Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Microsoft rumored to be preparing to make Windows 8.1 freeware

This is topic Microsoft rumored to be preparing to make Windows 8.1 freeware in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=006965

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-01-2014, 12:22 AM:

Story in the Daily Wail

Executive summary: Microsoft is said to be considering giving away a free version of Windows 8.1, which is to be called "Windows with Bing", along with restoring the proper start menu and desktop (in effect, relegating the "Metro" screen to an optional extra that desktop users could ignore altogether), in an attempt to persuade more people to upgrade from earlier versions (and I suspect, to stem the loss of desktop market share to MacOS and Linux).

This strikes me as yet another blunder. My understanding is that around 99% of copies of Windows are supplied preloaded onto PCs, and that only a tiny minority of geeky users would ever try to upgrade an existing computer to a later version. Therefore if MS did start to give away Windows, the main beneficiaries would be the big hardware manufacturers, and I feel safe in predicting that they would not pass those cost savings on to their customers! After all the bad reviews Windows 8 has had, I suspect that only a tiny minority of owners of W7 computers would contemplate trying to install 8.1 on their machines, even if it was offered to them for free: not least because that tiny minority are precisely the people who will have educated themselves as to how bad W8 is.

The other thing that strikes me as ominous is that if they are going to produce a specific free version that is separate from, but marketed alongside the paid-for one, this says to me that the free version will probably be laden with crapware, locked down in various irritating ways (e.g. it won't allow you to install any browser besides IE) ... you name it.

I can't believe that they're seriously contemplating doing this. But there again, I couldn't believe that they'd produce a version of Windows with some of its most popular, intuitive and easiest to use features stripped out and replaced with ones that are the exact opposite. But they did.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 03-01-2014, 08:49 AM:

Is there any serious market loss to Mac or Linux? Perhaps just enough to keep them from being labeled a monopolist.

Too bad they don't just sell XP to someone who, for a small fee, could keep security patches coming.

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 03-01-2014, 01:54 PM:

The problem with Windows is not an exodus to Mac or Linux...it's more that people just don't see a need for a new operating system, and they don't like what they see in Windows 8.

Just read an article this week from a Windows expert. His living is made by writing books on the subject. He says he can not recommend Windows 8 to either experienced or inexperienced users.

I was seriously looking at buying a new computer this week, but am holding off because I do NOT want Windows 8 as my main system. There are a few manufacturers out there who will install Windows 7, but not on the configuration I was considering.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-01-2014, 02:19 PM:

My laptop (2007 vintage) is now getting a bit sluggish, and so I'm looking into a new one. The bottom line - the current range of models simply aren't available with 7. I even went into Office Depot and tried to haggle with an assistant there. She was prepared to negotiate on all sorts of things, but not a downgrade to W7. Everyone asks that, but sorry, she can't offer it.

Basically, I'm either going to have to wait until MS sees sense and does a version of 8 that gets rid of the tile screen shite totally for its desktop/conventional laptop machine configuration (i.e. non-touchscreen), or buy one with 8 preinstalled, shell out another $100 for an OEM 7 license and install it myself. I'll probably give it another couple of months before deciding.

I have 7 and Ubuntu installed on separate partitions on my computers, and use Ubuntu most of the time. However, there are a few things that I just need Windows for (Adobe CS, mainly), and therefore abandoning Windows altogether isn't an option for me, annoyingly.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-01-2014, 02:30 PM:

I think Microsoft is the only one who actually still SELLS their OS, which is stupid. Apple offers their OS for free. Linux, well, yeah it's always been free. Now MS looks like a bunch of retards selling an OS weaker than the other two. Making it free is a good way to cub some of that. I think more people would upgrade if MS didn't release a new OS only once every 4 or 5 years or so. New OS from Apple happens about every year. New OS from Linux happens probably twice every day. What's even worse about MS is that their OS is friggin' EXPENSIVE! And they offer a whole bunch of different flavors like Home, Student, Employee, Server, Enterprise, Professional, Ex wife, etc etc etc etc. WHY? There should be a standard edition and maybe a more powerful server edition and that's it.

Also Windows 8 sucks nobody wants that.

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 03-01-2014, 02:41 PM:

Have you (i.e. Leo)considered Virtual Box for your Microsoft program needs? I'm currently using it to play with the RHEL 7 beta, which I installed a few days ago. This computer actually runs Centos 6, but with Virtual Box I can boot RHEL 7 and run it (the whole operating system) in a window on my regular desktop. Using the desktop, installing and running programs works just the same as if it was running on a real (non-virtual) computer.

You can actually install just about any operating system into a Virtual Box image; just tell Virtual Box where to find the install disk (iso, whatever), boot 'er up and install. The virtual hard drive is just a (big) file on your actual hard drive, so if you want to back it up or give someone else a copy of your virtual drive, just make a copy of the file.

Virtual Box is absolutely free, too.

Incidentally, if anyone is interested in my impressions of RHEL 7, here they are:

I could live with Gnome 3 if I really had to but I don't like its rigidity. I'm also not a fan of the "overview" system for selecting programs and documents. I think the Gnome 3 guys have spent too much time looking at Android tablets (especially with gnome-clock and the like).

I tried KDE 4 and while it's a bit closer to what I'm used to in a desktop it's not what I want either. I had all sorts of hassle with setting up plasmoids and even found one (Alarm Clock) that would somehow cause all of my desktop panels to disappear every time I dropped it onto a panel. Plus, oddly for a system that appears to be configurable in all kinds of ways, there doesn't appear to be any way to put a usable drawer onto a panel to hold a selection of programs. I kind of managed to create one to hold documents and the like, but then there was no way to change its icon to anything other than a standard folder.

Ultimately, KDE 4 didn't turn my crank either.

I also installed the Mate desktop from the Fedora 19 repo onto my RHEL 7 test image and finally I had a desktop that (a) I understand, (b) looks normal, and (c) I can configure so I can spend time doing what I do and not fighting with the desktop. The basic graphic desktop concept and layout hasn't really changed since the days of CDE, Amiga and Atari ST, and I really don't understand why the Gnome guys (and KDE folks to a somewhat lesser extent) suddenly think it needs a complete re-design. Sometimes stuff that hasn't changed in years isn't stagnant; it just works. The basic layout of the drivers seat, steering wheel and pedals in cars hasn't changed in years either and for much the same reason. It works, and everyone who needs to operate it understands the layout.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned in what I expect to see on my computers, but after giving Gnome 3 and KDE 4 what I consider to be a fair trial, I think I'm merely sane.

My final (and possibly best) desktop trial was Cinnamon. Now that looks pretty damn cool. I'm thinking that it looks like a reasonable compromise between the old-style desktop and the new-fangled thing that I don't really understand.

The only thing that it seems to be missing (that I've noticed so far) is panel drawers. I want to have a number of drawers on my panel and that doesn't seem to be possible for some reason. If I ultimately decide to use Cinnamon I may have to write a few launcher-menu applications for myself so I can add them to the panel. Kind of the long way 'round the bush if I have to do that, though.

My ultimate choice of "modern desktop" will probably depend on what the EPEL guys decide to package; so far it looks like they're planning to provide Cinnamon for sure and Mate remains to be determined.

Ultimately I won't be forced onto Gnome 3 or KDE 4, which suits me fine.

As to the rest of the RHEL 7 beta release, what I've seen of it so far looks pretty cool, but I haven't really put it through its paces yet since I've been fiddling around with desktops up to this point.

