I have recently switch to Deepin Linux, but now I want to switch to Windows due to problem with software. What are your guys thoughts on Windows 10 (the latest build)
Windows 10 is great, It require at least 1 gigabyte of RAM and a 1 gigahertz or higher processor w/ 16 gigabyte harddisk. It has that Metro theme in the start menu. By the way how are you able to get Linux on your computer?
@Winworldpc Fan 9000 said:
Windows 10 is great, It require at least 1 gigabyte of RAM and a 1 gigahertz or higher processor w/ 16 gigabyte harddisk. It has that Metro theme in the start menu. By the way how are you able to get Linux on your computer?
When I had Windows, I chosen a Linux Distro, then burned onto a USB drive using Rufus. It switched back to Windows because software was updating in Linux. Thanks for letting me know how Windows is going along, but I’m not a big fan of the Metro them or the start menu layout, but I know how to get around that.
He probably thinks that Windows 10 is still the steaming turd that we all knew it as. I'm sceptical if it even has improved since its original release, mind you...
@Bry89 said:
He probably thinks that Windows 10 is still the steaming turd that we all knew it as. I'm sceptical if it even has improved since its original release, mind you...
Oh, It’s pretty stable, starts up fast, program load fast. It’s preety good.
It would only be "good" if it does away with the other crap, like forced updates and that godawful Start Menu with ads and such. Then again, there's always the LTSB version to have a try at, that was mentioned here before.
@Bry89 said:
He probably thinks that Windows 10 is still the steaming turd that we all knew it as. I'm sceptical if it even has improved since its original release, mind you...
Oh, It’s pretty stable, starts up fast, program load fast. It’s preety good.
Well, even if so, the above is to consider, and the complete lack of privacy!
LITERALLY EVERYTHING YOU DO CAN BE MONITORED AND/OR RECORDED!
@HorseBatteryStaple said:
Well, even if so, the above is to consider, and the complete lack of privacy!
LITERALLY EVERYTHING YOU DO CAN BE MONITORED AND/OR RECORDED!
While it's never been proven with 100% certainty what exactly is sent to MS in the telemetry data (they've given more information over time but not everything), if anything that created privacy issues was really going on someone would have probably found it by now and blown it wide open. They aren't likely to be doing anything that Google/Apple/Facebook/Whatever else aren't also doing with their products / your information.
That said, I still use 8.1 and actually prefer it over 10. On my main PC I installed StartisBack and installed a 7 theme, so I get the enhancements that are worth upgrading for and none of the downsides. I've also got 8.1 machines that I just keep the start screen on, it doesn't really bother me on lesser used machines.
10 feels kinda bloated, so many features tacked on that really don't seem needed. I'm getting over the lack of control for updates, I mean I typically just install everything when a previous OS offers them....
@HorseBatteryStaple said:
Well, even if so, the above is to consider, and the complete lack of privacy!
LITERALLY EVERYTHING YOU DO CAN BE MONITORED AND/OR RECORDED!
While it's never been proven with 100% certainty what exactly is sent to MS in the telemetry data (they've given more information over time but not everything), if anything that created privacy issues was really going on someone would have probably found it by now and blown it wide open. They aren't likely to be doing anything that Google/Apple/Facebook/Whatever else aren't also doing with their products / your information.
That said, I still use 8.1 and actually prefer it over 10. On my main PC I installed StartisBack and installed a 7 theme, so I get the enhancements that are worth upgrading for and none of the downsides. I've also got 8.1 machines that I just keep the start screen on, it doesn't really bother me on lesser used machines.
10 feels kinda bloated, so many features tacked on that really don't seem needed. I'm getting over the lack of control for updates, I mean I typically just install everything when a previous OS offers them....
As Microsoft updates Windows 10 more and more the gay ads and software seems to go away. And plus you can uninstall them if you like.
I've noticed more apps coming by default with each build and since they are provisioned apps they require a few extra steps to fully remove, it's these useless things bundled with the OS that I don't care for.
@Bry89 said:
He probably thinks that Windows 10 is still the steaming turd that we all knew it as. I'm sceptical if it even has improved since its original release, mind you...
Oh, It’s pretty stable, starts up fast, program load fast. It’s preety good.
Well, even if so, the above is to consider, and the complete lack of privacy!
LITERALLY EVERYTHING YOU DO CAN BE MONITORED AND/OR RECORDED!
Like I’ll ever use OS/2. Linux is already a nightmare. I have no background in OS/2 (although I am kinda interested running in a VM)
@HorseBatteryStaple said:
Well, even if so, the above is to consider, and the complete lack of privacy!
