Windows 10

[Vipera]

I don't get why I should get Windows 10. Really, this isn't a post à la hivemind where people act all dumb to prove a point. I have Windows 7 and I have everything here. What am I missing from 8 and 910? I have a big desktop PC with no issues of loading and stuff.

 

[FireEmblemGuy]

Not much of any reason, honestly. A few behind-the-scenes tweaks, faster boot times, and some UI updates for touch-friendliness in Windows 8; multi-desktop support, better integration of Metro apps for desktop use, a proper start menu that merges some of the Metro UI features, and a new notification/tweaked taskbar for Windows 10. No real reason to upgrade until Microsoft releases an OS-exclusive version of DirectX or something.

Aside from a few minor niggles (the lockscreen having an extra screen to go through before logging in/unlocking, the user account having to be tied to a Live account and its password to use pretty much any Metro app, still having to jump through hoops to load unsigned drivers, etc.), I'd say that eventually Windows 10 will be well worth upgrading to. Even though I did come to accept Windows 8 as a usable system, I wouldn't really recommend it to anyone satisfied with Windows 7.

 

[Originality]

My 2 cents: I liked the restore/refresh feature of Windows 8. Had to use it yesterday on a laptop that had slowed to a crawl.

Now to wait to see if I'll like 10 enough to migrate from 7 (and 8 on my tablet).

 

[Arras]

I don't get why I should get Windows 10. Really, this isn't a post à la hivemind where people act all dumb to prove a point. I have Windows 7 and I have everything here. What am I missing from 8 and 910? I have a big desktop PC with no issues of loading and stuff.

You can apply that logic to almost any version upgrade ever. It's lighter, faster and shorter boot times (and eventually Windows 7 will stop getting security updates much like XP did).

 

[FAST6191]

End of 7 support, though mainstream support technically ends in a little under 3 months, is not until the start of 2020. I am very unsure what the consumer/small-medium enterprise landscape will look like then.

 

[Vipera]

You can apply that logic to almost any version upgrade ever. It's lighter, faster and shorter boot times (and eventually Windows 7 will stop getting security updates much like XP did).

XP was a huge update from 2000 because some stuff was already XP only after a year.
Vista was a huge update from XP because it became very unstable after a few months.
7 was a huge update from Vista because it's the most stable OS I've ever owned.
(I'm talking about stable builds. First two OS were crap when they came out).

7 works so well on my machine that I see no point in going ahead. I can keep my PC on for an unlimited amount of time and it wouldn't change anything. Having XP on for more than a weekend was a challenge.
The only part I'd be interested in is the energy consumption. But that's if I'll ever own a laptop again. On my desktop pc, 7 all the way.

 

[filfat]

-snip-

You did notice that its earlier then a beta build right? bugs are to be excepted as they have stated over and over and over again...

I don't get why I should get Windows 10. Really, this isn't a post à la hivemind where people act all dumb to prove a point. I have Windows 7 and I have everything here. What am I missing from 8 and 910? I have a big desktop PC with no issues of loading and stuff.

like saying "why should i switch from my Nokia N8? it still works for texting, even though there are a lot of better options out there!"

 

[WiiCube_2013]

7->8 was a paid upgrade though, so if you basically view 10 as another free upgrade to 8 much like 8.1 was, having to pay to upgrade 7->10 makes sense.

So those who pirated 8 can upgrade freely to 10.. something doesn't seem right about this.

 

[Arras]

So those who pirated 8 can upgrade freely to 10.. something doesn't seem right about this.

Only if they found a way to pirate the automatic updates too. I have legit Windows so I don't know whether this is possible. Besides, even if it wasn't a free upgrade, they can just pirate 10 anyway.

 

[WiiCube_2013]

Only if they found a way to pirate the automatic updates too. I have legit Windows so I don't know whether this is possible. Besides, even if it wasn't a free upgrade, they can just pirate 10 anyway.

Probably the 8 way but a Windows 10 Loader might not.

 

[smf]

XP was a huge update from 2000 because some stuff was already XP only after a year.
Vista was a huge update from XP because it became very unstable after a few months.
7 was a huge update from Vista because it's the most stable OS I've ever owned.
(I'm talking about stable builds. First two OS were crap when they came out).

I have run windows 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 95, 98, NT4, 2000, XP, Vista, 7, 8, 8.1 & I have played with the preview version of 10. I don't hate any of them and they all have their good points.

I don't understand why you feel that you need to evangelise about how great 7 is, if you want to run it then you are entitled to.
When 10 is released I'll upgrade my computers to it & you won't. I don't need to justify that & neither do you.

 

[raulpica]

I'm old enough to know that most people said the same exact things when XP came out.

"It's slow!" "It's ugly!" "It doesn't run my DOS games!" "XP killed my cat!"

