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

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by shalym

Ahh...but see, the people that I'm talking about are the ones who never really learned how to use Windows or DOS, either. They just want to pop in the disc (or click on a link) and do what they need to do. They don't WANT to learn how things work--they just want it to work without HAVING to know how it works.

Shari

Which is a perfectly reasonable expectation. I don't know (or care) how my car works - I just want to get in it and drive it. The days when you had to be a mechanic to own a car are long gone; PCs should be a sufficiently mature product by now for the same to be true of them, too.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

As I said, Linux enthusiasts (or Windows dislikers) continually forget the only thing that matters in the end: does Linux run the software customers wish to use?

In many cases, the answer is "no", and that is where the matter ends for most people.

I understand that point and have no issues with it at all. I've had several people at work tell me they were interested in Linux and -- since they knew I used it at home -- asked what distribution they should try. The first question I always asked them -- do you play a lot of PC games? If the answer was "yes" that was where it pretty much ended. If they didn't play games, the next question was -- do you have to have Microsoft Office? Again, if the answer was "yes," that was the end of it -- except I would add, if you're willing, you could run Office under Wine, using Crossover. I really didn't suggest it, however. I, personally, never liked or used Office (except when forced to at work) and I don't play games, so neither of these were ever a concern for me.

Anyhow, your point is valid. I understand that. I know of a lot folks who don't play games and don't want/need Office.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by shalym

Ahh...but see, the people that I'm talking about are the ones who never really learned how to use Windows or DOS, either. They just want to pop in the disc (or click on a link) and do what they need to do. They don't WANT to learn how things work--they just want it to work without HAVING to know how it works.

I understand that. Unfortunately people like you (and me, when I can't get out of it) end up having to fix the danged things. I guess that's part of my problem. For the last seven or so years, the only time I see a Windows machine is when I have to fix some relative's or friend's PC. I come from a technical background (phone switches) -- when you fix something (do it right) it works, or there's a logical reason it doesn't (bad board, etc.). Windows -- at least for me -- is inconsistent. I can build three exact Windows machines and have three separate problems. I'm guessing it's "logical" (in other words, corruption of some kind in the Registry) but it "feels" random. I don't have those issues with Linux installs.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Which is a perfectly reasonable expectation. I don't know (or care) how my car works - I just want to get in it and drive it. The days when you had to be a mechanic to own a car are long gone; PCs should be a sufficiently mature product by now for the same to be true of them, too.

And that's exactly why I use Linux Mint. I invest 40 minutes for an install and complete OS and applications update -- and I'm done. No Office to install and update. No flash to install. No java to install. No anti-virus or anti-malware to install. No codecs to install. No video drivers to install. No repeated reboots when installing updates and drivers. All my programs are in the repository (with the exception of drivers for my printer -- and the possible exception of yagf -- which may be in the repository now, not sure). And I think I have to install Chrome (which I use for watching Netflix and running my Chromecast). And there's Spotify. I install that also. (But it's not like Windows users don't install separate programs in Windows also.)

The only reason Windows could be seen as an "easier install" is because most people don't install it.

Originally Posted by Katsunami

* Hear a cry of despair and a dying wail as the user flings himself and the computer out of a fifth story apartment window *

You just convinced me that Windows users are in greater need of psychological help than Linux users. That's quite the accomplishment there!

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by shalym

I actually use Linux every day as part of my job, and have supported people on it--real people who need support (people like Gregg) who were convinced to switch because of old hardware or just "because it's better". The scenario I outlined was not "hyperventilating". It was an actual scenario that I had to deal with less than a year ago with a relative who switched because my son convinced him to, and then my son decided that he didn't want to deal with supporting him anymore.

Thanks for playing, though

My apologies for assuming. I have no idea what your Linux distribution you use, or the kind of support your offer, but I do know that with my father, my brother and few friends, Linux support is almost unnecessary. With my Dad -- who is in his 80s, when he was using Windows there was a "major problem" about every week. Now he'll ask me a few questions about every other month. The question is usually "why does it say such and such when updating" -- where "such and such" a server time-out or something. I personally never see these messages because I don't turn on the "more information" option. I always ask, "did it update okay?" "Yes ... but ... does yours have these errors?" "I don't know Dad, I don't turn on the "'more options button.'" And that's the biggest issue he has with Linux Mint.

[murg]

Originally Posted by rcentros

asked what distribution they should try.

Originally Posted by rcentros

you could run Office under Wine, using Crossover

Originally Posted by rcentros

Anyhow, your point is valid. I understand that. I don't know of a lot folks who don't play games and don't want/need Office.

This about says it all.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by murg

This about says it all.

Actually that was a typo (now corrected) -- it should have said "I know a lot of folks who don't play games or need Office." (I should not write these posts when I'm tired.)

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

You just convinced me that Windows users are in greater need of psychological help than Linux users. That's quite the accomplishment there!

Nah. That was a once-Windows, now-Linux user who found out he has to go looking for an alternative the 34th time this week

Mind you, I'm not bashing Linux. My daily work revolves around it, as I have designed and built an embedded system on top of Debian Testing. I also maintain it, so I work with Linux daily.