LITERALLY EVERYTHING YOU DO CAN BE MONITORED AND/OR RECORDED!
They aren't likely to be doing anything that Google/Apple/Facebook/Whatever else aren't also doing with their products / your information.
Windows 10 sucks! I'll put it in a list for the reasons why.
1.) flatter Metro UI instead of Vista/7 Windows Aero (personal, I know, but a more advanced UI is always better)
2.) start menu with useless live tiles
3.) bloated with useless Windows Store apps: the Windows Store, Cortana, etc.
4.) un-intuitive split between Settings and Control Panel - keep it all in the good Win32 Control Panel
5.) WINDOWS 10 S!!!! There is no good reason to buy Windows 10 S just like there's no good reason to buy a ChromeBook. It's useless, with no support for non-Store apps.
6.) telemetry from Microsoft - they track you, with keyloggers, and tell MS what programs you use -- Cortana, like Siri, Alexa, and the other assistants, send what you say to them (and possibly other conversations) to MS; all data processing is server-side
7.) forced updates
Fake reasons to upgrade to Windows 10:
1.) Virtual Desktops. NO!!! Support for it has existed since Windows XP, and using the SysInternals utility or third party solutions, you can enable it
2.) Cortana. NO!!! Useless, invades privacy.
3.) Windows Store. NO!!! Fills the HD with junk.
4.) Microsoft Edge - under the hood, it still has a bit too much in common with Internet Explorer. Dropping ActiveX is great, but Edge is too slow on weaker computers than Firefox or Chrome (or especially the Atom/WinXP build of Pale Moon)
5.) more secure. NO!!! With intelligence and a good antivirus (Microsoft Security Essentials is my favorite), you won't get viruses.
Plus, there is no advantage over Windows 7/8.1. I hate out-of-box 8.1, but with some programs, you can reenable the start menu and Windows Aero to make it like Win7.
If an argument against moving to Windows 10 involves appearance, then you must have been living under a rock. There are tweaks that exist such as aero glass, icon swappers, and more to make it more "fancy" just like with 8/.1. An OS shouldn't revolve completely around appearance.
If an argument against moving to Windows 10 involves bringing up editions such S, which I have yet to see in person, then some consideration must be made for the others such as LTSB and Enterprise.
Download one of said editions, find a way to "make it work," and you can disable the fluff you mentioned such as telemetry, live tiles, etc. Actually, some of those can be disable on the more public editions.
And you can still get viruses with antivirus and good internet practice. Just ask browser exploits. Hell, there was one on even IOS which claims to jailbreak your phone, install some telemetry virus, and track away.
I will say, the split between metro settings and control panel is assinine. Pick one or the other Microsoft, and if both must be kept at least make them equal in terms of control.
Sure I like to beat down 10, and I still do. But at least consider some facts, something people seem to do less of today.
Windows 10 has become pretty heavy: About the first half of 2017, I installed Windows 10 Anniversary update in my Pentium 4 machine, it even installed several updates (Which I didn't bother for). It ran really smooth, and with the drivers installed, it was pretty usable as an Internet-Of Things machine, I mean you could access YouTube, Facebook and WinWorldPC and so on very well. I decided to install several lightweight freeware programs which ran just fine. I had a very good experience with Windows 10 Anniversary update (Compared with Windows 10 RTM which run slow and got very inefficient). But nor Windows 10 RTM is comparable with Windows 10 Fall Creators Update: It just took about 1 or 2 hours (Compared to the 1/2 or 1 hours of the Anniversary Update) to install and get to the desktop. (Even I had to disconnect and reconnect the Power because it got freezed). Then, finally, the desktop, awaiting to open the start menu, but wait, the menu got irresponsive? I click it and nothing happens! Let's task manager!, Wait, isn't the task manager now bloated too? OMFG! Let's restart manually. Aaaand, the desktop... ...again. This update just made it all worse than Windows 10 RTM, it's pretty irresponsive, the telemetry crap installs apps and I can't disable it because of the first, Microsoft Update 'eats' all my very limited 5 mbps internet, and takes a LOT to boot (I had to disble the new boot manager and set it to legacy). And the shutdown is as same as slow. I think Windows 10 has became more exigent than the specified specs, I have a Pentium 4 2.93@Ghz, 1 GB of RAM, like 100 GB of 232 GB of free space, and just the required for Windows 10, but it seems it wants the double requirements. I think the 'minium requirements' of Windows 10 are pretty far from the real ones.
