Windows 10 - free upgrade to those with PC using Windows 7 or 8

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by theducks

Tools need to be sharpened, cleaned and oiled.
Many updates are doing things like that.
Others take care of the Safety recalls.

Except, unfortunately, Windows' updates often dull the tools instead of sharpening them. My old Latitude D400 run decently under Windows XP SP2 (for awhile it was my only Windows computer -- I dual-booted with Linux). When I "upgraded" to XP SP3, it became a boat anchor. Literally it would still be thrashing the hard drive nearly ten minutes after booting. I'm now running Linux Mint 13 Mate on that computer. It boots in about 50 seconds and is ready to use when it boots.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by rcentros

By "nagging" updates, I guess you mean we Linux users get notified that an update is available? -- that an icon changes color?

That was an unnecessary assumption based on my saying "Every platform out there provides constant updates. So does whatever current version of Windows you have."

I didn't say anything about nagging updates, as far as I can tell speakingtohe was the first one to mention nagging updates in any context.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by rcentros

ArchLinux is a "tinkerer's" dream. I ran it and -- when I got it all set up the way I wanted -- I thought, "why did I waste that much time?" Linux Mint, on the other hand, literally installs in about 20 minutes, and that includes almost all the applications I use and all the codecs, and add-ons, like Flash, Java, etc., -- that a Windows' install requires AFTER installing the OS, installing and configuring all the applications and drivers, updating the OS and updating the applications and drivers. And don't forget about the ten or so reboots that it requires. Once you've got that done, then be sure to find and install your malware applications, and be sure you keep them up to date. I just don't have the time or patience for Windows' maintenance.

But I understand what you mean about ArchLinux or Gentoo. At one time I may have enjoyed learning and using those distributions, now I just want an OS to load and use -- even if it's not "tuned" to the gnat's eyebrow for my machine (like it might be with ArchLinux or Gentoo). That's why I use Linux Mint, it's simple with almost no maintenance.

I happen to be using ArchLinux ATM, I enjoy the tinkering and have the time.

I more or less agree with this:

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

I've been a computer guy for 30 years, starting on mainframes and moving across and down. I've spent a lot of time popping the hood and fiddling with the insides.

But there's a limit to how much of that I want to do. I use Ubuntu these days because it does the best job I've seen in a Linux distro of figuring out what hardware it's being installed on, setting itself up, and Just Working that I've seen in a distro. I want to devote my time to using the system, not to fiddling to make it usable.

Originally Posted by Mivo

Cost is relative if you consider time. I ran ArchLinux (and Ubuntu) for a couple years, and I spent substantially more time on tinkering, tweaking, and fixing than I ever had with a Windows machine.

A lot of that depends upon the user. I've been using Linux for around 20 years now, so I've long since passed through the tinkering and tweaking aspect. I install the OS, add the packages that have served me well over the years, and make a few minor configuration changes that I find useful. Anything beyond that is asking for a productivity sink. Then again, the same can be said for Windows. There are an astounding number of ways to tweak Windows using integrated tools or third-party utilities.

Fixing things seems to depend upon the user as well. I've always been fortunate with Linux in that most of my hardware has worked out of the box. I realize that isn't the case for everyone. I also realize that sometimes the Linux community is to blame because they push the cool distributions and fairly deep modifications rather than sticking to the defaults on tried-and-true distributions. Yet that is more of an issue with how people approach Linux than with the platform itself.

I'm not going to claim that Linux is a good solution for everyone, or even a good solution for people who have major issues with Windows. When people are thinking of making the jump, I usually suggest switching to open source software under Windows first. If they can't adapt to new software, Linux isn't going to be a pleasant experience. Once they know that they like the software, they should try their selected distribution via LiveCD/LiveUSB prior to installing it. If their chosen distribution doesn't work with their hardware out of the box, they probably aren't going to be happy with it either.

While I try to be realistic in my expectations of Linux, with respect to its benefits and pitfalls, I do see a lot of the criticism of it as being undue. If someone thinks it involves a lot more tweaking and fixing, it's probably because of how they approached Linux. Linux offers a lot of control and flexibility, but that doesn't mean that you have to use it. If you do choose to use it, be aware that you may break things in the process. Even the criticism about having to relearn things is partially a matter of how you approach computers. If you learn the basis of how applications work, most skills are transferable. If you learn an application, you're going to be relearning those skills for each new application and even major updates. (To give you an idea of what I mean, I had very few issues with Windows 8 or Office 2007 because it was a new metaphor for the same old stuff. A lot of people did have issues with the interface changes because their understanding of the software was as a collection of tasks that were performed in a particular way.)