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 03-01-2014, 04:11 PM:

Well. I am 100% Linux. Pretty much all the Windows programs I use can run through Wine. I have restored a few laptops now that were running Windows 8. No one that I know likes Windows 8. I don't think they will even be able to give it away for free. My impression here is that there must be something built in to Windows 8 that the U.S. and other governments really like (if you know what I mean). Microsoft will probably get a kickback for this.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 03-01-2014, 06:40 PM:

Like Mark, I've been considering a new laptop, but won't buy one because of Windows 8. I haven't really looked into Windows 8, but from what I've seen of the interface, I'm not interested. I use Windows 7 on my office computer, home computer, and laptop. I am perfectly happy with Windows 7. Like XP, it seems to be stable OS which is very easy to use once you get used to the differences from XP.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-01-2014, 06:58 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
I think Microsoft is the only one who actually still SELLS their OS, which is stupid. Apple offers their OS for free. Linux, well, yeah it's always been free.

Wait a minute...when did the MacOS become free? I missed that one. It never used to be. I know the version I'm running now (10.6.8...aka Snow Leopard) wasn't free. I checked the Apple store and sure enough 10.9 "Mavericks" is listed as free. Then again, people are bitching about it too if you read the reviews.

Win 7 has been about $100 to $150 depending on where you shop and if you want Home or Pro...I don't think that is an unreasonable price for the software that runs the computer and for a company that has to support it for years.

I have definitely played with Linux a bit...it is free and not worth a penny more to me. It is the most annoying thing I've worked with. If Joe doesn't like the variations of Win 7 ... he must hate all of the different "Distros" of Linux with the various GUIs. I've played with several...Ubuntu, of course, and a couple of the other distros. On top of Ubuntu I've played with the likes of LXDE and Mint for GUIs to get away from the "Unity" desktop Ubuntu comes with...they all suck though Mint seemed to have nicest desktop...the programs I was working with just didn't work with Mint...but they did with Ubuntu.

I guess people just like free and expect others to work for free for them. How does one make a quality product and provide support for it for free? I understand hobbies and people doing things that they love doing for free...that is great but one cannot support themselves on free. Ubuntu comes with a bunch of free programs...the Libre Office suite (a MS-Office knockoff) Firefox (many people's favorite browser) and several others. It comes with what you need to get going. I've been using it for a couple of years and still find it very frustrating. But hey...if all I wanted to do is surf the web and use knock off spreadsheets and documents for free...I guess it would be great. The fact of the matter is, software developers...particularly specialized software...they don't really test it or test it fully on Linux...they seem to just port it there if they have a Linux version at all.

Those that love it...more power to you...it just isn't for me (except in purpose built applications...where I think its real strong suite is).

I find that the MAC OS remains the most productive over the years and I have always had Macs for personal use at home (well since 1987 though I did work on an original 1984 Mac right after it came out because my boss at the time bought one).

I use Windows for work because that is what the programs are written for. I've used MS-WORD since version 3 on the Mac (1987) so I've been very familiar with it and have rolled with the changes though version 5.1 on the Mac was the best by far in balancing features/speed and layout.

Microsoft seems to change things for the sake of change itself without regard for the grief it causes by not improving the work flow and now requiring knowledgeable people to relearn what they already knew. I guess they are trying to mimic Apple in that they have also reinvented its OS as it has moved along and also moved away from things like floppies and now CDs first but their moves have been more logical and evolutionarily. Rarely has it been ...yesterday we do it only this way...tomorrow we will only do it that way. The biggest change really coming between OS9 and OSX. But as someone that has seen it from the beginning...a 1984 Mac user would be at home pretty quickly in the modern OS...things like the dock (and color) would be some of the bigger differences. Long gone are the "INIT Parades" but I don't know of many that would miss them.

With Windows...the jump from Win 7 to Win 8 is just annoying. We are changing the computers at the office...they will all be Win 7 machines. Win 7 has been a winner for Microsoft...it has generally been quite stable as compared to its predecessors. People familiar with WinXP can normally find things pretty easily in Win 7 though there are some changes. Microsoft should have just run with Win 7 while developing the next big thing and bring it out when it was needed. People don't want to go about changing their OS that regularly.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-01-2014, 07:31 PM:

Here's my 2¢ on Windows 8. It's not as good as Windows 7, but it's not all that bad either once you work past that damned "Metro" front end on it.

We have three computers at my workplace running Win 8 Professional now. Note: we haven't installed the free upgrade to Win 8.1. I'm gun-shy about that, based on some stories I've read about installation issues. Win 8.1 doesn't really restore the "start" button. It just puts a Windows key icon on the desktop task bar. I can already hit the Windows key on the keyboard to jump back and forth between desktop and metro modes.

My work desktop PC runs great with Win 8.1. It boots up very fast, quite a bit faster than my notebook running Win 7 Ultimate. The only hassles I've had to deal with involved networking, not with the other machines running Win 7 or Win XP, but networking between the three machines running Win 8 to make them see each other on the network properly. I also had to deal with an issue in shared file/folder permissions. It wasn't easy to get the OS to have all the files and subfolders in a shared folder to inherit the permissions of that shared folder. With each release of Windows Microsoft makes the networking setup more and more complicated. My suspicion: Microsoft is pulling this shit so IT businesses can make more money doing more service calls setting up people's PCs rather than making so the customers can set them up on their own without calling the fucking Geek Squad or whatever.

In one respect I think it would be a GREAT idea for Microsoft to make its latest version of Windows free to download and install. They ought to do that. Everyone else does.

However, Microsoft is fooling themselves if they think giving away Win 8 will cause lots of people to upgrade out of old but still working PCs. That's not going to happen.

When you buy a new computer you not only have to buy that new computer you must also buy a shit load of new software. Depending on the software you use that could easily double the price of a new PC purchase. Lately Microsoft has been making each new version of Windows very incompatible with older versions of software.

When I got my new work computer a little over a year ago I had to sign up for an Adobe Creative Cloud account. My old CS4 Production Suite software wouldn't run on it. I have Adobe Master Collection CS5.5 on my Win 7 Ultimate notebook and I'm going to keep using that until my notebook bricks itself. CorelDRAW X5 wouldn't run on Win 8, so I had to upgrade to version X6 (which actually doesn't work as well as X5). We had to spend $1000 to upgrade to the latest version of FlexiSign software when my coworker Valorie got her new Win 8 machine, along with getting another Adobe Creative Cloud account.

Customers are wise to this shit. They don't feel like getting bent over a barrel and wallet raped when they have to buy a new computer. We're long into the zone where people no longer see "magic" in new PCs and want to get new computers when the latest CPUs are released. Now people only buy when their old computer breaks and can no longer be fixed. I'm pretty happy to see the smart phone and tablet industry now entering that zone.

If Microsoft wants more people to install whatever latest version of Windows they release it might help if they make that new version of Windows a little more backward compatible. At least Windows XP was pretty good at that.