The automatic updates is one thing Microsoft messed up on. My desktop is not my phone. Even then, its jailbroken so updates are disabled anyways.
I am especially displeased with microsoft for forcing updates even when metered connection is on. I feel for those who pay for bandwidth.
The fall creators update brings a lot of garbage for the fancy new features it's supposed to bring. So 1gb ram even with rtm is on the verge of begging for paging.
But yeah MS needs to start revising because Windows 10 2 years ago is not windows 10 today with all the stuff tacked on.
@yourepicfailure said:
If an argument against moving to Windows 10 involves appearance, then you must have been living under a rock. There are tweaks that exist such as aero glass, icon swappers, and more to make it more "fancy" just like with 8/.1. An OS shouldn't revolve completely around appearance.
If an argument against moving to Windows 10 involves bringing up editions such S, which I have yet to see in person, then some consideration must be made for the others such as LTSB and Enterprise.
Download one of said editions, find a way to "make it work," and you can disable the fluff you mentioned such as telemetry, live tiles, etc. Actually, some of those can be disable on the more public editions.
And you can still get viruses with antivirus and good internet practice. Just ask browser exploits. Hell, there was one on even IOS which claims to jailbreak your phone, install some telemetry virus, and track away.
I will say, the split between metro settings and control panel is assinine. Pick one or the other Microsoft, and if both must be kept at least make them equal in terms of control.
Sure I like to beat down 10, and I still do. But at least consider some facts, something people seem to do less of today.
Have you ever even used 10?
Yes, I have used 10, and hated it. You do have good points, that I'd like to respond to.
1.) there are tweaks - yes, I used one, but they cannot fully restore the UI - for example, the window borders are larger in Win10 than 7/8. The appearance of 8 can be restored to 7, but not 10 to 7. However, I do agree with you that appearance is secondary to the operating system. Just helps. Plus, Flip 3D was nice.
2.) You're right. There are the better editions; Home, Pro, Enterprise, etc. But the fact that Windows 10 S (or Windows 10 "Cloud" when it first surfaced in build 15025, one I tried out in January) shows impaired judgement on Microsoft's part - there is no advantage and it is useless
3.) you're right - you can still get viruses even with good practice and antivirus - but Windows 10 dosen't help security much - it's still the same UAC, and Windows Defender in Windows 10 is just re-branded MSE
@SistemaRayoXP said:
Windows 10 has become pretty heavy: About the first half of 2017, I installed Windows 10 Anniversary update in my Pentium 4 machine, it even installed several updates (Which I didn't bother for). It ran really smooth, and with the drivers installed, it was pretty usable as an Internet-Of Things machine, I mean you could access YouTube, Facebook and WinWorldPC and so on very well. I decided to install several lightweight freeware programs which ran just fine. I had a very good experience with Windows 10 Anniversary update (Compared with Windows 10 RTM which run slow and got very inefficient). But nor Windows 10 RTM is comparable with Windows 10 Fall Creators Update: It just took about 1 or 2 hours (Compared to the 1/2 or 1 hours of the Anniversary Update) to install and get to the desktop. (Even I had to disconnect and reconnect the Power because it got freezed). Then, finally, the desktop, awaiting to open the start menu, but wait, the menu got irresponsive? I click it and nothing happens! Let's task manager!, Wait, isn't the task manager now bloated too? OMFG! Let's restart manually. Aaaand, the desktop... ...again. This update just made it all worse than Windows 10 RTM, it's pretty irresponsive, the telemetry crap installs apps and I can't disable it because of the first, Microsoft Update 'eats' all my very limited 5 mbps internet, and takes a LOT to boot (I had to disble the new boot manager and set it to legacy). And the shutdown is as same as slow. I think Windows 10 has became more exigent than the specified specs, I have a Pentium 4 2.93@Ghz, 1 GB of RAM, like 100 GB of 232 GB of free space, and just the required for Windows 10, but it seems it wants the double requirements. I think the 'minium requirements' of Windows 10 are pretty far from the real ones.
You really have a good point. But anything Vista, 7, 8, or 10 (NT 6.x or 10.0) requires at least 2GB of RAM and a dual core processor (Athlon 64 X2 or Pentium Dual Core/Core Duo) to run well in my experience. Vista's minimum requirements were far from usable ones, just like 7/8/10. For such an old box, Windows Embedded POSReady 2009 is really the way to go. It's still supported by Microsoft, but will run a lot of your software.
