kong, Germany and France.
Wikipedia parent sues to stop NSA's massive surveillance effort
The Wikimedia Foundation argues that the NSA's full-scale seizure of Internet communications is a violation of its First and Fourth Amendment rights.
The NSA is in hot water yet again.Declan McCullagh/CNET
The Wikimedia Foundation, the organization that operates the wildly popular online encyclopedia Wikipedia, says user privacy has been violated and that it's going to court to try to fix it.
Wikimedia filed a lawsuit on Tuesday in the US District Court for the District of Maryland against the National Security Agency and the US Department of Justice for allegedly violating its constitutional rights on Wikipedia. The organization argues that an NSA program collecting information wholesale across the Internet, known as upstream surveillance, is a violation of its First Amendment right of free speech and a violation of the Fourth Amendment's ban on unreasonable search and seizure.
Wikimedia said it is joined by eight other organizations, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, and represented by The American Civil Liberties Union. Wikimedia has been working on the lawsuit for "approximately one year," said its general counsel, Geoff Brigham.
"Privacy is the bedrock of individual freedom. It is a universal right that sustains the freedoms of expression and association," Wikimedia wrote Tuesday on its blog. "These principles enable inquiry, dialogue, and creation and are central to Wikimedia's vision of empowering everyone to share in the sum of all human knowledge. ... If people look over their shoulders before searching, pause before contributing to controversial articles, or refrain from sharing verifiable but unpopular information, Wikimedia and the world are poorer for it."
Wikipedia is the world's most comprehensive online encyclopedia. The service comprises editable wikis that allow users to correct misinformation and add details on individuals, events, organizations and ideas. More than 500 million people worldwide visit Wikipedia each month, and at least 75,000 people around the globe add or edit the content.
In 2013, one-time NSA contractor Edward Snowden leaked information revealing Wikipedia was a target of government surveillance. According to Snowden, the US government taps the Internet's "backbone" (the core data routes between large, interconnected network centers) to capture communication with "non-U.S. persons." Part of that surveillance is authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that Congress amended in 2008, which supports US spy agencies to collect Internet information at will. (A large component in the NSA's mission stems from a 1981 executive order that legalized surveillance of foreigners living outside the US.)
Since Snowden's leaks began, the US government has shied away from claims that it may be intercepting communications and information from Americans. FISA does not authorize spying on US citizens. The ACLU and Wikimedia believe surveillance agencies are violating that regulation.
"In the course of its surveillance, the NSA copies and combs through vast amounts of Internet traffic, which it intercepts inside the United States with the help of major telecommunications companies," the ACLU said in a statement on Tuesday. "It searches that traffic for keywords called 'selectors' that are associated with its targets. The surveillance involves the NSA's warrantless review of the emails and Internet activities of millions of ordinary Americans."
Jimmy Wales is taking aim at the NSA and DOJ.Jimmy Wales / The People's Operator
In an editorial in The New York Times on Tuesday, Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales argued that the US government's sweeping collection of information across the Web has put Wikipedia in its crosshairs and has discouraged the service's users, many of whom seek to operate anonymously.
"On our servers, run by the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation, those volunteers discuss their work on everything from Tiananmen Square to gay rights in Uganda," Wales wrote. "Many of them prefer to work anonymously, especially those who work on controversial issues or who live in countries with repressive governments."
FISA-related data collection has long been a murky business. When technology companies provide their transparency reports on requests for user information, they can often reveal the exact number of warrants or law enforcement demands they've received, but only provide a broad range of FISA requests. Google, for example, revealed last year that it received between zero and 999 FISA requests in the six months that ended December 2013.
In response to those ranges, Twitter last year sued the US government to lift a gag order about NSA spying. The move came after Google requested the same of the US Justice Department.
"It's our belief that we are entitled under the First Amendment to respond to our users' concerns and to the statements of US government officials by providing information about the scope of US government surveillance -- including what types of legal process have not been received," Twitter legal counsel Ben Lee said last year. "We should be free to do this in a meaningful way, rather than in broad, inexact ranges."
Now Wikimedia and Wales have taken their argument a bit further. Wikimedia says that the wholesale collection of information under the FISAAmendments Act of 2008 is based in shaky justification, at best, and often entangles innocent individuals.
"The statute only requires 'reasonable belief' that a non-US person is located outside the United States," Wikimedia wrote in its blog Tuesday. "There is no need to show that target is a foreign agent, much less a terrorist. The purpose of the statute is to acquire 'foreign intelligence information'-- a very general concept. We believe the broad interpretation of this statute that allows for upstream surveillance is unconstitutional."
Ultimately, Wikimedia wants the US government to stop its upstream surveillance and has asked the court to rule that it is unconstitutional. "Surveillance might be used to reveal sensitive information, create a chilling effect to deter participation or, in extreme instances, identify individual users," Wikimedia's Brigham said.
4:57 PM