Posted by Justin Silverstein (Member # 8118) on 03-01-2014, 07:57 PM:

I've always been utterly baffled by all the "Win7 is great, Win8 is terrible!" sentiment that I hear from casual users and professionals alike. It literally makes no sense--Win8 is Win7, with a bunch of speed, stability and security improvements added. The one and only reason to dislike Win8 is the Metro/tile interface, but that can be effectively banished from your computer in a matter of minutes. Just install Classic Shell or any of the similar equivalents, and make sure all your default programs are the non-Metro versions. Done and done-- you'll never see Metro again, and you'll basically be using a souped-up, much-improved Win7. Casual users can certainly be forgiven for not knowing this, but it drives me nuts that professional advice-givers can't grasp it.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-01-2014, 09:46 PM:

On the "MacOS is free" issue, my understanding is that it isn't - rather, the price of the OS is bundled into the price of the computer. Unlike Windows, it simply isn't sold separately from Apple hardware (apart from version upgrades). As with PCs that come bundled with Windows, when you buy an Apple computer, tablet or phone, part of the price is paying for its operating system. The difference is that if you choose to, you can build a computer from the motherboard up using individually sourced components and then buy a Windows license to put on it, but Apple doesn't let you do that with MacOS.

In many ways, Microsoft have a much bigger software engineering challenge than Apple. Apple only need to ensure that their operating system will work on a very small range of hardware, all the components of which they design or select themselves. So there are a small number of compatibility variables, all of which are totally under Apple's control. Microsoft, on the other hand, sells Windows to anybody who wants to buy it for use on a huge potential number of motherboard/processor/peripheral combinations. Furthermore, much of the hardware driver software is written by third parties. Personally I don't think that $100 a license is that unreasonable for the extent of the flexibility and compatibility that gives me, especially for the better versions of Windows (2000, XP and 7).

Justin's points are noted, and I'd certainly have no problem with experimenting with 8 if and when the XP/Vista/7 start menu is available on it, and the tile screen can be totally disabled.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-01-2014, 10:02 PM:

quote: Justin Silverstein
I've always been utterly baffled by all the "Win7 is great, Win8 is terrible!" sentiment that I hear from casual users and professionals alike.

That's incoirrect: Win8 AND Win7 are both terrible....WinXP is great. Except of course for the security issues.

Posted by Justin Silverstein (Member # 8118) on 03-02-2014, 12:18 AM:

Well, liking XP and hating *both* Win7 and 8 is at least consistent, so I can give you that. [Smile]

And, Leo: check out Classic Shell - it's totally free and allows you to do everything you need, including bypassing the Metro mode at startup and bringing back the Start Menu. You can even customize the Start Menu to resemble *any* previous version of Windows, not just Win7.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-02-2014, 12:20 AM:

In my experience, Windows 7 Ultimate is the best version of Windows Microsoft has released to date. I've had ZERO to complain about in using Win7 Ultimate on my Dell XPS notebook computer.

But like Justin said, Win8 is really a great deal like Win7, but with some notable improvements. It does indeed boot faster than Win7; it's practically an instant-on kind of thing if you're using a PC with a solid state cache or SSD. Win8 has some security improvements over Win7. The "Metro" UI is the most obvious turn-off. It only takes clicking the Windows key on the keyboard to jump past the Metro UI into the familiar desktop mode. Or you can go farther by installing Classic Shell. I haven't done that. But I see no problem clicking a key on my keyboard to get into desktop mode.

My biggest complaint with Win8 is the fucking lack of backward compatibility with computer software. If you're running Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Office or basically anything else more than a couple years old you're probably going to be forced into buying the newest version of that application. I think that's a far more serious problem than that damned tiled Metro front end, yet the Metro UI is all I hear the technology press bark about. What about the extra hundreds or thousands of dollars a customer will have to spend on new software when he buys a Windows 8 PC? What about that!!!????

Posted by Justin Silverstein (Member # 8118) on 03-02-2014, 12:32 AM:

Hmm, that's odd. I run lots of old software on Win8 and I've never had a problem. Old versions of Adobe CS and such certainly work. My guess is, whatever the culprit of your compatibility issues may be, it's not the actual Windows 8 kernel. Perhaps you were running Win7 Ultimate 32-bit, and you've upgraded to Win8 64-bit? The transition from 32-bit to 64-bit can certainly hurt compatibility, but in that case you could just use Win8 32-bit and everything you have should run as it did before. Otherwise, if you were in fact on Win7 Ultimate 64-bit, my guess is you've got some driver conflict somewhere which is preventing the 32-bit subsystem from working, so that only recent 64-bit software will run. I sympathize, as these kinds of things happen and are nightmarish to figure out, but it's definitely a problem specific to your own setup, not Win8 per se.

Posted by Randy Pryde (Member # 7488) on 03-02-2014, 12:40 AM:

Leo and Mark,

Dell and Lenovo are still selling models with Windows 7 and/or Windows 7 Pro on their websites. Check their "small business and home office" pages.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-02-2014, 01:15 AM:

quote: Leo Enticknap
along with restoring the proper start menu and desktop (in effect, relegating the "Metro" screen to an optional extra that desktop users could ignore altogether)

All of that is false. With 8.1, it introduces a start button (a windows icon/logo button where the old start menu button was). Clicking on said button brings up the metro screen.

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-8/where-is-start-menu

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-02-2014, 02:03 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
I know the version I'm running now (10.6.8...aka Snow Leopard) wasn't free.

The version you're running now (10.6.8 -- same here for now) was $29. A far cry from the $150+ of MS OS's which have an increased amount of suck built in.

quote: Bobby Henderson
In my experience, Windows 7 Ultimate is the best version of Windows Microsoft has released to date. I've had ZERO to complain about in using Win7 Ultimate

Why aren't ALL versions of Windows 7 the "ultimate" edition? This just makes no sense and only complicates their market.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-02-2014, 02:32 AM:

quote: Justin Silverstein
Hmm, that's odd. I run lots of old software on Win8 and I've never had a problem. Old versions of Adobe CS and such certainly work. My guess is, whatever the culprit of your compatibility issues may be, it's not the actual Windows 8 kernel.

No, it's only Windows. I haven't been doing anything to modify Windows. With Win8 if you want to run Adobe Creative Suite you have only two choices: run CS6 or Creative Cloud. There is no other alternative. Corel only works on Win8 at version X6. Our other apps, like Flexi, only work at their latest levels on Win8.

Microsoft changes up enough shit in their OS to force customers to buy upgrades to various 3rd party software suites they already own. Honestly, I feel Microsoft is doing this in some part to get customers on the hook with fucking Microsoft Office 365 subscriptions.

quote: Joe Redifer
Why aren't ALL versions of Windows 7 the "ultimate" edition? This just makes no sense and only complicates their market.

I couldn't answer that question. I am completely all in agreement that Microsoft should be selling only one "ultimate" version of the Windows OS. But knowing what sons of bitches MS can be, I figured getting their top end OS available at the time for my then new notebook computer would be the best thing for my interests. I don't regret my decision. Win 7 Ultimate on my Core i7 notebook has been working like a charm. No complaints. Very reliable. I just don't feel like spending money on a PC upgrade anytime soon.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-02-2014, 03:01 AM:

Joe, yes I recall the change from Leopard to Snow Leopard was a cheap change...I recall prior versions being more though typically under $100.00

Bobby, while Win 7 Pro is about $25 more than Home...Ultimate is nearly double. What is so much better in Ultimate (as in I think I've seen maybe one or two PCs with Ultimate on it ever) as to be worth nearly double?