I like Windows 10. Which I know puts me in the minority. It's faster than 7, and 8... well shit 8 was beyond shit. I'm really loving the Linux subsystem! Although it made stuff like my port of Dynamips to native MinGW redundant, but it's great to have native ELF64 support!
@neozeed said:
I like Windows 10. Which I know puts me in the minority. It's faster than 7, and 8... well shit 8 was beyond shit. I'm really loving the Linux subsystem! Although it made stuff like my port of Dynamips to native MinGW redundant, but it's great to have native ELF64 support!
You have some decent points - Windows 10 does have a Linux subsystem, which is nice, and it is slightly faster than 7/8. But Windows 10 has serious flaws that I think the Linux subsystem and extra speed don't make up for:
Also, you can add a Linux userspace to 7/8 with the various programs like Cygwin, or even a full environment with virtualization (to be fair, you can still do that in 10), and to make 7/8 faster, you can uninstall some of the built-in applications. For example, in Windows 8/8.1, you can uninstall the Metro apps via PowerShell just like in 10, and in both 7/8/8.1, you can turn off Windows Services, or even cut the programs from the install before you install it with programs like 7Lite (or whatever it's called) that let you add and remove programs from the install.wim (I removed IE from my personal "Teal7" build).
Cygwin is way too slow. The Linux subsystem runs actual ELF64 binaries. And at full native speed as I'm not using a VM, nor do I need that terrible cygwin1.dll that is so hacky it's not even funny. Ever since MSYS I've steered so clear from cygwin it's not even funny.
8 not only looks horrible, but it's brain dead by design. They were far too late to the "actually useful browser" tablet Space. Just as Microsoft may have had smartphones back in 2002 the complete lack of attention and follow up sure showed. And 7? It's so out of date it's not even funny. Just like it's SUA, or SFU it's such an ancient BSD fork that was kept secretive for far too long then suddenly abandoned with no replacement until now.
Microsoft has lost so much brain share and so much market space it's unreal. The giant is sick. Windows was the crown jewel, but they ruined it. Now it's office and exchange server. And thanks to office 365 I don't even need an on site exchange server! Oh and the best part is that it's $9.95 a user, which is the same price as Google hosted email and "office", but MS office is way more useful than Google office. Oh and it works in China.
I agree partially with you OldNewComputers, in my personal experience, the post-XP oses like Vista, 7 and 10 trust more in the graphic card, in fact, I can run 7 fairly fine, I can run Chrome and Office, some Halo CE and XP era games. My graphic card is an integrated 256 MB ATI Radeon Xpress 200 Series which runs Vista and 7 just fine (And has support for Aero Glass). In fact I felt Windows 10 Anniversary just fine since I feel the most workload of actual Windows 10 is tge integrated crapware. Does anyone remeber those days when you bought a Windows and you knew it would have not any integrated overloading software? I guess everybody in M$ think that the computers are cheap everywhere. They may say the computers are cheapers than 20 years ago, but where I live the cheapest PC in 1998 costed $200 US dollars and now they cost exactly the same, the worst is that these are low spec PCs with 2 GB of RAM and an Intel Celeron. I guess they just think everybody has a gamer PC or an i7 with 40 cores and 256 GB of RAM and 16 TB SSD and a bandwith of 10 GBPS. I know I'm exceding me, but I have a 2006 Prescott with 1 GB of RAM and 5 MBPS speed, and can't get a better PC, and they say the min specs are 1 Ghz processor, a GB of RAM and 16 GB of space, where is the truth that M$ had? I wonder if Steve Ballmer would have made best with Windows, beggining with calling it 9 as first place,
I think this comment is offtopic, but does anyone remember when M$ and Apple were top market and the internet was really empty of intrusive publicity? (Excepting the PopUps, of course)
@SistemaRayoXP said:
I agree partially with you OldNewComputers, in my personal experience, the post-XP oses like Vista, 7 and 10 trust more in the graphic card, in fact, I can run 7 fairly fine, I can run Chrome and Office, some Halo CE and XP era games. My graphic card is an integrated 256 MB ATI Radeon Xpress 200 Series which runs Vista and 7 just fine (And has support for Aero Glass). In fact I felt Windows 10 Anniversary just fine since I feel the most workload of actual Windows 10 is tge integrated crapware. Does anyone remeber those days when you bought a Windows and you knew it would have not any integrated overloading software? I guess everybody in M$ think that the computers are cheap everywhere. They may say the computers are cheapers than 20 years ago, but where I live the cheapest PC in 1998 costed $200 US dollars and now they cost exactly the same, the worst is that these are low spec PCs with 2 GB of RAM and an Intel Celeron. I guess they just think everybody has a gamer PC or an i7 with 40 cores and 256 GB of RAM and 16 TB SSD and a bandwith of 10 GBPS. I know I'm exceding me, but I have a 2006 Prescott with 1 GB of RAM and 5 MBPS speed, and can't get a better PC, and they say the min specs are 1 Ghz processor, a GB of RAM and 16 GB of space, where is the truth that M$ had? I wonder if Steve Ballmer would have made best with Windows, beggining with calling it 9 as first place,