[kacir]

Originally Posted by dickloraine

I don't understand why regular updated are considered a bad thing from so many?
...
And at least my windows 7 does not reboot automatically but asked to be rebooted.

Many people are not technically savvy enough to tweak Windows so the updates only prompt and not update automatically.
Another large group of people use Windows in corporate environment and they are not allowed to even change a desktop wallpaper, let alone more dangerous settings like messing with the updates. So when their corporate-installed OS and antivirus start doing their thing they, can only helplessly watch as the deadline for submitting the document they are working on now is approaching, or watch in horror when their computer suddenly becomes very slow during important presentation.
Another feature that I very strongly dislike: my notebook does an automatic update during the day - for various reasons, including company policies, I have it configured to update automatically. At the end of the workday I am in a hurry and I need to switch off the notebook and take it with me. I click quickly on the shutdown button and see message: "Please do not switch off your computer during the update. Installing update number 1 of 37." I know that it says on the power off button that it is going to do the update and that there are a few tricks how switch the computer off without the update, but when you are in a hurry and when this situation occurs only in-frequently you do not always pay attention.

Another thing that made updates un-popular: In the distant past, when hard disks were relatively small we used to make 20GB C: partition for XP and the rest of disk was D: for documents. 20GB was plenty of space for OS and applications *and* reserve for future. After a decade of automatic updates you need at very least 30GB. Lots of people with old computers are forced to seek help of computer technician or a knowledgeable family member. It is not possible to install XP that includes the latest SP on such a computer. The license that is tied to that ancient notebook is for the oldest version of XP. So you install that and then spend next couple of days installing updates and watching in horror how system becomes slower and the disk is filling with cryptic files used for patch installation that you can't delete.

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Example, WIndows 7 no longer supported 16 bit Legacy applications. A clear design choice made by Microsoft. So?

In windows 7 Pro there is possibility to install virtual machine from Microsoft with mimimalistic XP that lets you run legacy apps. It even provides you with a legal license for the XP inside the virtual machine. And programs installed in that virtual machine can be seamlessly integrated into your W7 desktop.
For even older programs (like really old bookkeeping software written in ancient versions of FoxPro that you have to keep for tax audits) there is DosBox. It runs under Windows, Linux, OSx.
There are quite a few virtual machines that you do not have to pay for.

[Mivo]

Originally Posted by kacir

Many people are not technically savvy enough to tweak Windows so the updates only prompt and not update automatically.

Those are the people who benefit the most from automatic updates. If not for this default setting, those people's machines would be virus sprinklers and spam relays at an even larger scale.

[danwdoo]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

Murg upgrading to Win 10 might be a win win for the bean counters and the techos in your company internationally.

I'm wondering about multiple licences be it company or individuals with this free version.

The free upgrade is only for consumer versions.

[eschwartz]

So just non-enterprise?

I guess that means small businesses (I can think of a few schools using Pro) should be eligible?

[danwdoo]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

So just non-enterprise?

That haven't announced what SKUs (versions such as pro, enterprise, etc) there will be so we can't be definite on what qualifies, but any sizable company would not be included in this announced offer. There may be separate offers for those versions announced at later dates and enterprise customers with Software Assurance agreements get it included anyway.

[danwdoo]

Probably covered, but nothing is certain until they formally give all the details.

[joblack]

I am wondering: Who wants an Windows 10 NSA spyware on their computers?

[arjaybe]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

Even the criticism about having to relearn things is partially a matter of how you approach computers. If you learn the basis of how applications work, most skills are transferable. If you learn an application, you're going to be relearning those skills for each new application and even major updates. (To give you an idea of what I mean, I had very few issues with Windows 8 or Office 2007 because it was a new metaphor for the same old stuff. A lot of people did have issues with the interface changes because their understanding of the software was as a collection of tasks that were performed in a particular way.)

Some people are task oriented and others are tool oriented. The first will do the task with whatever suitable tool is available. The second are lost without a specific tool.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by joblack

I am wondering: Who wants an Windows 10 NSA spyware on their computers?

Why is that specific to Windows 10?

[piper28]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

It doesn't surprise me that Windows 10 is going to be free, because it seems that there's somewhat of a lack of interest in updating an OS given the figures still using Win7 (I'm in that): 48.14%, and XP: 28.47%.

That XP figure is extraordinary given that XP came on the market in 1999 (perhaps)?

That XP number is likely to drop drastically in the near future, because companies are really starting to work on getting rid of them as a security hazard. My university has mandated that they be off the network by feb 1, and I know I've heard other universities that have gone similar routes. (In related news, January has really sucked for me.)

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Difflugia

If I didn't do that, how would I find out about the best online gambling sites?

Ask anyone. Your Mother in law perhaps or a 12 year old.

Helen