Oh...and why can't Microsoft have a "migrate" program like Mac so one can move from one version to another? Moving from an entire old Mac to a new one with a different OS is pretty painless with "Migrate" ...no need to reinstall everything. No need to even reconfigure the various logins.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-02-2014, 08:24 AM:

For whatever it's worth, the boxed copy of Win7 ("Professional" version) is (was?) about $250. The $150 version is the "OEM" version, which is only supposed to be sold along with a newly built computer. In practice, most people just buy that with a hard disk or something that is sufficient for the retailer to call it a "computer." But, last time I looked, it was not legal to run the OEM version as a VM.

Agreed with Joe that there is little justification for having so many different versions of Windows. No one else does this. There really should just be one version or, at most, a desktop version and a server version (but, even then, the only justification for making the distinction is to charge more for the "server" version).

Agreed with Leo that making Windows "free" is sort of pointless, since relatively few people buy it off the shelf. If they do it, then it is probably a scheme to discourage large companies and government agencies from looking to other options (Linux, Mac, etc.).

At my current job (in the publishing industry) we have a bunch of Mac users. The operating system itself is fine (I am not hugely fond of the GUI shell). Apple is a miserable company to deal with from a corprate IT point of view, however. They are pretty much user-hostile as far as making it possible for people to repair their own computers (non-removable batteries, weird tri-wing or pentalobe screws, etc.). Worse, there is no public product "roadmap" and old products are discontinued when new products are announced (which is something that happens with no advance notice). The new products typically have no backwards compatibility with their old ones; this is not a problem for Aunt Millie at home, but is a major issue in a standardized corprate environment. Furthermore, it is difficult to order individual parts for Apple hardware and, unlike PC equivalents, most parts are nonstandard. Proprietary systems that are better than commodity systems are fine, but proprietary parts that are made that way for the sake of being proprietary is just silly. I can go out today and buy a quality ATX power supply that will work in pretty much any desktop PC for about $50-150. Good luck finding any such Mac equivalent locally.

Linux is great for certain applications (typically either simple single-purpose uses or for advanced users or for servers or embedded systems), but does not suit the typical semi-knowledgeable user well. The fragmentation among distributions and UIs does not help, nor does the historically limited hardware compability (no longer really an issue, but still a problem of perception). And I agree with Steve that software ported to Linux from other platforms is typically poorly QC'd before being released.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-02-2014, 09:24 AM:

While there is no denying that Apple goes out of its way to discourage end-users from repairing their own devices, repairing them isn't necessarily insurmountable. The only things I've ever had fail were power supplies and Hard Drives. Even in my iMAC...when the internal HDD started to fail, I was able to use an off-the-shelf HDD to replace it. It wasn't an end of the world operation either.

It is nice there are people on YouTube that will show you what you are up against so it doesn't seem like your breaking the computer in the process.

But yes, I agree that there is a trade off on having things that just work versus having to support every odd card, or device made by 3rd parties.

I think things have their place...at home, I like my Mac...it just works and always has. At work...I use a PC...it mostly works.

As for Win7 OEM...we do use that version for the computers we "make" We place a computer on site for service purposes. It has been very effective for us and our clients. Generally, Win7 Home is sufficient. Win 7 pro allows a "free" WinXP via Virtual PC...which is handy for dealing with Series 1 projectors (ever notice that the DLP control program for series 1 disconnects on you all of the time with Win 7 64-bit?...not so with WinXP)...as well as some other A/V based utilities. But for plain vanilla DCinema. Win 7 Home is sufficient. It is currently about $95.00 from Amazon.

I'll say this...I've seen Win 7 prices fluctuate quite a bit in just a months time...it is like a commodity. We have one source that is cheaper on Pro...one that is cheaper on Home.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-02-2014, 11:53 AM:

Here is one that has cropped up on me quite bit in the past month on Win 7 (pro or home)...it will forget to load its Path or somehow not know what is residing in the windows\system32 folder. The way I find out...ping becomes an unrecognized routine. If I modify the Path and hand put in the C:\Windows\System32 (presuming you are on "C" drive"...then all is well in the world again.

What is up with that?

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 03-02-2014, 11:59 AM:

The latest MacOSX update, 10.9 (aka Mavericks) was a free download, but you needed to already have MacOSX. I suspect this is what will happen with Win8.1.

As for who would still pay for Windows, that would be the small percentage of Mac users who need to dual boot for a variety of reasons. I occasionally have to boot up the Windows side of my MacBook for school reasons, and I only upgraded to Win7 last year because it was finally made available free to students.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-02-2014, 12:11 PM:

quote: Steve Guttag
Bobby, while Win 7 Pro is about $25 more than Home...Ultimate is nearly double. What is so much better in Ultimate (as in I think I've seen maybe one or two PCs with Ultimate on it ever) as to be worth nearly double?

As far as I am aware, there are only two substantial functions that W7 Ultimate has but Professional does not: Bitlocker encryption (unnecessary, because if you want encryption, TrueCrypt is free and IMO better) and the ability to install multiple languages for the front end and swap between them quickly and easily.

I have only been in one situation in which that feature had any real-world use, which was when a German manufacturer of film scanners which are supplied bundled with a PC to receive the captured video sold one to a US customer. As delivered, Windows was set up in German (i.e. the button in the bottom left was "Eingang" instead of "Start", etc.), and because the version of Windows on it wsa Ultimate, we were able to change it to English quickly and easily. So I suppose Ultimate makes sense if you're in the business of selling computers with pre-installed Windows images to customers in different countries and with different language requirements. But I can't imagine any other situation in which you'd need it. Even if you can speak two languages, why would you want to keep changing the language of your operating system between them? As a private customer, I can't think of any situation in which I'd be willing to pay an extra $100 for this functionality.

quote: Chris Slycord
All of that is false. With 8.1, it introduces a start button (a windows icon/logo button where the old start menu button was). Clicking on said button brings up the metro screen.

I know that is the case at present, which is why I'm not interested in W8. My point is that if MS introduces a fully "classic" W8 front end for WIMP, i.e. non-touchscreen users (i.e. no need to install third-party software to get W8 to mimic previous versions), then my resistance to it would be lowered.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-02-2014, 12:40 PM:

quote: Edward Havens
The latest MacOSX update, 10.9 (aka Mavericks) was a free download, but you needed to already have MacOSX. I suspect this is what will happen with Win8.1.

Win 8.1 is available free for Win 8 users as a download from the Microsoft store. I get a message from time to time when I boot up my work computer about the free upgrade.

I'm a little too leery about jumping on it right now. There is some risk the upgrade could hose my computer or at least cause me to have to reinstall a bunch of my applications -some of those, like the Adobe Creative Cloud applications, have to be downloaded.

quote: Leo Enticknap
My point is that if MS introduces a fully "classic" W8 front end for WIMP, i.e. non-touchscreen users (i.e. no need to install third-party software to get W8 to mimic previous versions), then my resistance to it would be lowered.

Microsoft will have to bring back real Start button functionality in their next version of Windows. The Metro UI is a PITA. It takes more time and more clicks to get to the applications you need. And selecting the "All Apps" view doesn't really show you everything. In the end, you end up having to create all kinds of shortcut icons on your desktop or pin them to the task bar to have access to everything you need in the desktop view. It's counterproductive.

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 03-02-2014, 01:24 PM:

The number one thing I like about Linux? It's adaptability. You can modify the O.S. to whatever task you want to use it for. Open source software is the single greatest to happen to this generation. My fourteen year old son is learning to program in GNU/Linux. He chose a project to build over the summer and it will be powered by a Raspberry Pi micro-computer running on Debian version of Linux. No version of any Windows or Apple OS can do this. Windows is great - for the office, Apple is great - for graphic design. Linux - is great for whatever you want. Look what has been accomplished in the D-Cinema world with Linux.