I think this comment is offtopic, but does anyone remember when M$ and Apple were top market and the internet was really empty of intrusive publicity? (Excepting the PopUps, of course)
Windows Vista, 7, 8, 8.1, and 10 all depend on the GPU -- to a point. If you have a decent DX9-class WDDM graphics processor (with at least 64MB of video memory, your Radeon would suffice), there is enough power to move the video rendering load from the CPU to GPU via the Desktop Window Manager. Other than that, it depends on the RAM and CPU. RAM I still recommend at 2GB even for basic use, 1GB stalls, and CPU should be dual-core. It will be a tad slow on an Athlon 64 X2, but fine on a Pentium Dual-Core or Core Duo/Core 2 Duo. (single-core Celeron or Sempron would slow to a crawl)
@neozeed said:
Cygwin is way too slow. The Linux subsystem runs actual ELF64 binaries. And at full native speed as I'm not using a VM, nor do I need that terrible cygwin1.dll that is so hacky it's not even funny. Ever since MSYS I've steered so clear from cygwin it's not even funny.
8 not only looks horrible, but it's brain dead by design. They were far too late to the "actually useful browser" tablet Space. Just as Microsoft may have had smartphones back in 2002 the complete lack of attention and follow up sure showed. And 7? It's so out of date it's not even funny. Just like it's SUA, or SFU it's such an ancient BSD fork that was kept secretive for far too long then suddenly abandoned with no replacement until now.
Microsoft has lost so much brain share and so much market space it's unreal. The giant is sick. Windows was the crown jewel, but they ruined it. Now it's office and exchange server. And thanks to office 365 I don't even need an on site exchange server! Oh and the best part is that it's $9.95 a user, which is the same price as Google hosted email and "office", but MS office is way more useful than Google office. Oh and it works in China.
What exactly about 7 is so out of date? It works with all modern software and regularly receives security updates. The design of it looks like any other Windows system (except 8) and it works on modern hardware just fine (other than Micro$oft needlessly disabling Windows Update on new CPUs just so they can force Windows 10).
Exactly, WIndows 7 isn't out of date: it has a good market share (As for today, it's the "same" for Windows 10, with a difference of 0.30). I'm amazed how WIn10 which was initially rejected by much PC users, while today has a VERY significant market share of 41.65 (From all the Windows versions). I remember how in 2012 XP was still a widely used OS, even on 2013 and 2014, but bit by bit, it got less and less market share. And the wide acceptation of WIndows 10 "has become a problem" for Win7. What I meant is that WIndows XP was in the same way that Windows 7 is, with its succesor gaining more and more market share, then lowing its own numbers until getting unsupported, and I don't like when an OS gets unsupported, and I'd like that 7 would get an extended support like did XP, but it won't if it has lower market share
Offtopic
Something amazing is that XP is still surviving! (The OS who negates to die) with a Windows market share of 3.6, over the Win8 and WinVista numbers (Such market share could be little, but even with little quantities means at least thousands, if not millions of XP PCs)
Well, XP (SP2 & 3) was/is a simple, fast and stable OS. It also had a huge install base from everyone upgrading from the 9x series and due to the long amount of time between XP and the release of Vista. And we all know how Vista was received...
I still use XP on a couple machines (and VMs), and 7 is the last version of Windows I care about for use on my devices. 8 and 10 both suck in different ways and I won't use them on any of my things. I use linux now.
Comments
Windows 10 is great, It require at least 1 gigabyte of RAM and a 1 gigahertz or higher processor w/ 16 gigabyte harddisk. It has that Metro theme in the start menu. By the way how are you able to get Linux on your computer?
When I had Windows, I chosen a Linux Distro, then burned onto a USB drive using Rufus. It switched back to Windows because software was updating in Linux. Thanks for letting me know how Windows is going along, but I’m not a big fan of the Metro them or the start menu layout, but I know how to get around that.
ok thanks, did you switched back to windows 10 then?
Yes, just yesterday I did.
I am very sorry for you.
