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

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by rcentros

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.

XP was always rather slow to start. Windows 7 is better and Windows 8.1 even better then 7.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Hardware updates would be incredibly noticeable. You can tell because of the way (strange?) people are in the room rummaging around in the casing and swapping stuff in and out.

... or did you mean firmware updates?
Those tend to be software-based too, the key point being that you still have to download it (it doesn't happen through osmosis), and something has to be checking for them.

Generally firmware updates get downloaded from the manufacturer's website manually, yes? Why would they be manifesting as an update notification?

For the Surface Pro series, Microsoft calls them hardware updates. This is not the same as a firmware update for your laptop or desktop. Microsoft delivers firmware updates via Windows Update. And you will be notified you have a hardware update even if you have other updates turned off.

[murg]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But XP users have a real hassle trying to run Calibre 2.x. And they also have the same hassle trying to runt he latest Sigil. It's a combination of XP and/or outdated hardware.

The reason XP is not getting a Windows 10 upgrade is that a lot of XP systems cannot handle the processor requirements which is the same as Windows 8.1.

Not to mention that A) XP is out of life, and really shouldn't attract a free upgrade, and B) Microsoft last saw the money from the XP people a decade ago (at least).

[Greg Anos]

Sorry about the gap, I have been traveling...

First off, is a statement I will back with money, marbles and chalk:

"Software is immortal." (qualification - it must exist on a durable medium, and there must be hardware capable of executing it. But both of those qualifications aren't the subject of the software, but its environment.)

Because of that, I consider any effort to obsolete existing software as obnoxious. As far as I am concerned, it came to a head with Windows 7 cutting off their 16 bit legacy programs. It was a clear and open choice by Microsoft, for no other reason to force legacy Windows users to buy more software from Microsoft.

Yes, 3rd party software filled the gap, but why was I being dependent on 3rd party software? Go the whole hog and use 3rd party software exclusively...

So now I use Linux. I'm barely above a N00b, but nobody will give a <redacted> if I use the same version of Linux for the next 20 years. (And I may, because I am getting a copy of the repositories (all 60 or so gigsbytes worth) to install app from whenever I want to rebuild my system.) And for my old software...A virtual XP machine. (I have an original retail XP copy of the OS, I'm not cheating Microsoft...)

My software cost now approach $0 over time, and I truly don't care if you think I'm obsolete. As to the Internet - those new USB size computers at $100 USD or less....

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

As far as I am concerned, it came to a head with Windows 7 cutting off their 16 bit legacy programs. It was a clear and open choice by Microsoft, for no other reason to force legacy Windows users to buy more software from Microsoft.

To be fair to Microsoft, they were probably trying to reduce their support and development costs. That's particularly true when you consider how flakey older software can be on modern systems even with concerted efforts to support old software.

My software cost now approach $0 over time, and I truly don't care if you think I'm obsolete. As to the Internet - those new USB size computers at $100 USD or less....

Agreed on both counts. I have a Raspberry Pi and it works quite well for almost everything except web browsing, even with "heavy applications" like LibreOffice. Even with the latest version of Mathematica, providing you aren't doing anything too computationally or memory intensive.

[dickloraine]

Software is not "immortal" in a practical sense. It needs hardware to run and an environment that can handle it. In your case you for example need a virtual xp environment. Of course it is possible to provide these environments, but someone has to program these too. And if you look to apps like browsers, if standards are changing, you could not use them for their purpose anymore. Not to speak about security issues.

[dwig]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

To be fair to Microsoft, they were probably trying to reduce their support and development costs. ...

+1

Supporting old/antique formats and apps quickly becomes an albatross around developer's necks.

There is a practical limit to the amount of legacy services you can support when developing new versions. Everything has to be tested under all configurations. The quality assurance effort increases geometrically with every legacy function retained. You can't double the QA staff every release and stay in business, FOL.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But XP users have a real hassle trying to run Calibre 2.x. And they also have the same hassle trying to runt he latest Sigil. It's a combination of XP and/or outdated hardware.

The reason XP is not getting a Windows 10 upgrade is that a lot of XP systems cannot handle the processor requirements which is the same as Windows 8.1.

An updated browser is a must. Security updates render old versions actively ddangerous.

Updated versions of Sigil/calibre are not. What worked, still works.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

For the Surface Pro series, Microsoft calls them hardware updates. This is not the same as a firmware update for your laptop or desktop. Microsoft delivers firmware updates via Windows Update. And you will be notified you have a hardware update even if you have other updates turned off.

Interesting nomenclature is all I can say.

OK, I'll shoot. What exactly is "not the same" about these ones?

[ApK]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Interesting nomenclature is all I can say.

Indeed, though for the record, I remember Windows Update listing any updates concerning installed devices--keyboards, printers, monitors, mice, etc--as "Hardware updates" as far back as XP. As they say: "It made sense at the time."

[LinuxArie]

Originally Posted by kacir

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.

In Windows 7 Home you can install VirtualBox or VMware Player and install Win XP (or any other OS) inside.
Of course you'll need a CD and a key for XP, XP can than run in seamless mode

[QuantumIguana]

Windows 8 performs pretty well on older computers. Once I installed a third-party Start Menu, it actually became a usable operating system.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by Glorfindel

That's a pretty big 'if'. Odds are against that happening, but you have a backup image just in case that happens, right? (Right?)

Damn right!!

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by dickloraine

Software is not "immortal" in a practical sense. It needs hardware to run and an environment that can handle it. In your case you for example need a virtual xp environment. Of course it is possible to provide these environments, but someone has to program these too. And if you look to apps like browsers, if standards are changing, you could not use them for their purpose anymore. Not to speak about security issues.

<Shrug> people still hunt with bows and arrows - by choice.

I'm still running Atari 800 software, via emulator, by choice.

What's this "practical sense"? There was nothing to prevent Microsoft from offering the existing 16 bit emulator on Windows 7 on an as-is basis,as a separate emulator. After all, Microsoft offered Virtual PC 2004 for $100 (which I bought) under XP, which would run any of their software (not hardware dependent) all the way back to DOS 1.0. Do you think that everybody is going to stop making x86 chipsets? (and all the existing ones are going to evaporate?)

Ripley's Believe It Or Not, there are other uses for computers and software than the internet. 60-80% of my use is on my "sterile" machine, not the one with an internet connection...

[dickloraine]

As to why Microsoft chosed to not rewrite the emulator I can just guess. I would think it was to much hassle to do properly, since they couldn't just use the 32bit emulator. And since there was an alternative with virtual machines which were there and working, they chose to cut the cost, development time, the testing time and the support costs. One may not like it, but all this is important for a company. And it is the same in most other businesses as well. You could still drive your very old car, but you won't get replacements for it any more from the manufacturer.