Also - a freeware version of Windows 8 is great, but will they ever release the source code for it? Then we will be getting somewhere.

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 03-02-2014, 03:03 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
My biggest complaint with Win8 is the fucking lack of backward compatibility with computer software. If you're running Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Office or basically anything else more than a couple years old you're probably going to be forced into buying the newest version of that application.

Exactly. And since I'm happy with my current versions of all my software (and my PC, which I got just before Win8 was released), I have no intention of moving to 8.

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 03-02-2014, 03:36 PM:

The problem for Microsoft is that Windows/Xp is good enough. Windows/7 is also good enough. People who have stuff that is "good enough" don't feel the need to spend money. This leaves Microsoft's Windows division in a somewhat difficult position.

Linux as a desktop OS sucks, everything is just too hard, and often, too different. But as a server OS, Linux is good enough. More than that, decent distributions have package managers that make updating a machine with a lot of packages on it so much easier than a Windows machine.

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 03-02-2014, 04:15 PM:

I think that the idea behind Linux (and Unix-y operating systems in general) is that you have a system administrator who sets up your computer for you, and then you just use it.

I have set up Linux desktops for a few small businesses and it works so well that some of their employees have even purchased their own computers and asked me to set up a Linux desktop for them at home.

The nice thing about Linux is that it can be set up in such a way that it is more-or-less bulletproof. I can set up a desktop for you today and drop it on your desk. Five years from now that machine will still be there on your desk doing exactly the same thing in the same way and just as well as it did it when I first set it up.

Unfortunately, most people don't have a system administrator readily available to set their Linux desktop up for them.

When you buy a computer at your local office supply store, you take it home, plug it in and it comes up with Windows or OSX. Since it's now working, there is a vanishingly small number of people who look any further than that.

One other thing that drags down things like Windows is the dancing pig problem. By design, a properly configured Linux desktop is a lot less susceptible to that sort of vulnerability than Windows.

Of course, nothing is 100%. A few months ago my wife, who is reasonably computer-savvy (after all, she lives with me) responded to an exceptionally well-crafted phishing attack and ended up giving away her gmail password. Fortunately, about five minutes later she casually told me what she had just done (not yet realizing that she had been duped) and after I climbed back down off of the ceiling we managed to change her password before the bad guys logged into her account. But that was a damn narrow escape and while I don't think that exact thing will be happening again (to her) there's always the possibility of a new-and-better scam coming along that she might fall for. I'm actually pretty surprised that she fell for this one, but I'll admit it was very well done and many people just don't have security front-and-center on their mind. I have a more suspicious nature than she does, apparently.

Not every scam is written in fractured English and signed by Prince Abullah's nephew.

Posted by Wayne Keyser (Member # 2420) on 03-02-2014, 11:21 PM:

I was afraid of Windows 8, too, but download "classic shell" free and you're right back home where you want to be.

Posted by Jeff Kane (Member # 6372) on 03-02-2014, 11:39 PM:

Win 8 is a travesty and the start button doesn't help matters nor does the classic interface as trying to do anything beyond basic OS settings involves delving into the kludge that is the half-way half-assed UI with some settings only accessible through Metro-UI screens and others only through the control panel.

Then there's the font rendering in 8.1. Holy F*(*#@$&! I thought I needed glasses! Nope, the renderer is very very broken. Anything over 100% text size is extremely blurry. 100% rendered on a 14" 1920x1080 screen is SMALL. Worse, it varies from application to application. Win 7 does this without error, why can't 8?

Then there's the incompatibilities. Apps that're fine in 7 inexplicably crash with no error or won't start in 8 regardless of compatibility settings. Sadly, Outlook 2010 is one of 'em! I refuse to go to 2013 but that's an entirely different matter.

Posted by Justin Silverstein (Member # 8118) on 03-03-2014, 01:15 AM:

I mess around with deeply-buried OS settings as much as anyone, and the vast majority can be accessed in Win8 through the classic-style control panel, which doesn't differ from Win7's in any important way. Even with all the tinkering I do, I don't need to venture into the metro-style menus more than once every few weeks, if that, and it's a pretty minor annoyance even then.

With regard to compatibility, I'm certainly not calling anyone a liar, but the problems some people seem to be having running slightly older software are clearly dependent on the individual setup, which makes me wonder whether they're really inherent to Win8. As a specific example, I'm running Outlook 2010 on Win8 along with the rest of Office 2010 Professional Plus, and have been doing so for over a year. I use all of Office 2010 including Outlook 2010 virtually every day, extensively, and have never experienced a single glitch of any kind beyond the usual minor stuff that occurs on any version of Windows. This is true on all three of my systems. I don't doubt that the people who claim to be having problems really are having problems, and maybe there really are inherent flaws in Win8 that are causing those problems for some people, but I find it strange that these reports are so inconsistent.

Posted by Jeff Kane (Member # 6372) on 03-03-2014, 04:41 AM:

The permutations are limitless. Different hardware and software configurations, different drivers, different features in use, different updates applied, whether those updates were successful or not, whether 8 does something that exposes a hardware bug that 7 didn't... I'm using Business Contact Manager with Outlook 2010 Pro Plus as well as Google Apps Sync... nothing terribly out of the ordinary but something's clearly JUST different enough to fail where 7 isn't. It's set up to dual boot so I know it's not a hardware issue and I've made sure both Office installations are identical. (I'm going to miss my TechNet subscription terribly when it goes away... no more installing stuff on a whim.)

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-03-2014, 10:40 AM:

quote: Frank Cox
The nice thing about Linux is that it can be set up in such a way that it is more-or-less bulletproof. I can set up a desktop for you today and drop it on your desk. Five years from now that machine will still be there on your desk doing exactly the same thing in the same way and just as well as it did it when I first set it up.

You can do this with Windows, too, though with the "home" editions, not officially (i.e. you need to change registry settings).

Whenever I set up Windows installations for relatives, friends, etc., I create a restricted user account for everyday use, and an administrator account which I tell them to log on to only if they need to install or update software. Being logged onto a "standard" (Vista and 7) or "restricted" (XP) account actually offers pretty good protection against both malware and accidentally doing something that breaks something. But this feature isn't used by default on consumer Windows installations: the factory image on typical desktops and laptops encourages everyday use while logged into an account with administrator privileges, thereby throwing away most of the inherent protection that the operating system has.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 03-03-2014, 11:29 AM:

One difference between the versions of W7 out there is that W7 Home/Ultimate can handle up to 16 GB of RAM, whereas W7 Pro can do up to 192 GB:

Memory Limits for Windows and Windows Server Releases

W8 starts at 128 GB, and W8 Pro goes to 512 GB.

Granted, not many people are going to be running 128 GB in their boxes, but 16 GB isn't the high-water mark it used to be. My next box will have 16 GB as the start, and I might just get another 16 so I can use it for caching, a RAM drive, and lots of breathing room for software.

Microsoft definitely ran into a brick wall that they had to have been expecting, but thought they could overcome. They tried to change people's behavior by making a radical shift to an interface that was better suited to touchscreen tablets than to devices with keyboards, mice, and standard screens.