Then 9 years later, XP was our saviour and nobody wanted to ever upgrade from it. "Windows 7 doesn't work with my 7-year old Webcam" "Dude 64-bit support breaks stuff!" "My GPU sucks balls but I still want to have Aero enabled and everything's slow!"

Now everyone's on 7. Rinse and repeat.

 

[smf]

I'm old enough to know that most people said the same exact things when XP came out.

People hated the start menu when windows 95 came out, now they demand it back. Collectively people are stupid.

 

[WiiCube_2013]

People hated the start menu when windows 95 came out, now they demand it back. Collectively people are stupid.

Where'd you get those statistics?

And at the time I was a kid who'd play on NES or pirated carts but also had a Windows 95 computer to play that space rocket game so in that regard I always used the Start Menu.

Man, I remember loving to play the space rocket game it was so much fun even when it'd blow up. lol

 

[TecXero]

Unless I can cut down the GUI to be more like Windows 98 (I like clean and efficient UIs), I'll probably stick to 7.

 

[Vipera]

like saying "why should i switch from my Nokia N8? it still works for texting, even though there are a lot of better options out there!"

You are kidding, right? First of all, you are comparing hardware with software. Second, even if the N8 had the same specs of my Lumia, Why the fuck would I want to choose a vulnerable OS uncapable of stuff like multitasking, good app support and battery optimization? Windows 7 already does everything except apps, which only dumb down a 3.4/4.2Ghz quad-core PC. I also do not experience any slowdown or random errors, which still happened in the Xp era even if you had a premium PC.

I have run windows 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 95, 98, NT4, 2000, XP, Vista, 7, 8, 8.1 & I have played with the preview version of 10. I don't hate any of them and they all have their good points.

I don't understand why you feel that you need to evangelise about how great 7 is, if you want to run it then you are entitled to.
When 10 is released I'll upgrade my computers to it & you won't. I don't need to justify that & neither do you.

I don't get why I should get Windows 10. Really, this isn't a post à la hivemind where people act all dumb to prove a point. I have Windows 7 and I have everything here. What am I missing from 8 and 910? I have a big desktop PC with no issues of loading and stuff.

Good thing I wrote that part to avoid retarded repl--oh.
And, please, let me know the part where I state that I "hate" Windows 10.

 

[smf]

Where'd you get those statistics?

People I worked with, the media etc. If memes had existed back then the start menu would have become one. A lot of people liked the start menu and were quiet, but there were a lot of people that hated the start menu and were vocal about it because they wanted everyone to hate it too. The same thing happens on every Windows upgrade, I am immune.

And, please, let me know the part where I state that I "hate" Windows 10.

And, please, let me know where I state that you "hate" Windows 10.

 

[filfat]

You are kidding, right? First of all, you are comparing hardware with software. Second, even if the N8 had the same specs of my Lumia, Why the fuck would I want to choose a vulnerable OS uncapable of stuff like multitasking, good app support and battery optimization? Windows 7 already does everything except apps, which only dumb down a 3.4/4.2Ghz quad-core PC. I also do not experience any slowdown or random errors, which still happened in the Xp era even if you had a premium PC.

So the fact that Windows 8 boots ALOT faster, has a better way of accessing the installed Application (booth Win8 and Desktop apps), Way more secure And is even faster than XP on XP hardware, and that is just handpicking some things that Windows 8 adds

Anyways, Thumbs up for a fellow Windows Phone user

 

[FAST6191]

Is boot time really such a big deal? It half reminds me of the megahertz wars, possibly even the more recent javascript ones, but seemingly with even less benefit at the end of the day, mostly by virtue of solving an issue that potentially already had workarounds (standby* and hibernate). Certainly it can become unmanageable (no doubt we have all fixed those machines and have startup fiddling tools used as part of the opening foray) but for a well managed install on reasonable hardware of the day it is has never really been bad. The bigger annoyance for me is turning it on to check something and seeing "installing update ?? of silly number, you will have to wait it out".

*I would not be all that shocked to hear the boot time stuff caused some companies to lessen research into idle or "standby" power, or at least stopped them from fixing up drivers when problems arose there. I can only hope the allure of portable devices and server farms compensated.

 

[filfat]

Is boot time really such a big deal? It half reminds me of the megahertz wars, possibly even the more recent javascript ones, but seemingly with even less benefit at the end of the day, mostly by virtue of solving an issue that potentially already had workarounds (standby* and hibernate). Certainly it can become unmanageable (no doubt we have all fixed those machines and have startup fiddling tools used as part of the opening foray) but for a well managed install on reasonable hardware of the day it is has never really been bad. The bigger annoyance for me is turning it on to check something and seeing "installing update ?? of silly number, you will have to wait it out".

*I would not be all that shocked to hear the boot time stuff caused some companies to lessen research into idle or "standby" power, or at least stopped them from fixing up drivers when problems arose there. I can only hope the allure of portable devices and server farms compensated.

Boot time is a big deal when it comes to 3 seconds VS 1.5 minutes.