Well good luck is all I can offer...
Wait... What do you mean?
He probably thinks that Windows 10 is still the steaming turd that we all knew it as. I'm sceptical if it even has improved since its original release, mind you...
Oh, It’s pretty stable, starts up fast, program load fast. It’s preety good.
It would only be "good" if it does away with the other crap, like forced updates and that godawful Start Menu with ads and such. Then again, there's always the LTSB version to have a try at, that was mentioned here before.
Well, even if so, the above is to consider, and the complete lack of privacy!
LITERALLY EVERYTHING YOU DO CAN BE MONITORED AND/OR RECORDED!
While it's never been proven with 100% certainty what exactly is sent to MS in the telemetry data (they've given more information over time but not everything), if anything that created privacy issues was really going on someone would have probably found it by now and blown it wide open. They aren't likely to be doing anything that Google/Apple/Facebook/Whatever else aren't also doing with their products / your information.
That said, I still use 8.1 and actually prefer it over 10. On my main PC I installed StartisBack and installed a 7 theme, so I get the enhancements that are worth upgrading for and none of the downsides. I've also got 8.1 machines that I just keep the start screen on, it doesn't really bother me on lesser used machines.
10 feels kinda bloated, so many features tacked on that really don't seem needed. I'm getting over the lack of control for updates, I mean I typically just install everything when a previous OS offers them....
As Microsoft updates Windows 10 more and more the gay ads and software seems to go away. And plus you can uninstall them if you like.
I've noticed more apps coming by default with each build and since they are provisioned apps they require a few extra steps to fully remove, it's these useless things bundled with the OS that I don't care for.
Like I’ll ever use OS/2. Linux is already a nightmare. I have no background in OS/2 (although I am kinda interested running in a VM)
I don't use FB/Google/Apple, so =P
Windows 10 sucks! I'll put it in a list for the reasons why.
1.) flatter Metro UI instead of Vista/7 Windows Aero (personal, I know, but a more advanced UI is always better)
2.) start menu with useless live tiles
3.) bloated with useless Windows Store apps: the Windows Store, Cortana, etc.
4.) un-intuitive split between Settings and Control Panel - keep it all in the good Win32 Control Panel
5.) WINDOWS 10 S!!!! There is no good reason to buy Windows 10 S just like there's no good reason to buy a ChromeBook. It's useless, with no support for non-Store apps.
6.) telemetry from Microsoft - they track you, with keyloggers, and tell MS what programs you use -- Cortana, like Siri, Alexa, and the other assistants, send what you say to them (and possibly other conversations) to MS; all data processing is server-side
7.) forced updates
Fake reasons to upgrade to Windows 10:
1.) Virtual Desktops. NO!!! Support for it has existed since Windows XP, and using the SysInternals utility or third party solutions, you can enable it
2.) Cortana. NO!!! Useless, invades privacy.
3.) Windows Store. NO!!! Fills the HD with junk.
4.) Microsoft Edge - under the hood, it still has a bit too much in common with Internet Explorer. Dropping ActiveX is great, but Edge is too slow on weaker computers than Firefox or Chrome (or especially the Atom/WinXP build of Pale Moon)
5.) more secure. NO!!! With intelligence and a good antivirus (Microsoft Security Essentials is my favorite), you won't get viruses.
Plus, there is no advantage over Windows 7/8.1. I hate out-of-box 8.1, but with some programs, you can reenable the start menu and Windows Aero to make it like Win7.
If an argument against moving to Windows 10 involves appearance, then you must have been living under a rock. There are tweaks that exist such as aero glass, icon swappers, and more to make it more "fancy" just like with 8/.1. An OS shouldn't revolve completely around appearance.
If an argument against moving to Windows 10 involves bringing up editions such S, which I have yet to see in person, then some consideration must be made for the others such as LTSB and Enterprise.
Download one of said editions, find a way to "make it work," and you can disable the fluff you mentioned such as telemetry, live tiles, etc. Actually, some of those can be disable on the more public editions.
And you can still get viruses with antivirus and good internet practice. Just ask browser exploits. Hell, there was one on even IOS which claims to jailbreak your phone, install some telemetry virus, and track away.
I will say, the split between metro settings and control panel is assinine. Pick one or the other Microsoft, and if both must be kept at least make them equal in terms of control.
Sure I like to beat down 10, and I still do. But at least consider some facts, something people seem to do less of today.
Have you ever even used 10?