I don't think Microsoft has anything to fear from the Mac or Linux-based installations for the desktop realm. Sure, Mac is more popular than it ever has been, but the far greater threat to MS is the mobile-device segment. iPads and Android tablets have done far more to harm Microsoft in a short time than the Mac will ever do. So many people use their computers for nothing more than reading E-Mail, browsing the web, and looking at photos. These are tasks that touchscreen tablets excel at, and Microsoft had a severe case of fear and envy.

W8 was Microsoft's lead-in to get people to use the Surface interface, but Surface will never be what Android and iOS are already. The gamble failed, and the result is that nearly everyone at the management level at Microsoft involved with W8 is now pretty much gone or demoted.

It will be interesting to see where they go with Windows 9 or whatever they will call what they release in April 2015.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-03-2014, 01:35 PM:

quote:
One difference between the versions of W7 out there is that W7 Home/Ultimate can handle up to 16 GB of RAM, whereas W7 Pro can do up to 192 GB:

Wait... so Pro is better than Ultimate? This is extremely confusing. I thought Ultimate was supposed to be, you know, Ultimate. If there is a tier above ultimate then it's not ultimate at all. No how no way.

Posted by Jeff Kane (Member # 6372) on 03-03-2014, 03:59 PM:

According to MS Ultimate has the same upper limit as Pro and Enterprise. It's Home Basic and Home Premium that have the limitation; 8GB for Basic and 16 for Premium.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical_memory_limits_windows_7

Arbitrary limits to try to get you to shell out for an upgrade, natch.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-03-2014, 05:22 PM:

Here is the chapter and verse. There are various remote and networking little things that Enterprise/Ultimate can do but Professional and the various flavors of Home can't (audio recording over a remote desktop connection, anyone?! Maybe they should call that the Nixon button...), but the only two substantial extra bits of software functionality are encryption and language switching.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 03-10-2014, 04:15 PM:

quote: Jeff Kane
According to MS Ultimate has the same upper limit as Pro and Enterprise. It's Home Basic and Home Premium that have the limitation; 8GB for Basic and 16 for Premium.

Yeah, that was my error. Not sure how that happened, but it probably had something to do with caffeine levels.

Posted by Rick Raskin (Member # 1561) on 03-10-2014, 05:22 PM:

192 GB RAM? What MOBO could handle that much? [Confused]

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 03-10-2014, 05:37 PM:

Everything on this page

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-14-2014, 06:37 AM:

quote: Leo Enticknap
I know that is the case at present, which is why I'm not interested in W8. My point is that if MS introduces a fully "classic" W8 front end for WIMP, i.e. non-touchscreen users (i.e. no need to install third-party software to get W8 to mimic previous versions), then my resistance to it would be lowered.

I get that. I was just responding to the claim that you made (or at least were quoting from an article)that 8.1 actually did that itself already by default.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-14-2014, 02:08 PM:

So does the free Windows OS still require a serial number? To my knowledge Windows is the only OS that ever required a serial number. Certainly the only modern one that does. Even when Apple charged for their OS they didn't need silly ol' serial numbers.

Posted by Rick Raskin (Member # 1561) on 03-14-2014, 03:44 PM:

quote: Frank Cox
Everything on this page

I was thinking PC. Would any of those motherboards function as a PC? Just wondering. If not, then why the 192 GB limit on W7?

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 03-14-2014, 04:30 PM:

Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 are on the same platform. In most cases, the drivers are interchangeable. I'm guessing the memory capacity came along for the ride.

In fact, I have a machine that I need to behave like a workstation, but needs the power and redundancy of server hardware, so I installed Windows 7 on a Dell PowerEdge server.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-15-2014, 08:09 AM:

quote: Rick Raskin
I was thinking PC. Would any of those motherboards function as a PC? Just wondering. If not, then why the 192 GB limit on W7?

Because of companies that want to have one computer that runs several different servers inside virtual machines and use windows to achieve this.

Also, you have to realize that whether or not it can function as a personal computer is irrelevant. Windows is an computer operating system. It's not a "thing for personal computers."

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 03-15-2014, 08:49 AM:

One thing different about Windows 8: The serial number gets embedded in the BIOS when you install it. They only good thing about that is, if you have to reinstall it on a system that previously had it - you do not have to enter the key in.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-15-2014, 09:25 AM:

quote: Dennis Benjamin
The serial number gets embedded in the BIOS when you install it.

I wonder how that works in a VM or multiple-boot situation? Not that I really care that much, though, since my current interest level in Win8 is approximately zero.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-17-2014, 03:59 PM:

I also wonders how that works if your motherboard/BIOS includes the facility to block the operating system from writing to the BIOS? For example, one of my computers enables you to set up an administrator and/or a user password in the BIOS, and the latter has to be entered before it'll let you write anything to the BIOS. Even the firmware updaters that run under Windows require you to enter the BIOS admin password before it'll flash the update.

Does the Windows 8 installation procedure ask you for that password if needed? Will it refuse to install Windows if you don't let it write to the BIOS?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-24-2014, 05:15 PM:

This whole thread is a lie. They are still charging out the ass for Windows 8.1 and idiots everywhere are actually paying.

http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/en_US/cat/categoryID.62684800?WT.mc_id=WOL_Buy

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 03-24-2014, 05:44 PM:

Since when has Windows 8.1 been free? If you're on Windows 8, you can upgrade to Windows 8.1 for free. The only thing that will probably be given away for free is their Windows Phone incarnation, because that's probably the only way to give that OS some relevance in the market. You still need to buy a phone that can run it though, and that's usually not free...

If you want to get some work done with your Windows 8 machine, this 8.1 upgrade is mandatory, or else you will end up bald rather quickly after tearing your hairs out every time you get lost in this horrible Metro jungle.

The upgrade (which you can get via their shitty store) downloads a few gigabytes worth of junk and after an hour or two/three/twelve/infinity (dependent on your Internet connection and machine) the first thing it does is trying to ram a Microsoft account down your throat, which can only be avoided via a maze of options.

On the bright side, Windows 8.1 is almost NOT worthless, it allows you to boot into desktop mode, returns something like a "Start" button, which either brings you to Metro or... "Modern UI" or a full-screen listing of your installed applications (I dare not to call them "Apps"...). The "Start-button-right-click" power-menu is actually neat, it gives you a shortcut to stuff that was formerly buried in sub-menus.

The upcoming/already leaked "8.1 Update 1" seems to contain yet other features that bring back the OLD Windows, featuring a desktop and you know, actual Windows!

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 03-24-2014, 07:30 PM:

Why isn't Windows free? Isn't the answer obvious?

Apple started out as a hardware company and has mostly stayed that way; their OS and other software systems (iTunes) exist soley to help sell their hardware. The fact that Apple used to charge for its OS is the truly ridiculous fact.

Microsoft, on the other hand, started as a pure software company; unlike Apple the software WAS their product. If Microsoft gave away its software, there would be no Microsoft. Microsoft has been moving into the hardware side of things-or rather trying to.

Their big mistake was trying to market Windows 8 as a desktop OS as well as a mobile one. Windows 8 should have been a product exclusively for the Surface.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 03-25-2014, 03:30 AM:

Please note that Apple suddenly giving away MacOS X updates for free is somewhat fishy... It's clearly a sign that they're spinning up the built-in obsolescence cycle for your overpriced Mac hardware from this point on, just like your iOS devices.

quote: Leo Enticknap
Does the Windows 8 installation procedure ask you for that password if needed? Will it refuse to install Windows if you don't let it write to the BIOS?

