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

[JoHunt]

I cancelled the request to upgrade to Win 10 on my PC, yet I still get this message in Windows Update on a daily basis (which is probably the reason my computer is no longer going to sleep at night )

Upgrade to Windows 10 Home
Installation status: Failed
Error details: Code 80240020

I've turned off gwx.exe from the task manager, but it keeps coming back. Does anyone know how to permanently disable upgrade attempts until I decide to upgrade?

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

It's NOT the same at all. It's NOT a start menu. It doesn't function the same. How is it the same as the Windows 7 start menu?

How is it NOT the same?? What is it you could do with the start menu on Win 7 that you could not do with the start screen on Win 8?

[Graham]

<deleted> Rethought my post, sorry...

Graham

[kacir]

Originally Posted by howyoudoin

What is it you could do with the start menu on Win 7 that you could not do with the start screen on Win 8?

Make hierarchical structure?
Try installing Adobe Creative suite and a few similar large packages of apps in W8 and watch large number of tiles get generated.
In start menu you have nice hierarchical structure for apps. In start screen you have a jumble of tiles.

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by kacir

Make hierarchical structure?
Try installing Adobe Creative suite and a few similar large packages of apps in W8 and watch large number of tiles get generated.
In start menu you have nice hierarchical structure for apps. In start screen you have a jumble of tiles.

You could do a search, which is blazing fast in Win 8. Type in the first few characters and the name shows up faster than drilling through tons of sub menus.

Win 8 start screen had live tiles. Win 7 did not have those.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by howyoudoin

You could do a search, which is blazing fast in Win 8. Type in the first few characters and the name shows up faster than drilling through tons of sub menus.

Win 8 start screen had live tiles. Win 7 did not have those.

It's nice that Windows 10 combines the best features of both: the hierarchical structure of the Windows 7 "Start" menu with the live tiles of the Windows 8 Metro screen. Everyone should be happy .

[kennyc]

Windows through the ages: http://www.engadget.com/gallery/wind...ough-the-ages/

After upgrading my desktop I pulled the product key using the Produkey utility. It is different than the Win 7 product key.

Here's an Engadget review: http://www.engadget.com/2015/07/28/windows-10-review/
(one thing the reviewer says it that he doesn't know any reason they skipped windows '9' - but there is actually a very good technical reason which he apparently isn't aware of)

[ApK]

Originally Posted by kennyc

(one thing the reviewer says it that he doesn't know any reason they skipped windows '9' - but there is actually a very good technical reason which he apparently isn't aware of)

I'm not sure I buy that reason. It's far more typical (and correct) to check the version number than the name, and so much has changed that could break compatibility since those days, that I cannot believe whatever small fraction of still running legacy code that, 1, is coded like that, and, 2, might possibly be negatively affected by it, and, 3, is mission critical, and 4, can't be easily patched, would even be a blip on the operational, much less marketing, radar.
Nope, I'm not buying it.

[danwdoo]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's nice that Windows 10 combines the best features of both: the hierarchical structure of the Windows 7 "Start" menu with the live tiles of the Windows 8 Metro screen. Everyone should be happy .

I do hope (and suspect) they will add the folder support to Windows 10 that they already have in Windows Phone (or at least some semblance of it). It's nice to be able to keep lesser used programs and utilities bunched together in a way that takes less room.

[danwdoo]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Here's an Engadget review: http://www.engadget.com/2015/07/28/windows-10-review/
(one thing the reviewer says it that he doesn't know any reason they skipped windows '9' - but there is actually a very good technical reason which he apparently isn't aware of)

This reasoning doesn't hold any credibility to me. Programmatically (which is the only way this would possibly matter for program compatibility) Windows 10 is version 10 (though earlier in the beta it was 6.4) But Windows 8 was only 6.2 Windows 95 was actually 4.0. There is no 'function' that would return Windows 95, 98 or 10 that could have broken anything and there has never been a windows 9.x. Names such as 95, 98, or 10 are purely marketing labels and are completely independent of the true OS version number. They could have just stuck with the 6.4 version or even gone to 9.x and called it Windows 9 and there would not have been any problems at all.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by danwdoo

There is no 'function' that would return Windows 95, 98 or 10 that could have broken anything

I can certainly contrive ways to do it, and since 3rd party libraries and tools might do things in odd ways, I didn't want to dismiss it outright, but I'm with you. I'm definately not buying it,. Sound more like the poster was working backwards from the name and trying to fabricate a reason.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ApK

I can certainly contrive ways to do it, and since 3rd party
party libraries and tools might do things in odd ways, I didn't want to dismiss it outright, but I'm with you. I'm definately not buying it,. Sound more like the poster was working backwards from the name and trying to fabricate a reason.

There was a long discussion on this at the time that the name was announced. Although calling the "GetVersion(Ex)" API is of course the correct method for an application to query the Windows version number, apparently there are apps around which do indeed retrieve the version "name" rather than the version number.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HarryT

There was a long discussion on this at the time that the name was announced. Although calling the "GetVersion(Ex)" API is of course the correct method for an application to query the Windows version number, apparently there are apps around which do indeed retrieve the version "name" rather than the version number.

As I said, I just don't see those apps being of any numerical consequence. The most likely case I can see for using the name is in a high level script type environment which parses command line output rather than using the api, or a language that offers its own version function that features the name. In either case, however infrequently they might be encountered, a portion could likely be easily patched as the bulk would be interpreted languages with editable source, resulting in even fewer that would matter.
Just my opinion as a 20-year Windows business app developer. *

ApK

* who is currently seeking new employment, in case you know of any opportunities.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ApK

As I said, I just don't see those apps being of any numerical consequence. The most likely case I can see for using the name is in a high level script type environment which parses command line output rather than using the api, or a language that offers its own version function that features the name. In either case. However infrequently they might be encountered, a portion could likely be easily patched, resulting in even fewer that would matter.
Just my opinion as a 20-year Windows business app developer.

Oh, I completely agree with you. I too have been a Windows developer since the days of Windows 3. I have a complex, multi-threaded application on the market which I initially released for Windows 3 and which still runs fine under Windows 10. The reason it's continued to work with virtually no code modification in that 20-something year timespan is that it obeys all Microsoft's "rules". It's pretty easy to write "future-proof" Windows programs.

[danwdoo]

Originally Posted by HarryT

There was a long discussion on this at the time that the name was announced. Although calling the "GetVersion(Ex)" API is of course the correct method for an application to query the Windows version number, apparently there are apps around which do indeed retrieve the version "name" rather than the version number.

Even saying some poorly written app decided to pull the name variable, it would result in the text string "Windows 95" or "Windows 98" and not the decimal 9.0. There never has been a 9.0 either in 'name' or version number so there is no real possibility of a conflict programmatically since the two different types of data cannot be used for comparisons. That's why I call this whole theory bogus.

My personal belief is that they will be sticking with Windows 10 for the foreseeable future with new versions (similar to OS X) and felt 10 was a much better choice for this than 9.