Windows 10 has become pretty heavy: About the first half of 2017, I installed Windows 10 Anniversary update in my Pentium 4 machine, it even installed several updates (Which I didn't bother for). It ran really smooth, and with the drivers installed, it was pretty usable as an Internet-Of Things machine, I mean you could access YouTube, Facebook and WinWorldPC and so on very well. I decided to install several lightweight freeware programs which ran just fine. I had a very good experience with Windows 10 Anniversary update (Compared with Windows 10 RTM which run slow and got very inefficient). But nor Windows 10 RTM is comparable with Windows 10 Fall Creators Update: It just took about 1 or 2 hours (Compared to the 1/2 or 1 hours of the Anniversary Update) to install and get to the desktop. (Even I had to disconnect and reconnect the Power because it got freezed). Then, finally, the desktop, awaiting to open the start menu, but wait, the menu got irresponsive? I click it and nothing happens! Let's task manager!, Wait, isn't the task manager now bloated too? OMFG! Let's restart manually. Aaaand, the desktop... ...again. This update just made it all worse than Windows 10 RTM, it's pretty irresponsive, the telemetry crap installs apps and I can't disable it because of the first, Microsoft Update 'eats' all my very limited 5 mbps internet, and takes a LOT to boot (I had to disble the new boot manager and set it to legacy). And the shutdown is as same as slow. I think Windows 10 has became more exigent than the specified specs, I have a Pentium 4 2.93@Ghz, 1 GB of RAM, like 100 GB of 232 GB of free space, and just the required for Windows 10, but it seems it wants the double requirements. I think the 'minium requirements' of Windows 10 are pretty far from the real ones.
The automatic updates is one thing Microsoft messed up on. My desktop is not my phone. Even then, its jailbroken so updates are disabled anyways.
I am especially displeased with microsoft for forcing updates even when metered connection is on. I feel for those who pay for bandwidth.
The fall creators update brings a lot of garbage for the fancy new features it's supposed to bring. So 1gb ram even with rtm is on the verge of begging for paging.
But yeah MS needs to start revising because Windows 10 2 years ago is not windows 10 today with all the stuff tacked on.
Yes, I have used 10, and hated it. You do have good points, that I'd like to respond to.
1.) there are tweaks - yes, I used one, but they cannot fully restore the UI - for example, the window borders are larger in Win10 than 7/8. The appearance of 8 can be restored to 7, but not 10 to 7. However, I do agree with you that appearance is secondary to the operating system. Just helps. Plus, Flip 3D was nice.
2.) You're right. There are the better editions; Home, Pro, Enterprise, etc. But the fact that Windows 10 S (or Windows 10 "Cloud" when it first surfaced in build 15025, one I tried out in January) shows impaired judgement on Microsoft's part - there is no advantage and it is useless
3.) you're right - you can still get viruses even with good practice and antivirus - but Windows 10 dosen't help security much - it's still the same UAC, and Windows Defender in Windows 10 is just re-branded MSE
You really have a good point. But anything Vista, 7, 8, or 10 (NT 6.x or 10.0) requires at least 2GB of RAM and a dual core processor (Athlon 64 X2 or Pentium Dual Core/Core Duo) to run well in my experience. Vista's minimum requirements were far from usable ones, just like 7/8/10. For such an old box, Windows Embedded POSReady 2009 is really the way to go. It's still supported by Microsoft, but will run a lot of your software.
I like Windows 10. Which I know puts me in the minority. It's faster than 7, and 8... well shit 8 was beyond shit. I'm really loving the Linux subsystem! Although it made stuff like my port of Dynamips to native MinGW redundant, but it's great to have native ELF64 support!
You have some decent points - Windows 10 does have a Linux subsystem, which is nice, and it is slightly faster than 7/8. But Windows 10 has serious flaws that I think the Linux subsystem and extra speed don't make up for:
Also, you can add a Linux userspace to 7/8 with the various programs like Cygwin, or even a full environment with virtualization (to be fair, you can still do that in 10), and to make 7/8 faster, you can uninstall some of the built-in applications. For example, in Windows 8/8.1, you can uninstall the Metro apps via PowerShell just like in 10, and in both 7/8/8.1, you can turn off Windows Services, or even cut the programs from the install before you install it with programs like 7Lite (or whatever it's called) that let you add and remove programs from the install.wim (I removed IE from my personal "Teal7" build).
Cygwin is way too slow. The Linux subsystem runs actual ELF64 binaries. And at full native speed as I'm not using a VM, nor do I need that terrible cygwin1.dll that is so hacky it's not even funny. Ever since MSYS I've steered so clear from cygwin it's not even funny.