Please note that BIOS is actually quite obsolete and most new machines come with UEFI, that just emulate BIOS for older OSes. UEFI is capable of a much more sophisticated access control.

UEFI is also being used to lock a computer to a certain Operating System. If the bootloader hasn't been signed by something that's recognized by the UEFI loader as being approved, it will just not load the OS. For now, most vendors allow you to bypass this "OS approval", otherwise installing Linux would already be impossible. But this is also why it's rather hard to run something different than Windows on a MS Surface tablet for example.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-25-2014, 11:01 AM:

Thanks. The most recent motherboard I own and/or have reinstalled an OS on was made in 2010, so this is a new one on me. I must admit to not liking the sound of buying a computer on which you're not allowed to install Linux, but as with rooting smartphones, if the sale of this technology in a locked-out state becomes normal, then hacks will become available to address that, I guess.

However, that would partially explain why MS is not exactly giving away Windows 8 (as yet, at any rate), but it is offering a $100 rebate if you buy a new PC with it OEM-installed. Given that $100 is the retail price of a standalone Windows license, when I read this news I wondered why they didn't just give the OS away to anyone who wanted to carry out a DIY installation on their existing machines. For one thing, actually giving people $100 will cost them more than giving away copies of W8, I'd heva thought. I'm guessing the reason to be that they want to remove as many "insecure" (from their perspective, i.e. owners have the non-revocable option of installing a non-MS OS) computers from circulation as possible.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-25-2014, 12:28 PM:

quote: Marcel Birgelen
UEFI is also being used to lock a computer to a certain Operating System.

EFI rose to prominence several years ago when the first Intel-based Macs started shipping. EFI "bootstraps" Mac OSX to specific Intel motherboards made solely for Apple branded computers. This prevents someone from getting a copy of OSX and loading it on something like a Dell PC.

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 03-25-2014, 03:17 PM:

I am starting to get all the "Windows XP Support goes away as of April 8th" E-mails. Apparently, Microsoft will pay you to upgrade to Windows 8.

Well, let's see, Windows 8 won't run older computers that were optimized for Windows XP. So I guess that "$100" will go towards the purchase of a new, snazzy, computer.

If you are running on a computer that old, why don't you just install Linux?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-25-2014, 03:31 PM:

Not sure what all the fuss really is. W7 is still available for purchase at many locations. You can also still buy a new computer with W7 loaded on it. We order them for our "Cinema Service Care" remote computers all the time.

But then if MS gets rid of the tiles and puts the start button back where it belongs then who really cares. the rest of 8.1 is much the same as W7.

On loosing sales to Mac and Linux. This isn't happening at all. W8 just caused a slump in the sales of computers. That in no way means all those people that are not buying PC would then run out and buy a Linux or Mac. The thought is really sort of ridiculous. Linux is by no means user friendly and it would be easier to learn W8 with the tiles. And Mac won't run most programs people want to use today. While a Mac can also run Windows what are you gonna load on it? W8? LOL!

None of my work related programs run on any Apple device...

Mark

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-25-2014, 03:52 PM:

I think Windows 8 has received a little too much of the blame for slumping personal computer sales. The simple matter is PCs have reached a point similar to that of TV sets. People buy a new one when the old one finally breaks, not simply because they want a new one.

The sales trends of smart phones and tablets are headed that direction soon. That will send lots of stock market investors scurrying. But then when things settle down the computing industry might actually be allowed to concentrate on more important things rather than trying to make a bunch of short term investors happy.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-25-2014, 04:01 PM:

quote: Dennis Benjamin
Well, let's see, Windows 8 won't run older computers that were optimized for Windows XP.

Actually, it possibly would. I recently installed 7 on my father in law's 2004-vintage XP PC after upgrading the 512mb of RAM it came with to 2GB (cost around $20 from Ebay), and it works perfectly well. As long as you're not making it work any harder than trying to watch a DVD, it doesn't even feel slow or unresponsive. The graphics card was a high end one for its day (including DVI out), and so even Aero works.

Windows 8 is published in a 32-bit version, and so I'm guessing that it would work on most motherboard/processor combinations made since the early '00s, though probably without Aero in the case of some integrated graphics chips on motherboards.

However, as I speculated in my earlier post, MS may be offering a $100 rebate on new PC sales rather than simply giving XP users an 8 license because they actively want to drive older hardware out of circulation.

But the bottom line is that my father in law is not going to want to edit HD video or play World of Wankcraft, and so with W7, I can't see any reason why that machine won't do him perfectly well until 2020 (when W7 support ends).

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-25-2014, 05:51 PM:

I think it's funny that Windows users hate Mac more than Mac users hate Windows. Mention that you use a Mac pretty much anywhere and the vile comments come about how useless or overpriced they are. Owning a Mac really makes other people angry. Those other people are idiots. It never fails.

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
None of my work related programs run on any Apple device.

That's nice. ALL of my work-related programs do. Only a couple of them run on Windows.

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
And Mac won't run most programs people want to use today.

Please give an example of "most programs people want to use today".

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-25-2014, 06:05 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
I think it's funny that Windows users hate Mac more than Mac users hate Windows.

I guess it's offset by how much Mac people think they are elite somehow. They're not, they just punch buttons on a different computer.

I figure I'm balanced, I have Windows computers, but we support several iDevices (and two iTunes accounts) and Quicktime is my default media player.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 03-25-2014, 06:16 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
I think it's funny that Windows users hate Mac more than Mac users hate Windows. Mention that you use a Mac pretty much anywhere and the vile comments come about how useless or overpriced they are. Owning a Mac really makes other people angry. Those other people are idiots. It never fails.

I guess that "hate" originates from the somewhat demeaning way many Apple users tend to look at Windows users.

But it this bidirectional hate relation is actually quite funny, because both the Apple and Windows ecosystem come with their own thick layers of suckyness.

Then there is the world of Open Source and, although I'm a great supporter, user and even limited contributor, that also comes with thick laminated layers of suck. The main problem there is the total cluster bomb of options, often resulting in interoperability issues and there is a general lack of focus.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-26-2014, 11:03 AM:

quote: Joe Redifer
I think it's funny that Windows users hate Mac more than Mac users hate Windows.

There's simply no way Windows users could hate Apple more than what has been happening the other way around for decades. Just look at Apple's advertising for nearly 30 years: much of it based on bashing anything not Apple branded. In recent years it was the "I'm a Mac" and "I'm a PC" thing featuring Justin Long and John Hodgman in stereotypical roles. I very rarely ever saw any PC manufacturer taking pot shots at Apple. They just concentrated on selling their own products, not bashing what somebody else was selling.

Apple has encouraged a bunch of its users to adopt an arrogant attitude toward anyone not using Apple branded gear, either through its commercials or its product launch events the mainstream media is only too happy to cover as news. It's a central part of the Apple brand's culture. The hipster dick Apple user is a pop culture stereotype. I have friends here in Lawton who use Mac-based computers at home or at work and they'll say, "I'm a Mac user, but I'm not one of those Mac users."

Just about any place online where I see a couple of Windows PC users discussing some technical problem with a piece of software, a video card driver or whatever eventually someone else shows up saying, "I use a Mac" or "you need to get a Mac" or "if you used a Mac you wouldn't be having that problem" or any number of other snarky lines which conveniently overlook just how difficult and expensive it is to switch computing platforms. Then the discussion devolves into the usual Mac vs. PC flame fest that didn't have a damned thing to do with the original discussion.