If I need a bunch of webservers, or If I need an operating system to build something on top of, which goes into some sort of appliance/mini-computer, I'd go for Linux (or BSD) every time.

However, I also have a lot of experience with Linux on the desktop, and though I can make it work, finding workarounds or alternatives for stuff that is readily available on Windows just takes too much time. For people who just want to use THEIR OWN software stuff on the desktop, Linux is a 100% no-go, except if that software happens to be open source already, such as Firefox/Thunderbird/Calibre, etc.

Originally Posted by Katsunami

However, I also have a lot of experience with Linux on the desktop, and though I can make it work, finding workarounds or alternatives for stuff that is readily available on Windows just takes too much time. For people who just want to use THEIR OWN software stuff on the desktop, Linux is a 100% no-go, except if that software happens to be open source already, such as Firefox/Thunderbird/Calibre, etc.

Which is why I suggest switching to open source applications before switching to Linux, when someone expresses interest in Linux. There is no sense in making the jump if you discover that the alternatives don't reflect your needs. There is also no sense in attempting to make a switch that will fail because they are overwhelmed by too much new stuff at the same time.

Yet suggesting that Linux is a lacking on the desktop is a bit silly. Many excellent developers have contributed to making an excellent desktop for Linux users. What people usually end up having trouble with is making the transition, and those difficulties apply to transitions in both directions. Going from Linux to Windows may be uncommon, but a few of us have done it. In my case it was because I transitioned from a career where Unix dominated, to one where Windows and OS X dominated. Even though switching between applications didn't present much of an issue, there was a bit of a culture shock when it came down to maintaining a Windows system. (Not that it surprised me. I had already turned down a job developing software for a robotic observatory since it involved Windows software development. Apparently Windows developers speak an entirely different language from Unix developers.)

Even after using Windows and OS X for a number of years, that history with Linux is still evident. The only application that is consistently open under OS X is the Terminal. My editor of choice under Windows is vim. Heck, I even plopped down a hefty sum of cash to get a Windows file manager that supports regular expressions (amongst other things). I can only imagine the difficulties that Windows users go through when switching over to Linux. After all, I have the benefit of using a variety of open source applications under Windows. Very few Windows users have the option of using their commercial applications under Linux (unless they trust WINE or use a VM, both of which present issues for some software).

Yet none of that says that Windows is better than Linux or Linux is better than Windows. It just says that they are different, and that it is easier to use what you are familiar with. That's true even when the user is willing and able to adapt.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by rcentros

And that's exactly why I use Linux Mint. I invest 40 minutes for an install and complete OS and applications update -- and I'm done. No Office to install and update. No flash to install. No java to install. No anti-virus or anti-malware to install. No codecs to install. No video drivers to install. No repeated reboots when installing updates and drivers.

You got me there; this is one of the things I detest on Windows.

Windows:
New install, update, reboot, update, reboot, update, reboot, update, reboot...

* 6 hours later *

Install driver... reboot... repeat 7 times or so
Install program... (possibly reboot)... repeat ad infinitum

* Another 8 hours later *

Shit I'm tired...

Linux:
New install
apt-get update && apt-get upgrade (and/or dist-upgrade if required)

* 20 minutes later *

apt-get install firefox thunderbird gimp inkscape.... <enter>

Then get some coffee and read a book

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

You got me there; this is one of the things I detest on Windows.
[...]
* 6 hours later *
[...]
* Another 8 hours later *

I'm with you both Those times are no exaggeration.
I had to do that several times in recent memory for machines at work. I cannot understand why the Windows upgrade process is still like that.
Maybe 10 will be better? (Hey, on topic!?)

My most recent Linux install (Ubuntu on my re-flashed Chromebook) did take long while to update completely (maybe 30-40 min?) but it was nothing compared to Windows.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by ApK

Maybe 10 will be better? (Hey, on topic!?)

.

Naughty, naughty!

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by ApK

I'm with you both Those times are no exaggeration.
I had to do that several times in recent memory for machines at work. I cannot understand why the Windows upgrade process is still like that.
Maybe 10 will be better? (Hey, on topic!?)

You know what I want, under Windows? And I have been screaming that since using Linux the first time in 2001. I want Microsoft to give manufacturers and users to tie programs into Windows update, the same way as it is with MS Office.

Then Windows Windows update would get the latest update for each program at the official update site and install it automatically.

Another addition would need to be an install / de-install queue to start multiple installations and de-installations, with all needed prompts up front (if any are needed).

Maybe the Windows 10 Market will bring this possibility, finally, and I'd welcome it, as long as it is optional, so programs can run on older Windows versions without this capability, or newer ones were it might be incompatible.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

You know what I want, under Windows? And I have been screaming that since using Linux the first time in 2001. I want Microsoft to give manufacturers and users to tie programs into Windows update, the same way as it is with MS Office.

I believe the Windows app store, introduced in Windows 8, does do this (or something essentially equivalent, at least).