8 not only looks horrible, but it's brain dead by design. They were far too late to the "actually useful browser" tablet Space. Just as Microsoft may have had smartphones back in 2002 the complete lack of attention and follow up sure showed. And 7? It's so out of date it's not even funny. Just like it's SUA, or SFU it's such an ancient BSD fork that was kept secretive for far too long then suddenly abandoned with no replacement until now.
Microsoft has lost so much brain share and so much market space it's unreal. The giant is sick. Windows was the crown jewel, but they ruined it. Now it's office and exchange server. And thanks to office 365 I don't even need an on site exchange server! Oh and the best part is that it's $9.95 a user, which is the same price as Google hosted email and "office", but MS office is way more useful than Google office. Oh and it works in China.
I agree partially with you OldNewComputers, in my personal experience, the post-XP oses like Vista, 7 and 10 trust more in the graphic card, in fact, I can run 7 fairly fine, I can run Chrome and Office, some Halo CE and XP era games. My graphic card is an integrated 256 MB ATI Radeon Xpress 200 Series which runs Vista and 7 just fine (And has support for Aero Glass). In fact I felt Windows 10 Anniversary just fine since I feel the most workload of actual Windows 10 is tge integrated crapware. Does anyone remeber those days when you bought a Windows and you knew it would have not any integrated overloading software? I guess everybody in M$ think that the computers are cheap everywhere. They may say the computers are cheapers than 20 years ago, but where I live the cheapest PC in 1998 costed $200 US dollars and now they cost exactly the same, the worst is that these are low spec PCs with 2 GB of RAM and an Intel Celeron. I guess they just think everybody has a gamer PC or an i7 with 40 cores and 256 GB of RAM and 16 TB SSD and a bandwith of 10 GBPS. I know I'm exceding me, but I have a 2006 Prescott with 1 GB of RAM and 5 MBPS speed, and can't get a better PC, and they say the min specs are 1 Ghz processor, a GB of RAM and 16 GB of space, where is the truth that M$ had? I wonder if Steve Ballmer would have made best with Windows, beggining with calling it 9 as first place,
I think this comment is offtopic, but does anyone remember when M$ and Apple were top market and the internet was really empty of intrusive publicity? (Excepting the PopUps, of course)
Windows Vista, 7, 8, 8.1, and 10 all depend on the GPU -- to a point. If you have a decent DX9-class WDDM graphics processor (with at least 64MB of video memory, your Radeon would suffice), there is enough power to move the video rendering load from the CPU to GPU via the Desktop Window Manager. Other than that, it depends on the RAM and CPU. RAM I still recommend at 2GB even for basic use, 1GB stalls, and CPU should be dual-core. It will be a tad slow on an Athlon 64 X2, but fine on a Pentium Dual-Core or Core Duo/Core 2 Duo. (single-core Celeron or Sempron would slow to a crawl)
What exactly about 7 is so out of date? It works with all modern software and regularly receives security updates. The design of it looks like any other Windows system (except 8) and it works on modern hardware just fine (other than Micro$oft needlessly disabling Windows Update on new CPUs just so they can force Windows 10).
Exactly, WIndows 7 isn't out of date: it has a good market share (As for today, it's the "same" for Windows 10, with a difference of 0.30). I'm amazed how WIn10 which was initially rejected by much PC users, while today has a VERY significant market share of 41.65 (From all the Windows versions). I remember how in 2012 XP was still a widely used OS, even on 2013 and 2014, but bit by bit, it got less and less market share. And the wide acceptation of WIndows 10 "has become a problem" for Win7. What I meant is that WIndows XP was in the same way that Windows 7 is, with its succesor gaining more and more market share, then lowing its own numbers until getting unsupported, and I don't like when an OS gets unsupported, and I'd like that 7 would get an extended support like did XP, but it won't if it has lower market share
Offtopic
Something amazing is that XP is still surviving! (The OS who negates to die) with a Windows market share of 3.6, over the Win8 and WinVista numbers (Such market share could be little, but even with little quantities means at least thousands, if not millions of XP PCs)
Well, XP (SP2 & 3) was/is a simple, fast and stable OS. It also had a huge install base from everyone upgrading from the 9x series and due to the long amount of time between XP and the release of Vista. And we all know how Vista was received...
I still use XP on a couple machines (and VMs), and 7 is the last version of Windows I care about for use on my devices. 8 and 10 both suck in different ways and I won't use them on any of my things. I use linux now.
I personally never liked Windows 10, and I only see Windows 10 getting worse over time and not better.