It's like this thread. We don't have a flame war happening, but the thread is drifting into the direction of the usual Mac vs. PC thing. This topic is about Windows 8.1. Not OSX. Not Linux either. Why the hell would a discussion about Windows 8.1 even be of interest to any Mac user? A loyal Mac user isn't going to buy a Windows PC no matter how good or bad it is.

quote: Joe Redifer
Please give an example of "most programs people want to use today".

There's a lot of PC games developed only for the Windows platform. Various industries have trade-specific software that is PC-only. This is why I use Windows PCs in my day job. In the computer graphics industry some applications only run on Windows or Windows and certain Linux builds (the Mac platform has some of its own exclusives too). CorelDRAW is a popular vector graphics application that is currently Windows-only. Corel did release version 11 for OSX, but sales were terrible so they didn't bother with Mac for following versions.

There's also a problem of some companies not making it clear enough to potential customers that they have a Mac version available. We had a person in my civic club who agreed to take on the treasurer's job. But then she wound up not being able to do the job because the club's finances were organized in QuickBooks. She said she couldn't mess with it since she used a Mac. No one bothered to check if there was a Mac version of QuickBooks (Intuit has one).
[Roll Eyes]

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 03-26-2014, 12:39 PM:

Not to get even further off track, but depending ont he situation with QB it may not be that easy to switch between MAC and PC. Intuit is TERRIBLE for having 50 gazillion versions of their software. Well, not 50 gazillion, but a lot. You need to have the same version or higher, from the same year or later for a Quick Books backup file to be compatible. I don't know if the version hierarchy is the same from the PC to MAC software-it wouldn't surprise me if it's not, which would make it impossible to port your QB file from PC to MAC.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-26-2014, 02:11 PM:

That's one thing I like about Adobe. Their software is platform agnostic for the most part. I can trade Illustrator, Photoshop and InDesign files back and forth between Mac users and rarely run into any problems. Font files are the biggest potential hangup. Postscript Type 1 font files are not cross platform compatible. True Type seems to work alright. Obviously OpenType is best.

The more common problem: people saving various Adobe application files in the latest format without thinking what the user receiving the file is using. Adobe Illustrator CS6 and CC both have certain effects and functions that don't work when saved down to earlier "legacy" versions.

Windows 8 is the thing the forced my shop into the Adobe Creative Cloud subscription thing. I'm not upgrading my personal license of CS5.5 Master Collection anytime soon; at least it runs fine under Windows 7.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-26-2014, 06:57 PM:

Bobby, you are the shining example of what I was talking about. Thanks for that!

Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 03-26-2014, 09:51 PM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
And Mac won't run most programs people want to use today

Macs and Apple software are so overrated. I feel bad for the suckers who buy Apple stuff, but oh well, its not my money.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-26-2014, 11:11 PM:

One advantage for Apple users is that if they want to, they can run Windows. If there's something that only runs on Windows, using bootcamp and/or a VM lets you get access to those Win-only programs.

On the other hand, Apple wouldn't be able to have that if Microsoft made Windows licensed like MacOS is, since technically you're only allowed to install OSX on Apple-branded hardware (even if there are ways around it, ala the Hackintosh).

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-04-2014, 10:07 AM:

Surprise surprise - the British government has been caught with its pants down, and is paying Microsoft £5.5m to provide bespoke support and security updates for XP and Office 2003 for another year.

However, if this story's claim that 27.7% of the world's PCs were still running XP as of Monday, HMG certainly aren't the only ones to have had their heads in the sand.

The only other substantive information in the linked story (Daily Telegraph, April 3), is that the government claims to have plans in place to upgrade or replace all 200,000 of its XP PCs by April 2015.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 04-04-2014, 11:21 AM:

This gets back into the whole notion of "if it ain't broke why fix it?" That figure of 27.7% might be a conservative estimate.

Lots of businesses have been replacing aging computers when necessary, but I would actually be surprised if there will be any sort of big rush over the next couple months as Microsoft officially ends support of XP next Tuesday, April 8. Vendors of anti malware applications, such as Norton & McAfee have said they'll continue to support XP. Of course there is a question of how well those applications will work in an obsolete OS that is no longer receiving security patches.

Microsoft has said users will still be able to activate a Windows XP installation after April 8, like in the event a user decides to wipe the hard disc and re-install WinXP clean. One question I have about that is whether all the updates leading up to April 8 will still be available to download.

There's also this matter to consider with old computers: some institutions, such as non profit charity organizations, have no choice but to keep them running. Here in Lawton citizens passed a school bond measure to repair old buildings, replace buses (some of which are over 25 years old) and replace very old computers. Some of these computers are over 15 years old. We're talking machines designed to run Windows 98 and the classic MacOS. Some of these aging computers were running WinXP, but running it excruciatingly slow. Citizens in Lawton have been notorious for rarely ever passing a school bond measure. The new Superintendent publicized a list showing just how little Lawton has spent compared to many other districts across the state. I think residents here might have been a bit embarrassed for being shown as cheapskates. That, and the idea the US Army and other national businesses were looking at those bond figures, helped secure an overwhelming "yes" vote for the measure. The IT dept. at Lawton Public Schools will be able to replace a bunch of those ancients computers. Of course they'll probably be replaced with shiny new PCs running Windows 7.
[Razz]

Posted by Rick Raskin (Member # 1561) on 04-04-2014, 02:21 PM:

Supporting Leo's post (above), I have loaded W7 on several old machines that top out at 1 GB RAM. It works just fine because those users are not doing much more than Word, Excel and Internet.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-04-2014, 03:02 PM:

I've been struck by how well Windows 7 works on older machines. I've never tried to install it on a machine as old as 15 (my father in law's PC, mentioned above, is the oldest computer I've installed a 7 license on), but the fact that it'll work happily on a decade-old computer for everything except processor-intensive games and multimedia must be making MS pretty unpopular with hardware vendors. I'm wondering if the fact that free Windows 8 licenses didn't materialize, but a $100 rebate on a new Windows 8 PC did, was the result of negotiations between MS and the big Asian hardware makers; and that (ironically, given the Windows 8 debacle), the basic problem with both XP and 7 for Microsoft was that the programmers who created these operating systems made too good and long lasting a product for the business model that dominates their target market.

Maybe I'm turning into a grumpy old git, but the throwaway culture for consumer technology is something that irritates me. Refurbishing an old computer (which for me means replacing all the fans, the CMOS battery and thermal grease on the processor, thoroughly cleaning inside the case, replacing the hard drive if it's older than around five years, and reinstalling the OS from a clean format), or keeping a 1999 Civic with 150k miles on the clock in good health is not rocket science: it just takes a little willingness to negotiate a learning curve.

In big ticket pieces of technology infrastructure that are operated and maintained by professionals, this is accepted and factored into lifestyle planning, hence the reason 60 year-old DP70s are still running. Trains and airliners typically have a design life of 20-40 years, with planned major refurbishments and overhauls along the way. But yet when it comes to consumer technology, the throwaway culture seems to rule. In the last six months alone I've encountered someone who was about to replace a clothes dryer because a $3 thermal fuse had popped, and someone else who was about to replace an HVAC exterior unit because a $15 motor run capacitor had died. Both were astonished when I showed them how straightforward it was to diagnose and fix them.